top of page

I've owned three Tang Band products over the years, and all were very disappointing. I wish I’d owned none… but sometimes, you buy "hope".

​

I owned a pair of tweeters. Those were quickly re-sold at a steep loss. However, still better than the trash bin. The saying is "buy cheap, buy twice".

Those were the ribbon tweeter model, with an insane distortion number, and not very good frequency response either. What a waste of money that was. Actually, the Raal ribbon tweeter line isn’t much better, considering the exorbitant cost they fetch, but let’s focus this review on Tang Band.

​

I owned a pair of woofers, which gave me issues as well. They were the Model: W8-740P. Their spider came unglued, and I had to fix it with adhesive.  Sure enough, after I fixed one, months after, the other one came undone. What a quality control disaster!

​

I eventually connected them to my wall socket to see how long they would last at 120Vac. (Representing about 1800 watts at 60 Hz for an 8-ohm driver)

Turned out it was less than two seconds before they quit :)  I blew both up and threw them in the trash, as it's likely where they come from in the first place. No regrets blowing them up.

I did a YouTube video on this. If you do a search… you'll find it.

​

Lastly, I owned a pair of W5-1611SAF full-range drivers. Garbage product as well, having specifications, ( which were way off) similar to the other Tang Bands.  Tang Band datasheets are not to be believed whatsoever.

Compare TB data my DATS impedance measurement below:

Capture2.JPG
Capture.JPG

  • FS is 80 Hz, not 60 Hz, 33% more than advertised

​

  • yes, my drivers were burned in.

​

​

  • Not sure that can hold 28 watts for a very long time…

​

  • 5.53TM? In your dreams buddy.

​

​

 

  • ​Inductance is 7X higher than specified! as in seven time more...​

  • 3mm x-Max seem very optimistic for such, Fostex are around 1.6mm for similar design. (FF125WK)

  • Qes, Qms and QTS are vastly different than specified. No surprise here.

​

​

  • The real measurement of DATS of the W5-1611SAF

​

  • At least, TB does show the 1.16 kHz anomaly in the impedance.

5w-1611saf measurement1.jpg

  • Same scale as the published TB datasheet

​

  • Who uses a 100 dB graph scale anyway? its very close to false advertising

​

  • Inside an 8-liter sealed enclosure, well damped

​

  • Low frequency drops more than published

  • High frequency above 10 kHz is well off.

  • 5 kHz drop is more pronounced

5w-1611saf measurement2.jpg

  • More appropriate scale frequency response

​

  • Measured @ 3" from the cone

  • Same 8-liter sealed enclosure

​

  • High frequency lack of energy is more evident.

  • Not super flat either.

​

  • 92 dB @ 3" is not very loud. At the listening position, it’s like 80 dB. Such low power measurements would bring the best possible distortion number from the W5-1611 as the cone barely vibrates

5w-1611saf measurement3.jpg

VERY WRONG:

 

  • Distortion measurements are dismal.

​

  • That is at only 92 dB @ 3", representing barely 80 dB at my listening position. Nobody listens that low. Crank the SPL and distortion will increase exponentially.

 

  • Full range are always crap IMHO.

5w-1611saf measurement4.jpg

  • Not super bad, but not great either.

​

  • The 1.15 kHz anomaly seen on the impedance graph is quite visible here.

20190901_113337.jpg

  • My temporary box for measuring the W5

​

Not much effort was put in the box... it was a temporary thing.

​

Measurements above and below are from this set-up.

5w-1611saf measurement6.jpg
5w-1611saf measurement5.jpg
20190901_113355.jpg

TWEAK ALERT!

 

I drilled a single 5/8" hole in the back of the 8l sealed enclosure

(click to see full picture)

​

It sort of creates a Bass Reflex.

 

A BR tuning for the W5-1611SAF would call for 15-liter enclosure and a much bigger port, My hole is more of a "aperiodic loading" than anything else.

​

The hole function is to prevent air pressure building inside the box, and relieves the driver to fight such air pressure.

​

In a sealed box air acts like a spring, and it's not the best option if the enclosure is small relative to the speaker T&S parameters.  In that case, at 8 liters internal volume, the enclosure is considered "small".

5w-1611saf measurement7.jpg

Being only 5/8" diameter, the hole is tiny relative to the W5 frontal radiating surface area. This means almost no sound will escape. (That’s the point of it)

 

SPL response, from before and after the small hole was drilled, is almost a perfect copy of each other.

​

The red curve shows output from the hole at 0.5" (very minimal sound radiates from it, and that doesn't represent enough energy to significantly change the frequency response)

​

FR is within 0.25 dB from one another...

​

Therefore, if there’s no change or improvement in the frequency response graph, what’s to gain from such "tweak"?

Seems like a waste of time… right?

5w-1611saf measurement8.jpg

Distortion below 100 Hz is decreased by a factor of 2 with the hole option!!!

​

A tiny hole is all that’s required to make the W5-1611SAF breathe a bit easier, and make a significant improvement.

​

Such a tweak very often works great on high Qes drivers. (high Qes=small magnet)

​

On a quality driver, the gain from such tweak is often ZERO. That’s because the speaker is properly designed to fight instantaneous internal air pressure change with minimal effect.

20190901_121538.jpg

August 2019,

 

Temporary TV setup. 

​

I have nothing at the moment, and needed sound.

​

The two Tang Band are playing, but they will join their  W8-740P "friend" in the trash bin eventually.

​

It won't be long before I replace them again.

 

 

Later… 

bottom of page