| Re: Cone versus compression driver midrange [message #653 is a reply to message #645] |
Sat, 17 July 2004 10:07  |
Adrian Mack
Messages: 568
Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
I have personally only used compression drivers for the HF, but I use a cone driver for my midrange horn covering the (take a guess) midrange. I would say that either properly implemented would sound great. For example, the Commmunity M4 compression midrange driver, I've seen heaps of good feedback on that driver. Then again, a cone driven midrange horn also sounds really sweet, if optimized correctly for the intended application. One thing I should point out is probably cost - the community driver is a good few thousand dollars if I recall correctly, and most good compression drivers also cost a stack of money, especially if you're looking at ones designed to cover the midrange. The parts and technology is so expensive. On the other side, cone drivers cost next to nothing compartively and sound superb too when mounted to a horn, and you get the other benefits that Wayne mentioned such as greater excursion etc. So for me, I'd always go for a cone driven midrange horn, because they can be built for so much less $$$ but dont compromise quality!
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Get a T-Shirt!
