Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community

Recommended Posts

Hi,

Wondering if anybody has heard the HE version of the 4592?  Jack at Assitance Audio said it has a shorting ring and comments, “To me it sounds cleaner and more refined. To those that prefer the regular version the HE version sounds thinner, with slightly less content. (The HE has the same original signal, just less of the harmonics.)
Any general comments on 4592 experiences, comparisons.?  Also any comments on Beryllium diaphragm in a 3 way system ( 6000hz cut off) Radian 950/951?

thanks for any input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run the 4592 nd on the Volti Audio V-track in my khorns.  The improvement was stunning.  Everything is more relaxed and open with truer timbre.  Replacing the stock tweeters with the Fostex t500 AMK III was an even bigger improvement.  They have Beryllium diaphragms and are just extraordinarily composed with an extension that makes music almost tactile.  They are as stunning for what they don't do (no ringing, glare or any other distortion) as for what they do.  They have the breath of a soft dome or ribbon without the coloration or lost detail.   All of this has come at the cost of exposing the shortcomings of the bass bin in it's upper frequency range.  Hopefully that's fixable with dsp if I ever get time to actually listen let alone tinker.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had both BMS 4592ND coax drivers and TAD 4002 beryllium drivers for years.  I sold the BMS drivers long ago in favor of the TADs because overall the TADs were clearly the smoother sounding and more realistic sounding to me and required a lot less fuss (DSP).  I ended up buying a second pair of the TADs as well.  I use them in a 3-way on my Jubs with a 6K crossover, and similar on my MCM setup.  The TADS do not need a tweeter and can run out to almost 20K themselves.  I have just always preferred a tweeter.  YMMV.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I changed from Faital HF200s to 4592NDs. The Faitals were very good, but the BMS drivers are better to my ears, smoother and more natural. They do require EQ, but I have a Xilica XP-4080. I am building Quarter Pies for  completely horn loaded speakers (except for my IB subs).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, VDS said:

Hi,

Wondering if anybody has heard the HE version of the 4592?  Jack at Assitance Audio said it has a shorting ring and comments, “To me it sounds cleaner and more refined. To those that prefer the regular version the HE version sounds thinner, with slightly less content. (The HE has the same original signal, just less of the harmonics.)
Any general comments on 4592 experiences, comparisons.?  Also any comments on Beryllium diaphragm in a 3 way system ( 6000hz cut off) Radian 950/951?

thanks for any input.

I have a set of the HE's

 

I didnt note that mine are the ND mid versions, but they have the rings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mark1101 said:

I have had both BMS 4592ND coax drivers and TAD 4002 beryllium drivers for years.  I sold the BMS drivers long ago in favor of the TADs because overall the TADs were clearly the smoother sounding and more realistic sounding to me and required a lot less fuss (DSP).  I ended up buying a second pair of the TADs as well.  I use them in a 3-way on my Jubs with a 6K crossover, and similar on my MCM setup.  The TADS do not need a tweeter and can run out to almost 20K themselves.  I have just always preferred a tweeter.  YMMV.

The TAD 4002 would certainly be my ultimate choice! I guess like everybody I would have to be able to justify the large expense.  You’re not the first person to say they are clearly better than anything they’ve had before! Thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Max2 said:

I have a set of the HE's

 

I didnt note that mine are the ND mid versions 

Any idea how the sound compared to “standard” 4592’s?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VDS said:

Any idea how the sound compared to “standard” 4592’s?  

Sorry. The only worthy full range driver I have heard were TAD's.  I can say Jack wont steer you wrong.  As far as hearing a difference with the rings or without, I likely couldnt pick out either. Some say there is a benefit from the ring while others say its a myth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max2 said:

Sorry. The only worthy full range driver I have heard were TAD's.  I can say Jack wont steer you wrong.  As far as hearing a difference with the rings or without, I likely couldnt pick out either. Some say there is a benefit from the ring while others say its a myth.

Yah. I was thinking there probably can’t be much of a difference or they would of made them a different product number to really differentiate them from the already popular 4592

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Chris A         may be able to shed some light on the 4592 for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The results of my (pretty extensive) work dialing in a K-402 horn are listed here:  https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/186238-bms-4592nd-coax-xo-sugestion/&tab=comments#comment-2416945

 

I found the BMS4592ND really needs to be bi-amped and very carefully EQed for flat phase (which I found no one else is actually doing).  After you do that, there isn't anything lacking in its performance vis-à-vis TAD TD-4002s.  That doesn't mean that I can't see a difference in impulse response plots between the two--I can.  But I can't hear the difference, and I know that the FM distortion levels are lower with the 4592 versus the TD-4002.  But that isn't the end of the story, however. 

 

The bottom line is: I strongly recommend bi-amping with a DSP crossover to dial it in, and use something like the settings I posted in the link above.  It takes a few hours of the 4592 running in for the driver to settle down and its output performance to become stable (particularly the crossover between the two diaphragms), but after that, it's great.

 

Noting that the BMS 4592ND is about half the price of a Celestion Axi2050 and its performance can be a dead match for the TAD TD-4002s already, I'd say that even if you've got to buy an extra stereo amplifier and an extra channel of DSP crossover to bi-amp the two diaphragms separately, it's probably still a better deal financially than the Celestion or the Radian beryllium diaphragm 950BePB (similar in price to the Celestion Axi2050 with titanium diaphragm).

 

JMTC.

 

Chris

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought my TADs at high discounts.  I would not pay the ridiculous prices some ask on Ebay these days.  So for me they were a huge bargain and I am enjoying.

 

If I was looking for drivers today, I'd be looking at what Klipsch uses.  They are always able to get great performance from not so expensive parts.

 

Before I installed the TADs on my Jubs I was using K691s with Roy's settings (2-way) in the Xilica processor.  That is a very hard combo to beat.  Sounded great with all types of music.  The 691s are now my tweeters.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The JTR speaker line uses that BMS driver in its speakers if I'm not mistaken.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, mark1101 said:

I bought my TADs at high discounts.  I would not pay the ridiculous prices some ask on Ebay these days.  So for me they were a huge bargain and I am enjoying.

 

If I was looking for drivers today, I'd be looking at what Klipsch uses.  They are always able to get great performance from not so expensive parts.

 

Before I installed the TADs on my Jubs I was using K691s with Roy's settings (2-way) in the Xilica processor.  That is a very hard combo to beat.  Sounded great with all types of music.  The 691s are now my tweeters.

Looks like you'll be upgrading to the Celesion Axi's soon..............now that they are available in the USA, which they were not about a year ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I need to make a point about the TADs, K-691s, and the BMS 4592NDs.  Below is the spectrogram of a TAD TD-4002 on a K-402 horn at 92 dB on-axis (1 m):

 

468157930_TADTD-4002onK-40292dBOnAxisSpectrogram.jpg.de94bc1188623386b80b01dadaaa8aee.jpg

 

That little vertical line at about 0.7 and 1 ms are apparently related to the TAD driver snout reflections on the K-402 (delayed energy bouncing around in the snout, driver, and horn). If you get the snout lined up extremely well on the K-402 (it wasn't apparently well centered for this measurement) and faired in really well using modeling clay, those vertical reflection lines at 0.7 and 1 ms seem to almost disappear.  That's how I know where they come from.

 

Here is the same thing for a K-691 (a stock K-402-HF assembly Klipsch driver) driver at 90 dB:

 

315595500_K-691onK-40290dBOnAxisSpectrogram.jpg.d181f3e28d313800ec01580005f72207.jpg

 

There is chattering at 14.9 kHz that's visible.  It's also audible, although it doesn't knock you down.  Play some bebop jazz with a continuous ride cymbal, and you can pick it out.

 

And the BMS 4592ND bi-amped on the same horn at 82 dB at 1m (on the prototype K-402-MEH):

 

438266698_Bi-AmpedBMS4592NDonK-40282dBOnAxisSpectrogram1m.jpg.15e59afc1bd810fbdf575f1bbd4a1968.jpg

 

When I say that I can see the differences in performance of the TAD TD-4002 and the BMS 4592ND, this is what I'm talking about (it isn't much, and note that the BMS here is about 10 dB quieter than the TAD).  I can't hear this difference, however, and note the verticality of the impulse spike of both drivers.  This is not true for the K-691 driver (titanium diaphragm).  Adding shorting rings may make a difference on the BMS 4592ND, but I rather expect it makes a difference at PA loudness levels (well over 90 dB at 1m), but maybe not so much at home hi-fi levels.  That's your call, however.

 

Chris

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chris A said:

The results of my (pretty extensive) work dialing in a K-402 horn are listed here:  https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/186238-bms-4592nd-coax-xo-sugestion/&tab=comments#comment-2416945

 

I found the BMS4592ND really needs to be bi-amped and very carefully EQed for flat phase (which I found no one else is actually doing).  After you do that, there isn't anything lacking in its performance vis-à-vis TAD TD-4002s.  That doesn't mean that I can't see a difference in impulse response plots between the two--I can.  But I can't hear the difference, and I know that the FM distortion levels are lower with the 4592 versus the TD-4002.  But that isn't the end of the story, however. 

 

The bottom line is: I strongly recommend bi-amping with a DSP crossover to dial it in, and use something like the settings I posted in the link above.  It takes a few hours of the 4592 running in for the driver to settle down and its output performance to become stable (particularly the crossover between the two diaphragms), but after that, it's great.

 

Noting that the BMS 4592ND is about half the price of a Celestion Axi2050 and its performance can be a dead match for the TAD TD-4002s already, I'd say that even if you've got to buy an extra stereo amplifier and an extra channel of DSP crossover to bi-amp the two diaphragms separately, it's probably still a better deal financially than the Celestion or the Radian beryllium diaphragm 950BePB (similar in price to the Celestion Axi2050 with titanium diaphragm).

 

JMTC.

 

Chris

Chris, thanks for the response and all the info I’ve seen you post.  Just to clarify, would the above info be applicable when using the 4592 mid ( non coaxial), crossing over at 500/5500 in a passive 3 way?  I’m getting more convinced of active networks all the time, but if I decide to go that route I would need to do complete planning for that approach.  Your active crossover “tutorial” on the forum is a great resource, but just want to clarify that I’m talking 3 way here.  I’m not deeply experienced in speaker/crossover design yet, so apologies if I’m not understanding you correctly.

thanks, ted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using a 4592ND-MID means you're also using a non-coaxial tweeter and a separate horn.  The problem of EQing and time aligning the two internal diaphragms of the 4592ND isn't there, but it's replaced by the multiple issues of using non-coaxial diaphragms/drivers (which are many, including significant polar lobing and trying to EQ and time align two separate horns/drivers and having to deal with that lobing).  I don't see why anyone would use a 4592-MID with separate tweeter when they avoid the headache and costs of separate drivers and horns, but I suppose there must be some rationale--I just don't see it.  Having TAD-like performance out of a driver costing <25% than the TAD (the 4592ND, that is), and also having much lower FM distortion above 5.7 kHz than the TAD (the crossover frequency of the 4592ND without phase-inducing crossover filters) are real advantages.

 

Chris

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris, would the spectrogram that you provided of the BMS 4592ND change much if the volume was set to 92 dB (like the TAD) instead of 82 dB?

 

Mark

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chris A said:

Using a 4592ND-MID means you're also using a non-coaxial tweeter and a separate horn.  The problem of EQing the two internal diaphragms of the 4592ND isn't there, but it's replaced by the multiple issues of using non-coaxial diaphragms/drivers (which are many, including significant polar lobing).  I don't see why anyone would use a 4592-MID with separate tweeter when they avoid the headache and costs of separate drivers and horns, but I suppose there must be some rationale--I just don't see it.  Having TAD-like performance out of a driver costing 25% or less than the TAD (the 4592ND, that is), and also having much lower FM distortion above 5.7 kHz than the TAD (the crossover frequency of the 4592ND without phase-inducing crossover filters) are real advantages.

 

Chris

Chris, you make a strong case!  Maybe I’ll pause and seriously look into a 2 way k402 system.I’m not be sarcastic here at all, but you seem to really advocate for 2 way, active biamping as the best solution for high quality horn systems.  I will reread you major post on active biamping and give some real thought to it. Thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, VDS said:

Your active crossover “tutorial” on the forum is a great resource, but just want to clarify that I’m talking 3 way here.

Yes.  The treble diaphragm in the 4592 needs a little over one wavelength of delay at ~6.9 kHz (0.145 ms, as shown in the link to the PEQ settings for the Xilica crossovers.  The only way to do that is to use a DSP crossover and separately amplify the HF diaphragm from the midrange diaphragm.

 

Could I hear the differences once I tri-amped the K-402-MEH and time aligned the diaphragms?  YES.  That's when I started to regard the MEH with a lot more respect than I had before (using a K-69-A, then a non-time-aligned BMS 4592ND). 

 

6 minutes ago, Marks said:

Chris, would the spectrogram that you provided of the BMS 4592ND change much if the volume was set to 92 dB (like the TAD) instead of 82 dB?

Yes, it would show a more extra stuff around the main impulse spike, but since the difference in input electrical power to the driver is still extremely low (about one milliwatt vs. 0.1 milliwatt).  Only when you get up around 1 watt do things really begin to change (i.e., 110 dB at 1m), I think.

 

That's the real secret to why Klipsch designs sound so dynamic and clean.  Efficiency.

 

Chris

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...