4way, 3way, 2way or co-axial?

[Akira]

What is your preference?
In a well executed design the end goal may be the same, but different formats will always yield a different bias. While my main system is a 4way, I prefer a 3way design with sub.
To me it boils down to a perfect balance of bass, mid and high. (with a sub sonic cushion) It's just the way I mix and listen to sound. A 2way co-axe may have a smoother response, but a well balanced 3way is what I want to hear. Though not as seamless in response, there is a naturalness in the way it interprets music.
Maybe it's just a personal bias rooted in what I grew up with; Younger engineers seem to favor 2way systems these days.

[speakerdave]

I agree, they all have their advantages. I used the 604-8G for a number of years--they're in storage right now--and currently use the Tannoy/VTL/Manley/Mastering Lab 10 in one of my systems, so I have a real appreciation for a good coaxial. However, I think the 15" coaxial is really a contradiction in terms, because of having to take a 15" cone up to meet a horn that will fit. A 12" might be OK--I haven't tried one. The 10" is really nice, especially with that time aligned crossover, but it needs to be run over a sub at about 80-100 Hz.

I'm building a two-way with horn treble which is outstanding because it uses outstanding components that really can cover their assigned frequency ranges with very low distortion, and has double woofers, so the bass holds up well into the upper 20-'s. Such a two way, though, has, by definition almost, a crossover in the middle of a range in which I'd rather not have it. I do like a three way, especially if the middle driver plays a long range, as it does in the LSR32, 250 to 2200. In my idle moments I'm meditating on a large three way which could do something similar with classic components, say an Altec 414 from 80 or 100 to about 1700 with a TAD 2001 or 2 on a small horn above and a JBL 2245 below. Widget's sub1500/TAD 1102/4003 plus supertweeter is really very close to what I think will work best, but the 1102 seems to have been discontinued. The Manley Lab 10 with a subwoofer--perhaps the LE14-3--might actually be the easiest and optimum way to achieve that.

However, I fear I am addicted to the 10" midcone in the big JBL four-way. There is a clarity there superior even to the Tannoy (a subwoofer would probably clear up any midrange). Problem is, I'd like it to go lower. It is also not quite as coherent in imaging and so, I continue to work on the two-way.

David

[Hoerninger]

My dream would be an "augmented" 1way system. ;)

This means a midrange speaker with an extended frequency response, a good power handlimg capacity (and all other benefits of course) with additional bass and high extension speakers. But such a midrange speaker is hardly to get. Once Scanspeak had a good offer, now out of production.

But recently I heard a wonderful augmented 2way system (EVII). ;)
___________
Peter

[speakerdave]

My dream would be an "augmented" 1way system. ;)

This means a midrange speaker with an extended frequency response, a good power handlimg capacity (and all other benefits of course) with additional bass and high extension speakers. But such a midrange speaker is hardly to get. Once Scanspeak had a good offer, now out of production.

But recently I heard a wonderful augmented 2way system (EVII). ;)
___________
Peter

Yeah, I think we're talking about basically the same thing.

[Mr. Widget]

My dream would be an "augmented" 1way system. ;)That would be great... I have tried a few, but none have had the dynamics or tonal accuracy of a three-way or as I consider my current system, an augmented three-way.


Widget

[SEAWOLF97]

My dream would be an "augmented" 1way system. r

Had never thot of it that way....but does my 1 way Walsh's with a M&K sub qualify as an "augmented 1way system". IMHO , the lack of a crossover net really adds to the seemless/smoothness/coherency

[edgewound]

It's hard to beat the coherance of a co-ax. I haven't had the chance to play with one, but I'd love to try the BMS co-ax compression driver on a co-ax LF for a hi-end tri-ax.

One point source for all to come through. Adapted to a 2235H would be killer.

[grumpy]

might be able to try that on an already modified-for-UREI E145
(fittings for driver/horn already machined).?

... trade off a higher crossover for LF extension, but I'd personally
rather have to graft on LF than make (more) compromise in the LF/MF
crossover range.

[Robh3606]

Hello Grumpy

I have the E145 based 801C driver in my HT set-up as my center channel. It's one fine sounding driver. I would be tempted to get a pair of 811C just to check them out as a stereo pair. That said I have been using a B380/2235 sub for LFE and it's a nice combination. I just had Cloverfield going, what a hoot!

As much as I like the 801C coax I really like the JBL 10"s both the 2122 and 2123 and the 8" 2108 in a set-up. There is just something they bring to the mix, clarity, naturalness hard to say exactly what it is. I am really partial to either a 4 way or a 3 way with subs.

Rob:)

[Ian Mackenzie]

When I met Steve Schell in LA he neatly explained the short comings of the larger Coaxial designs like the Altec 604 series. As is hinted above the problem is blending the dispersion of the "larger woofer" with the dispersion of the "smaller" at the crossover point.

Those co axials are just pea shooters compared to the more contemporary bi radial based systems. Unfortunately the correctly sized horn just won't if in the centre of the driver.:banghead:

Smaller coaxial's like 8'' and 6.5 work better because the constraints of the large cones aren't nearly as bad and as in the Sea's coaxials they can use very good dome's because the crossover point is much higher.

A seperate auxillary sub works very well provided you take baffle diffraction correctly into account in terms of the overall response. A lot of people miss this point with smaller systems where the response falls off below 300-500 hertz and they wonder why it sounds like a small system compared to system with much large baffles.

If super loud levels aren't required and you want more flexibility in listening distances this approach has a lot going for it over large baffle discrete 3-4 way systems. I think Kef has recently introduced on some systems along the lines of a 3 way using a smaller 2 way coaxial for mid and highs and obviously there is the Tad at the top end of the market.

[andywin]

It's hard to beat the coherance of a co-ax. I haven't had the chance to play with one, but I'd love to try the BMS co-ax compression driver on a co-ax LF for a hi-end tri-ax.

One point source for all to come through. Adapted to a 2235H would be killer.

UK speaker company Volt uses a BMS driver in a 12" coaxial in it's Pro PA range. I've often wondered what one of their 18" drivers might be like with the BMS coaxial. It would require mods to their chassis casting though.

http://www.voltloudspeakers.co.uk/About_Us/about_us.html

[Zilch]

There are newer-design JBL 8s, 10s, and 12s to try.... :yes:

[Robh3606]

drivers might be like with the BMS coaxial.

Hello Edgewound

I wonder if you could get a 2" throat driver to work in a 4" coil?? It looks like it's a tight fit with a 1" throat.


Those co axials are just pea shooters compared to the more contemporary bi radial based systems. Unfortunately the correctly sized horn just won't if in the centre of the driver.:banghead:

Hello Ian

Yes but they are no worse than the 2307/2405 combo used in the monitors. They can sound quite good on axis.

Rob:)

[felixx]

I listen KM30 from Phy on open baffle and also on Rondo enclosure.
Superb detail.Superb focus.
On the Rondo they have more impact on the low bottom.
Both options was amaizing and easy listening.

http://www.phy-hp.com/English/Products/KM30_SAG_E.html

[cooky1257]

FWIW Just found this; apparently it uses a 3.5 inch/2 inch dia dual concentric compression driver
http://www.tannoy-speakers.com/products/305/VQ%20100%20V1.02%20LR.pdf

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hello Edgewound

I wonder if you could get a 2" throat driver to work in a 4" coil?? It looks like it's a tight fit with a 1" throat.



Hello Ian

Yes but they are no worse than the 2307/2405 combo used in the monitors. They can sound quite good on axis.

Rob:)


I have not heard a 604 for a while. Perhaps it was the honking. The Urei's were a better implementation. I guess if they could fit a 2307 in the centre with the depth we would not be having this discussion.

[edgewound]

Hello Edgewound

I wonder if you could get a 2" throat driver to work in a 4" coil?? It looks like it's a tight fit with a 1" throat.

Rob:)

Yes, Rob.

PAS makes a 4"coil 15" & 12" for a 2" exit driver, that is meant to accept 3rd party drivers. The horn is a 60x30 dispersion. PAS was at some point the supplier for Urei monitors.

Radian also makes 4" coil 15" & 12" with integral 3" diaphragm 1.4" exit drivers.

Like you said...if your listening in a tight window, power response matters less. But if you're many feet away the dispersion spreads out, and large format drivers are better for far field listening anyway.

It helps to have an open mind....

If it sounds good to the listener....it is good.;)

[Chas]

As much as I like the 801C coax I really like the JBL 10"s both the 2122 and 2123 and the 8" 2108 in a set-up. There is just something they bring to the mix, clarity, naturalness hard to say exactly what it is. I am really partial to either a 4 way or a 3 way with subs.

Rob:)

Rob, I just have to chime in here wrt your 10" comment. To me, both are really special. I find it interesting that I can't label which one is "best" between the two. Yet, they both are, without doubt, very special -yet different, drivers, when used appropriately.

[Robh3606]

I guess if they could fit a 2307 in the centre with the depth we would not be having this discussion.

Hello Ian

They could. A 2307 is about a 1/2" shorter than the Urei horn when you measure from the bug screen.

Thanks Edge

Rob:)

[Akira]

When I met Steve Schell in LA he neatly explained the short comings of the larger Coaxial designs like the Altec 604 series. As is hinted above the problem is blending the dispersion of the "larger woofer" with the dispersion of the "smaller" at the crossover point.

That's exactly right. I have a dual concentric 12" Tannoy with 1" compression driver and it sounds great in one narrow spot where the blend is perfect. They were great in a studio where your locked to one position but, useless in a general listening environment.
I liked the 4430 2way because the bi-radial had an excellent dispersion match up with the 15. The image was physically the same size from top to bottom....would have enjoyed a super tweeter on top though.
I'm surprised there are not more endorsements for the classic 43xx 4ways which many of us have.

[Mr. Widget]

I'm surprised there are not more endorsements for the classic 43xx 4ways which many of us have.What are you talking about... there are quite a lot of threads just gushing about them. :)

But then again, there are quite a few threads by people gushing about their dome tweetered systems as well. ;)


Widget

[Ian Mackenzie]

That's exactly right. I have a dual concentric 12" Tannoy with 1" compression driver and it sounds great in one narrow spot where the blend is perfect. They were great in a studio where your locked to one position but, useless in a general listening environment.
I liked the 4430 2way because the bi-radial had an excellent dispersion match up with the 15. The image was physically the same size from top to bottom....would have enjoyed a super tweeter on top though.
I'm surprised there are not more endorsements for the classic 43xx 4ways which many of us have.

The 4430-35 series was more of a long running commercial success. the 4435 being the preferred candidate (over the 4430).

I would add the 43xx have limted vertical coverage with that horn and slot.

There has been a lot of rambling over preferences for both the 43XX series and the 44XX series. With a lot of messing around with setup the more recent 4344-4345 have their following

[Robh3606]

I would add the 43xx have limted vertical coverage with that horn and slot.

My point in my previous post. Pea shooters.

Rob:)

[Chas]

I'm surprised there are not more endorsements for the classic 43xx 4ways which many of us have.

After many personal trials and tribulations, that's why I am still here at the LHS! I remain totally gob-smacked about how well these apparent "flawed" (by some) designs reproduce sound.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose.:)

[Ian Mackenzie]

My point in my previous post. Pea shooters.

Rob:)

I thought your freakin chair was adjustable.....unless it was kicked out from under you...LOl :p.

All jokes aside when I clear the bench of some long outstanding jobs (sorry to those waiting) I plan to look at those DMS 1 horns Subwoofer sent over.

Without a doubt those horns are awkward at distances under 3 metres.

But I think the bi radials on the 44XX series are too much the other way in all directions for home use.

How are your PT wave guides going?

[Ian Mackenzie]

After many personal trials and tribulations, that's why I am still here at the LHS! I remain totally gob-smacked about how well these apparent "flawed" (by some) designs reproduce sound.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose.:)

There certainly have been some trials and tribulations.

[johnaec]

DMS 1 horns...I know Zilch has done some testing with those, (2332, correct?). I'm not sure if he posted curves here, but you might be able to de-duplicate efforts by checking his observations.

John

[4313B]

But I think the bi radials on the 44XX series are too much the other way in all directions for home use.Having used them in quite a few homes since they were first introduced I don't think so at all, but use the TAD or 476Be on the 90 x 50 waveguide instead if you want.

[Ian Mackenzie]

I guess you can alway pick on home listening room where they will work but we have seen a number of posts here where they don't.

If you guys go into the Library JBL talk about contolled coverage in their consumer series......yawn. I dont see 100 x 100 degree bi radial horns in any of the consumer series. I guess they didn't think it was a good idea. Nor do I. Inevitably, low ceilings and large flat surfaces like glass side walls in domestic environments are an issue. Either way the 44XX series was deliberately designed for a flat power response on recording control room.

[edgewound]

Their seems to be some contradicting philosophical viewpoints being espoused from common cogniscenti on the merits of coax vs controlled directivity formats that have wide format dispersion.

One given, is that some formats are more appropriate than others for a given listening space.

I guess debate and opinion is the only thing that's constant.

[merlin]

Could I just put a brief word in for the "augmented two way" approach. Keeping crossovers to a minimum or as far from the presence region as possible.

Way to Go! (as you Yanks are fond of saying :)

[4313B]

I guess you can alway pick on home listening room where they will work but we have seen a number of posts here where they don't.

If you guys go into the Library JBL talk about contolled coverage in their consumer series......yawn. I dont see 100 x 100 degree bi radial horns in any of the consumer series. I guess they didn't think it was a good idea. Nor do I. Inevitably, low ceilings and large flat surfaces like glass side walls in domestic environments are an issue. Either way the 44XX series was deliberately designed for a flat power response on recording control room.Ian, plenty of people have also whined about how terrible the 43xx series sounded in the home. In most circles pretty much "anything JBL" isn't even considered worth talking about for home use much less 43xx Studio Monitors.

Here's a system that suffers from a ton of floor and ceiling bounce...

[4313B]

Could I just put a brief word in for the "augmented two way" approach. Keeping crossovers to a minimum or as far from the presence region as possible.Yes, these latest 12-inch, 14-inch, and 15-inch 2-way and 3-way systems are quite impressive. Sitting them next to the 4345's and 4355's pretty much puts the whole debate of where to spend one's money to rest. Sure, there will always be those who like BIG for the sake of BIG; The fact remains that a 4355 has a visual impact that the new 12-inch 2-way lacks. The 4355 is also really loud which some people adore.

Honestly though, if the latest stuff didn't exist I would be back with my 43xx and 44xx stuff. No doubt about it.

[Chas]

[quote=4313B;208462]Ian, plenty of people have also whined about how terrible the 43xx series sounded in the home. In most circles pretty much "anything JBL" isn't even considered worth talking about for home use much less 43xx Studio Monitors.

quote]

I sure wouldn't want to spend much time listening to my 4345's in a typical domestic, untreated room. Mind you, my 4430's do just fine in this sort of environment.:)

[Ian Mackenzie]

Perhaps Tad have the ultimate soa solution.

http://www.tadhomeaudio.com/reference-one.html


.............TAD’s Coherent Sound Transducer (CST), key to the sonic success of every TAD loudspeaker. This unique driver, which covers the frequency range from 250 Hz to a staggering 100 kHz, employs a midrange cone and tweeter dome configured concentrically. A concentric solution radiates both upper and critical mid-frequencies from a single point source, and results in rock-solid imaging and a seamless soundstage, essential to accurate sound reproduction. But more than concentricity sets the CST apart from other speakers.

[richluvsound]

the smile says it all :D

Rich

[Ian Mackenzie]

Rich,

Well said.

For those with a broader mentality than of a reconer home theatre acoustics are a completely different kettle of fish to 2 channel stereo hi fidelity. At least according to industry experts RPG.

Of course with Diy you don't have to conform to any particular way of doing things. Just trust your ears.

Specifying a system to a particular engineering outcome in one of the pro industry segments is a bit more cut and dried.

[edgewound]

Rich,

Well said.

For those with a broader mentality than of a reconer home theatre acoustics are a completely different kettle of fish to 2 channel stereo hi fidelity. At least according to industry experts RPG.
.

Sometimes, Ian...no wait....many times, Ian...you should really read over what you're going to post before you broadbrush reconers as...let's just say..."narrow minded".

The TAD Be coax is a brilliant execution of a fine transducer. Even I...a simple minded reconer...could appreciate the reproduction from the Model One and Reference One.

Since we're talking "kettles of fish"...you're dipping into different kettles, that at this point I don't believe have fish in them.

Discussions about loudspeaker systems and room acoustics should be treated as two separate issues that become integrated when it's time to choose what performance one wants. If it wasn't...then both TAD and JBL wouldn't even consider offering the Reference One and Everest II, respectively, as home theater system set-ups....which they both do.

OK then....since I've been thinking out loud now...and TAD and JBL offer recone kits...and I do both...I now take your previous "reconer" comment as a compliment to my higher level of intellect.:applaud:

Thanks, bud.

[4313B]

Sometimes, Ian...no wait....many times, Ian...you should really read over what you're going to post before you broadbrush reconers as...let's just say..."narrow minded".:rotfl:

OK then....since I've been thinking out loud now...and TAD and JBL offer recone kits...and I do both...I now take your previous "reconer" comment as a compliment to my higher level of intellect.:applaud:

Thanks, bud.:)

[Ian Mackenzie]

Ah Kenneth darling,

You take everything too literally boy.

I guess I won't ask you to recone some Volt radial drivers.

The expression has been around since before American independance...you's just ain't borrower that one yet...LOL.

You can argue and talk a war of words about any of this if you think it (and your opinions) matters. The majority don't.

I am sure you are more valuable replying to this thread than blowing smoke here:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=19949

[edgewound]

Ah Kenneth darling,

You take everything too literally boy.

I guess I won't ask you to recone some Volt radial drivers.

The expression has been around since before American independance...you's just ain't borrower that one yet...LOL.

You can argue and talk a war of words about any of this if you think it (and your opinions) matters. The majority don't.

I am sure you are more valuable replying to this thread than blowing smoke here:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=19949

Oh, Ian, my love...

You talk funny...we don't understand each other...and that's fine.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Ah Kenneth darling,

You take everything too literally boy.

I guess I won't ask you to recone some Volt radial drivers.

The expression has been around since before American independance...you's just ain't borrower that one yet...LOL.

You can argue and talk a war of words about any of this if you think it (and your opinions) matters. The majority don't.

I am sure you are more valuable replying to this thread than blowing smoke here:
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=19949

I guess you weren't speaking your mind in response to this post on what loudspeaker in what room:

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=202357&postcount=1

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=202374&postcount=5

And this proclamation here;
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=202416&postcount=8

You just felt like making your point again.:barf:


Here is some really great stuff on coaxials and horns and pretty much nails the real issues as to what this thread was about;

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=76021#post76021

[Ian Mackenzie]

Hey Giskard,

That big screen has a great reflection.

I wonder how it will go with some digital enhancement!

[oznob]

I know this is :offtopic: but, I think the Forum is getting fun again! We were in a slump but things are starting to pick up! :applaud: When solid senior mebers are calling each other "love" and "darling", that's good stuff! What a great disfunctional family we make!:p

[demon]

i listended once to a link (http://www.linkwitzlab.com/Pluto/intro.htm)witz orion and some smaller tannoy, i can clearly say that a coaxial driver is THE way to go.
imaging is primary for me.
but loud volumes and subbass...no chance, need the coaxes need help!
-so, its an augmented coaxial for me please.
thinking about it, if one is a very computer-and-crossover-understanding person, could there be a way of changing the crossoverfrequencies according to the volume?
i mean:
very silent: totally coax
and getting louder, the coax freq.band gets more narrow and the others wider, to offer stability.

--a morphing crossover!

cheers,
mikey

[Krunchy]

I know this is :offtopic: but, I think the Forum is getting fun again! We were in a slump but things are starting to pick up!
About bloody time too! :D
and no Oz, it wasnt just you, it was in a bit of a dulldrum there.
(what were we talking about? oh yeah....Action!)

[cooky1257]

In terms of imaging I'd agree that time aligned coax nails it.
As far as I'm aware most of the dual bass coax monitors can be configured for 3 way operation with the coax rolled in at 250hz or so.
This significantly cleans up the mids too in the larger (15inch )models.

[Ian Mackenzie]

About bloody time too! :D
and no Oz, it wasnt just you, it was in a bit of a dulldrum there.
(what were we talking about? oh yeah....Action!)

Hmm, I have a confession to make.

I was thinking of lovely Debbie (magnet3) when I wrote that.

When ever I read Edgewound's posts I have visions of The Great Gastsby (F. Scott Fitzgerald's famous novel).

Meeting Edge bought greater meaning to that vision. It must feel kind of strange living on the West coast hey Edge.

I agree this place have become somewhat boring.

iMac.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Oh, Ian, my love...

You talk funny...we don't understand each other...and that's fine.

Shucks Edge,

I guess it depends on your concentration span but don't let it bother you.

We miss Debbie by the way!

iMac

[boputnam]

...you should really read over what you're going to post...:) Good general rule, that one is...


...you're dipping into different kettles, that at this point I don't believe have fish in them. Dammit, edge!!! :bash: I wish I had posted that!! :rotfl:



You can argue and talk a war of words about any of this if you think it (and your opinions) matters. The majority don't.Sorry - I'm lost - who are you representing here? I'm pretty respectful of edge's opinion, but I'm admittedly a layperson in all this... :blink:

[Krunchy]

Hmm, I have a confession to make.

I was thinking of lovely Debbie (magnet3) when I wrote that.

:rotfl: Thank you for clarifying that Ian & will bear it in mind when I read yours & edge's posts.

[Steve Schell]

Wow, thanks for the mention Ian, you make it sound as though I had said something significant! It was fun having all of you guys over that time. Anyway, the rest of my take on coaxials is that due to the necessity for a small h.f. horn that doesn't block the entire woofer cone, the crossover point must be pushed up to around 1.5kHz. A floppy woofer cone just doesn't sound as clear and dynamic in this range as a good compression driver and horn, so we make a terrible compromise smack in the middle of the critical midrange.

Jim Lansing once wrote of the progressive downsizing of his systems to meet requests for package size, from huge Shearer to Lansing Monitor to Iconic to Duplex. I think the Duplex went one step too far, as the Iconic lays waste to the Duplex with its decent size midrange horn and 800Hz. crossover point. The point source geometry of the Duplex is nice, but comes at too great a cost IMO.

Paul Klipsch used to say "The midrange is where we live." I built my first midrange horns back in 1992, 150Hz. square exponentials. They were about three feet long with mouths 28" square. They beamed highs like crazy which required one's head to be locked in a vise for listening, but they also offered my first taste of what I like to call "big goose bumps" midrange reproduction. Vocals can sound scarily real when the midrange driver and horn are up to the task. So many systems past and present use midrange horns that look more like throat adapters to me, and the pinched sound drives most folks away.

[rs237]

Paul Klipsch used to say "The midrange is where we live." I built my first midrange horns back in 1992, 150Hz. square exponentials. They were about three feet long with mouths 28" square. They beamed highs like crazy which required one's head to be locked in a vise for listening, but they also offered my first taste of what I like to call "big goose bumps" midrange reproduction. Vocals can sound scarily real when the midrange driver and horn are up to the task.

Hello Steve,

very interesting information. Is there more information, pictures of this Horn?

regards

juergen

[Titanium Dome]

snip