ScanSpeak tweeters, D3004/660000, D2904/710003, D3004/664000 and R2908/714000

Copyright 2011-13 © Troels Gravesen

Go to on this page: D3004/660000    D2904/710003    D3004/664000    D2908/714000


click images to view large

From left: D3004/660000    D2904/710003    D3004/664000     D2908/714000
Click above to download SS specs.

For future projects, a pair of 6600 and 7100 tweeters were acquired. The basic differences between these two tweeters are the magnet system and the dome, where the 7100 has a ring of damping glue to the dome. The ring neodym magnet of the 7100 tweeter provides a whopping 95+ dB sensitivity, suitable for fairly high-efficiency systems where the 6600 does well up to 92 dB/2.8 volts. The 6600 display some inconsistency in sensitivity, around 1 dB and although I don't regard this as a serious problem, a little disappointing. Only two units were available for the 6600 tweeter. I had another pair of 7100 for test, hence 4 samples on display below. All of these are consistent in sensitivity and only display minor differences between 15-20 kHz, probably due to the damping ring applied. I wonder why SS added the damping ring as the 6600 display less distortion in this area compared to 7100.
Both of these domes appear suitable for two-way systems with a very low point of crossover and from clients' project I know the 7100 can do well down to 1.5 kHz with a simple 2nd order crossover. The 7100 tweeter was tested in experimental designs and proved well down to 1.4 kHz, 12 dB/octave. Very impressive.
The 6640 and 7140 Be domes were later added to my collection.

All measurements done with tweeters flush-mounted on 35 x 50 cm baffle, center placement and 20 cm from top. An IEC baffle may provide better low-end response.

The 6600 and 6640 tweeters present some challenges  with regard to crossovers, because these tweeters go so low the can play midrange! The 7100 with its steeper low-end roll-off due to the very strong magnet system is easier. Taking the 6600 and 6640 down to 2 kHz and using a 12 dB/octave filter makes it necessary to apply impedance linearisation to render a smooth roll-off profile.  

D3004/660000
BACK TO INDEX


Left: SPL @ 2.8V, 1 m, unit 1 and 2. 
Right: Distortion measured at 0.25 meter, input 2.8V ~92 dB/1 meter, unit 1 and 2.


 
CSD, 2.8V.  Left: Unit 1. Right: Unit 2.

 

D2904/710003
BACK TO INDEX


Left: SPL @ 2.8V, 1 m, unit 1 and 2.
Right: Distortion measured at 0.25 meter, input 2.8V ~96 dB/1 meter, unit 1 and 2.


CSD, 2.8V. Left: Unit 1. Right: Unit 2.

 

 Left: Step response, unit 1. Right: Step response unit 2.


 7100 dispersion at 0, 10,20, 30 and 40 deg.


D3004/66400 Beryllium dome
BACK TO INDEX


Click image to view large. Download specs here.


SPL normalised for 1 m/2.8V, unit 1 and 2. 


Impulse response, unit 1 and 2. 


Step response, unit 1 and 2.


CSD, 25 dB, unit 1 and 2. Very clean indeed!


Left: SPL unit 1 and 2 (not normalised for 2.8V/1m). Right: Impedance unit 1 and 2.
Quite as matched pair!


Distortion from unit 1&2. Measurement at 0.25 m distance, 2.8 V. Black = 2nd harm., blue = 3rd harm.
These tweeter display significant lower distortion compared to 7100 and 6600.

I don't think I've ever had a pair of so closely matched tweeters. They have outstanding performance in my Jenzen ATS speakers.


D2908/714000 Beryllium dome
BACK TO INDEX


Click images to view large

Measurements, baffle: 65 x 57 cm, 27 cm from top. All measurements normalised for 2.8V/1m.

My expectations are high on this new tweeter and nothing below suggests I should be dissapointed. The Revelator magnet system is stronger compared to the Illuminator motor, thus an 8 ohms voice coil is used here. On top of this a titanium voice coil former, not seen before on ScanSpeak tweeters. Most noticeable is Qm, 7.3 according to specs. My measurements suggest a little lower, but nevertherless, nothing I've seen before. High Qm means low mechanical damping and some may fear this will make a too lively treble. Time will tell. I've heard reservations towards this 7140 tweeter based on the  response graphs displayed at SS website. The use of a 10-100.000 Hz range doesn't make things look better on paper. Looking at the 1.000-20.000 Hz range alone (see below) display an usually well behaved response and initial modelling suggest an easy tweeter when it comes to crossovers. And let me say that I couldn't care less about the dip above 16 kHz towards 20 kHz. Some people are obsessed about a flat response to e.g. 30 kHz. There are much more to good treble performance than a ruler flat response to 30 kHz. 


Left: SPL at 0.5 m distence, on-axis. Right: Tweeter 1 and 2.
These units are so much alike that only one will be shown below except for cumulative spectral decay and impedance.


Left: Impedance of unit 1 and 2. Right: Step response display better damping compared to 6640!


Left: Horizontal dispersion at 0, 10, 20, 30 and 40 deg., 1000-20000 Hz.
Right: Same at 200-40000 Hz. My CLIO microphone is down 1 dB at 20 kHz and 5 dB at 30 kHz, so please add some level there.
Generally these response graphs look better than those published in Voice Coil and Klang&Ton magazines.


CSD @ 25 dB range. These are seriously clean and quite better than those made by Vance Dickason.
I wonder if some work has been done to the tweeter since they were reported in Voice Coil.
Compared to the 6640 tweeter, these CSDs suggest a better rear chamber with fewer resonances in the 500-1200 Hz region.


Left: Red, SPL as-is and red, 6.8 uF bypassed by 3R3. Simple equalisation.
Right: Orange: Test crossover @ 2 kHz from 8.2 uF/2R2+0.47mH in front of above equaliser. I don't think equalising will be necessary in my final set-up. 


Left: Distortion at 2.8V input taken at 0.25 m distance. Green = 2nd harm., blue = 3rd harm. Right: Same at 5.6V input.
This tweeter can safely be used down to 2 kHz - if you can tune the frequency response! Not that easy.

Now, all measurements above were done on a large flat panal, but how does it look when it we use a small baffle like the one I'm going to use for the next ATS 4-way speaker?
A quick cardboard mock-up, approx. 13 x 20 cm, and some midrange cardboard panel below display the red response above compared to the large flat panel (green). Not bad at all! I took the measurement to my simulation software and it looks easy. And no equalising step needed. Looking forward to implementing this tweeter in my next construction.

BACK TO INDEXBACK TO INDEX