Mark, if you had to choose (which you don't have to), would you take the 4594 or the DCX464?
I expect either of those to sound smoother than the 15CXN88 in the upper mids/highs.
I apologize for the following answer...as i know how we look to gather opinions from each other ....but I really don't know yet.
I've been so consumed with a synergy attempt, I haven't done any fair apples to apples comparisons.
But I can say, with the dcx464 on the synergy, I'm hearing/understanding vocals I've never heard on any system...
but is it due to the driver or the box...I dunno?
The subjective take of the different drivers on the synergy, is that the dcx may have a little cleaner HF section, but that overall it has a drier less sparkly sound. It's like, it does super for drumsticks clicking together, but cymbals dry up.
I dunno yet, if the sparkle i hear with the 4594, in comparison, is real or distortion...
And again, this is on a speaker build (the syn) that I still don't have a full handle on. Sorry for the non-answer...
As best as i can remember, the differences lay more below the large coaxial's crossover (1200Hz) than above. Whether that was due to the horn speaker's lower crossover point and pattern control (650Hz), or the 15" coax's fuzzier measurements from 100 Hz up, vs the 12"s in the speaker with the coax CD/horn, I dunno.
All I do know is that the large coax just sounded a bit more diffuse, a little less defined. Pleasingly so however...I could see some folks preferring it.
My taste is towards an electrostatic-like clarity and focus.
Oh, and later you asked about comparisons to non-coax CDs. The one in the 15cxn88 is the only one I have...
I still own UREI 813C for casual listening. It's a JBL made 604 variant with 15" woofer staggered large monitor which used to be ubiquitous in pro studios in 80's before Kinoshita and Genelec appeared. A lot of shortcomings for critical monitoring today, but it is a very pleasant and cozy sounding speaker in spite of its fridge like size and industrial look. Frequency flatness and phase alignment is great for 15" coax, but the bass and top extension is limited as you can guess. For those who do not mind if your 604 is not Alnico, it's worth to trying to find them. You can probably still find a good condition ones in US for very cheap from closing studios, because no one wants them today. I got mine from my neighbor's private studio owned by a retired music producer.
Another good thing about it besides the price, UREI's (JBL's) quality control for those "true" pro monitors was very high, so the pair would still be very well matched for 40 years old speakers (mines are). When UREI was buying 604 units from Altec for their 803B, the unit rejection rate was 90%? or so. I wonder where those huge amount of rejected 604 units went to...
Another good thing about it besides the price, UREI's (JBL's) quality control for those "true" pro monitors was very high, so the pair would still be very well matched for 40 years old speakers (mines are). When UREI was buying 604 units from Altec for their 803B, the unit rejection rate was 90%? or so. I wonder where those huge amount of rejected 604 units went to...
Last edited:
I think they went into shopping malls as ceiling speakers.
Only half kidding. John Busch lent me a pair of his 604s that had been ceiling speakers in a New Jersey shopping mall. Reconed and re-magged by GPA. They were basically 515 with a tweeter. Very dynamic. They were a joy to listen to.
Only half kidding. John Busch lent me a pair of his 604s that had been ceiling speakers in a New Jersey shopping mall. Reconed and re-magged by GPA. They were basically 515 with a tweeter. Very dynamic. They were a joy to listen to.
Yep, those classic speakers like 604 and Tannoy are joyful sounding speakers, but I don't know why they can make me smile.
Thanks Mark!
It's my guess the vocals sound so good because of the DCX464.
The midrange of the DCX is supposed to be one of its strong points. The highs of the BMS extend a little further, thus adding some sparkle > good for cymbals. Distortion components may contribute to the perception as well.
There are many folks who actually like the sound of cone/dome breakup with certain types of music > not suggesting you're one of them
Last edited:
Well that’s not what I expected, especially with the high praise some models of coaxial designs for mixing and probably less frequently, for mastering..you’d think the close you get to the “perfect” reproduction, the more critical the speaker becomes. Compression driver plus horn seems to be on top of the list for truthful production, people always say about them, bad recordings sound just that, bad. I think IMD, lack there of, is apart of this truthful equation, and if anyone has strong feel sung about why/how this truth telling occurs, please chime in....otherwise, once again, you can see why I’m trying cover the most spectrum allowable for situation, with a horn. It could be the large amount directed energy, outside of the other benefits that using a horn bring to the driver...maybe the lack of room energy has a lot to do with it than is assumed. All in all it’s a conglomerate of facts that attribute to the whole but, if you break it down to the core values, you can focus on exploiting those aspects while neglecting the ones that do not add to sum of the end goa, were allowable, the goal in this case, highest level of criticality, maximum truth, activate!
OK, I'll bite!
Why is it then that Floyd Toole, Sean Olive and myself all believe that nonlinearity in a loudspeaker is not an issue? (Unless something is broken and that can be the design!) My own data shows that IMD and THD have no correlation to perception and yet you continue to hold to this belief.
And that's the "truth".
Both Have Coaxial Radiators ...
A "full range" unit implements a mechanical crossover rather than an electrical one for a "coaxial" unit. However for the "full range" unit both radiators move in unison at low frequencies. These are the principal differences between the two types of units. There is also a triaxial driver as well, one of which was made by Jensen. WHG
A "full range" unit implements a mechanical crossover rather than an electrical one for a "coaxial" unit. However for the "full range" unit both radiators move in unison at low frequencies. These are the principal differences between the two types of units. There is also a triaxial driver as well, one of which was made by Jensen. WHG
Dear Gedlee
As you continue to be a light in the darkness, let’s get one thing straight....you sir have years and years of wisdom knowledge that I do not lol!! So you can probably assume my ignorance to the topic lol! So first, I’d need to list what aspects are non-linear and which are linear. I am well versed in theory, and I understand to question all things, and that coincidence does not equate causation, as well, subtle aspects can be made known by exaggerating the catalyst/trigger....if I take my 12” woofer and play 35hz sine tone....then 100hz sine tone and memorize what they sound like separated...then play both simultaneously and it’s obvious that the 35hz has lost its umph and the 100hx is no longer as clear.....is that not IMD?
Further more, why do you feel that compression +horn results in a production that clearly separates a bad recording from a good one where as other wise might be forgiving? Is it just the lack of room diffusion?
I can't explain what you hear. I only know that the data that I have says that IMD and THD are not quantifiable metrics in the perceptual sense.
I have said so many times, that IMO the diffraction causes the sound to sound harsh and muffled as the SPL is increased. No diffraction - anywhere, the speaker, the room, and there is almost no SPL effect. The sound is as clean at high levels as it is at lows. Is that not "dynamics"?
Dynamics is more or less the opposite of compressed, actually. A highly compressed track would be considered of no dynamic. A track that is otherwise either expanded much or completely without compression containing very subtle low passages and powerful, Impactful high-level passages such as that played by Orchestra would be considered highly dynamic. A loud speaker that can play low passages as well as a very high level clearly, is one that produces dynamic material well but has no bearing on whether or not the actual difference between the highest levels of this song in contrast to the lowest level of the song are actually reflective of a one to one input, output ratio. It is suggested that a standard dynamic driver provides an experience where the input output ratio results in output that is less than one where as, instead of getting a 5 dB Increase in a particular frequency in the song, that being true to source signal, the speaker instead, hypothetically, produces a 3.5 dB increase in spl. Contrarily to what I have read this is a completely measurable event , as long as the type of input metering remains constant as well as the measurement protocol, you certainly can decipher which loudspeakers provide the truest output behaviors, compression and/or if possible, levels of expansion.
So, so this is what I perceive dynamic contrast to be and it is suggested that it is a strong quality on horn loaded compression driver. Once again, my question to you is why you think horns + compression drivers are known for a high level of dynamic contrast? Are you still saying that this is the result of audible diffraction? I asked why do you think that people commonly say that it is the horn loaded compression driver where a bad recording sounds bad and the compression driver is unforgiving… This is also diffraction as well?
So, so this is what I perceive dynamic contrast to be and it is suggested that it is a strong quality on horn loaded compression driver. Once again, my question to you is why you think horns + compression drivers are known for a high level of dynamic contrast? Are you still saying that this is the result of audible diffraction? I asked why do you think that people commonly say that it is the horn loaded compression driver where a bad recording sounds bad and the compression driver is unforgiving… This is also diffraction as well?
Last edited:
HEADROOM. This comment is all about headroom for me ( i let diffraction aside). Horn+CD is considered as having 15db more output capability (average) than typical direct radiator driver.
This is almost as much as the 20db dynamic range which is nescessary for a non compressed source signal ( classical, jazz ...so let's say we don't need 1w but 4watts and we are good with amplification) and 1db more than the requested dynamic range for typical pop/rock (14db) ( so 1 watt needed).
This is 3db more than the 12db dynamic range needed for broadcast ( a whooping 0,5watt needed).
Here are some food for thoughts:
The-Loudspeaker
You'll find this kind of comments for almost every kind of loudspeakers if you search enough.
Have you ever heard ATC monitors? Or PMC or Quested or Kinoshita or even Quad esl? ( i could include E.Geddes products but i never had the luck to listen to them).
They all qualify to me for the same comments. But they do it with different kind of overall presentation. And here a polar map is interesting to see to spot some of the difference as well as a frequency response graph.
Who is telling you that comment is interesting too: i heard many times from audiophiles that Tad/Pionneer Exclusive loudspeakers are unforgiving/ accurate, with the better dynamic you can find, bla bla bla...
Well yes this may be true when you are 65 years old and the breakup of 2" cd is out of reach for your ears and your main concern is to have " orchestra in your living room" ( which means to me very high spl and seems very silly: how could you have the same early reflection you experience in a concert hall in a 'small' domestic room- except if you have an RFZ which would probably not qualify as domestic anymore...?).
When at 25 years old i made my first encounter with this kind of loudspeakers, how could i say it... the outcome was a surprise!
Yes they have high dynamic and are unforgiving but to my ears the breakup was definitely there and doesn't made some of the instruments 'lifelike' despite what others said.
Once used to them it was less problematic to work with but still... now i'm 40 i'm sure it'll be even less an issue.
Last edited:
Exactly. Particularly for a non constant directivity horn, you are hearing very little reflected high frequency, it's mostly direct. This enhances perceived detail but is unfriendly to harsh recordings. Reflected sound sweetens and smooths, think singing in the shower.
Interesting, but I guess that's really a separate issue from whether a tight radiation pattern is more or less forgiving to poor recordings. I would say, all else being equal, that they are far less forgiving to bright, strident recordings.
In my estimation, the biggest reason it's hard for me to listen to recordings with poor quality on great horns is that once you hear the great recordings, it's a disappointment to tolerate less. Whereas on my lesser systems, good recordings and great recordings sound the same anyway.