Coaxial

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#62
Pano said:
Anything has to be an improvement. That is one harsh coax. :sour:
Click to expand...
They're not that bad, though it is mainly the CD and the awful factory xover.
Pano said:
Do you like them with a better CD?
Click to expand...
I have 1 440 I've tried on one and will get three more if I do go Atmos (not holding breath). I've also tried other CDs like the DE250 with an adaptor, but there were too many discontinuities between them, the adaptor and throat to work really well.

Pano said:
The 15" and now defunct 18" use a better compression driver, tho it wasn't the easiest to crossover.
Click to expand...
The 15CX38 I used for a while with a BMS4550 coax to make a triax. Like the DE250 experiment, a custom adaptor could have made something really good. Dunno why I ever sold them.

I also have some older KEF Q-something 8" coaxes that I got for dirt with damaged cabinets and some old NOS EV 12" units still in the shipping boxes, never touched. I should at least try the former in something else.

In reality though, the best coax units are Unitys/Synergys.
 
#63
Danley's Unity-synergy properly implemented should be "seamless" - I do like my Frazier CAT40 as they didn't cost much.

C4043.JPG
 
#64
planet10 said:
In the Tannoy’s i had (Dimension 8) there was at least part of a horn between the diaphragm and the exit at the woofers voice coil.
Click to expand...
Was it a metal or plastic piece down in the throat?

Brett said:
The 15CX38 I used for a while with a BMS4550 coax to make a triax.
Click to expand...
That's a novel idea. I have a pair of the BMS coax CDs, wonder if they could be adapted to the P.Audio 18? 2" exit down to 1.4" but not be too happy, tho.
In reality though, the best coax units are Unitys/Synergys.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are rather good. :up:
 
#75
Patrick Bateman said:
I'm listening to my 3" Kef coaxes right now. They're nice, but I'd speculate that they're pushing the 'practicality' of how small you can make a coax. I measured them, and found that the tweeter is just barely covering two octaves. A full range like the SB Acoustics SB65 probably makes more sense than the Kef coax.

Once the diameter approaches four or five inches, a coax starts to make more sense than a full range.

BTW, I think putting the tweeter on a 'bridge' works better than putting it in the neck of the woofer, particularly if you use a crossover topology that deals with the delay between the woofer and tweeter.
Click to expand...

Patrick, Adolf,

Thanks for the answers.

I understand, mechanically integrating a small tweeter on to a small midrange driver might be non-trivial for mass manufacture and reasonable pricing.

Further, maybe a 5-6" cone allows a better waveguide profile for the tweeter.

But my question was for a more specific application. Upper midrange-tweeter Coax. Since these are usually crossed over high in a 4-Way design, driver C2C is more of a problem. Further, since the upper midrange driver cone will have very low movement in this application, a stable waveguide profile for the small tweeter might be possible.
More specifically, for a 4-way design with
woofer-lowmid : 150Hz - 1KHz
Coax: upper-mid : 1KHz - 5KHz
Coax: Tweeter : 5KHz - 20KHz

An example is the LX521, though here choice for 4-way is also due to the dipole design.
That brings me to the second question, how about a dipole tweeter coaxial with an upper midrange?

I understand this is a very narrow application, but just looking for thoughts from the good folks here.
 
#77
Pano said:
Sure is! LOL
Click to expand...

Unless I'm missing something, no more so, for example, than the Tymphany D27TG35-06, Dayton Audio DC25T-8 or Tang Band 25-1742S are considered 'horn' tweeters. But if you're convinced that slight set back has the same potential negative impact as your initial observation about coaxial cones, I'm listening...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom