what are the thoughts of stand alone super tweeter

i want to buy a pair of totally stand alone super tweeters, with all necessary parts built into the super tweeter, just place it on top of my speakers and run speaker cables to piggyback my present speakers connections or even come off my power amp.please tell me pros and cons. price seems to be from $500-$3000 except for the radio shack built years ago.which sell for about $80.00 used........... audiogon has the high end ones all the time, is it worth my money... regards forevermusic414
Pro: more air and space, greater definition throughout the frequency range, and cleaner transient snap.

Cons: makes your speaker a tougher load (some companies deny it but I think there is no physical way around it), potentially goofy look.

Hifi+ has reviewed a couple of them - the Townshend and the Tannoy. They couldn't explain it technically but their impact was obvious. They loved both and deemed them a highly worthwhile purchase no matter what speakers you use.

One thing to keep in mind with any add-on supertweeter that was not designed as part of a speaker system is that the transition between the main speaker and the super-tweeter is going to be widely variable.

The Townshend, for example, says its range is 20KHz and up with a -3dB point at 12KHz.

The Tannoy (depends on model) has a third order crossover starting at 14KHz. That means it'll be 18 dB down at 7KHz but there is still a lot of energy output below 14KHz as it comes up to crossover frequency.

In both cases, the tweeters have significant output in the range where many main speakers already have significantly flat output by themselves.

If coupled with a speaker with significant high frequency energy, you would have a rising frequency response above 10 or 12KHz. If coupled with a speaker with dropoff in highest octave, you couple have a dip in the high response with the frequency response then rising above the dip.

What is simply a roll of the dice is whether your resulting high frequency response bears any resemblance at all to a uniform, smooth output. Most serious speaker companies put a tremendous amount of effort into getting a seamless transition between drivers. With an add-on tweeter, that simply isn't going to happen unless by sheer accident.

While the idea of extending a speaker's high frequencies is admirable in theory, this seems to be a bit of "throw a spit wad and see if it sticks" approach. I find it interesting that basic preamp tone controls have long since been banished from high end equipment but audiophiles have found all manner of new ways to tinker with tone balance through products such as this and others.

The net result is that you can only try a unit and see if you like it. Just don't get the idea that you are necessarily improving the "accuracy" of your high end response. ;-)
Mlsstl is correct. In addition, note that, since you cannot hear above 20KHz, the interactions he describes will be the dominant effects of adding on the supertweeter.

At my age, approaching big five O, I appreciate a great mid-range much more than a good tweeter. So super tweeter does absolutely nothing to me.

Unless you are young and have 20/20 hearing, IMHO, don't waste time and money on super tweeter.
Years ago at CES Murata demonstrated their supertweeter. Listeners heard a musical passage without them and then again with them. The passage had more air, sparkle, and life with them. As we were all murmuring about how something that has no response below 15K Hz, someone thought to ask to hear the Murata by themselves. The guy running the demonstration said, "You are." We all focused on what we were hearing. There was no music to be heard, only zips, pops, and tizzes. I was very difficult to believe this would add to the sound we had heard. He reran the demonstration and again the Murata's benefits were undeniable. I bought a pair on the spot.

Initially, I had Beauhorn Virtuosos with Lowther single drivers. The Muratas did wonders with them. When I sold them, initially I just set the Muratas aside thinking that I would probably sell them. Much later after I got adjusted to my Acapella LaCompanellas with frequency response out to 30K Hz. Out of curiosity, I decided to try the Muratas with the LaCompanellas. They had the same benefits with the LaCampanellas! I have repeatedly to find where they add to the sound. I have them outboard of the main speakers and 36" up from the floor.

I have a friend who says the Townshends are better, but I will probably just stick with the Muratas.

There is some research that would suggest that although your ears probably are lucky to hear up to 16K Hz, that high end extension to 100K Hz does register in listener enjoyment of music. I strongly believe this is so.

I think that you should have no response below 15K Hz in a supertweeter.
"There is some research that would suggest that although your ears probably are lucky to hear up to 16K Hz, that high end extension to 100K Hz does register in listener enjoyment of music. "

Correct. There is some research but it all comes from one lab without, to date, independent corroboration.
Thg said: "I think that you should have no response below 15K Hz in a supertweeter."
While that is a nice sentiment, it is highly unlikely.

The Murata is rather vague about its crossover mechanism but if its range is given as 15KHz and up, it almost certainly has output below that (just like the other two supertweeters mentioned.) If it is a simple capacitor, the crossover slope would be 6 dB. Mechanical characteristics will likely add to that slope at some lower frequency but we don't know where that is.

If it is a 6 dB slope, that means output could only be down 6 dB at 7500 Hz.

Even if there is some super-high frequency magic taking place, it is pretty easy to see there is also a fair amount of energy being added in frequency bands that are already being serviced by the main speaker.

Back when I worked in a stereo store in the 1970s almost all equipment had tone controls. It was nearly universal for a customer (regardless of system, age, type of music or any other factor) to turn the treble up a notch or two. They just liked the way it affected the sound.

I hardly find it surprising that an add-on tweeter that clearly has output in the 10KHz band (even if the specs indicate it starts higher) is going to be audible.

There is an old saying that when you hear hoofbeats you should usually think of horses before you start looking for zebras. Maybe there is a zebra out there at 40 Khz but I sure see a lot of horses in the clearly audible 10KHz to 15Khz range in all these products.
Mlsstl, it is my understanding that there is no crossover in the Muratas. I have also seen the frequency response curve on them. There is some output below 15K Hz but very little. As I said, when they only are playing you hear no music. I have tried it here and continue to hear nothing of the public or even of the beat. I have never heard a demonstration of the Townshends only, perhaps they do have something since they much have a crossover as there is a selector switch.
As noted previously, Murata is rather vague about the internals of their device. If there is no electrical crossover then the cutoff is being handled by the inherent mechanical parameters of the tweeter. There will still almost certainly be output under 15KHz since drivers don't just stop working at a precise frequency. (Ever watch a woofer move with a warped record? With one warp in a record that is about 0.5 Hz but the driver is still trying.)

I've got some fairly sophisticated audio processing software (Adobe Audition) that I used for mixing and editing and it is interesting to play with the several different equalizer options. One can create a nearly infinite number of slopes and crossover points and easily apply them to real music. Frankly, there is precious little to actually "hear" as music when one does steep slopes above 10KHz.

I applied a variety of curves to some material to model possible Murata outputs. I can guarantee you that with a curve set around 10KHz for cutoff there isn't much music to hear. Yet if one applies the inverse curve to the same music, the sparkle and air disappears. And all of that happens with no output above 20KHz since I used CD material.

In short, I was able to duplicate the effect you talk about by limiting the output to above roughly 10KHz but yet without using any super-high frequencies.

I know the super-tweeters have a following. One doesn't have to have uncontested exotic scientific theories at work in order to enjoy the effects of a piece of audio equipment.

As noted before, if the original poster is interested in one of these, he simply needs to try it. If it gives him more listening pleasure then he doesn't need to worry about whether it is ordinary high audio frequencies at work or super high ones.
I didn't say that the output of the Murata only dropped below 15K Hz. It is dropping sharply at 15K. Yes, I suspect it is the mechanical characteristics rather than a crossover and thus my speculation about the Townshends.

I doubt seriously if you can duplicate the effects of the Muratas or other supertweeters without frequencies above 15k Hz. I do agree that the original poster should try them.
...without frequencies above 15k Hz.

That is not what I said.

I said without frequencies above 20KHz from a CD (actually 22,050 Hz from the Nyquist theorem but there is only 1/10th an octave difference between 20K & 22K.)

Arbitrarily decreasing a number I used by 5,000 isn't a very on-point response. You in politics? ;-)

However, even with non-CD material, one has to wonder where the super-high frequency info comes from. The majority of microphones used for professional recording don't have response past 20 KHz and many only get to the 15KHz or 17KHz range.

Anyway, having been exposed to these devices over the years I remain a skeptic that any significant portion of the effect these devices have is due to energy above 20KHz.

Obviously, others disagree.
Let me throw this out for speculation/discussion.

Many reviewers and others report super tweeters to be an improvement. I have never heard speakers with them so I have no informed opinion.

They operate at frequencies we can't hear. So there shouldn't be any problem with integration with the main speaker since we can't hear them anyway.

My speculation is that they operate simply by having their frequencies interact with the frequencies that we do hear. In other words, the compression and rarefaction of air from the sound waves of the main speaker is added to or subtracted when it meets the wave of the super tweeter. So we're just altering the frequencies of the main speaker.

In other words, it's just another type of a tone control. Right? If not, then what does it do?

I'm not trolling here. I'm just trying to figure out how these things work.
Best to have one custom matched to your loudspeaker.
I tried the Onix supertweeters with 2 models of Alons. Misstl points out the possibility of coherence issues. I suspect the whitish coloration I heard in the highs was a coherence issue, super tweeters may alter the tonality of your loudspeakers.

YMMV may vary with different super tweeters and/or loudspeakers.
I have been using speakers that extend well above the audible range since the early seventies and am convinced that it is a definite benefit. BUT I think you are letting yourself in for a lot of trouble. Unless you are going to get a good electronic crossover and amplify the tweeters separately OR you are or have access to a talented crossover designer the speakers will probably sound worse. The tweeter has to be very carefully integrated with the rest of the drivers and this is the thing that separates the men from the boys in speaker design. Years ago I owned a pair of B&W P2H speakers [their first product]. This used what may still be the finest tweeter ever massed produced, the Ionic tweeter. This was marketed in different countries with different names[ theirs was the Ionafane] . It was totally massless , flat out to 30 or 40k and glowed with a blue light. It was about the neatest thing I ever saw in audio and it sounded wonderful. But even B&W did not succeed in matching it to a cone driver. If I wanted more extended highs I would change to different speakers as I think it will be cheaper and easier in the long run.
Stanwal, the Ionic tweeter or Corona or plasma, is not a supertweeter. Many come well down into the audible range. I think there is a good reason to distinguish tweeters and supertweeters. The Reference 3A Grand Veenas, have both tweeters and the Murata supertweeters.

I do entirely agree about mating plasma tweeters with other drivers. Acapella uses the plasma in every speaker above the LaCampanellas, which I own. In all but the Trilon at $160,000 this tweeter stands out as exceptional and draws your attention to it alone. This is the reason I bought the Acapellas that I did.

Sns, again I think my satisfaction with the Muratas comes from them not reproducing music. They only begin to come into play at 15K Hz.
You can find these on ebay called the ionovac by Dukane. Here in CA my city has probably more per capita then anywhere else in the USA. Five of my friends have a pair of them, one two pair. They stopped making them due the need to use certain chemicals. Me, I prefer the Maggie ribbon. But, the ionovac sounds good when set up well. jallen
I use the Radio Shacks for all my systems, including the reference system. Its very efficient, you can pad it down with a resistor.

I have been using Townshend Super Tweeter for many years and I won't pretend to know the tech mumbo jumbo behind them but I will say if you add them to your speakers you will never listen to music without them.
Tbg, the Onix came in about the same frequency, you could hear no music from it. It is not the most expensive super tweeter out there, could be some limitations that more expensive super tweeters overcome. I still suspect there may be coherence issues with any add on device to loudspeakers.
Sns, since my experience is limited to using the Muratas with the Beauhorns and then the Acapellas, it is hardly generalizable. Earlier when I had Altec VATers, however, and tried the Ionovacs with them, I did have unsatisfactory interactions in the top frequencies. I had assumed it was because you could hear music from the Ionovacs, which came down to 7000 Hz, if I remember correctly.

Faziod, mine is the same experience, at least so far, with the Muratas.
generally speaking, a band aid for a loudspeaker, a placement, or room problem....rarely a cure.
Jaybo, not in my experience.
Ihave been looking into the super tweet subject for awhile.I have no reason to add a pair,from any lack of audible performance,and my speaker is ruler flat to 25khz.

Yet,I heard the Townshends on a pair of Sonus Extrems,and NO person can tell me it was not a HUGE improvement!!

Yet,and yet it is still dependent on the main speaker,and room situation.ALL systems are actually voiced with "room/speaker/amp",and the combination of those factors will determine the success of the final sound.

Since the Extremas(a great speaker,especially with the Townshends)have tweeters that roll off at 17khz,the super tweeter subject is a good idea here,and the Townshends can b adjusted for gain,so it's not a stretch there.

But,in my case I "think" I'd be playing with fire,since I have superb high freq performance,and cannot risk it.

"Except" I occassionally get enthused all over again,when I read about the virtues of hyper extended highs,now "supposedly" available on some of the new domes and ribbons.....Then I'll play some "high freq loaded" program material,and the desire to add something else goes away!

Just my 2 cents.

I am well aware that the Ionic driver was not a super tweeter as such. My point was that it went out as far as a typical super tweeter, did not require a crossover to a tweeter as it went low enough to mate directly with a cone woofer/midrange but still , despite the best efforts of B&W, was not totally satisfactory. I have seen any number of revolutionary tweeters and super tweeters come and go over the last 40 odd years. The problem has always been matching them to the rest of the system. My speakers are also flat out to 25k and I must admit to being puzzled as to what extending it to , say ,40k would achieve. I would not be the best judge in any case as my ears will no longer hear 16k.
Stanwal, I can just hear 16K and my speakers are supposedly good to 40k Hz, I too have had several tweeters and super tweeters, but the Murata demo was my first real experience where I had to have them. I have to assume that their having no music they reproduce is the key. I have also to assume that information beyond our "hearing" is contributing to our pleasure.
I am having trouble with the concept of " having no music they reproduce" . Surly they must be reproducing the overtones of music in the audible range. Otherwise we left with the notion the simply stimulating our hearing beyond the audible range is somehow pleasurable. I have been using Spendor speakers [as well as many others] since 1971 and I well appreciate the value of a WELL Integrated super tweeter. At this point I declare "De Gustibus Non Disputandum Est" and retire.
Stanwal, nevertheless at the demonstration all we could hear was pops, etc. Most of us, as I said, did not notice that they were on and still playing the music. As I said there is at least one study that I have read that shows an awareness of such high frequencies, but off cd how do you even get these frequencies?

I too will rest my case, but I think the lowest frequency that a super tweeter is key to its benefit in the system.
It if funny how some can embrace changes a copper wire can make but then refute the concept of a supertweeter.

I also find it funny that Kal is looking for "independent corroboration" when it is right here in this thread and in audio magazines. This is as much corroboration as we'll ever get.

Ditto for the impact different cables can make. There is no scientific proof! We just make our own independent analysis using the finest test equipment in the world - our ears.

My personal theory of explanation is in line with Markphd's. It must have something to do with interaction of the sound waves - and not necessarily the sound waves (or frequency level) coming out of the tweeters.

I am anxious to try a pair of supertweeters one day and see for myself what difference they make.

1 of the problems with super tweeters is they are designed to work with many loudspeakers so thus they never are fully matched or fully integrated to any unless you get lucky. Best to DIY or have one custom built to match your loudspeakers. You wouldn't just use any tweeter and crossover type if you needed to replace tweeters in your loudspeakers you would contact manufacturer or find best match to the speaker, but with super tweeters you just buy a one for all design? this not optimal at all. At least with subwoofers they have own amplifiers and fully adjustable networks but with commercial super tweeters your lucky to get a switch to adjust 2 setting or a cheap pentameter to match levels.Most don't even offer this. And if ST is properly designed for your loudspeaker you shouldn't need anything to adjust, level or crossover.Just move ST forward and back to set up time alignment.
Johnk, what you say is true only for those supertweeters that extend down into the music range. I have had many of those over time and never found satisfaction even when I used a crossover. The Muratas and Townshends have been no problem.

Aball, do try a pair of supertweeters sometime but be sure that they do not come into the music range. Or at least make certain that one pair you try don't.
Aball wrote: "I also find it funny that Kal is looking for "independent corroboration" when it is right here in this thread and in audio magazines. This is as much corroboration as we'll ever get."

That's pretty sad. The referred to papers at least attempt a controlled study and I am asking for a similarly scholarly corroboration. Almost everything posted here is anecdotal.

Kal, all audio is anecdotal. Again this is not a science, it is a taste choice.
Tgb said: "what you say is true only for those supertweeters that extend down into the music range."

Earlier you've stated that a supertweeter shouldn't have any output below 15 KHz. Let's grant that for a moment just for the sake of argument: it is stipulated that we have a tweeter that cuts off very sharply right at 15 KHz.

If one can step back and think about the implications for a transition from the speaker's tweeter to the supertweeter, what you get is a completely unpredictable response.

Take a speaker with strong response from 15 KHz to 20 or above. Adding a supertweeter in this situation would give you a response that would have a significant peak in this range.

Take a speaker with more limited output in the highs (say a single full range driver design that falls rapidly above 10 KHz) and now you have a major dip in response before the supertweeter kicks in.

High frequency curves vary widely among the thousands of speakers on the market, so the above are hardly the only two examples.

So the argument essentially becomes, no matter what the characteristics of the main speaker, more is always better when it comes to high frequencies.

I find that a suspect proposition. In virtually every other aspect of audio reproduction, effort put into having well-integrated, carefully crafted matches between individual components yields better results than simply throwing a mishmash of parts together, even if each part is excellent in its own fashion.

I guess the red flag just goes up for me anytime I encounter a situation that says one product or solution is always the answer no matter what the circumstances.
Mlsstl, I was suggesting that many people's difficulties with supertweeters derive from those that have music in what they reproduce. That is certainly my personal experience.

I have used the Murata with Beauhorns which meet you rapid roll off speaker and with the Acapella LaCampanellas which "supposedly" extent to 40k Hz. The benefits on the Acapella are not as great as on the Beauhorns but still are something that I will not do without.

I grant the logic of what you say but not the reality. As I say all too often, I act on what I hear not based on logic or out limited understand of sound reproduction. Do listen to such a supertweeter if you find it illogical, I won't mind in the least. If you do, however, and like it, please explain why you do.
10-09-08: Tbg
Kal, all audio is anecdotal. Again this is not a science, it is a taste choice.
I would not say all but I would not dispute your position about audio and matters of taste.

OTOH, I was pointing out that the scientific studies have not been corroborated. Offering audio anecdotes as supporting evidence is simply inappropriate, especially in view of your statement.

Kr4, I haven't a clue what "inappropriate" means in any scientific sense. I suspect that by corroborated you mean replicated, but again I don't understand what this has to do with anything except to say that better experiments are needed and perhaps better instrumentation is urgent.

The only value I personally derive from various internet sites is the personal experiences of others. I do draw clues as to whether I care what someone reports from what they say and what their equipment looks like. This is, of course, anecdotal, the least value defense of a hypothesis and an early level of science. IMHO this is where we are in the science of audio reproduction, but I do need my music so I do as well as I can.
It might be helpful to look at the paper by Martin Colloms on his web site. He is the author of HIGH PERFORMANCE LOUDSPEAKERS as well as being a speaker designer and audio critic. It is too long to reproduce but in part it states:

2.5 Anecdotal Consumer Press Reporting
I have considered that informal, anecdotal reports from reviewers concerning the advantage of addon
super tweeters to be rather suspect since I feel that generally the basis of their evaluations has
generally been so flawed that the results may be discounted. The difficulties encountered are
manifold and only a few need be considered to confirm my negative view. Firstly the test for
response extension benefit will only be valid if the extended response is achieved without affecting
the performance in the existing ‘audible’ range.
Testing for a subtle effect, which may well be barely audible, is a manifest nonsense if it changes
the uniformity and loudness in the already operative treble range. Yet this is what is happening in
these tests. So far, no commercially available add-on tweeter and matching crossover can avoid
this fundamental error. Note that when such a driver and crossover is patched on to an existing
audio chain, as it often is, it will inevitably change the loading on both the cable and the amplifier,
and thus very likely impart another audible difference.
These ‘super tweeter’s typically operate in parallel with the existing tweeter over about an octave
bandwidth, and may destructively interfere with the primary tweeter output. Thus there is a potential
to impair as well as alter the results. Sadly, some critics are so pleased to have heard a difference
they are tempted simply to judge it as an improvement. Often the crossover is a simple capacitor
feeding a metal dome tweeter, perhaps with a beryllium composite diaphragm. Such a crossover is
something of a disaster since a calculated 20kHz ‘crossover’, comprising a single capacitor for a
nominal 5ohm rated tweeter, provides the response shown in Figure 1. The intrinsic output is
compared with the crossover objective, which is seen to be markedly different from the practical
result generally obtained with such a single element filter. The cause is the complex impedance
presented by the high frequency driver compared with a plain resistor load. Even with more
complex, higher order filters, the practical crossover points for super-tweeters are often placed well
into the audio band. It is not surprising that audio professionals dismiss such published subjective
results, which often seem to be produced in support of media and equipment marketing.
In my last post I failed to give a complete guide to the article. It is Archive A10
Martin Colloms, Colloms Electroacoustics London, 2006
It is found on the AUDIO CRITIC magazine section of the web site.
Stanwal, the fallacy of his argument is saying, "These ‘super tweeter’s typically operate in parallel with the existing tweeter over about an octave
bandwidth, and may destructively interfere with the primary tweeter output." This is what you have continually argued also and it is just not true of the Muratas and, I think, the Townshends.
Tbg, we seem to be in a circular argument.

First let's state a hopefully agreed fact: whether the Muratas, Townshends or another supertweeter, their frequency bandwidth starts at some point. For example, you use the figure of 15KHz for the Muratas.

Not every speaker on the market is polite enough to stop at that selected point. Some fall short before. Some run past that frequency. Perhaps a few stop where the supertweeter expects them to.

Your position seems to be: no matter what the main speaker, a supertweeter always makes things better.

Some of us are less credulous of that position. In Martin Colloms case, he is one of the most respected and experienced voices in the world of speaker design and evaluation. I, and many others, give his views great credence. A supertweeter, if used, deserves the same effort toward integration as any other driver. Otherwise the effectiveness of the results will be haphazard.

I guess we just need to agree to disagree on this point.
Mlsstl, my Acapellas extent supposedly to 30K, so there is overlap. But the Muratas play no music. You hear nothing that you would mistake as music on them when played alone. I participated in a demonstration at CES several years ago when I initially heard this. Martin Colloms whom I respect greatly is right in my previous experience with super tweeters. I always preferred the speakers without the super tweeters.

The Muratas worked well with the Lowther drivers in my Beauhorns which were rolling off above 14K Hz. When I got the Acapellas, I thought they would be of no use. Much to my surprise, they added greatly to the soundstage width and realism.

As always, I really don't care what the logic you and Martin state means if I hear otherwise. I know full-well the limits of our understandings.

I don't really disagree with you, I think your explanation fails to account for observations. I know from my science training that an explanation that fails to account for observations is a failed explanation whether or not it is broadly accepted.
Readers should do a search and read Tbg's posting history for a clearer picture of what misunderstanding means.

Chock full of them folks.

And they're funny, too.
My use of super tweeters is limited to a custom pair of Tonian Labs built for my Audio Note E SEC Silver speakers and a pair of Murata ES 103B. My experience with super tweeters is similar to what Tgb has communicated about the Muratas.
My Doctoral research area was the History of Science , I also have a Graduate degree in Theology from the University of Chicago. I consider myself somewhat knowledgeable about what constitutes an observation. Raw sense data is in no way an observation in a scientific sense. If you tell me that we have a product that 1. Plays no music and 2. Is inaudible and 3. In some inexplicable way makes the music better , I will say that you are in the realm of my other field, i.e., Religion, where belief in the power of unseen forces is prevalent. I am sure testimony such as yours would be admissible in witch trials but hardly in scientific enquiry. Your dismissal of Colloms would have been more convincing if you would have pointed out where he was wrong. You did bother to read the article didn't you?
Readers should do a search and read Audiofool's posting history for a clearer picture of what little he contributes.

If he doesn't sell it, it is worthless.

He is juvenile also.

Don b, there were two pairs of speakers at the RMAF with Murata supertweeters in them. One was the Reference 3A Grand Veena, which always are among the best sounding rooms. I forget the other speaker's manufacturer.
My doctoral degree is in political science and one of my undergrad degrees was physics. I have taught research methods at the graduate and undergraduate levels for 42 years. One thing that science does not recognize is authorities and I suspect that Martin Collums would not expect to be declared one. Data is what speaks. Certainly, he is speaking of what he has heard and trying to make sense out of it. So am I.

I did point out where he was wrong. You seem entirely hidebound by you belief that all supertweeters are the same and that nothing matters beyond 16K Hz. I cannot imagine how you would ignore the possibility that you are wrong in your explanation as this is the very basis of science but I guess it fits with your theological studies.

Fundamentally, as this is a hobby and a matter of tastes, however, I rise to your being dismissive of what others hear. Frankly sir, I don't give a damn what you think.
I also studied psychology, undergraduate major , Graduate work at Chicago and 2 years of Psychoanalytic training and I recognize certain symptoms in your responses which lead me to the conclusion that it is you who cannot brook disagreement with the conclusions you have already reached. When your pronouncements are questions you descend into name calling. If you do not care what I think why are you so upset about it? I will not enter such a contest as vituperation is not one of my skills. I will only point out that what you THINK you hear is not data and simply declaring something to be so is not making sense of it.
is it worth my money... regards forevermusic414

Only you can decide. FWIW There is not much above 15Khz that most adults can hear. If you want to improve on a tweeter that rolls off at 12KHz then by all means go for it - however, for the money, I would think there is likely a better investment. Just two cents...