November 06, 2014 2 min read

Test Bench: Radian Audio Engineering 950PB and 760NEOPB Compression Drivers
 
This was the first time Test Bench featured a product from the highly respected Radian Audio Engineering. Radian Audio Engineering was founded in 1988 by Dr. Richard Kontrimas. Radian’s initial offerings were replacement compression driver diaphragms. However, the diaphragms were so popular that soon the company was making compression drivers. Several major loudspeaker manufacturers quickly identified Radian as an important source for their compression driver needs and became OEM customers. Then, Radian introduced coaxial loudspeakers, followed by woofers, and finally, complete loudspeaker systems. Today, Radian, based in California, is well known in the OEM loudspeaker component business, the sound contractor/fixed installation market, and the portable/touring sound industry. 
 
Radian sent the 950PB and the 760NEOPB, two of the company’s flagship compression drivers, for this Test Bench review. I chose these two mostly because these Radian transducers have a reputation among recording and touring experts as having a high degree of musicality. The 950PB and the 760NEOPB share several features. They are both 2” exit compression drivers, with a useful response above 10 kHz. The 950PB and the 760NEOPB use neodymium motor structures and pure aluminum diaphragms with a proprietary mylar suspension that greatly reduces second- and third-order harmonic distortion. The two transducers mainly differ with regard to their voice coil diameters. The 760NEOPB has a 3” voice coil diameter with a three-slit phase plug. The 950PB has a 4” diameter voice coil with a four-slit phase plug, which translates into higher power handling. The 950PB is rated at 125 W AES (Audio Engineering Society standard). The 760NEOPB is rated at 105 W AES.
 
This article was originally published in Voice Coil, November 2014.


Also in Articles

Radian Audio Engineering on Voice Coil Test Bench
Radian Audio Engineering on Voice Coil Test Bench

January 27, 2020 2 min read

For the February 2020 edition of Voice Coil magazine, Vance Dickason characterizes a new Radian ferrite compression driver. The Test Bench focus on Radian's 835PB ferrite 1.4” aluminum diaphragm compression driver. After reviewing several of Radian’s neodymium series of compression drivers, Dickason characterized the 835PB and noted how this driver continues to have the expected rich feature set that is the hallmark of the company.
Read More
Radian 475PB 1-Inch Compression Driver
Spotlight on the Radian 475PB 1-Inch Compression Driver

January 31, 2019 1 min read

In January 2019, Vance Dickason characterized the 475PB 1" compression driver from Radian Audio Engineering. This was the second ferrite motor compression driver from Radian to be featured in Test Bench, following the 745PB, covered in the December 2018 issue. The Radian 475PB has a similar set of features as Radian’s 745PB and includes a 1” throat diameter, a 134 mm × 19 mm ferrite magnet motor, a high-temperature 44.5 mm (1.7”) diameter polyimide voice coil former wound with copper-clad aluminum edge-wound ribbon wire voice coil, 50 W AES power handling above 800 Hz and 100 W program power handing. 
Read More
The 745NEOBe Compression Driver from Radian Audio by audioXpress
The 745NEOBe Compression Driver from Radian Audio by audioXpress

March 19, 2018 5 min read

For the October 2017 Test Bench, Dickason characterizes the 745NEOBe, a pro sound 1.4” beryllium compression driver from Radian Audio. Radian, based in California, is a major player in the OEM loudspeaker component business, with more than three decades of success under its belt, now benefiting from new ownership, management team, and investment from Fortune Sound, Inc., led by Dwight Tobiano. For this Test Bench, Radian Audio sent its new beryllium diaphragm 745NEOBe compression driver, together with its 745NEO iteration using an aluminum diaphragm for comparison, which costs six times less. The test focuses on the Radian 745NEOBe, but Dickason provides interesting objective comparisons of both models.
Read More