TAD-2001 + K400

[artto]

Has anyone here used a TAD-2001 driver on a K400 horn using the standard passive Klipsch crossover? Mine is are type AA.

I'm just considering a transitional upgrade on the way to K402 with a JBL 2327 throat adapter with EV DX38 crossover.

FWIW, from my own personal perspective, it seems that if you're not using the TAD-2001 in a large venue or sound reinforcement situation, the 1" 2001 should do fine and be more than adequate in a home system. Also, it seems to me that "all things being equal" per se', the smaller diaphram is lighter and should provide better transient response and extended frequency response. However, as we all know, "the proof is in the pudding".

Any and all insight are welcome (even if I don't necessarily agree, unless of course you provide some actual documentation as opposed to subjective opinion)

[]

EDIT: the info on the TAD website seems kind of inconsistent with regards to frequency response and "highest recommended crossover" for the 4003, 4002, 4001, 2002 & 2001 drivers. I've got an email into their local dealer to try and clarify things.

Also, it appears that IMAX uses the TAD-2001 driver on some of their speaker systems designed by Sonic Associates.

[PrestonTom]

I am half way through a similar experiment so these are the data so far.

I had been using the K-510 (the K-402's little brother) with a JBL 2446 driver. This is a 2in throated horn with a 2 in throated driver. It sounds quite good (it is on a Jubilee copy bass bin). The JBL driver is quite a bit less expensive then the TADs, but it still sounds quite good (the JBL 2445 is also a good driver). There are a ton of these on the used market.

Recently, I took the plunge and got a K-402 horn. When you buy them they will come with a K-69 driver (both are 2 inch throats). This stock version sounds good, very good (better than what I had before). I have not a had a chance to do the obvious swaps (K69 on the K-510 or the JBL 2446 on the K-402).

What I have learned so far is that the horn is the big item to worry about, after that then you can worry about the driver (within reason ....).

One other tidbit: In my limited experience, throat adapters are generally not a good idea and you should avoid then if possible.

[The Dude]

Is that the 2446h, and the 2445h. What are the drivers made of.

[The Dude]

All so what is the frequency range of the 510

[Chris A]

it seems to me that "all things being equal" per se', the smaller diaphram is lighter and should provide better transient response and extended frequency response.

A relevant quote:

...All distortion is not created equal: If you have two drivers, one a 2" diaphragm and the other a 3" driver and the phase plug, vc, back air chamber, diap., etc. have all been optimized equally and the same, then distortion goes down with increasing diaphragm [area]; you know, less displacement. Paul believed and proved that if the above held true, then it came down to displacement which helps to generate more intermod distortion and thus overrode...in priority.

Chris

[artto]

I am half way through a similar experiment so these are the data so far.

One other tidbit: In my limited experience, throat adapters are generally not a good idea and you should avoid then if possible.

Thanks Tom.

I have absolutely no experience using throat adapters, nor trying to measure or calculate any differences. But "intuitively", it seems that unless the throat adapter is designed and made in such a way as to be an extension of the horn flare, that there would most likely be any number of problems that would arise and cause some kind of audible degradation in sound quality, if not measured performance. So unless someone can prove otherwise, your response kind of confirms my suspicions.

[artto]

it seems to me that "all things being equal" per se', the smaller diaphram is lighter and should provide better transient response and extended frequency response.

A relevant quote:

...All distortion is not created equal: If you have two drivers, one a 2" diaphragm and the other a 3" driver and the phase plug, vc, back air chamber, diap., etc. have all been optimized equally and the same, then distortion goes down with increasing diaphragm [area]; you know, less displacement. Paul believed and proved that if the above held true, then it came down to displacement which helps to generate more intermod distortion and thus overrode...in priority.

Chris

OK Chris. I'm going to play "devil's advocate" here [6]

First, while I realize that transient response has a relationship to distortion (and frequency response), note that my statement was about transient response and frequency response, not distortion specifically. And there is a reason for this.

We're talking about a high frequency driver here. The reason I make the distinction is that as we go lower in frequency, the longer the wavelengths become and there is a benefit in having more driver surface area to move (displace) more air as required by the longer wavelengths.

In professional sound applications the requirements place a very high priority on reliability. Furthermore, in professional applications products are seeing use in situations that simply do not exist in virtually any residential environment. (think GE AC4400 locomotive or Kenworth T800 verses a Ford Focus, or even a Ferrari 458 for personal transportation). The sound pressure levels required at the driver/loudspeaker and the volume of space and distance required for sound distribution and projection are extremely different.

That being said, when it gets down to even a quite large dedicated A/V rooms as some of here have, there is simply no comparison to what is required in pro sound applications.

With that in mind, I have to wonder where the distortion levels, due to lower diaphram displacement, especially in regards to mid/treble drivers, becomes so low that other things become more important. For instance, does controlled directivity become more important in a domestic environment than in large venues or outdoors in order to minimize early reflections from bouncing off the walls? Is transient response more audidle in this situation than in a large venue? And certainly high frequency extension is more audible in a domestic situation as it is a well know fact that high frequency response falls off pretty rapidy in even the best concert halls while in a residential environment they will tend to bounce around more since there's far less distance to contend with.

In regards to Roy's quote, I'm a little confused. "Paul believed and proved that if the above held true, then it came down
to displacement which helps to generate more intermod distortion and
thus overrode...in priority." It seems to me that the less a driver cone/diaphram has to move, the lower the intermodulation distortion would be. Maybe its just the way its stated but it sounds confusing. And while this is quite audible at lower frequencies, I have to wonder at what point it's no longer a factor at higher frequencies in far less demanding situations.

And last but not least, just for fun, one of my favorite contradictory statements. "IF" grandma had balls she'd be grandpa. It would be nice "IF" all things were actually equal (that would make it easy), but the reality is they're not.

At any rate, the potential problems associated with using a throat adapter on the K400/K500 with a TAD-2001, and then again when I switch over to the K402, probably out weigh any possible benefits, so it's probably best to just go with the K402/K69 combo as they come equiped and worry about the TAD drivers later.

And quite honestly, I'm still seriously thinking about getting some dual array Quad ESL and see how/if those can integrate with the bass horns.

[PrestonTom]

My friendly suggestion is to wait until the K-402/K69s arrive and then try them. I assume you will be using some sort of electronic crossover.

You may be quite surprised by just how good they sound. I know that I was quite surprised. My guess, and it is only a guess, is that you will find that migrating to the K-402s is a major step up and swapping the drivers may be an incremental step up.

[Chris A]

OK Chris. I'm going to play "devil's advocate" here

I don't think that anything that I say is going to change your mind: the quote above is from both Roy and Paul. The subject of the quote is essentially the same that you are proposing to do- but taking the other path.

I will refer you to an interesting article the subject of modulation distortion (actually a test procedure: Klippel, 2011).

Have a good day!

Chris

[Don Richard]

A 1" compression driver operated at a 400 Hz crossover point will have more THD and IM distortion than a 2" driver at that crossover. The 2" driver will beam at high frequencies if attached to a CD horn. Either driver will beam at high frequencies if attached to an exponential horn. Whether the added distortion or beaming will be problematic or not depends on the specific application and the expectations of the listener.

[artto]

OK Chris. I'm going to play "devil's advocate" here

I don't think that anything that I say is going to change your mind: the quote above is from both Roy and Paul. The subject of the quote is essentially the same that you are proposing to do- but taking the other path.

I will refer you to an interesting article the subject of modulation distortion (actually a test procedure: Klippel, 2011).

Have a good day!

Chris

This has nothing to do with changing my mind. I'm well aware of pretty much aware of everything and anything PWK had to say on the subject. Who do you think provided the complete set of Klipsch Audio Papers, Dope From Hope, and many other assorted goodies, including personal correspondence available in hardcopy (300+ pages worth) which I sent out to more than 2 dozen Forum members at cost and which were later scanned and put online here by another Forum member? Oh, excuse me. I guess you weren't a Forum member back then. Never mind.

Second, that "interesting article" you refer to is not really an article, it's not even any kind of test. It's as you so kindly noted after the fact a "test procedure" ~ an application note actually, for Klippel software. I don't need examples of application notes. I'm asking very specific questions to very specific products, and looking for some answers, perferably under similar use conditions and wondering if anyone else here has gone through the exercise, and if so, what the results were.

So please don't patronize me as if I don't have a clue as to what I'm asking or talking about. If you have some real experience with what I asked then please do tell. If you have some real data on it, please post it. If not, have a fantastic day anyway.

[artto]

A 1" compression driver operated at a 400 Hz crossover point will have more THD and IM distortion than a 2" driver at that crossover. The 2" driver will beam at high frequencies if attached to a CD horn. Either driver will beam at high frequencies if attached to an exponential horn. Whether the added distortion or beaming will be problematic or not depends on the specific application and the expectations of the listener.

Yeah, I was thinking alone the same lines, that the lower crossover point might be an issue when trying to use the TAD-2001 down that low. I still haven't heard back from TAD. And as Tom mentioned, using a throat adapter on the 402 with the TAD-2001 might be the more important issue.

The beaming, I can probably deal with since my setup is more of a wide-stage setup. And then I also don't have to worry about reflections as much. It kind of limits the sweet spot but I'm the only one listening 99.9% of the time. If anyone else wants to hear it at its best they'll have to be in the captian's seat.

[artto]

Well, I finally heard back from TAD.

From "the horse's mouth"~~~

The 4003 is the driver "to get" (my edit: obviously, since its the most recent and most expensive, right?) It does not go up beyond 20Khz (like some of the drivers in this series do). The 4002 is not as refined. People usually add the 703 tweeter to add a little more "sizzle", crossing over at 15Khz-25Khz.

The 2002 is a little better than the 2001. It accepts a lower crossover point (than the 2001) and is a little sweeter sounding. Both the 2001 and 2002 are brighter, so unless your room is very well damped, you may find it a lttle in-your-face unless you are 16-20 feet back. A controlled dispersion wood horn will help soften the tone a bit.

If you're after a better sound, the 4002 or 4003 for the mid/high frequency range and the ET703 tweeter for the high frequency range will be a lot more resolving and natural sounding. You'll get a lot more detail with less fatigue.

[Chris A]

The 4003 is the driver "to get" (my edit: obviously, since its the most recent and most expensive, right?)

About $3KUS...each...the last time I looked.

The 4002 is not as refined

The 4003 must be really, really nice in order to be "more refined". I can't imagine a driver more natural sounding than the 4002. JMHO.

People usually add the 703 tweeter to add a little more "sizzle", crossing over at 15Khz-25Khz.

I'd bet it would have to be EQed pretty high in order for most folks here to hear the effects of a "super-tweeter" due to natural age-related hearing loss. You also have the real problem of crossover design and time-alignment to within ~1/4 inch of the midrange horn/driver acoustic center. An active crossover would be required, in addition to an instrumented rig to help in the delay adjustment settings, IMHO.

...and your dogs and cats will hate you...

Chris

[artto]

The 4003 is the driver "to get" (my edit: obviously, since its the most recent and most expensive, right?)

About $3KUS...each...the last time I looked.

The 4002 is not as refined

The 4003 must be really, really nice in order to be "more refined". I can't imagine a driver more natural sounding than the 4002. JMHO.

People usually add the 703 tweeter to add a little more "sizzle", crossing over at 15Khz-25Khz.

I'd bet it would have to be EQed pretty high in order for most folks here to hear the effects of a "super-tweeter" due to natural age-related hearing loss. You also have the real problem of crossover design and time-alignment to within ~1/4 inch of the midrange horn/driver acoustic center. An active crossover would be required, in addition to an instrumented rig to help in the delay adjustment settings, IMHO.

...and your dogs and cats will hate you...

Chris

Actually, they quoted me as follows:

TD-4003 $3500, TD-4002 $2250, TD-2002 $1695 and ET-703 $1475

I know as a matter of fact that my hearing drops off pretty rapidly above 12.5Khz. And while I can't hear much of anything above that, I can sometimes detect what those higher frequencies are doing, affecting, (frequency modulation?) interacting with the frequencies below. And yes, an active crossover would essentially be required and time alignment critical. From my discussion with them I think this was assumed since they also were recommending whole systems, all of which require active crossover (not that I won't be going active after the 402 switch) until I sent them links to my system here on the Forum so they could get a picture of where I'm coming from (and want to go).

The few systems I've heard with supertweeters weren't setup that way, I've prefered them with the supertweeter switched out of the equation. Just my opinion but keep in mind I can't hear much of anything up there anyway.

[Speakmeister]

Who quoted the drivers? I have had a hard time finding a dealer.

[artto]

Who quoted the drivers? I have had a hard time finding a dealer.

I was refered to Ciamara Sound in New York, one of their pro audio dealers.

http://ciamara.com/

[The Dude]

The 4003 is the driver "to get" (my edit: obviously, since its the most recent and most expensive, right?)

About $3KUS...each...the last time I looked.

The 4002 is not as refined

The 4003 must be really, really nice in order to be "more refined". I can't imagine a driver more natural sounding than the 4002. JMHO.

People usually add the 703 tweeter to add a little more "sizzle", crossing over at 15Khz-25Khz.

I'd bet it would have to be EQed pretty high in order for most folks here to hear the effects of a "super-tweeter" due to natural age-related hearing loss. You also have the real problem of crossover design and time-alignment to within ~1/4 inch of the midrange horn/driver acoustic center. An active crossover would be required, in addition to an instrumented rig to help in the delay adjustment settings, IMHO.

...and your dogs and cats will hate you...

Chris

Actually, they quoted me as follows:

TD-4003 $3500, TD-4002 $2250, TD-2002 $1695 and ET-703 $1475

I know as a matter of fact that my hearing drops off pretty rapidly above 12.5Khz. And while I can't hear much of anything above that, I can sometimes detect what those higher frequencies are doing, affecting, (frequency modulation?) interacting with the frequencies below. And yes, an active crossover would essentially be required and time alignment critical. From my discussion with them I think this was assumed since they also were recommending whole systems, all of which require active crossover (not that I won't be going active after the 402 switch) until I sent them links to my system here on the Forum so they could get a picture of where I'm coming from (and want to go).

The few systems I've heard with supertweeters weren't setup that way, I've prefered them with the supertweeter switched out of the equation. Just my opinion but keep in mind I can't hear much of anything up there anyway.

is that a piece.

[Chris A]

...is that a piece?

Yes, but most folks I know find a way of finding a lower price - significantly lower.

In my estimation, getting the hf drivers/horns right is a lot more important than owning a very high-priced amplifier or pre-amp. I don't get why someone would drop $5K on an amp or preamp and then buy speakers with much lower quality hf drivers and poorly implemented passive crossovers that don't correct for time delay with the lf bin (or midrange horn/dirver if a 3-way speaker).

Chris