Domes & Cones Midrange questions

[Megalomaniac]

I am planning to go 3-way. I am looking into the difference in cones and domes....midrange only


Here is what I know.


Cones
pros: plays lower than a dome(~250hz lower), but can play just as high; and cheaper
cons: off-axis response isnt so great; takes up more space to an extent


Domes:
pros: Better off-axis response, smaller, maybe smoother sound
Cons: doesnt play lower(like lower than 500hz); expensive


For a cone driver i am highly considering the TG9

For a dome i was thinking of using an Irridium, havent decided if i should use the 3" one or the smaller one. I was also thinking to use morel domes or DYnaaudios

another dynaaudio


Im not sure which one i want to use your advice will be appreciated.

They will be glassed into the A-pillars(in an accord sdn 00) along with my Hertz hsk165s Tweeter. Im leaning towards the dynaaudios(not sure which ones though, that 3" one is heavy on price though). but the tg9 would do good playing lower, im thinking it will bring stage height higher but im not sure if that low is necessary to achieve the height.

~mir ali~

[MiniVanMan]

That much separation between the midbass and the midrange drivers will not do well for a dome (IMO). Mainly due to the highish crossover point you'll need to use. The crossover point will be smack in the middle of both of male and female vocals (1st and 2nd harmonics for female, and 2nd and 3rd for males).

So, I'd go with the TG9. Nice little driver. You can also look at some of the Tangband offerings. Many of them get good reviews.

[Boostedrex]

Originally Posted by MiniVanMan

That much separation between the midbass and the midrange drivers will not do well for a dome (IMO). Mainly due to the highish crossover point you'll need to use. The crossover point will be smack in the middle of both of male and female vocals (1st and 2nd harmonics for female, and 2nd and 3rd for males).

So, I'd go with the TG9. Nice little driver. You can also look at some of the Tangband offerings. Many of them get good reviews.

The X-over point that you're talking about for the dome mids? Roughly what frequency are you talking about? Is that the 500Hz range? I'm just curious here as I know that the DLS IR3 dome mid can be crossed as low as 300Hz with a 36dB/oct slope and I was curious if that would be low enough to avoid the problem you mentioned. Thanks in advance.

[MiniVanMan]

Originally Posted by Boostedrex

The X-over point that you're talking about for the dome mids? Roughly what frequency are you talking about? Is that the 500Hz range? I'm just curious here as I know that the DLS IR3 dome mid can be crossed as low as 300Hz with a 36dB/oct slope and I was curious if that would be low enough to avoid the problem you mentioned. Thanks in advance.

Unfortunately, it's not as cut and dry as I kind of made it sound. So, in general, yeah, 500 hz is the low end of where you'd cross a lot of domes. The IR3 probably can handle 300 hz with a 36db slope, but that's a very steep slope, and probably quite a few domes can handle that range with that kind of slope. The Dayton RS52 can get down close to that far as well. I don't know if I recommend it though.

To the other question, yeah, 300 hz is better than 500 hz, but still not great. My personal opinion is to keep the crossover point below 250 hz. Now understand, that while I say this, I have a pair of Adire SF7s, mated to a pair Dayton RS52s in my wife's car crossed in the 600 hz range. The RS52 are in kicks, ran relatively on the same axis as the SF7s, making the crossover point a bit more seamless IMO. It still to A LOT of tuning around the crossover point to get it right. Messing with the 2nd and 3rd harmonics of a vocal reproduction can really kill the overall sound, and throwing a crossover point in there doesn't help.

So, I guess, if you have a ton of tuning capability (i.e. I use the DCX-730), then you can accomplish a lot more than if you're using even a high end head unit for all your tuning.

I know the RS52 is a fantastic sounding driver, however put it in a car and it seems to want to tear your head off. Domes generally behave similarly, but when implemented well, can sound really great. Like I said though, plan to tune, tune, and tune some more to get them tamed, and normalized.

While domes may extend higher than coned drivers, with the challenges in car audio, I don't think the benefits outweigh the sacrifices. A good coned driver will cover the critical midrange ranges just fine, and the upper end extension lost by not going with a dome is not nearly as detrimental as the low end lost by not going with a coned driver. Especially, when the two drivers will be separated by the amount the OP is talking about. That much separation just wreaks havoc on your staging, and imaging when you have a crossover point in the 500-700 hz range.

[internecine]

+ most domes come with an enclosure

[Megalomaniac]

im leaning towards the dynas so i dont have to mess with imaging and no need to take up more space for airbag to deploy

[Luke352]

Of interest talking of xover points for domes, I know the xover point on the DLS UR2.5 passive xover is actually 450hz @6db.

I would go with the DLS or Morel Domes, these are both able to be crossed lower then the Dyn dome which uses a factory xover of about 900hz I believe, but I could be wrong.


I don't agree that most cones will play as high as a Dome, most cone mids will still only play upto 3k there are exceptions of course, but in a wider sense most domes will play higher 5k-6k.

Luke

[azngotskills]

Originally Posted by Luke352

I don't agree that most cones will play as high as a Dome, most cone mids will still only play upto 3k there are exceptions of course, but in a wider sense most domes will play higher 5k-6k.

And thats due to the concept of "beaming"

[demon2091tb]

Yea

Beaming is a bitch.

My next order i'm grabbing up a pair of the TG9's as well, for future use.

[bikinpunk]

Well, crap...I thought the tg9's were a dome? I thought cones were the ones that had that weird cone in the center of the speaker.

Someone care to explain the physical differences, since my previous assumption seemed to be wrong?


FWIW, I have the tg9's on-axis and they seem to perform pretty well. My only complaint about them is that they have a little bit of trouble "keeping up" with the rest of my setup, and I assume that it's due mainly to its low sensitivity.

[kevin k.]

Saying that "domes have better off-axis response" is too generalized a statement and can be shown to be inaccurate. You need to consider the size of the cone and, quite possibly, it's shape.

Has anyone checked the manufacturer's FR curves for the TG9's and, for example, the Dyns... to my old eyes it looks as though 60 degree off-axis response for the TG9's is only down around 7 db at 5 kHz versus the Dyns which are down substantially more... closer to 18 db...

[azngotskills]

What about the ATC domes though? LOL j/k please go on with the discussion

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by Luke352

Of interest talking of xover points for domes, I know the xover point on the DLS UR2.5 passive xover is actually 450hz @6db.

I would go with the DLS or Morel Domes, these are both able to be crossed lower then the Dyn dome which uses a factory xover of about 900hz I believe, but I could be wrong.


I don't agree that most cones will play as high as a Dome, most cone mids will still only play upto 3k there are exceptions of course, but in a wider sense most domes will play higher 5k-6k.

Luke

Well i was reading an older thread about the tg9 compared to the l3. that it can be run without a tweeter and wouldnt sound soo "terrible". but yes playing low and playing high is a hard task to accomplish at the same time.

and the Dyna md140/2 can be played from 500hz-6khz

Originally Posted by kevin k.

Saying that "domes have better off-axis response" is too generalized a statement and can be shown to be inaccurate. You need to consider the size of the cone and, quite possibly, it's shape.

Has anyone checked the manufacturer's FR curves for the TG9's and, for example, the Dyns... to my old eyes it looks as though 60 degree off-axis response for the TG9's is only down around 7 db at 5 kHz versus the Dyns which are down substantially more... closer to 18 db...

I am sure you are right. BUT, most cases its true...


I just realised those dynas are priced each and not a set I read that the Daytons RS52an would be a good dome? but only downside i can see is they are 8ohms and i dont have an amplifier to supply the power for it.

[kevin k.]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

I am sure you are right. BUT, most cases its true...

I'm not sure how you've come to the conclusion that "most" domes have better off-axis response than cones. Would you please elaborate? Your statement is based on what real world experience? Have you used the domes in question? Have you had the chance to measure them compared to different midrange cone drivers? In the same environment / install?

I have owned and tested the Dyn MD140's, DLS IR3's, and currently have ATC SM75-150 domes in my car... all used and tested in the same car.

In that same car I have had the good fortune to use various cone mids... AudioTechnology C-Quenze H15's, Accuton C89/T-6's, Seas Excel 15's, Lotus RM110's, Scan Speak 12M Revelators and 15W Revelators, HAT Legatia 3's, Focal Utopia 136's and I forget what else right now.

I was able to measure all of them at various times utilizing a Bruel and Kjaer Type 2250 and an audiocontrol RTA.

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by kevin k.

I'm not sure how you've come to the conclusion that "most" domes have better off-axis response than cones. Would you please elaborate? Your statement is based on what real world experience? Have you used the domes in question? Have you had the chance to measure them compared to different midrange cone drivers? In the same environment / install?

I have owned and tested the Dyn MD140's, DLS IR3's, and currently have ATC SM75-150 domes in my car... all used and tested in the same car.

In that same car I have had the good fortune to use various cone mids... AudioTechnology C-Quenze H15's, Accuton C89/T-6's, Seas Excel 15's, Lotus RM110's, Scan Speak 12M Revelators and 15W Revelators, HAT Legatia 3's, Focal Utopia 136's and I forget what else right now.

I was able to measure all of them at various times utilizing a Bruel and Kjaer Type 2250 and an audiocontrol RTA.

To be honest no i havent used any dome midranges personally(hence this thread ). But from reading and researching it seems that domes have better off-axis compared to a cone. a cone seems to be more directional. Ya feel me?

I think you are going above and beyond the way you are talking about sound. I dont have golden ears like you, My expectations/standards are a little bit lower when it comes to SQ lol.


I read great things about that tg9 but i just dont want to make my pillars stick out that much. the dome seems to "look cooler" and suppose to sound great too. You had me scared about separation but it occured to me that my car isnt a full blown SQ vehicle just yet. my substage will probably drown in some(i know, sounds dumb)

[Abmolech]

kevin k. is quite correct.
The reason domes are "known" for their off axis response is because ON axis they are terrible. The shape has little to do with off axis response, the main precursor is the radiating diameter.(beaming)

There is no area where drivers of similar capabilities, that a cone cannot easily out perform a dome. The enclosures on a dome may be thought of as an advantage (space), however you pay a high price because of the back wave induced distortion.

Use a dome only if you have no other choice.

[Genxx]

More info and advice below I recieved from Ambolech when I was doing my search for cone or dome. I deicided to use a cone in the end.

Dome mid ranges are poor compared to cone mid ranges in just about every aspect. The off axis response (power response) non linear distortion etc are demonstratively superior on a cone. Since I got away with mentioning closed termination systems on the sound deadening thread, I will push my luck on this one.

A cone radiating driver uses the apex (centre) as the motor driver termination. The dome uses the outside of the dome as the primary termination for the motor.

Why not have the best of both worlds and drive both the centre and the outer?
This would be relatively trivial to do. It comes back to resonance and modal lines. If you drive both the centre and outer you have a closed termination baffle. The modal lines will travel to the outer, where they will be reflected back to the centre. To say this would wreak havoc is an understatement. I guarantee you this would not be a pleasant experience.

Every radiating cone driver systems use an open termination system, and a decoupler. On a cone this decoupler is the surround, on a dome the decoupler is the dome dampening material. IE The dome itself dampens. What happens on a dome is the modal lines converge on the centre and reflect back to the outside (closed termination system). THIS IS THE PRIMARY REASON FOR DOMES OFF AXIS LISTENING ADVICE. IE it SUCKS on axis. Have a listen to a dome on axis, it will hardly resemble the original source.

Well I won't be listening to it on axis anyway so why does it matter?
Well logically if are driving a dampening material, it cannot discern the "real" from the resonance. IE it must dampen BOTH the original source and the indirect.

Point
The response on a dome is demonstratively worse than a cone. The transient response and the over shoot (ringing) are MUCH poorer. Open termination devices produce pleasant even order harmonics. (Example, triangle, xylophone,cymbals etc.) Closed termination devices can produce odd order harmonics, unless carefully managed and/or dampened. (Drums for example).

There is Little doubt the these domes have carefully managed closed termination, but coupled with excessive response times and the back wave of the built in enclosure they CANNOT compete with their cone cousins.

[Oliver]

Genxx, Thanx for the informative post ^^^^^

[Hernan]

I have used the RS52 at the kicks. I had them mounted with a swivel pod for testing. I like them more off axis.
Now I have mount them at the sail panels (pretty forward), facing each other and I'm very happy, much smoother than on axis at the kicks.
Don't worry about the high xo point. I usually use a 2nd order at 630hz and they blend nice with the midbass at the doors.

[tRidiot]

Originally Posted by bikinpunk

Well, crap...I thought the tg9's were a dome? I thought cones were the ones that had that weird cone in the center of the speaker.

Someone care to explain the physical differences, since my previous assumption seemed to be wrong?

Here are some examples for you. It's easier to visualize than explain.

DLS IR3 dome midrange
http://www.autosound.cz/media/good/normal_699.jpg

Dyn dome midrange
http://people.cornell.edu/pages/peh1...20of%20box.jpg

Morel CDM-88 dome midrange (a thing of beauty)
http://www.morelhifi.com/products/im...rs_cdm88_1.jpg


Seas cone midrange w/phase plug
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/images/w26fx002.jpg
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/images/w22ny001.jpg
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/ima.../W18EX-001.jpg

Peerless cone midrange w/phase plug
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/ima...uct/830883.jpg

Peerless-V (Vifa) cone midrange with standard dustcap
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/ima...L22WR09_04.jpg
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/ima...t/MG14WK09.jpg

Vifa TG-9 Cone midrange with standard dustcap
http://www.baysidenet.biz/bsnshop/im...g9fsd10-04.jpg


Hope that helps.

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Originally Posted by kevin k.

I'm not sure how you've come to the conclusion that "most" domes have better off-axis response than cones. Would you please elaborate? Your statement is based on what real world experience? Have you used the domes in question? Have you had the chance to measure them compared to different midrange cone drivers? In the same environment / install?

I have owned and tested the Dyn MD140's, DLS IR3's, and currently have ATC SM75-150 domes in my car... all used and tested in the same car.

In that same car I have had the good fortune to use various cone mids... AudioTechnology C-Quenze H15's, Accuton C89/T-6's, Seas Excel 15's, Lotus RM110's, Scan Speak 12M Revelators and 15W Revelators, HAT Legatia 3's, Focal Utopia 136's and I forget what else right now.

I was able to measure all of them at various times utilizing a Bruel and Kjaer Type 2250 and an AudioControl RTA.

Kevin, I knew you had tried many different midrange speakers, but, wow. Please tell us about the qualities of these different speakers, I am all ears. What differences did you note between a dome and mid? Are the current ATC domes the best yet? which cone sounded best? I value your opinion greatly.

[Megalomaniac]

How come DLS, Dyna, & Morel are using Domes? I thought they reproduce high quality accurate sound?

Are you suggesting the TG9 is the better route to go through for off-axis response? (im not trying to put words in your mouth, i am just wanting a little bit direct response )

[Megalomaniac]

I have some drivers that i have sitting in a box. i have never used them

one set is an A/D/S Al4


the other is an Audex




Anybody know if they are any good?

[Fellippe]

[QUOTE=Megalomaniac;253468]How come DLS, Dyna, & Morel are using Domes? I thought they reproduce high quality accurate sound?

QUOTE]

Domes are high quality, smooth sound.

I just think in the applications for the manufacturers listed above, they are going for a smoother sounding speaker that can play high.

Domes seem to get a bad rap on the boards for some reason. My only question is, why should they even exist if cones are hands down superior in every way?

[Abmolech]

Domes seem to get a bad rap on the boards for some reason. My only question is, why should they even exist if cones are hands down superior in every way?

Because like everything else, it is choice.
Domes have their place, but not in any of my setups.
If we talk about toroidal on tweeters, that may be an interesting concept. But on mid range, the energy is to great for the dome material to dissipate.