Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site


In the Forum: Horn-Loaded Speakers
In the Thread: The most promising “best” commercial speaker
Post Subject: Neodymium vs. Cobalt as far as TAD concern.Posted by Romy the Cat on: 7/31/2007

Well, let start with factual data:

http://www.mceproducts.com/knowledge-base/article/article-dtl.asp?id=32

How relevant it is for us, the audio people? Probably very little, and the most important it does not answer why TAD use cobalt in their tweeter.

Guy claims that “not everyone shares the view that Neodymium sounds better in audio”, presuming that someone at TAD actually employed the specific magnets in order to get the well-defined and objectionable sonic consequences.  Here is where I need to let my attitude to run wild. 

I do not believe that anyone at TAD ever conduct any more or less serious listening assessments in order to come to any practical data regarding the sound of those things. Vitavox, JBL, Altec, EV did their Alnico drivers, using different type differently sounding Alnico magnets and they did not even care to acknowledge the differences. I am absolutely convince that TAD engineers, in their vision of magnet saw only dimensions, the maintenance aspects, the flux density in gap and nothing else. No one listen those drivers at least seriously. Sure, they are measured to comply with demanded PA-level specifications but those Pro prodacts have no “sonic specifications” and made sonically “as is”.  The High-End audio is very-very minuscule market for those companies and no one care how this product would sound outside of PA applications. Even the High-End-specific product are made to sound crappy, so what would you expect from a DJ-oriented products?  So, any conversations that someone use cobalt to get some kinky sonic effect on context of 0.15W driving the tweeter, I would disregard as a wishful thinking. Unfortunately…

Also, another interesting subject. TAD, does Neodymium MF drivers and Cobalt Tweeters… Hm…, if “not everyone shares the view that Neodymium sounds better in audio applications” then it should be … different?

Erik the “Be” might be correct and TAD made the driver before Neodymium was used widely and Cobalt was the most powerful. Or perhaps the Pioneer marketing people decided that a new buzz phrase “Samarium Cobalt” would sound very sexy in their marketing catalog? The similar to: “makes the driver especially suitable for monitoring digital sound”.

Rgs, the Cat

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site