Newsgroup: it.hobby.hi-fi
Titolo: Usher e Scan speak.

Ho avuto la risposta by Taiwan.
Non sono assolutamente cloni altrimenti sarebbero in causa con Scan Speak.
Aggiungo una review che mi hanno mandato sui tweeter usati nella serie 7.
Raffronto con Scan Speak ,Dynaudio,Seas.
Buona lettura.
ciao
berry
Madisound Audio Discussion
Review of Usher 9950 Tweeters (along with Dyn. D260, Seas Excel T25, and
Scans 9500) by Jeff B., dBe, and Keith Kidder (Long)
Posted By: Jeff B. (
arc3-64.kokomo.in.hypervine.net
)
Date: 9/13 4:24p.m.
  Jeff B. review of Usher 9950 Tweeter.
  along with the Dynaudio D260, Seas Excel T25-001, and Scanspeak 9500
  First of all the initial question that I should answer is, "Why are you
reviewing an Asian clone tweeter that none of us can really buy in the first
place?" The answer is because this review will point out that the state of
the Asian-art in speaker making has reached a higher level than many of us
had expected it would. Yes, I agree with many of you, that reverse
engineering existing products is not the best direction for speaker design,
as one manufacture representative shared with me in an email. However, this
tweeter is no Tangband, no offense to Tangband aficionado's, because it is
no Vifa, and no Dynaudio (D260) either. In fact, I think it is better than
all of them. Another reason to review this tweeter is because I have learned
that it is sold as an OEM unit to several high-end speaker companies where
we only "think" the tweeter is a Scanspeak.
  To quote Joe D'Appolito directly from an email between us when I
questioned the quality of the Usher products he responded: "Usher drivers
are of extremely high quality. The drivers have been made to my
specifications for various commercial projects. This tweeter has the lowest
intermodulation distortion of any tweeter I have measured." Joe went on to
say, "The day of the "Asian Knockoff" syndrome is long gone." He also shared
some other details which I do not feel at liberty to write in this review,
but according to him Usher does their own engineering.
  Well, I was always in the market for a decent sounding budget tweeter. As
a general rule I have not been too impressed with the common fare of Vifa
and most Seas tweeters and even less impressed with the Pioneer, MCM, and
Daytons I have tried. Since I could pick up a matched pair of these for
about a third of the cost of a pair of Scanspeak 9500's I decided to give
them a try, especially after reading Joe's comments.
  However, when I made the comment on the board that I had a pair of these
tweeters coming and would post a review someone made the comment that since
I bought them I would obviously post that they were great. So, the first
thing I did was send them on to Albuquerque to the ASS and let them measure
them and listen to them first. Keith Kidder was nice enough to run some
measurements on the tweeters, which I have posted below. You can follow the
link to see pics of the tweeters too if you like. Next Dave Elledge (dBe)
took them to the Santa Fe Studios and replaced the 9500's in their monitors
and a group gave them a listen. Dave sent me back his impressions, which I
will include below.
  First, a description for those who may not be familiar with it. The Usher
tweeter is essentially a Chinese cloned Scanspeak 9500, although they, and
Joe, claim that they have done a lot of their own engineering. It has an
aluminum face plate, a 28mm soft dome with a large chamber on the back, and
a small amount of ferro-fluid in the gap. The Fs is about 560 Hz, but the
impedance peak hits about 18 ohms. Sensitivity is about 89 dB/2.83V/M, and
the response is very smooth. The dome is a soft dome made of a very thin
layer of silk linen and treated with some type of polymer to stiffen it. The
loading looks similar to a Dynaudio, Scanspeak or Morel tweeters. The
tweeter is very well built. When I said this is no Tangband, part of what I
meant is that this does not look like cheap tweeter. It is actually the
second best built tweeter that I have used. The most robust looking tweeter
was the Seas Excel. The Usher is heavier and more robust looking than even
the Dynaudio D260. It weighs in at 710g and has a magnet wt. of 310g. It has
a larger magnet than the Excel T25, but in not quite as heavy overall due to
the Excel's extra-heavy face plate. This is a very rugged looking tweeter.
One really nice thing about them are the heavy 1/4" terminals. There are
some good tweeters that would benefit from the addition of those.
  I finally had an opportunity to check them out and evaluate them against a
couple of tweeters I had lying around. I compared this driver head to head
with a Seas Excel T25-001 and a Dynaudio D260. (I included the Hiquphon OWII
in the shoot-out but I won't comment on it here, because I am going to post
a review of it later).
  I ran each driver with my Focal 5K013L midbasses and I will not pretend
that the crossover was optimal in any case, as I simply used the 4.7 uf PPMF
cap with each one. I was listening more for the quality of the tweeter's
sound rather than a perfectly integrated crossover. However, I am sure some
may find this method less than perfect. I concur, it is. Using alligator
clips on the terminals I switched each tweeter in and out listened to
specific passages over and over again. I was alone doing this and I kept my
eyes open so it was certainly not a blind test. I spent most of my time
listening to the following CD's:
  "Bonnie Portmore" from the Highlander Endgame soundtrack
  Trumpet Spectacular with Doc Severinsen and Erich Kunzel (CPO) on Telarc
  Jazz At The Pawnshop on Proprius
  and Michael Hedges' Ariel Boundaries on Windham Hill.
  In each case I tended to find the D260 to be the airiest of the three,
almost to a fault. This came out the strongest on Bonny Portmore whose
female vocal (Jennifer McNeil) is recorded a little "hissy" anyway (which is
why I selected this CD for the test). A quick response check indicated that
the Dynaudio has peak in response in the 10kHz region. This made D260 sound
unnatural to my ears. The Seas had the strongest projection of her voice,
and sounded the least "hissy", probably due to the slightly rolled off top
octave of the T25, which measure very smooth otherwise. It sounded much more
natural than the D260 did. The Usher was very clean in the upper vocals and
tended to sound most natural of the three tweeters. It had a little more air
than the T25, but not quite as airy as the Dynaudio. Overall the Usher
seemed a little more neutral than the other two, and this is mostly due to
the top octave differences between the three tweeters.
  I spent some time listening to Trumpet Spectacular and at times I was
having a very difficult time pin-pointing the differences between tweeters.
Each tweeter had it's own sound but these differences were subtle and at
times hard to define. The easiest thing to pick out was always the extra air
from the D260. The overall sound of the Usher and the Seas T25 were quite
similar on most music with the exception of the aforementioned top octave
balance and the fact the T25 is about 2 dB more sensitive.
  However, while listening closely to the brush strokes and hi-hat on the
Jazz at the Pawnshop CD I realized that the Usher seemed to be a little more
detailed and honest than the other two tweeters. It had excellent resolution
of detail and was very balanced in the top octave. In this area I felt it
was best of the three tweeters. Having said this, I will add that with a
crossover that lifts the top octave of the Seas Excel a little it really
comes alive and sounds remarkable on this passage too. The "faults" (if that
is a good word?) of the T25 are quite easy to deal with -the ones in the
Dynaudio are not. The Usher seemed neutral enough that I would probably not
need to contour it any. It is very natural over it's entire spectrum.
  On Ariel Boundaries by Michael Hedges, when he really plucks the strings
on his guitar the Dynaudio and the Seas both were dynamic enough to almost
make me jump. I would call this the fright-factor. These tweeters had an
excellent ability to jump in dynamics very suddenly and scare you. Of the
two I would give the edge to the Seas tweeter. When I played the Usher this
level of dynamic response seemed as good or better compared to the others.
The Usher had the strongest dynamic output in it lower registers of the
three, with the Seas very close. Keep in mind here that the Seas is only a
25mm dome and the Usher is a 28mm dome - a seemingly small difference but
enough to give the Seas an edge in the dispersion category. The fact that it
appears to keep up with the other two in the lower registers (even better
than the D260) reveals it to be an excellent tweeter for a 25mm dome.
  My personal conclusions are that the Usher is a more dynamic and neutral
tweeter than the Dynaudio D260 and reveals better resolution of detail as
well. I would certainly select it over the Dynaudio. Compared the Seas Excel
T25, both tweeters have areas cause me to lean toward them for different
reasons. I think the Usher may be better suited for lower crossover points,
but the Excel is OK here too. The Usher has a better upper octave balance,
but the Excel, by being smaller is a little more open. Both tweeters sound
almost identical in the mid-treble range, their differences were more
pronounced at the extremes. Based on the tweeter's natural response I like
the over all presentation of the Usher better, but it is quite easy to make
the Excel "sing" with the right crossover. Is the Usher could be purchased
for around $120 a pair, which is more than I paid, then they would be the
best buy in tweeters out there. They are certainly the rival of any dome
tweeter out there at double that price.
  Here is what Dave Elledge had to say about them when he compared them to
the Scans 9500's :
  Jeff...
  Are they 9500's?
  In a word: no
  Are they really good tweets?
  To use a different word: yes
  Me and three (out of the Dirty 5) of my guys spent a morning with them in
a familiar setting with known software.
  The technical end of this supposition is -
  they are a "little" less sensitive than the 9500s' at the crossover point
(2.8K) The existing crossover was used with no modifications. It took me a
couple of months to get the transition to the point that it suits the owner
( a little on the "hot" side if you ask me, but I don't mix speed
metal...;-)). Anyway, they nestled in and I thank Keith for getting them
broken in. The caps in the tweeter circuit are NC Crescendos, so I know
them. They sound SOOOOO good. Having said this, they seem a tad, and I mean
a 'tad' forward in the 10K region. Nylon drum stick tips on cymbals are
really there, where they are 'kinda there' on the 9500s' The "air" in these
tweets is stupendous, as the forward character above 10kHz would suggest. I
think that they are probably a little more honest in the last octave than
the Scans: they seem to go forever. They are certainly not lacking in
dynamics... we cranked up the system until it showed 105 dB (unweighted) on
the old B&K Audiometer. The cymbal crashes never "cacked", they always
sounded like cymbals, not a burst of white noise. They can certainly BOOGIE!
  Perception (I am, after all, Dave the Subjectivist)
  I think the thing that impressed me (I hate the term "impresses") is the
absolutely natural presentation that they have @ ~ 3kHz. Sibilance is not in
the equation. Allison Krauss sounds fabulous on these guys as do: strings,
harpsichord, brass...Chris Botti is a treat! This is a function of the lower
treble shelf (~1dB) that Keith measured. It certainly follows the trend.
This would also follow the statement that these were the lowest distortion
tweets that Joe D had measured. I think that some of the 'distortion =
detail' guys will not care for this driver. I certainly do. They are not
harsh in any manner.
  Bottom line: I like 'em. I like 'em enough to use them in my monitors. I
will, if I can get them. At their alleged price point, they are a steal.
  Are they ScanSpeak 9500's? Once again, no. Will I use them exclusively
where I would have used a 9500 before? Yes. I think the top octave offers a
little more of what most people want, but less the "pssssssh" that suffices
for detail in some peoples minds (ears?). The Scans may be a little more
forgiving, but I don't think that this is always a good thing.
  I am really pleased that we (I) got to listen to these tweeters. Even Eric
(the resident curmudgeon) said that they didn't suck. From this guy, that is
an accolade. He thinks that the only thing that is relevant is live
performance. He has been recording the NM Symphony Orchestra for years and
is a "true" ear. Ain't none of us got gold ones, eh?
  Dave
  Respectfully Submitted,
  Jeff Bagby (Jeff B.)


Letto e mi permetto di non concordare quanto detto sul D260 che uso da 
anni e conosco assai : ))

 Aggiungo una review che mi hanno mandato sui tweeter usati nella serie 7.
Interessante.
Il recensore sembra abbia buone orecchie, infatti definisce "il piu' aperto"
tra i tw in esame il Dynaudio e posso confermare che lo e'.
Adesso pero' ci devi dire come e dove trovare questi tw Usher 9950 in
vendita....  chissa' magari capita di provarli.
Mi piacerebbe farne analizzare uno da Mr. Siegried Linkwitz con la stessa
procedura usata nei suoi test di distorsione di alcuni tw a confronto
(attualmente i migliori risultano essere Seas Excel e Scan 9700) se trovo
dove vendono questi tw in USA glielo segnalo e propongo di aggiungerlo alla
lista delle misure.

 care e due.
lo so te lo avevo scritto io :)


Togliere SBAM per rispondere via mail.

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:aqglvg$9tbjh$1...@ID-141601.news.dfncis.de...


 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:Mk5z9.9350$8E3.2...@twister2.libero.it...


 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:aqiqu6$a9jmv$1...@ID-141601.news.dfncis.de...


 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:lm6z9.9546$8E3.2...@twister2.libero.it...


 che sotto ma perche' non in mezzo?
In questo modo (si alternano i "pezzi" dei due interlocutori).
Lo so richiede un certo lavoro in piu' alla tastiera, ma quando ti abitui
poi fai veloce e nei discorsi complessi segui meglio.

 che lasciare dei papiri di roba per poi rispondere con due righe.
Concordo al 100%: il discorso, in questo modo, si svolge in modo molto piu'
logico.
Ciao a tutti.

 > intricata.
Complimenti a tutti e due  ! Veramente  ...
Per scrivere 4 righe avete occupato quasi 80 kb  ....
Eppure il GC di usenet posta regolarmente un messaggio che vi consiglio
caldamente di leggere .
Daniele