Why are Tweeters Convex?

[Assimilator87]

This is a really wierd, random question that popped into my head. How come tweeters are convex while all the larger drivers are concave?

[VR3]

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/geeks...vex-cones.html

"In an ideal world, all speakers would be concave. Response is exactly the same as convex, and it is much easier to pack, avoid damage, etc. Here's a simplified explaination:

The issue with tweeters is that their moving parts need to be as small and light as possible, thus, close to the magnet. If you try to make a concave tweeter, the diaphragm will probably hit the magnet structure (pole piece). So convex it is.

There have been a few concave tweeters made by adding a spacer to give more clearance between the magnet and the diaphragm, but this adds mass and reduces both efficiency and the top end response, and so it didn't really become a trend.

-k"

There are a few Concave tweeters (JM Lab most notably I can think of)

[dudeinaroom]

Not all tweeters are convex. There are lots that are cone, and ribbon. I believe convex(dome) tweeter have a better dispersion pattern because the sound is not limited by frame around them.

[BWilberg266]

If they weren't convex, what would little booger-eaters running round home theater stores have to poke in?

[polkfan38]

If they weren't convex, what would little booger-eaters running round home theater stores have to poke in?

LOL! Go to a Best Buy and look at the speakers 4 feet or less off the ground! Holes, dents ect...They must love that!

[mhardy6647]

EPI (Epicure) made concave domes that were quite well respected in their time.
http://www.humanspeakers.com/

Tangband (AFAIK) still makes a concave dome.

Roy Allison's paper midrange and tweeter domes had topologies that resembled... ahem...nipples.

All of these were/are quite nice drivers.