For those asking this question repeatedly in the comments, his review does not apply to tweeters with a waveguide. One of the specific design goals of a waveguide is to greatly reduce if not eliminate altogether edge diffraction.
Like the Paradigm Reference Studio Esprit. Nothing flush mounted, has a waveguide. Testing and tweaking I guess. Mines not flush mounted. I didn't know I can go back after the circle guide with a rabbiting bit. Now I do. The problem is my big router is too clunky for the job, on a small truncate faceplate cut. Maybe one day with a little palm router. I wouldn't be able to hear this video without non flush mounted!! Actually they are flush mount, almost total crap pc speakers. They work.
Erin in a very short period of time, your videos have become one of my favorites! Why? Because you're realistic, explain speaker/sound characteristics with the inclusion of some empirical testing, room dynamics - on axis and off axis. The best part is I actually understand what you're explaining; that understanding coming via my own ears, in my own home. Thanks!
This may not be a desirable fix for alot of people, but I've fixed a surface mounted tweeers edge defraction by adding black foam strip (1/4" wide 1/8"tall) to the outer edge of the tweeter flange. Then I added it to the outer edges of the flat front baffle. Just applied it down both side running top to bottom. My speakers baffles are black, so the narrow black foam doesnt look bad at all. With just this minor mod the speakers came to life. The mids and highs instantly sounded louder with more detail, especially at lower volumes. I'd rather have flush mounted tweeters, but for now this works
It may not be new information Erin, but it’s always going to be new to someone. And your concise, easy to follow explanation is very helpful. Really appreciate all you’re doing for those of us interested in all things audio. Many thanks!
oh dear poor edifier haha. Actually I wouldnt be too quick to dismiss the speakers shown in the images and thumbnail, while they do suffer from the issues described in this video, they are very cheap and perform well within their price range. Even Amir from ASR put the R1280T on his recommended list.
Well, Amir says a lot of stuff I don't agree with. But that's why they call them opinions. I just presented the facts of what happens when you surface mount. Value/performance is the decision made by the customer. :)
There's a big difference _on the graph_ which doesn't mean it will be a great difference for your ears as well. Remember this measurement equipment is many times more sensitive than our "ape ears". It's good practice to do but it won't make a night and day difference as is implied here.
@@scivirus3563 You obviously do not understand how this works. The diffraction is from the tweeter being about a 1/4" off the baffle.. The 1/4" dimension is VERY much a wavelength of a high frequency driver.
Here's an idea - arrange a simple test to see if anyone can hear the difference between a flush-mounted and surface-mounted tweeter in the same speaker, all else kept equal. Should be easy to arrange by adding a simple cardboard shim behind a flush-mounted tweeter to emulate it being surface mounted. How many people do you think will be able to hear the difference?
I think the off-axis response around 7-10kHz being up about 2-3dB will definitely be audible. But I'd have to arrange a setup. Regardless of *how* audible it is, it's poor design practice and not something that can be fixed once set in stone. As I'm sure you know.
@@ErinsAudioCorner this is just conjecture, really, unless it is tested... it is entirely possible that the diffuse point sources give a more pleasant spatial perspective, or not, just conjecture. Interesting topic, and one that I think nearly every speaker maker since the 1940s has wrestled with.
@@themaskedsingercucucachu8225 Linkwitz has written about it. And I can absolutely tell you that I've seen the effects from diffraction rear its ugly head by designs shooting for a flat on-axis response, not accounting for the off-axis issues of diffraction, and winding up with boosted HF in-room response. So, while the difference itself may be debatable in terms of audibility, the actual result from a poor *design* perspective isn't debatable and is audible and readily measurable.
@@themaskedsingercucucachu8225 It's not really conjecture. Additional reflected energy that create positive attributes like spaciousness, immersiveness... aren't manifested from the VER or Very Early Reflections... it's just smear, corrupted in both freq and time domain. Such characteristics you mention result from later arriving energy after a well delineated direct sound has been experienced by the listener. Ideally it's; 1.) Direct sound (a clean, phase coherent source) 2.) An adequate ITD Gap (initial time-delay) 3.) Then early reflections 4.) Finally, a diffuse reverberant sound field is experienced by the listener Subjectively this should result in a distinct image, it should resolve whatever depth existed in the recordeding, then the later arrival of the reverberant field is a pleasant bonus. I believe Toole's work established that the early reflected energy off the sidewalls can in some cases, add greater ASW, or "Apparent Source Width". Which in some cases is subjectively pleasing... if the material is well suited, and if the sidewall distance is adequately wide.
First timer here. Like others pointed out. Who cares if it is not new information? It's your interpretation of this fact and as for me I was very pleased with your way of putting things in perspective. This will help in my first build I guess!
The only time a surface mounted tweeter might not be bad is when the grille frame is designed to fit around the tweeter face, creating a smooth transition. Paradigm and some others have speakers designed like this.
Exactly, I have Studio 20 V2s and not only does the grille frame fit around both drivers, the edges of the frames are rounded to further reduce discontinuities! A very clever design technique.
Great video, particularly after I had the same question regarding the unusual surrounds on some of the Purifi drivers in your last video. As you, it has been discussed in the past, but I have NEVER seen an actual A-B comparison of the same driver like you've just presented. Man, I can't get enough of actual objective measurements and what they mean and how they impact sound and performance. I don't know how much you paid for that Klippel scanner - but I'm so glad you did....
Picture in the example i belive is Edifier 1280, and i think that all from 1100 to 1850 has surface mounting. But they are still among most sold and highest ranked budget BT active speakers under 200usd.
This mounting design is usually on powered desktop speakers under $200 like the one you show in the video. I have a pair of Edifier R1850DB that I bought on sale at Amazon for $140 a few years ago. It has the tweeter and woofer surface mounted. I use them on my computer desk connected to a DAC into a my desktop computer. It sounds good to me for the price.
So I have a pair of JBL L-100 centuries, arguably the most famous speaker ever made and certainly a well designed and great sounding speaker. This speaker has the tweeter and the mid range driver surface mounted as you describe while the woofer is flush mounted. I think there are many other factors that are far more impactful on the sound of a speaker than whether it’s elements are flush mounted or surface mounted. I will say it is an interesting exercise in measuring these differences, but by no means is this one characteristic something that should automatically qualify or disqualify a speaker especially without hearing it.
Bose 42 have a strut mounted tweeter.. not even on the box. The later 4.2 have tweeters on little angled cones, again not box mounted. They seem to be aiming for disconnection.. must be a reason.
data shows how sound is affected here. everyone gets to apply their own confirmation bias in how they want to think toward the data, that is expected. but just bc a speaker is famous doesn’t mean much. speaker design (bc of data) has changed / improved since those jbl designs. if ya like em then that is great. diffraction is def s component of sound though i figure.
So - EVERY auto audio system has the speakers surface mounted, and almost every tweeter is mounted in a pod that sits up to an inch from the surface. There are some very good auto systems out there. I agree with everything you are saying, but there are hundreds of thousands of great sounding systems in all sorts of auto, marine, off road, and aviation with surface mounted speakers! Just being real not trying to argue, as I love your videos.
Again thank you for such informative videos and explaining design flaws on speakers design! Based on your reviews, scientific data and recommendation I purchased a pair of KEF LS50W II on sale without listening to them first! They are great!
Erin, I have seen some people add stick on foam to the front edges of their cabinets. Does this help with edge diffraction . I will do an experiment with some revel m 105s
Look at Wilson Audio & what we have is "Diffraction City" with their "stacked boxes architecture" - somehow none of the so-called reviewers has called them out on this fundamental design flaw
@@r423fplip it's a "bandaid solution" - extending baffle size in this manner is pretty fugly as well & the extra gain will muck-up the response elsewhere....
So, in laypersons terms, the sound wave "trips" on the edge, and the open screw holes, and this causes part of the sound pressure wave to be slightly out of phase with the initial sound pressure wave. Depending on the frequencies, this may be in phase, or 180 degrees out of phase, which will increase or decrease the strength or the pressure wave (sound level), but will mostly add unwanted interference with the primary sound.
First of all, forget the graphs, if you like the sound of the speaker system go for it. I have the Edifier bookshelf speakers in use as my recording studio monitors and love em! I have Altec VOTTs as my main speakers driven by KT88s and after all these years, I am still in awe! Let your ears be the ultimate judge!
Agreed. I too have a couple of pairs of Edifiers and, bang for the buck, their sound (to me) is really hard to beat. With that said, I have the S2000MKIII models where the drivers are flush mounted (the tweeter even has a bit of a wave guide to it).
@@rangerrecon I think knowing what is a more preferred or better way of building a speaker might make it easier to filter out potentially "bad" speaker when buying new ones. If not going with any type of data you basically have to listen through all speakers around your budget if only go with your ears because you can't filter out any speaker out from your choices since you haven't listened to them. Would anyone entertain a speaker that is built wrong or measures horrible even if the ears are the final judge still? I think most people would probably not. Anyway data and design shouldn't be totally disregarded even if the ears makes the final decision, imo.
@cletusberkeley9441 I'm so tired of "either/or" decisions and judgments, not necessarily yours but also those in response to you. I think two things can be right at the same time and that two things can be wrong at the same time. Beware false dichotomies. It's the most common form of human understanding and categorization and it only indicates a normative desire to categorize information (regardless of the topic). But, that type of thinking is a trap. So, on one hand yes, "measurements" do make a difference and in some if not many cases this can be deceiving, especially so if the "room effects" aren't in your own room. Nonetheless, the music we hear, whether influenced by our own bias, or not still is indicative of our own experience and our own ears. Just one example: My Rogue Audio Sphinx V3 sounds great, and "warm" to my ears and I like that type of distortion. Nonetheless, it's still a well built and quality integrated hybrid amplifier. When it's coupled with my Tannoy speakers which, in their own right are noted by some to be "bright", in my room, in combination with the "warmth" I mentioned, they complement one another and the resulting sound, I would call synergy. So, they don't measure "flat" so well empirically but, my ears aren't empirical. Thanks
You should look into how Paul Barton and PSB have dealt with surface mounted tweeters. They designed their grills on some models with acoustic felts padding that allow the tweeter to become flush when they are attached. They use to include a little card saying to keep the grille on. They talk about it on the 50 year doc they've just released.
Actually, the current iteration of PSB speakers use a proprietary waveguide for tweeter mounting. Previous designs used flush mounting combined with felt surrounds in an effort to additionally reduce edge diffraction. None had surface mount tweeters to my knowledge.
Thank you for your informative video, Erin! Years ago, I used to make frequent visits to the Zaph Audio site you mentioned, and I liked it a lot for its data and general info. I also visited Seigreid Linkwitz's site and read his material on loudspeaker data, implementation and radiation patterns. I like these topics, and you are superbly presenting this subject matter in a very engaging and fun way! I thank you! 😊 🍺
You are right, the pressure zone leaves the transducer and jumps producing the air movement hopefully reaching your ear with some wave forms that resemble the intended sound from the artist. Technology/art..Like my photography....
I have triangle zetas where the tweeters appear to be more recessed so it's a bit behind the baffle. To me it sounds fine, not perfect but fairly well balanced. Like many metal tweeters, it can accentuate sibilance at times but tonally, for voices it does a fine job for budget speakers..much preferred when compared to borea 2
I'm curious how much it is influenced by sharpness of the edge or even the step distance. For example, can you radius the edge and drastically reduce the effect? And if that step down is moderate versus thin, how much does it matter. And is in the flange edge specifically causing the problem or what happens after? For example, if you have a flange step but the step down is a soft surface, does it modify the effect? I'm mostly curious what critical elements of the construction matters. The distance should affect frequency of influence, but what happens next? As a second part to this, I might expect the evenness of the edge distance would amplify the effect. But if that edge distance was non-linear, for example an oval flange or star shaped, would that reduce the magnitude of the effect? Would it damp out the behavior over a broader frequency range? Why the curiosity? Because we're not just talking speaker flanges. We're also really talking about enclosures too. Your enclosure size, your edge treatment, and even where you place the driver should influence this same effect. Do you install a tweeter center or offset slightly ? Do you purposely keep it away from edges as to not be right at the very top of the cabinet? At least through some operating range of frequency, this should matter. And if a 4" flange matters, most folks might have their tweeter, even if flush mounted, 2" or less to one of the corners of their enclosure. Should they worry? Should they change how they fundamentally place drivers into the enclosure face? (for example, MTW versus TMW) If the flange matters, the enclosure matters.
People heard about but do not know why it happens. Actually it is cooperation of two reflections - if phase of the same signal mixes in two sharply changing distances of reflection as presented here with baffle and reflection plate from speaker you get any single frequency vanishing 100% due to antiphase . Looking at dimensions step about 4mm antiphase should happen for 8 mm long wave.( 20kHz is 1,5cm long) it means we are talking about some 36 kHz. That reflection problem is at distance 5 cm from center so it will be six wave lengths after stright axis 36kHz is received . Of course some will claim for them it as audible and I congratulate them. With rounded there are more reflections filling continue way the gap. My opinion? ... no, I do not count
@@Bluehill29 In the simplest way, everything in a car is a baffle and a diffraction source. I have my tweeters flush mounted but they're right next to a window... so there's no way to get around all the issues. Best we can do is do things like flush mounting tweeters to help fix the things we can control
Lot of good technical info but at 89$ the Edifiers in specific sound really great and not only for the price, and I have them side by side with a pair of JBL HDI towers
I own the slightly better model then this one but they sound decent for the price I own a pair of jamo c95 ii and they sound incredible on a onkyo reciver but to be fair they are 400 off sale 200 on sale and even on sale they are still more than the pair a pice but I agree for there price they dont sound bad but I have a moderately bad ass system and I just gave mine away to my friend because I just didn't want them anymore they dont sound good enough for my needs they need a sub and at the time I made the mistake if getting the version that doesn't allow a sub if it did id probably keep them
Could use much more visual reference for flush mounted designs here vs the other just to make sure we can tell the difference but this great, loving your channel for certain (I just don’t have energy to do this + visit your site is all).
Been building, designing audio since 1971,retired now, in wheelchair, took a month to build last system, new tactics for good construction. 2.1 's only. I vulture tech, and DIY like the Chinese
My Klipsch KG2s use flush mounted drivers (with the woofer overlapping the tweeter). There was clearly a lot of effort put into designing these, and they weren't low budget speakers designed around production cost. Now, the tweeter is horn loaded, which changes the equation a bit. My opinion (everyone has one) is that the room is the elephant in the room. You won't hear the difference in baffle configuration if your room is not good.
Magnepan- surface, baffle mount? Psh. Kef uni-q drivers-np, mount em in the center of the woofer, perfection. Sooo many different variations. I do like externally mounted tweeters separate from the cabinet alot, especially dipolar ESS etc.
You forgot to mention this in the revival classic monitor test. Im currently designing my first speaker, and while I was trying to find a good driver layout, realised that this speaker is not really designed with diffraction and lobing in mind. So its either not that important in home audio, or aesthetics is more important :)
This is true. many moons ago, a good Danish Hi-Fi magazine tested a bunch of speakers vs the same speakers with an experimental 30mm rockwool damper front with cutout holes for the speakers and verified a dramatic increase in sound quality due to the sudden loss of edge difraction, Verified by very accurate and detailed measurements. The effect was described as switching from a cheap speaker to an electrostatic one, and Its true.
Good point! However, the Dome Tweeter is the Main reason that high end dynamic speakers have put high end audio back back 40 yrs! never been able to compete with good ribbon,or Horn Designs.I have some of the best sounding Dome Tweeter designed speakers in the industry! NO. 1; Celestion,Who Designed the first Metal Dome! That incorporated a slotted waveguide over the dome to minimize vertical reflection problems! NO.2; JM LAB/ FOCAL,who redesigned the Dome Tweeter,Creating a reverse dome that doesn't see the baffle at all! Used In Most Wilson Audio designs ( I have FOCAL Speakers ,and Separate Drivers) I build speakers,been doing so for some time! My Best design utilizes a ribbon Tweeter that also can't see the Baffle,and Horns,that also can't see the Baffle! So who Cares if a convex Dome is Flush Mounted or Not? It still has diffraction issues!
For me it all depends I buy components and I place them in different places in the room on sticks with magnets. I changed the positioning of my sound with the treble. I like the HR24 mackie tweeter with the laser wave guide. Surface or flat mount or flush. It doesn't matter if you have a grill though. I have definitive technology the original flagships from 1996 and I can never see my speakers unless I rip those socks off. It's a beautiful set up and I never really get to look at it unless I shine a really bright light.
I agree, wholeheartedly with your theory, and testing; and is actually another reason I APPLAUD whosoever designed Amazon's "Amazon Basics 80w RMS Bookshelf Speakers" which I now use as my active monitor solution and replaced my Paradigm Titan V2's with around a year ago. Since their release these speakers have jumped in price (as I predicted in my review) from $53 to over $250 and they're worth every penny in terms of sound quality, frequency response range, signal to noise ratio, waveform, and overall capability of the speakers. Granted, I'd have a MUCH harder time convincing myself they're worth what they sell for NOW, but they're EASILY worth $150 compared to some of the crap on the market being sold as "monitors."
Out of curiosity, did you find this video linked somewhere? I posted it weeks ago and I've been getting comments on it a lot the past couple days... seems like it's been shared somewhere. Don't know how else it would be gaining steam all of a sudden.
There is also a deflection point in the mortise between the driver face and the baffle. If it actually mattered, every tweeter would have a face that tapered to nothing on it's outside edge. To say that you can actually hear it is woo, plain and simple.
Totally agree. I designed a well reviewed loudspeaker about 8 yrs ago and it has unusually good dispersion matching between mid-bass and tweeter. However the baffle is narrow so diffraction has an effect. I'm thinking about a new version with a waveguide, not for matching to the mid-bass but simply to minimise baffle edge diffraction. It can take as little as a 10mm deep waveguide to help a lot. It's what happens off-axis with diffraction that often goes undiscussed.
And also equalizable word should be recommended to be added to dictionary your honour 😊😊!!! Jokes apart ... Great job Erin !!! Love your objective measurements, explanation and videos 👍👍👍😊
A way to mitigate this issue, especially if you use your speakers with the grills on or just don't care how they look is to tape foam around the tweeter, I did this to a pair of Edifier speakers my brother uses and could notice a clear reduction in the sibilance, I literally took spare foam tape that came as a sealant with the kitchen cooktop and glued around the tweeter it's similar to the foam tape we use to seal speakers in cabinets in DIY and in car audio. It just happens to be of the perfect height and since it's foam, it kinda absorbs a lot of the sound, I don't actually have acess to equipment to measure how much of a difference it made but if you find it interesting, I sure would be interested in seeing this measured, if for nothing else, at least to be sure me and my brother actually heard a difference instead of just falling for placebo effect. I don't think it was placebo, it was a very noticeable difference but it doesn't hurt to be sure. I don't recall what speaker now, but I've seen a speaker brand integrate foam on the outer edges of their tweeter facia and that gave me this idea.
Erin's assertions are not incorrect, but these refraction don't necessary determine a good or bad speaker. There are many high end excellent speakers that have surface mounted drivers. Agreed, flush mounting will reduce edge diffraction which occurs when the wave reaches sharp edges. This is more important in mid and higher frequency drivers and usually you don't need it except for looks in (large) bass drivers. But edge diffraction will also occur when the wave reaches the end of the baffle, hence a reason for beveling the baffle edge. The width of the baffle determines the baffle step and the curvature of the edges determine to a degree how smooth the transition between radiating in half to full space is.
Too bad the speaker selected as a bad one at 8:45 is an Edifier, because is actually quite a good brand. They have cheap with surface mounted tweeters and up to a point in price and style they have with flush mounted tweeters and quite good speakers. And not only that but they have a higher end brand (if you want to call it that way) called Airpulse that have quite impressive speakers. Thanks to having those cheaper ones, people on a very tight budget can have a pair of good enough speakers, with build and components quality, that last, unlike other cheap brands, and if you have more money, really good ones. I have a set of Edifier and mine are kind of in the middle, the model is "C200" and the tweeter is flush mounted, to me, but still has an outer ring that sticks out just a milimeter, probably just for decorative reasons. Wonder how much it affects.
Does this only go for dome shaped tweeters? or are more traditionally shaped paper cone tweeters also affected? My technics sb-a55 speakers sound really good to me, but they have huge surface mounted rims around the drivers, massive plastic rings that the speakers are recessed into.
That's nothing, you should see the up to 2cm thick frame in front of this iPod dock I have. They they even used nice little coaxial drivers, but sound is tarnished by the aesthetics design.
With dsp and cabinets using multi tweeters or hf drivers that will cover the hi freq spectrum your mot going to notice anything in fact in a array column design comb filtering knocks down the hf anyway unless it had a wave guide fitted
I have the Ediffier speaker u shown in the video. They sound good, I have no issue with them. 👍 Notice the tweeter sits inside the cone shape radiator which spread outwards. It’s not even the same design u have shown in your flushed tweeters. Unless u have an Ediffier and show us the test result, I am not convinced.
@@ErinsAudioCorner My point is the tweeter sits inside the cone-shape radiator, way beyond the surface of the speaker. The flushed tweeter u shown is different in term of "depth" placement.
Actually I just finished a Peerless/Dayton silk dome build.. Ya maybe one day I can flush mount the truncated :/.. I've heard many speakers. I find it hard to believe, these are the best sounding speakers for music, I've ever owned for a budget price. Not a perfect build. That's what happens when you go though many low budget, low end models. I guess you don't know good sound until you hear it.
all that work i put into buying router bits and tools pays off. and its a nice finish. could someone also mention some options to fix it on existing speakers please? heard people use felt and stuff like that, even a Dremel with the right bit could do this.
Could radius down the frame (lot of work, structural integrity considerations, debris, permanent mod) Could hand route your own countersink (possible need to consider z-offset, permanent mod) Felt could help a bit (see VAF, Duntech speakers, aesthetic considerations) Could 3D print a radius down to a thin edge (equipment cost + knowledge, aesthetic concerns) Could make this by hand too if you don't mind the work.
It is actually more about the quality of the Drivers and componets used than few mm differences in mounting. Most speakers would really benefit more if proper crossover components were used. Sadly in most cases this is not the case.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Yes true but what I have seen is that the phase problems between drivers are mostly because of the ironcore inductors. Ironcore inductors have a tendency to ruin the sound acting as a energy storage, basicly when there should be new signal coming to the speaker the old one is still kinda present and smudging also the new one. Drivers being flush mounted or not is a much smaller factor in these cases.
@@OriginalFinnish22 flush mounting va surface mounting is a first order issue. Before you even talk about crossover, the design is compromised. Pretty simple.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Truthly I have a hard time finding myself a proper pair of new speakers, probably would be easier to just buy something and replace the crossover components with better ones with the same specs. Tweeter level can almost everytime be tuned just changing the resistor value if needed.
@@ErinsAudioCorner I never said it does not matter, but feeding drivers flawed signal with ghost signals, no flush mounting is going to help. This moment Magnepan .7 would be my favourite, and those have very easy to upgrade crossovers with just few components. Been trying Magnepans in few places and that spacious sound and fast drivers oh boy. Been a hobbyist all my life and many think I'm crazy paying 600€ for in ear monitors. But Damn BA drivers are fast, and that audiotechnika's dynamic driver style bass, in their 3 way models.
I'm new to audiophile quality, so I just did a double-take on two recent used purchases - a pair of Mission and M-Audio - and both are flush mounted! Sigh of relief - lol.
I noticed that your scanning microphone was working very close to the tweeter, where you might expect diffraction effects to be the greatest. Also it didn’t seem like your apparatus had enough vertical travel to represent typical listening distances. Does the uneven response hold as you move out away from the speaker, or does it smooth back out? Your graphs likewise gave no distances.
The graphs state "2.83v @ 1m" on the y-axis. As for how the NFS works, check out this discussion with the design engineer: th-cam.com/video/-s-R1HCYUYs/w-d-xo.html
their tweeter looks like the ones you find on amazon when sorting by price, much like a visaton dtw72 but square. tho the bevel is tapered and thin on the edges
@@gamerpaddy It's a modified version which has A LOT less distortion than the original. It was originally chosen because the dispersion is terrific, but in its original form it doesn't sound or measure very well.
Having a largish radius down to a thin edge would help with flush mountability. It also looks better for using it that way. Usually used in cheaper drivers or speakers and projects, because it relieves the need for routing which costs money/difficulty for some.
A 3mm edge starts playing at about 28kHz imho. Is this true and is this a real show stopper? For CDs may be? ) About your measurements... Do you really thing that such big difference at 2kHz (6") was caused by that 3mm edge, and not by something else?
Erin, what about Paradigm Reference Studio Series speakers? They all had tweeters on a protruding plate. But with a grill in place they could be kind of flush mounted.
I'm a big fan Erin. Your videos have such valuable information. Not only informative, but also well produced. You are a kind and humble person. Question: Would it be a better idea surrounding the tweeter with damping material or flush mounting it?
You made me study my bowers & wilkins 607s2 silver anniversary speakers & I was thinking although they look like the main tweeter is impeded the metal shield covering is protruded so it's confusing.
Drivers mounted on the back of the baffle are worse. Have you ever heard the original Klipsch Heresy? The horn was rear mounted, with that smooth curve slamming into the squared baffle. I have never heard worse diffraction!
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
For those asking this question repeatedly in the comments, his review does not apply to tweeters with a waveguide. One of the specific design goals of a waveguide is to greatly reduce if not eliminate altogether edge diffraction.
I believe its because his first shot at 3 seconds in shows a tweeter with a moderate waveguide......
Like the Paradigm Reference Studio Esprit. Nothing flush mounted, has a waveguide. Testing and tweaking I guess.
Mines not flush mounted. I didn't know I can go back after the circle guide with a rabbiting bit.
Now I do. The problem is my big router is too clunky for the job, on a small truncate faceplate cut.
Maybe one day with a little palm router.
I wouldn't be able to hear this video without non flush mounted!! Actually they are flush mount, almost total crap pc speakers. They work.
His review? I thought this was a product advice video, not a product review video.
@@x-techgaming Pedantic much?
Are you telling me he went and took a picture of a popular active speakers even if it doesn't apply to his video??
Erin in a very short period of time, your videos have become one of my favorites! Why? Because you're realistic, explain speaker/sound characteristics with the inclusion of some empirical testing, room dynamics - on axis and off axis. The best part is I actually understand what you're explaining; that understanding coming via my own ears, in my own home. Thanks!
Wow, thank you!
I really like these generalized videos. Makes it a little easier to weed out speakers right off the bat. Excellent video. 👍
This may not be a desirable fix for alot of people, but I've fixed a surface mounted tweeers edge defraction by adding black foam strip (1/4" wide 1/8"tall) to the outer edge of the tweeter flange. Then I added it to the outer edges of the flat front baffle. Just applied it down both side running top to bottom. My speakers baffles are black, so the narrow black foam doesnt look bad at all. With just this minor mod the speakers came to life. The mids and highs instantly sounded louder with more detail, especially at lower volumes. I'd rather have flush mounted tweeters, but for now this works
Excellent comment - the foam dampens, or removes, the unwanted frequencies introduced by the step(s).
It may not be new information Erin, but it’s always going to be new to someone. And your concise, easy to follow explanation is very helpful. Really appreciate all you’re doing for those of us interested in all things audio. Many thanks!
It was new to me! I second this, appreciate everything you do Erin.
Good advice for the DIY crowd as well. It's not just the sound, they look so much better flush mounted too.
@ibstudios that's because they're either stupid/ignorant or assume their customer base is also stupid/ignorant.
oh dear poor edifier haha. Actually I wouldnt be too quick to dismiss the speakers shown in the images and thumbnail, while they do suffer from the issues described in this video, they are very cheap and perform well within their price range. Even Amir from ASR put the R1280T on his recommended list.
Well, Amir says a lot of stuff I don't agree with. But that's why they call them opinions. I just presented the facts of what happens when you surface mount. Value/performance is the decision made by the customer. :)
Lol - I listened to this video on a pair of Edifier S2000MKIII speakers...
That's surprising how much difference it makes for something that seems so small. Great work Erin!
it doesn't its purely for looks .Tweeters cant produce low enough waves to have this a problem
There's a big difference _on the graph_ which doesn't mean it will be a great difference for your ears as well. Remember this measurement equipment is many times more sensitive than our "ape ears".
It's good practice to do but it won't make a night and day difference as is implied here.
@@scivirus3563
That's obviously not true, maybe you should learn how to read a frequency response graph.
@@scivirus3563 You obviously do not understand how this works. The diffraction is from the tweeter being about a 1/4" off the baffle.. The 1/4" dimension is VERY much a wavelength of a high frequency driver.
Amazing how much of a difference a few mm can make! Thanks for the video 👍👍
That's what she said!!!!! (sorry, I couldn't help myself)
@@ErinsAudioCorner 😁
You'll be amazed that sound is as big as it's carrier atom.
How big is the air atom? Even a millimeter distance is way too big for it obviously.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Is this valid for full-range speakers?
Here's an idea - arrange a simple test to see if anyone can hear the difference between a flush-mounted and surface-mounted tweeter in the same speaker, all else kept equal. Should be easy to arrange by adding a simple cardboard shim behind a flush-mounted tweeter to emulate it being surface mounted. How many people do you think will be able to hear the difference?
I think the off-axis response around 7-10kHz being up about 2-3dB will definitely be audible. But I'd have to arrange a setup. Regardless of *how* audible it is, it's poor design practice and not something that can be fixed once set in stone. As I'm sure you know.
@@ErinsAudioCorner this is just conjecture, really, unless it is tested... it is entirely possible that the diffuse point sources give a more pleasant spatial perspective, or not, just conjecture. Interesting topic, and one that I think nearly every speaker maker since the 1940s has wrestled with.
@@themaskedsingercucucachu8225 1000%
@@themaskedsingercucucachu8225 Linkwitz has written about it. And I can absolutely tell you that I've seen the effects from diffraction rear its ugly head by designs shooting for a flat on-axis response, not accounting for the off-axis issues of diffraction, and winding up with boosted HF in-room response. So, while the difference itself may be debatable in terms of audibility, the actual result from a poor *design* perspective isn't debatable and is audible and readily measurable.
@@themaskedsingercucucachu8225
It's not really conjecture.
Additional reflected energy that create positive attributes like spaciousness, immersiveness... aren't manifested from the VER or Very Early Reflections... it's just smear, corrupted in both freq and time domain.
Such characteristics you mention result from later arriving energy after a well delineated direct sound has been experienced by the listener.
Ideally it's;
1.) Direct sound (a clean, phase coherent source)
2.) An adequate ITD Gap (initial time-delay)
3.) Then early reflections
4.) Finally, a diffuse reverberant sound field is experienced by the listener
Subjectively this should result in a distinct image, it should resolve whatever depth existed in the recordeding, then the later arrival of the reverberant field is a pleasant bonus.
I believe Toole's work established that the early reflected energy off the sidewalls can in some cases, add greater ASW, or "Apparent Source Width".
Which in some cases is subjectively pleasing... if the material is well suited, and if the sidewall distance is adequately wide.
On a blind test, can a person differentiate the flush mounted and the surface mounted?
First timer here.
Like others pointed out. Who cares if it is not new information?
It's your interpretation of this fact and as for me I was very pleased with your way of putting things in perspective.
This will help in my first build I guess!
The only time a surface mounted tweeter might not be bad is when the grille frame is designed to fit around the tweeter face, creating a smooth transition. Paradigm and some others have speakers designed like this.
Exactly, I have Studio 20 V2s and not only does the grille frame fit around both drivers, the edges of the frames are rounded to further reduce discontinuities! A very clever design technique.
I have to say the Studio 60v5’s and Studio CC690v5 have been some of the best sounding speakers in my LRC soundstage I’ve ever had.
Yes, PSB speakers too would come with a card telling customers to keep the grille on for this reason.
Then you have an edge around the hole on the front.
Great video, particularly after I had the same question regarding the unusual surrounds on some of the Purifi drivers in your last video. As you, it has been discussed in the past, but I have NEVER seen an actual A-B comparison of the same driver like you've just presented. Man, I can't get enough of actual objective measurements and what they mean and how they impact sound and performance. I don't know how much you paid for that Klippel scanner - but I'm so glad you did....
Picture in the example i belive is Edifier 1280, and i think that all from 1100 to 1850 has surface mounting. But they are still among most sold and highest ranked budget BT active speakers under 200usd.
Just ordered 1280 with T5.. and wonder if leaving grill on helps with this?
That time laps of microphone testing is awesome. The work that goes into acoustic tuning is insane.
This mounting design is usually on powered desktop speakers under $200 like the one you show in the video. I have a pair of Edifier R1850DB that I bought on sale at Amazon for $140 a few years ago. It has the tweeter and woofer surface mounted. I use them on my computer desk connected to a DAC into a my desktop computer. It sounds good to me for the price.
What is your dac of choice, I'm doing some research
@GiJoe I use a Schitt Modi for the computer setup.
So I have a pair of JBL L-100 centuries, arguably the most famous speaker ever made and certainly a well designed and great sounding speaker. This speaker has the tweeter and the mid range driver surface mounted as you describe while the woofer is flush mounted.
I think there are many other factors that are far more impactful on the sound of a speaker than whether it’s elements are flush mounted or surface mounted.
I will say it is an interesting exercise in measuring these differences, but by no means is this one characteristic something that should automatically qualify or disqualify a speaker especially without hearing it.
actually the tweeter is flush in the JBL models... the mid range is surface mounted, thogh.... i think it has to be with dispersion
Bose 42 have a strut mounted tweeter.. not even on the box.
The later 4.2 have tweeters on little angled cones, again not box mounted. They seem to be aiming for disconnection.. must be a reason.
data shows how sound is affected here. everyone gets to apply their own confirmation bias in how they want to think toward the data, that is expected. but just bc a speaker is famous doesn’t mean much. speaker design (bc of data) has changed / improved since those jbl designs. if ya like em then that is great. diffraction is def s component of sound though i figure.
So - EVERY auto audio system has the speakers surface mounted, and almost every tweeter is mounted in a pod that sits up to an inch from the surface. There are some very good auto systems out there. I agree with everything you are saying, but there are hundreds of thousands of great sounding systems in all sorts of auto, marine, off road, and aviation with surface mounted speakers! Just being real not trying to argue, as I love your videos.
Again thank you for such informative videos and explaining design flaws on speakers design! Based on your reviews, scientific data and recommendation I purchased a pair of KEF LS50W II on sale without listening to them first! They are great!
Really enjoyed this quick 'primer' style video on a specific subject.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge, Erin 👍
Awesome! Thanks for the feedback!
Erin, I have seen some people add stick on foam to the front edges of their cabinets. Does this help with edge diffraction . I will do an experiment with some revel m 105s
Look at Wilson Audio & what we have is "Diffraction City" with their "stacked boxes architecture" - somehow none of the so-called reviewers has called them out on this fundamental design flaw
@@r423fplip it's a "bandaid solution" - extending baffle size in this manner is pretty fugly as well & the extra gain will muck-up the response elsewhere....
Not being an audiophile, the Edifier powered speakers sound good paired with my computer.
So, in laypersons terms, the sound wave "trips" on the edge, and the open screw holes, and this causes part of the sound pressure wave to be slightly out of phase with the initial sound pressure wave.
Depending on the frequencies, this may be in phase, or 180 degrees out of phase, which will increase or decrease the strength or the pressure wave (sound level), but will mostly add unwanted interference with the primary sound.
Yep! You got it!
First of all, forget the graphs, if you like the sound of the speaker system go for it. I have the Edifier bookshelf speakers in use as my recording studio monitors and love em! I have Altec VOTTs as my main speakers driven by KT88s and after all these years, I am still in awe!
Let your ears be the ultimate judge!
No, the point is data makes good sound! How dare you even think your ears are the tool needed to make a subjective opinion
Agreed. I too have a couple of pairs of Edifiers and, bang for the buck, their sound (to me) is really hard to beat. With that said, I have the S2000MKIII models where the drivers are flush mounted (the tweeter even has a bit of a wave guide to it).
@@rangerrecon I think knowing what is a more preferred or better way of building a speaker might make it easier to filter out potentially "bad" speaker when buying new ones. If not going with any type of data you basically have to listen through all speakers around your budget if only go with your ears because you can't filter out any speaker out from your choices since you haven't listened to them. Would anyone entertain a speaker that is built wrong or measures horrible even if the ears are the final judge still? I think most people would probably not.
Anyway data and design shouldn't be totally disregarded even if the ears makes the final decision, imo.
@cletusberkeley9441 I'm so tired of "either/or" decisions and judgments, not necessarily yours but also those in response to you. I think two things can be right at the same time and that two things can be wrong at the same time. Beware false dichotomies. It's the most common form of human understanding and categorization and it only indicates a normative desire to categorize information (regardless of the topic). But, that type of thinking is a trap. So, on one hand yes, "measurements" do make a difference and in some if not many cases this can be deceiving, especially so if the "room effects" aren't in your own room. Nonetheless, the music we hear, whether influenced by our own bias, or not still is indicative of our own experience and our own ears. Just one example: My Rogue Audio Sphinx V3 sounds great, and "warm" to my ears and I like that type of distortion. Nonetheless, it's still a well built and quality integrated hybrid amplifier. When it's coupled with my Tannoy speakers which, in their own right are noted by some to be "bright", in my room, in combination with the "warmth" I mentioned, they complement one another and the resulting sound, I would call synergy. So, they don't measure "flat" so well empirically but, my ears aren't empirical. Thanks
You should look into how Paul Barton and PSB have dealt with surface mounted tweeters. They designed their grills on some models with acoustic felts padding that allow the tweeter to become flush when they are attached. They use to include a little card saying to keep the grille on. They talk about it on the 50 year doc they've just released.
Actually, the current iteration of PSB speakers use a proprietary waveguide for tweeter mounting. Previous designs used flush mounting combined with felt surrounds in an effort to additionally reduce edge diffraction. None had surface mount tweeters to my knowledge.
Your channel is definitely one of my favorites in audio because of videos like this
I knew I flush mounted all my speakers for a reason! 😉 good info man, thank you
🤣😅😭
No problem 👍
Thank you for your informative video, Erin! Years ago, I used to make frequent visits to the Zaph Audio site you mentioned, and I liked it a lot for its data and general info. I also visited Seigreid Linkwitz's site and read his material on loudspeaker data, implementation and radiation patterns. I like these topics, and you are superbly presenting this subject matter in a very engaging and fun way! I thank you! 😊 🍺
Well, thank you very much.
You are right, the pressure zone leaves the transducer and jumps producing the air movement hopefully reaching your ear with some wave forms that resemble the intended sound from the artist. Technology/art..Like my photography....
I have triangle zetas where the tweeters appear to be more recessed so it's a bit behind the baffle. To me it sounds fine, not perfect but fairly well balanced. Like many metal tweeters, it can accentuate sibilance at times but tonally, for voices it does a fine job for budget speakers..much preferred when compared to borea 2
The same problem
I'm curious how much it is influenced by sharpness of the edge or even the step distance. For example, can you radius the edge and drastically reduce the effect? And if that step down is moderate versus thin, how much does it matter. And is in the flange edge specifically causing the problem or what happens after? For example, if you have a flange step but the step down is a soft surface, does it modify the effect? I'm mostly curious what critical elements of the construction matters. The distance should affect frequency of influence, but what happens next? As a second part to this, I might expect the evenness of the edge distance would amplify the effect. But if that edge distance was non-linear, for example an oval flange or star shaped, would that reduce the magnitude of the effect? Would it damp out the behavior over a broader frequency range?
Why the curiosity? Because we're not just talking speaker flanges. We're also really talking about enclosures too. Your enclosure size, your edge treatment, and even where you place the driver should influence this same effect. Do you install a tweeter center or offset slightly ? Do you purposely keep it away from edges as to not be right at the very top of the cabinet? At least through some operating range of frequency, this should matter. And if a 4" flange matters, most folks might have their tweeter, even if flush mounted, 2" or less to one of the corners of their enclosure. Should they worry? Should they change how they fundamentally place drivers into the enclosure face? (for example, MTW versus TMW) If the flange matters, the enclosure matters.
Buy the Loudspeaker Design Cookbook by Joe D'Appolito to start.....It all matters.
People heard about but do not know why it happens. Actually it is cooperation of two reflections - if phase of the same signal mixes in two sharply changing distances of reflection as presented here with baffle and reflection plate from speaker you get any single frequency vanishing 100% due to antiphase
. Looking at dimensions step about 4mm antiphase should happen for 8 mm long wave.( 20kHz is 1,5cm long) it means we are talking about some 36 kHz.
That reflection problem is at distance 5 cm from center so it will be six wave lengths after stright axis 36kHz is received . Of course some will claim for them it as audible and I congratulate them. With rounded there are more reflections filling continue way the gap. My opinion? ... no, I do not count
I mean it is a optical issue too, flush mounted speaker look much better.
Thanks for this info ,found it useful to spot cheaply made speakers,even by established brands at times
Erin thank you for bringing this to my attention: my custom pillars are not flush mounted and this is my next goal on my updates
Car is a bit different but it still is good practice to flush mount when possible.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Care to elaborate how cars are different in terms of mounting? Thanks for the great vid!
@@Bluehill29 In the simplest way, everything in a car is a baffle and a diffraction source. I have my tweeters flush mounted but they're right next to a window... so there's no way to get around all the issues. Best we can do is do things like flush mounting tweeters to help fix the things we can control
Lot of good technical info but at 89$ the Edifiers in specific sound really great and not only for the price, and I have them side by side with a pair of JBL HDI towers
I own the slightly better model then this one but they sound decent for the price I own a pair of jamo c95 ii and they sound incredible on a onkyo reciver but to be fair they are 400 off sale 200 on sale and even on sale they are still more than the pair a pice but I agree for there price they dont sound bad but I have a moderately bad ass system and I just gave mine away to my friend because I just didn't want them anymore they dont sound good enough for my needs they need a sub and at the time I made the mistake if getting the version that doesn't allow a sub if it did id probably keep them
Plus the Edifiers have a waveguide on their Tweeter too to aid defraction. Cracking little speakers for the money.
Love a video where the first 5 seconds is all I need to watch.
Could use much more visual reference for flush mounted designs here vs the other just to make sure we can tell the difference but this great, loving your channel for certain (I just don’t have energy to do this + visit your site is all).
i am impressed by how the mounted option flush vs surface can be seen on the measurements! thanks
Been building, designing audio since
1971,retired now, in wheelchair, took a month to build last system, new tactics for good construction. 2.1 's only. I vulture tech, and DIY like the Chinese
You're most likely correct , plus flush mounted looks better too.
Anyways, that Edifier speaker is not classified as a hi-fi product. More likely a midclass computer speaker. I have one 😅
My Klipsch KG2s use flush mounted drivers (with the woofer overlapping the tweeter). There was clearly a lot of effort put into designing these, and they weren't low budget speakers designed around production cost. Now, the tweeter is horn loaded, which changes the equation a bit. My opinion (everyone has one) is that the room is the elephant in the room. You won't hear the difference in baffle configuration if your room is not good.
Magnepan- surface, baffle mount? Psh.
Kef uni-q drivers-np, mount em in the center of the woofer, perfection.
Sooo many different variations. I do like externally mounted tweeters separate from the cabinet alot, especially dipolar ESS etc.
You forgot to mention this in the revival classic monitor test. Im currently designing my first speaker, and while I was trying to find a good driver layout, realised that this speaker is not really designed with diffraction and lobing in mind. So its either not that important in home audio, or aesthetics is more important :)
This is true. many moons ago, a good Danish Hi-Fi magazine tested a bunch of speakers vs the same speakers with an experimental
30mm rockwool damper front with cutout holes for the speakers and verified a dramatic increase in sound quality due to the sudden
loss of edge difraction, Verified by very accurate and detailed measurements. The effect was described as switching from a cheap
speaker to an electrostatic one, and Its true.
Interesting video my towers have dome flush tweeters they’re old school but I love them sounds amazing to my ears.
Good point! However, the Dome Tweeter is the Main reason that high end dynamic speakers have put high end audio back back 40 yrs! never been able to compete with good ribbon,or Horn Designs.I have some of the best sounding Dome Tweeter designed speakers in the industry! NO. 1; Celestion,Who Designed the first Metal Dome! That incorporated a slotted waveguide over the dome to minimize vertical reflection problems! NO.2; JM LAB/ FOCAL,who redesigned the Dome Tweeter,Creating a reverse dome that doesn't see the baffle at all! Used In Most Wilson Audio designs ( I have FOCAL Speakers ,and Separate Drivers) I build speakers,been doing so for some time! My Best design utilizes a ribbon Tweeter that also can't see the Baffle,and Horns,that also can't see the Baffle! So who Cares if a convex Dome is Flush Mounted or Not? It still has diffraction issues!
Thanks you so much for coining the term 'equalizable'. This explains alot.
Now I went back to check the spinorama of Edifier 1280T and it seems to have the exact issue at the treble. Interesting.
When I flush my toilet it sounds pretty good!
@@chanslorvalorum6905 Yes, to be completely clear, I flush my surface mounted toilet.
uh-oh @tekton speaker co! 😂 kinda wondered about their designs being strange ish.
Good info sir!!
For me it all depends I buy components and I place them in different places in the room on sticks with magnets. I changed the positioning of my sound with the treble.
I like the HR24 mackie tweeter with the laser wave guide.
Surface or flat mount or flush. It doesn't matter if you have a grill though. I have definitive technology the original flagships from 1996 and I can never see my speakers unless I rip those socks off. It's a beautiful set up and I never really get to look at it unless I shine a really bright light.
I agree, wholeheartedly with your theory, and testing; and is actually another reason I APPLAUD whosoever designed Amazon's "Amazon Basics 80w RMS Bookshelf Speakers" which I now use as my active monitor solution and replaced my Paradigm Titan V2's with around a year ago.
Since their release these speakers have jumped in price (as I predicted in my review) from $53 to over $250 and they're worth every penny in terms of sound quality, frequency response range, signal to noise ratio, waveform, and overall capability of the speakers. Granted, I'd have a MUCH harder time convincing myself they're worth what they sell for NOW, but they're EASILY worth $150 compared to some of the crap on the market being sold as "monitors."
Out of curiosity, did you find this video linked somewhere? I posted it weeks ago and I've been getting comments on it a lot the past couple days... seems like it's been shared somewhere. Don't know how else it would be gaining steam all of a sudden.
@@ErinsAudioCorner It just appeared in my yt feed, but I do participate in a lot of audio based videos so that's likely why.
I'm a fan of the waveguide mounted tweeter - if implemented well - myself. Get's more efficiency from the tweeter, all things considered
The whole video i was breaking my head what's on your tshirt man .... Thanks a lot for clarifying it's saw dust. Now I'm at peace 😂😂😂😂👍👍👍👍
There is also a deflection point in the mortise between the driver face and the baffle. If it actually mattered, every tweeter would have a face that tapered to nothing on it's outside edge. To say that you can actually hear it is woo, plain and simple.
Thank you. The truth is always in the measurement.
That Peerless DX25 is a good value priced tweeter. Been using them for years.
The human ear is not picking up those differences.
But is going to pick up the 3dB+ from the off-axis effects when the designer tries to flatten the on-axis response. 👍
Totally agree. I designed a well reviewed loudspeaker about 8 yrs ago and it has unusually good dispersion matching between mid-bass and tweeter. However the baffle is narrow so diffraction has an effect. I'm thinking about a new version with a waveguide, not for matching to the mid-bass but simply to minimise baffle edge diffraction. It can take as little as a 10mm deep waveguide to help a lot. It's what happens off-axis with diffraction that often goes undiscussed.
And also equalizable word should be recommended to be added to dictionary your honour 😊😊!!! Jokes apart ... Great job Erin !!! Love your objective measurements, explanation and videos 👍👍👍😊
Absolute excellent video Erin and well explained..
I have an old Dunlavy SC lll speakers
You should see how the intergrate their tweeter to the enclosure! Great vid with good valuable information 👍
You should go over bad speakers configurations. Example like midwoofer tweeter woofer.
A way to mitigate this issue, especially if you use your speakers with the grills on or just don't care how they look is to tape foam around the tweeter, I did this to a pair of Edifier speakers my brother uses and could notice a clear reduction in the sibilance, I literally took spare foam tape that came as a sealant with the kitchen cooktop and glued around the tweeter it's similar to the foam tape we use to seal speakers in cabinets in DIY and in car audio. It just happens to be of the perfect height and since it's foam, it kinda absorbs a lot of the sound, I don't actually have acess to equipment to measure how much of a difference it made but if you find it interesting, I sure would be interested in seeing this measured, if for nothing else, at least to be sure me and my brother actually heard a difference instead of just falling for placebo effect. I don't think it was placebo, it was a very noticeable difference but it doesn't hurt to be sure.
I don't recall what speaker now, but I've seen a speaker brand integrate foam on the outer edges of their tweeter facia and that gave me this idea.
John Dunlavy patented it.
Erin's assertions are not incorrect, but these refraction don't necessary determine a good or bad speaker. There are many high end excellent speakers that have surface mounted drivers. Agreed, flush mounting will reduce edge diffraction which occurs when the wave reaches sharp edges. This is more important in mid and higher frequency drivers and usually you don't need it except for looks in (large) bass drivers. But edge diffraction will also occur when the wave reaches the end of the baffle, hence a reason for beveling the baffle edge. The width of the baffle determines the baffle step and the curvature of the edges determine to a degree how smooth the transition between radiating in half to full space is.
The term you were looking for at around 6:40 .. "de-embedding."
Literally my desktop Edifiers.
Dangit! I knew that was going to happen! Apologies! LOL
@@ErinsAudioCorner No worries, I bought them off my brother.
I'm looking to go separates for my desktop, got any suggestions?
Erin. Your content is amazing. Full stop.
Wow, thank you!
Excellent info as always man, excellent.
Much appreciated!
Too bad the speaker selected as a bad one at 8:45 is an Edifier, because is actually quite a good brand. They have cheap with surface mounted tweeters and up to a point in price and style they have with flush mounted tweeters and quite good speakers. And not only that but they have a higher end brand (if you want to call it that way) called Airpulse that have quite impressive speakers. Thanks to having those cheaper ones, people on a very tight budget can have a pair of good enough speakers, with build and components quality, that last, unlike other cheap brands, and if you have more money, really good ones.
I have a set of Edifier and mine are kind of in the middle, the model is "C200" and the tweeter is flush mounted, to me, but still has an outer ring that sticks out just a milimeter, probably just for decorative reasons. Wonder how much it affects.
Does this only go for dome shaped tweeters? or are more traditionally shaped paper cone tweeters also affected? My technics sb-a55 speakers sound really good to me, but they have huge surface mounted rims around the drivers, massive plastic rings that the speakers are recessed into.
actually you would want every speaker driver to be flush mounted. in reality... makes little difference if any . but its a nice touch.
Hi I'm now subbed and will be implementing this onto some older designs as I collect 70s audio to
The reference speaker used is edifier 1280db.. so we must avoid buying effort l edifier 1280.. Thanks
Would explain my issue with my Denon & Sony speakers from the ferret talk, thanks, Erin!
That's nothing, you should see the up to 2cm thick frame in front of this iPod dock I have. They they even used nice little coaxial drivers, but sound is tarnished by the aesthetics design.
Thanks, appreciate learning from your channel
Even my $40/pair Dayton Audio B452-AIR speakers have flush-mounted AMT tweeters. 👍
With dsp and cabinets using multi tweeters or hf drivers that will cover the hi freq spectrum your mot going to notice anything in fact in a array column design comb filtering knocks down the hf anyway unless it had a wave guide fitted
Real tweeters consist of compression driver and horn. Everything else is not even pro stuff, but childs play.
I have the Ediffier speaker u shown in the video. They sound good, I have no issue with them. 👍 Notice the tweeter sits inside the cone shape radiator which spread outwards. It’s not even the same design u have shown in your flushed tweeters. Unless u have an Ediffier and show us the test result, I am not convinced.
If you like your speaker then why let my video showing issues with these types of mounting bother you? Enjoy what you have.
@@ErinsAudioCorner My point is the tweeter sits inside the cone-shape radiator, way beyond the surface of the speaker. The flushed tweeter u shown is different in term of "depth" placement.
I flush mounted Tweeter, Mid range, and 12 inch woofers. right into the drywall of my room. sounds increadibl. no port.
Actually I just finished a Peerless/Dayton silk dome build.. Ya maybe one day I can flush mount the truncated :/.. I've heard many speakers. I find it hard to believe, these are the best sounding speakers for music, I've ever owned for a budget price. Not a perfect build. That's what happens when you go though many low budget, low end models. I guess you don't know good sound until you hear it.
all that work i put into buying router bits and tools pays off. and its a nice finish.
could someone also mention some options to fix it on existing speakers please?
heard people use felt and stuff like that, even a Dremel with the right bit could do this.
Could radius down the frame (lot of work, structural integrity considerations, debris, permanent mod)
Could hand route your own countersink (possible need to consider z-offset, permanent mod)
Felt could help a bit (see VAF, Duntech speakers, aesthetic considerations)
Could 3D print a radius down to a thin edge (equipment cost + knowledge, aesthetic concerns) Could make this by hand too if you don't mind the work.
It is actually more about the quality of the Drivers and componets used than few mm differences in mounting. Most speakers would really benefit more if proper crossover components were used. Sadly in most cases this is not the case.
Two things can be true at once.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Yes true but what I have seen is that the phase problems between drivers are mostly because of the ironcore inductors. Ironcore inductors have a tendency to ruin the sound acting as a energy storage, basicly when there should be new signal coming to the speaker the old one is still kinda present and smudging also the new one. Drivers being flush mounted or not is a much smaller factor in these cases.
@@OriginalFinnish22 flush mounting va surface mounting is a first order issue. Before you even talk about crossover, the design is compromised. Pretty simple.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Truthly I have a hard time finding myself a proper pair of new speakers, probably would be easier to just buy something and replace the crossover components with better ones with the same specs. Tweeter level can almost everytime be tuned just changing the resistor value if needed.
@@ErinsAudioCorner I never said it does not matter, but feeding drivers flawed signal with ghost signals, no flush mounting is going to help. This moment Magnepan .7 would be my favourite, and those have very easy to upgrade crossovers with just few components. Been trying Magnepans in few places and that spacious sound and fast drivers oh boy. Been a hobbyist all my life and many think I'm crazy paying 600€ for in ear monitors. But Damn BA drivers are fast, and that audiotechnika's dynamic driver style bass, in their 3 way models.
I'm new to audiophile quality, so I just did a double-take on two recent used purchases - a pair of Mission and M-Audio - and both are flush mounted! Sigh of relief - lol.
LOL. Awesome, man! Whew!
I noticed that your scanning microphone was working very close to the tweeter, where you might expect diffraction effects to be the greatest. Also it didn’t seem like your apparatus had enough vertical travel to represent typical listening distances. Does the uneven response hold as you move out away from the speaker, or does it smooth back out? Your graphs likewise gave no distances.
The graphs state "2.83v @ 1m" on the y-axis. As for how the NFS works, check out this discussion with the design engineer: th-cam.com/video/-s-R1HCYUYs/w-d-xo.html
Well, Ino Audio piP has surface mounted tweeter and it's among the best I've heard. And it measures really well too.
Where are the measurements?
their tweeter looks like the ones you find on amazon when sorting by price, much like a visaton dtw72 but square. tho the bevel is tapered and thin on the edges
@@gamerpaddy It's a modified version which has A LOT less distortion than the original. It was originally chosen because the dispersion is terrific, but in its original form it doesn't sound or measure very well.
Having a largish radius down to a thin edge would help with flush mountability. It also looks better for using it that way. Usually used in cheaper drivers or speakers and projects, because it relieves the need for routing which costs money/difficulty for some.
Cover with neoprene,so drivers will be flush and covers mess up acoustics at best
A 3mm edge starts playing at about 28kHz imho. Is this true and is this a real show stopper? For CDs may be? )
About your measurements... Do you really thing that such big difference at 2kHz (6") was caused by that 3mm edge, and not by something else?
Yes. It’s a simple A/B test.
Erin, what about Paradigm Reference Studio Series speakers? They all had tweeters on a protruding plate. But with a grill in place they could be kind of flush mounted.
That should measure close to flashed mounting.
This may be true with most speakers, but Tekton Designs has surface mounted tweeters on their speakers and they are amazing so how is that?
Thanks Erin! Is the same true for different tweeter designs (horn loaded, ribbon, air motion transformer, etc.)?
I'm a big fan Erin. Your videos have such valuable information. Not only informative, but also well produced. You are a kind and humble person.
Question: Would it be a better idea surrounding the tweeter with damping material or flush mounting it?
Good topic. Learnt imp point. Helps me to making better speakers.
Excellent
Tekton could learn a lot from this video. Too soon? ;)
You made me study my bowers & wilkins 607s2 silver anniversary speakers & I was thinking although they look like the main tweeter is impeded the metal shield covering is protruded so it's confusing.
Excellent video. Thank you, Erin
Glad it was helpful!
Drivers mounted on the back of the baffle are worse. Have you ever heard the original Klipsch Heresy? The horn was rear mounted, with that smooth curve slamming into the squared baffle. I have never heard worse diffraction!