[FrederikS|TPU]

For balanced armatures I believe the justification for multiple driver designs is the reduction of overhead per driver it yields.

It does however provide a challenge when it comes to designing a good crossover and getting X drivers phase-aligned since the package means that you cannot just stack them right on top of each other.

 

[goodvibes]

When you're talking BAs, My guess would be that they operate in a more or less, pistonic mode. It limits coloration and breakup modes of cone drivers but would also cause some bandwidth limiting vs output capability issues. A 2 way would be enough to compensate for any lacking of a single unit if done correctly. This is apparent by the number of VG single driver BAs that are considered full range and do one end of the spectrum or the other extremely well but not both. The exception may be the new siren or ortofon type driver that I suspect is a suspended cone who's center is driven by an armature's lever. It can be made to be strong and fast but with a large enough diphram for good bottom, the down side is that it could suffer from coloration and breakup modes but this can be controlled and some driver flex can actually help rise time at higher frequencies.

A single cone driver could be made full range with enough work and tuning.

More drivers could mean lower distortion at high listening levels but shouldn't be required beyong a 2 way BA. I think the fact the most companies use outsourced drivers as opposed to pupose building is why multi driver BAs can be better. I think much of the Xover discussion is overstated. I suspect most consist of a single component (cap) or (cap +res) 1st order networks to limit bandwidth along with blending drivers for linearity. 2 working in the same range should always be less resolved but apparently that's not the case. If there were big phase issues, this would be very noticable. This is why phase doesn't seem to be a big problem and multiple driver units can sound more balanced but it certainly shouldn't need to be so beyond a 2 way.

 

[stevenswall]

Hopefully more manufacturers will go to multiple DYNAMIC drivers. I think this will improve sound greatly, as I have never heard a fully satisfying single element BA, when you put more in, it is to correct its weakness, whereas a dynamic driver is acceptable, even single speaker designs. I haven't heard anything yet that can touch the Koss Dual Element 'phones, they sound like my home stereo system, with your head in the sweet spot, but portable, and more detailed.

 

[david1978jp]

Here is one multiple DYNAMIC drivers earphones, Radius hp-twf11, from Japan. It is certainly pretty.
4-5 bloggers have it and were not impressed.
MobiMega : Radius HP-TWF11R W Pro Dual Diaphragm Matrix Earphones
Wã€ãƒ‰ãƒ–ルベ】HP-TWF11 (Company website with measurement.)

 

[KLS]

@stevenwall,
There is something new and similar

Radius HP-TWF11

EDIT: Oh, david1978jp has posted before me.

 

[rawrster]

dual dynamic drivers do sound interesting. KLS you should go buy it and tell us how it is plz

 

[KLS]

@rawrster, I think @shigzeo has a pair and he is going to do a review on them!

 

[rawrster]

ohh thats true

Yeah you shouldn't buy them. If they are really amazing it's easier to ignore only one person than it is to ignore multiple people which is what did me in with the e-Q7.

 

[KLS]

^ Hah, that's the power of forum!

 

[Spyro]

I still think multi-driver BA's are far ahead of single driver dynamic..or any single driver for that matter. With a single driver, pick you choice...a nice upper register or lower register but only a multi BA can cover the whole frequency spectrum with great articulation. If you disagree, tell me a single driver that does it.

 

[bartimaeus]

well, ive tried the es3(x) and the ue10pro, but i still consider er4p as better in a few aspects. while a single drive can reach stunning effect in one aspect, to reach overall excellence the more drivers the better. also there's the tuning. chinese "replicatied"es3s can use the same material down to every cable, yet they still sound like a mere shadow of the es3's universal clarity

 

[bartimaeus]

but there are many ways of improving the sound quality. when it comes up to 8, 10 drives, every new one added is almost negligible in itself. the complex wiring and cross also contain potential risks…maybe work should be focused on the design and the tune

 

[james444]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif I still think multi-driver BA's are far ahead of single driver dynamic..or any single driver for that matter. With a single driver, pick you choice...a nice upper register or lower register but only a multi BA can cover the whole frequency spectrum with great articulation. If you disagree, tell me a single driver that does it.

The IE8 covers the whole range from extreme lows (you just need to EQ down the upper bass to hear it) to very extended highs. Same goes for the FX700, and you don't even have to EQ.

IMO it's not about extension, at least not with the top-tier IEMs, more about whether your preference leans towards BA or DD sound signature.

 

[Ted R.]

Yeah but there's also destructive waves between the
drivers to deal with too. It's all fine and well as a theory
but in practice those designers really have a tough gig.

What a great breakthrough though!

 

[warp08]

My 2 cents is that the JH16 Pro (so far) blows away any IEM, earpod or full-size cans I've ever heard by a wide margin. Multi-driver BA phones also respond well to quality amping, even a low-impedance one, like the JH16 or even the JH13.

The phase- and cross-over tuning of top tier customs like these is what Jerry Harvey got a patent for as it is not a simple feat to accomplish. But he figured it out and we're all the better for it. All it takes is one session with a demo unit....