I was on the fence on KEF speakers even after watching many videos but your five-year-old video push me over on the KEF side. I thank you for this video.
Would be good if you could match the driver size e.g. both 6.5inch. The lower frequency response on the coaxial is the main difference I hear because it's 12".
I think there are a couple of things going on. Coax, paper, open baffle and minimal cross over vs typical crappy box with little woofer and invasive cross over. I am displaying my personal bias. I can hear the sound of a box in all UA-cam speakers and I now prefer open baffle and good horns. Just more dynamic and realistic vs nasal and constrained. You captured the difference very well. I use vintage 10" Coral coax with alnico magnets and minimal crossover in an open baffle. The bass is an 18" open dipol. The sound is big, open, dynamic and natural. I am sure they measure badly but sound great. If I ever build speakers again, I want one of your horns from mid bass to treble. I think the big wooden horns look great and based on your measurements likely sound even better.
I would struggling to call this a fair comparison, but its and interesting one. I thought when i bought my Mark Audio CHN-70's that I would miss the mibass/tweeter set up of a more traditional speaker. The other thing with the
No not a fair comparison but I wanted to show how much the Mirage compresses the dynamic range in the midrange as compared to the Eminence 12CXT. I'm not claiming the 12CXT is better, only that it excels at one particular aspect which is often overlooked.
I've always found that the most striking difference between typical speakers and coaxial speakers is the coaxes have noticeably better stereo imaging -- interesting that your test specifically excludes this aspect. While I've never tried it, I plan to someday use a set of 5 or 7 identical (to eachother) coax speakers for home theater surround sound. The most important is L,C,R, of course... all at the same height and distance from listening position... the bottom of the screen will be just above the C speaker.
many years ago I did an experiment with two planar diaphragms 1'x4' in size both speakers used 1.5mil thick Mylar diaphragms both used the same line source single ended magnet system the difference was the efficiency one speaker was 3db more efficient than the other this achieved by changing the voice coil weight. The difference in frequency response was minimal. In listening tests the playback levels were adjusted to be the same at the listening position and the speaker location was the same for both speakers. In every instance listeners easily preferred the more efficient panel.
Mirage sound like a radio))). I had the same experiences when compared cheap 6.5 mid Eminence (I think it was around 94dB) with Scan Speak Revelator (86dB). Since then I never used a speaker with efficiency less than 96dB. Realism of high sensitivity drivers is just another level.
Thanks for another great video. Might the differences be a function of something like intermodulation distortion given the differences in the surface area of the radiators? Thanks!
These videos are very helpful. Thank you. I'm in the middle of working with a cheap Seismic 12" coax. I'm planning to watch your cross over videos soon, because I'll need all the help I can get. Keep posting!
The coax or full range sounds a lot better because it has a bigger box and a larger cone area. A good soft dome or cone tweeter added to the full range speaker will produce a better sound than the Mirage tweeter - woifer set up.
The price of this coax with a tweeter is about 260 euro, the total price of speakers from the Mirage is a maximum of 20 euro (I had a similar model 490is - in the late 90s it was a lower hi-fi).
The price of finished loudspeakers does not mean anything - since the manufacturer is left with a maximum of 50% of it. Of these 50% he needs to pay employees, rent an assembly shop, pay for the labor of speaker developers, pay utilities and taxes, and in the end - assemble the speakers themselves from something)) As a result, it turns out that the cost of all parts (cabinet, drivers, crossover and etc.) is a maximum of 10% of the salon cost of the loudspeakers. Therefore, we see ProAk D Two at a price of 5000 euros with Peerless tweeters for 25 euros ))) That's why I say - the price of the drivers in one Mirage is no more than 20 euros (I think less - there was nowhere worse quality).
Coincident or Coaxial as you refer to it is not about dynamic range or frequency response .It is ALL about the imaging which stays stable and much less affected by listener position with a coincident style driver .To demonstrate or appreciate the advantages of Coincident style drivers one needs to move around and see how the sound field changes compared to a multi driver array . I have been a Coincident and panel fan for over four decades and would prefer these to most multi driver array's single driver fullrange speakers are not to be ignored either . YES YOU CAN get good high frequency response without a tweeter !!!
Pete Pyrat I never discussed in the video why the coaxial exhibited better dynamic range. But I agree with what your saying about coaxials. Also any good horn will provide even coverage within its pass band. Many enjoy the clarity offered by reduced early reflections by maintaining pattern control. I personally prefer wide coverage verging on omnidirectional assuming the room acoustics are fully considered. Thanks for your reply. 🙂
Hi ! very interesting and i am a coaxial fan too ... by the way ... i wonder if a similar effect can be obtained with a D'Appolito configuration as well ... that is for instance the standard choice for a center channel upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Box-3-wege.jpg
it's very obvious that the vertical array has comb filtering which is a natural occurence due to different sources of sound. the coax almost sounds like a headphone - very cohesive.
Excellent video. I'm wondering on the coverage of the speaker; 90° x 90° for both frequencies? I would like to make a proyect like yours for a profesional use. I'm a weeding dj and I really want small boxes with that efficiency. Thanks for the idea, I feel inspired.
Thanks. There’s nothing special about the Eminence Coaxial. It’s just that it’s much larger and so it provides lower distortion and better pattern control through the midrange. You should look at existing plans available from B&C or RCF.
hi, an old school "university triaxial speaker" can beat that coax speaker, but very rare to find nowadays in pristine conditions those old school triaxial speakers, and also very expensive if you found one.
Another vintage speaker that could possibly beat the Eminence coaxial is an old Electro-Voice 12TRXB or 12TRXC triaxial. These pop up on eBay frequently are are affordable. I use a 12TRXC in homemade enclosures and they sound fantastic! They do require big enclosures.
Hard to narrow the difference in sound down to coaxial vs. component when you have so many other variables: cabinet, speaker size, speaker type, crossover, etc.
Hi very very nice. I love coaxial speakers. And i wonder why they are not more popular. I have listened mainly to Tannoy Dual Concentric speakers and always found them having a very enjoyable sound and great soundstage when listened from the sweet spot. And i have not listened to the best ones unfortunately. Nevertheless even the cheap ones sound very fine to me.
I made some 8" coaxials with drivers I got from eBay. Cost about $100 a pair to build. They are 8" "PA" drivers with a 2" voice coil. And I put Alpine 1.5" (1" dome) tweeters inside the cores of the 8" drivers. Seems a good match for each other, not too much bass or treble well balanced (with a crossover). They are time aligned and image gets better when driven a bit. If you want details I can get them from eBay. And I could only find these two drivers that are cheap enough and fit inside. But I had to strip the housing of the tweeters down a bit to fit it in. Main cone is free to excurt without touching the tweeter.
"And I wonder why they are not more popular." What intrigues me is that you can pay 400 grand for a pair of speakers with drivers all across the board. No time alignment and making the sound "flat" and lifeless.
Nice video but how do we know it's only about the shape? Not the same drivers ? The ideal will be a box one and a cone made with the same drivers. There is too many parameters.
Excellent presentation Joseph. It clearly demonstrates the differences between the two speakers. I prefer the sound of the Coax for sure. You do some great work , thank you.
Harry Me Thanks! Yes these woofers can sound very good. Similar sound can be had from the Fostex FW208HS woofer which is smaller and goes deeper. I have cabinet plans here... josephcrowe.com/products/autumn-bass-cabinet-speaker-plans
Great video thanks. I will go ahead and install dual cone Sony's rather than swapping them for 2-ways. Indeed, the simple speaker is so much more engaging and natural. Interesting how one speaker makes me hate the song and the other makes me love it.
I should have mentioned in the video that the Eminence 12CX is a coaxial driver similar to Tannoy. So it's a 2-way speaker with a high frequency compression driver that projects through middle of the woofer. The dust cap is acoustically transparent and uses the woofer's cone as a horn lens. Other types like this is the B&C 12CXT for Tannoy MG15.
Is there a way to visually display the sound difference between them? The coaxial has a sharper sound which might show up on a waveform as spikier, where the mirage sounds dull, like the peaks are rolled off. Time to build an anechoic chamber!
I have discovered there is no such thing as affordable speakers with sensitivity approaching 100db. I think I'm going to try and make my own, I guess. Can we use DSP in our crossovers without having to resort to an external processor? I wonder.
Due to the simple fact that high sensitivity in the bass region means a large enclosure and large driver, it will be more costly than a smaller configuration. 100dB is very high. A good 15” woofer will be 95dB. Why do you want 100dB? Many of my customers are very confused about this specification and don’t realize that 95dB is actually extremely good. The confusion surrounds Klipsch and other companies specifying their speakers’ sensitivity as “in-room” which introduces room boundary gain of +8dB or more from the standard anechoic measurement. I never specify an in-room sensitivity, and neither do driver manufacturers, who specify based on the T/S parameters which is a calculated value.
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding It doesn't have to be 100db, just close. 96db is probably fine. I just want to be able to run my amp at the lowest possible volume level while still getting high output levels, and I figured the higher the better. Am I wrong? Is 96db the sweet spot? What exactly makes it the sweet spot? Cost vs performance? Diminishing returns? Both? Thanks :)
A 15” driver represents about as large as most people are willing to go for a medium sized listening room. Going any larger presents technical challenge.
Nice little dem there, got to say I much preferred the coaxial. Would each speaker cost approx the same and would this be a good comparison in general of coaxial vs conventional speakers?
IMHO, the comparison isn't perfect. One speaker is larger. You could compare a KEF speaker with a Polk of the same size and price. I bet that you won't notice a difference.
The comparison is valid in terms of cost. The 12” coaxials are relatively affordable and comparable against a modern 6-12” 2-way stand mount speaker. The coaxial in the test is going to offer much lower distortion through the vocal range. It will also have more controlled coverage off-axis limiting room reflections offering better clarity. However soundstage width will be superior on the other speaker.
it all depending on the constrction of the speakers and placement , room , ect ect . also on a recorded video all from microphone type , placement ect play a role . you cant just ask and compare and think that people on a youtube video can hear any difference . yes in real life you can hear a difference and especially in the highest freqencies there vill be more distortion due to the vibrations from the bass speaker when placed inside it . it simple physics . you place a tweeter in the middle of a bass and the heavy vibrations will disturb the very sensitive tweeter there only moove with fractions of a milimeters precission . this will always make distortion in the tweeter, and yes you can hear it . its not for fun that most serious manfacturer they spending lots of time and energy in isolate the tweeter sometimes in seperate cabinets damped ect . its to isolate vibrations from reaching the sensitive tweeter ( and in many cases also done with mid reange if 3 or more ways ) i have tried to use coax speakers and i never do that again , personally i stick with well damped and isolated systems to get as clean sound as possible by eliminate vibrations to the different parts .
It's interesting but I don't think this was fair, the Mirage just doesn't have the surface area to create that depth of sound and actually very few modern speakers come with drivers larger than 8 inch. Most sound very neat and detailed, but lack any gravitas.
It’s not meant to fair. It highlights the difference between the two. It’s interesting because so many small drivers do not perform like the larger driver. Many people do not know what they are missing since they don’t have a chance to hear a larger driver like this. Like all things in audio there are exceptions however. The main attribute to the large driver is pattern controls through the vocal range which minimizes room reflections, and lower distortion since it’s not working nearly as hard to produce the same sound as the smaller driver. Exceptions do exist though.
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding I agree totally. Certainly here in Europe few people have the luxury of space for large standers but even if they do the fashion is to have as many drivers as possible. The best Analogy I could think of is the straight razor vs 5 blade disposable.
Justwantahover Good question. The midrange sounds less coloured, as if it were open baffle. But it wouldn’t have that much low end in a small open baffle without EQ. Maybe a box with the odd shape helping to reduce cabinet coloration?
@@jonathanknight8251 It does reduce coloration. Oblong boxes are bad. So manufacturers put uneven inside (reducing cubic capacity) and they would be nice (just make the box a bit bigger). About woofers, I don't know if you make speakers ,but the best woofer I heard is nice and cheap ($50 ea) and they are the home 10" "Response" brand by Jaycar (Australia). I don't work for them but I have some in sealed (angled) boxes and it's the best bass I heard. I have a Jaycar 200w+200w (@ 0.1% THD) for $300 brand new and it's magic with the 10" drivers. They are definitely worth checking out if you are a speaker builder.
It’s an enclosed cabinet with two rear ports. I’ve kept it around for ten years or so because it’s my Reference 12” enclosure. The non parallel walls and other features makes it sound really nice.
I think this should have been labeled high efficiency vs low efficiency speaker test. I don't think any of whats happening is because its a coax. Could have been a standard Eminence 12 and the same compression driver in a horn. Just my two cents.
I think it’s related to distortion. You can achieve similar sound from small drivers but they need to be very highly engineered. Check out the Purifi PTT6.5 as and example.
Thanks for the video. I think the coaxial is great. Very interested in more information about the box. What are you using for a crossover, and at what frequency? Thanks!
Whats the book shelf speakers sensitivity? 85 db maybe 87 db The Eminence is probably around 97 db. That is a huge difference the Eminence is going to have a much higher BL factor giving it more dynamics and of course mid range through a 12" cone compared to the bookshelf 4" or maybe 5" cone again not a fair comparison. The compression driver mounted to the Eminence is probably 105 db sensitivity without a L-pad. This is funny it is like comparing a old ford pinto with a 4 cylinder to a new mustang with a supercharged V8 it makes absolutely no sense. Are coaxial speakers better than other 2 way or 3 way designs no they are not my Tannoy gold 15" monitors and my KEF get beat easily by some Tekton Double impact and the Tekton are half the price of my Tannoy or KEF better imaging better bass better dynamics better everything. Do my Tannoy and KEF beat a lot of none coaxial speakers hell yea they do. I guess it comes down to what you like i like all my speakers but my desert island speaker would be the tekton double impact
bogie custer the point is to show that even at domestic listening levels the bookshelf exhibits power compression. It’s also an introductory to a pro audio product for domestic listening since most audiophiles do not have first hand exposure. There are pros and cons to both, but I’ll go through more comparisons in future videos. I’m revisiting old projects from my blog and presenting them as a narrative of my audio journey for the past five years or so.
Joseph Crowe. I think this is an excellent response. There certainly are pro's and con's to both. Exactly why audio can be a great journey for an enthusiast. A direct comparison between two similar speakers, or amplifiers, or source units etc... through UA-cam with different playback devices means I won't hear what another person hears. A comparison like this, however, is useful to me and may help others enjoy options they hadn't thought of or known about. Will be interested on the progress on the channel. Keep up the good work
Linear speaker cone distortion is less with larger cone , how realistic can reproduce a small cone a big kickdrum with full dynamics, listen to bassguitar through a jbl 2235h or a 2245h which are 15 and 18 inch drivers, or mids with big horn mouths for voice....
Completely different frequency response. If you had the capacity to equalize them with a DSP so they were similar then hearing the difference would likely be impossible, at least with this listen over youtube test.
well that was not a coaxial speaker that i know of,,i think its just a woofer with dynamic range. A coaxial speaker usually has a tweeter in the center of a mid woofer.
don't bother with trying to find a better microphone to capture the audio. no matter how accurate your microphone is in capturing an individual speaker's output, the process of compression in video editing will destroy any subtlety ...not to mention UA-cam's complete bastardization of the audiotrack when uploading to their platform. using a bad microphone, like you have in this video, actually does more to illustrate the differences. also, something no one else seems to do but would be hella more effective would be to include in the corner of the screen a live output from a RTA. just one from a phone app would work. that's the only way I can think of to visualize an auditory phenomena 🤷🏽♂️
I dont understand any of the guys that review or talk about speakers and such on youtube. And then let you "HEAR" the difference. Its kind of like showing people on you tube the difference between a 60hz monitor and a 144hz when youtube plays videos at a max of 60 frames per second. It makes so sense the audio will never be what the same as what they hear while in front of them.
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding If I listen to it through my soundbar or my phone. No I can't hear the difference. Only was a can hear a minuscule difference it when I run it through a dac and amp with my sennheiser headphones.
@@hxhdfjifzirstc894 16k views is really considered not many views. It all depends on your equipment, if you would watch this thru a phone you couldnt tell a difference no.
@@hxhdfjifzirstc894 A trained ear tho? Really? We are talking about a sample of sound reordered with what type of recording device? Then sent digitally to youtube to which will convert it to 128-192 kbps AAC. Then plays out of a device that can have a wide range of frequency responses. What you hear will never be the same of what this dude hears.
5 inch woofer.............. Please peoples, gimme a break with 4,5 and 6 inch ''woofers''), they are nothing more then a Chiwawa :). A real Woofahh is 10inches or more.
maybe from a car audio perspective. But when you graduate to big boy audio, the size of the drivers don't often determine efficiency, bass response and overall fidelity. visit a recording studio's control room if u don't believe me. give a listen to their near-field and far-field monitors. acoustical, electrical and cabinet design as well as manufacturing materials is why an 6" coax by Genelec can cost over $10k and produce far superior sound than many 10" drivers.
@Carl Klinkenborg See guys!. Don't talk to me about modern studio monitors, these ''modern'' recordings don't need great monitors, all they do is compression and LOOUUUD music now...
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding: Check the PDF Spec Sheet, page 2, paragraph 4: BETA 8CX, 10CX, and 12CX are coaxial speakers with tweeter sold separately
It is a coax in the sense that it will reproduce low and mid-range frequencies. It is however not a full range speaker because it will not reproduce highs. A tweeter must be used to achieve a correctly balanced sound if using this driver, as clearly stated in the specs sheet.
No youtube videos should contain camera audio ever. To do audio demos, use a pair of omni condenser microphones. Problem solved, that goes for the rest of you youtubers as well. Use 2 omni condensers.
I tried various microphones including a cardioid condensor and it picked up too much of just the direct sound of the speaker. Another issue I’ve found is the preamp inside the canon camera has too high a noise floor. So far the best microphone for this type of recording is the mic inside the iPhone XR. It records stereo and captures what seems like the most natural polar response. The only other option for the canon is to record the audio separately and then mix in during editing.
I was on the fence on KEF speakers even after watching many videos but your five-year-old video push me over on the KEF side. I thank you for this video.
me too but for me i am interested in Ascendo speakers
Would be good if you could match the driver size e.g. both 6.5inch. The lower frequency response on the coaxial is the main difference I hear because it's 12".
I think there are a couple of things going on. Coax, paper, open baffle and minimal cross over vs typical crappy box with little woofer and invasive cross over.
I am displaying my personal bias. I can hear the sound of a box in all UA-cam speakers and I now prefer open baffle and good horns. Just more dynamic and realistic vs nasal and constrained.
You captured the difference very well.
I use vintage 10" Coral coax with alnico magnets and minimal crossover in an open baffle. The bass is an 18" open dipol. The sound is big, open, dynamic and natural. I am sure they measure badly but sound great. If I ever build speakers again, I want one of your horns from mid bass to treble. I think the big wooden horns look great and based on your measurements likely sound even better.
I would struggling to call this a fair comparison, but its and interesting one. I thought when i bought my Mark Audio CHN-70's that I would miss the mibass/tweeter set up of a more traditional speaker. The other thing with the
No not a fair comparison but I wanted to show how much the Mirage compresses the dynamic range in the midrange as compared to the Eminence 12CXT. I'm not claiming the 12CXT is better, only that it excels at one particular aspect which is often overlooked.
You've got some pretty cool stuff going on here. Keep up the great work!
I've always found that the most striking difference between typical speakers and coaxial speakers is the coaxes have noticeably better stereo imaging -- interesting that your test specifically excludes this aspect. While I've never tried it, I plan to someday use a set of 5 or 7 identical (to eachother) coax speakers for home theater surround sound. The most important is L,C,R, of course... all at the same height and distance from listening position... the bottom of the screen will be just above the C speaker.
many years ago I did an experiment with two planar diaphragms 1'x4' in size both speakers used 1.5mil thick Mylar diaphragms both used the same line source single ended magnet system the difference was the efficiency one speaker was 3db more efficient than the other this achieved by changing the voice coil weight. The difference in frequency response was minimal. In listening tests the playback levels were adjusted to be the same at the listening position and the speaker location was the same for both speakers. In every instance listeners easily preferred the more efficient panel.
moray james interesting test James.
I have concentric/better coaxial. You can hear the difference by not sitting at sweet spot, thus move, Sit and stand it still gets better audio.
Thanks! I’m having a lot of fun making the videos!
Huge Difference. The coaxial is onto something. The vocals are so present. Like in your ear.
Mirage sound like a radio))). I had the same experiences when compared cheap 6.5 mid Eminence (I think it was around 94dB) with Scan Speak Revelator (86dB). Since then I never used a speaker with efficiency less than 96dB. Realism of high sensitivity drivers is just another level.
Thank you very much for making this video
Thanks for another great video. Might the differences be a function of something like intermodulation distortion given the differences in the surface area of the radiators? Thanks!
It’s likely the major factor.
wow I could really hear the difference, the coaxial blends the sound together naturally. Thanks for the experience.
This made me happy in 2020 which means a lot
Poor you. Psh.
These videos are very helpful. Thank you. I'm in the middle of working with a cheap Seismic 12" coax. I'm planning to watch your cross over videos soon, because I'll need all the help I can get. Keep posting!
It would have been so much easier if you would have just switched from speaker to speaker and pointed to them instead of talking.
too hard to keep up?
The coax or full range sounds a lot better because it has a bigger box and a larger cone area. A good soft dome or cone tweeter added to the full range speaker will produce a better sound than the Mirage tweeter - woifer set up.
Midbass in 12 vs 6,5 make a lot diference, voice is more deep. This will give details and body to the music.
You can hear even on YT thay the coax has a more fleshed out lower midrange and a much more even response and tonality.
The price of this coax with a tweeter is about 260 euro, the total price of speakers from the Mirage is a maximum of 20 euro (I had a similar model 490is - in the late 90s it was a lower hi-fi).
Both were about the same price when new. What’s your point?
The price of finished loudspeakers does not mean anything - since the manufacturer is left with a maximum of 50% of it. Of these 50% he needs to pay employees, rent an assembly shop, pay for the labor of speaker developers, pay utilities and taxes, and in the end - assemble the speakers themselves from something)) As a result, it turns out that the cost of all parts (cabinet, drivers, crossover and etc.) is a maximum of 10% of the salon cost of the loudspeakers. Therefore, we see ProAk D Two at a price of 5000 euros with Peerless tweeters for 25 euros )))
That's why I say - the price of the drivers in one Mirage is no more than 20 euros (I think less - there was nowhere worse quality).
Coax is next level 👌👌
Coincident or Coaxial as you refer to it is not about dynamic range or frequency response .It is ALL about the imaging which stays stable and much less affected by listener position with a coincident style driver .To demonstrate or appreciate the advantages of Coincident style drivers one needs to move around and see how the sound field changes compared to a multi driver array . I have been a Coincident and panel fan for over four decades and would prefer these to most multi driver array's single driver fullrange speakers are not to be ignored either . YES YOU CAN get good high frequency response without a tweeter !!!
Pete Pyrat I never discussed in the video why the coaxial exhibited better dynamic range. But I agree with what your saying about coaxials. Also any good horn will provide even coverage within its pass band. Many enjoy the clarity offered by reduced early reflections by maintaining pattern control. I personally prefer wide coverage verging on omnidirectional assuming the room acoustics are fully considered. Thanks for your reply. 🙂
Hi ! very interesting and i am a coaxial fan too ... by the way ... i wonder if a similar effect can be obtained with a D'Appolito configuration as well ... that is for instance the standard choice for a center channel
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Box-3-wege.jpg
Well the coaxial speaker came across as so much better! Even in the mid to high end.
it's very obvious that the vertical array has comb filtering which is a natural occurence due to different sources of sound. the coax almost sounds like a headphone - very cohesive.
Excellent video. I'm wondering on the coverage of the speaker; 90° x 90° for both frequencies? I would like to make a proyect like yours for a profesional use. I'm a weeding dj and I really want small boxes with that efficiency. Thanks for the idea, I feel inspired.
Thanks. There’s nothing special about the Eminence Coaxial. It’s just that it’s much larger and so it provides lower distortion and better pattern control through the midrange. You should look at existing plans available from B&C or RCF.
I think a point source coaxial speaker sounds tighter in terms of spatuial coherence.
Yes, it's a striking difference, once you notice it the first time.
hi, an old school "university triaxial speaker" can beat that coax speaker, but very rare to find nowadays in pristine conditions those old school triaxial speakers, and also very expensive if you found one.
Another vintage speaker that could possibly beat the Eminence coaxial is an old Electro-Voice 12TRXB or 12TRXC triaxial. These pop up on eBay frequently are are affordable. I use a 12TRXC in homemade enclosures and they sound fantastic! They do require big enclosures.
Hard to narrow the difference in sound down to coaxial vs. component when you have so many other variables: cabinet, speaker size, speaker type, crossover, etc.
That coax is box or open baffle ?? Nice video and great stuff by the way !!! 😀😀😀
Hi very very nice. I love coaxial speakers. And i wonder why they are not more popular. I have listened mainly to Tannoy Dual Concentric speakers and always found them having a very enjoyable sound and great soundstage when listened from the sweet spot. And i have not listened to the best ones unfortunately. Nevertheless even the cheap ones sound very fine to me.
I made some 8" coaxials with drivers I got from eBay. Cost about $100 a pair to build. They are 8" "PA" drivers with a 2" voice coil. And I put Alpine 1.5" (1" dome) tweeters inside the cores of the 8" drivers. Seems a good match for each other, not too much bass or treble well balanced (with a crossover). They are time aligned and image gets better when driven a bit. If you want details I can get them from eBay. And I could only find these two drivers that are cheap enough and fit inside. But I had to strip the housing of the tweeters down a bit to fit it in. Main cone is free to excurt without touching the tweeter.
"And I wonder why they are not more popular."
What intrigues me is that you can pay 400 grand for a pair of speakers with drivers all across the board. No time alignment and making the sound "flat" and lifeless.
Nice video but how do we know it's only about the shape? Not the same drivers ?
The ideal will be a box one and a cone made with the same drivers. There is too many parameters.
Coaxials are more about consistent sound at different listening angles, and sounding like the treble is coming from the same place as the bass.
Which is the song's name? It's so beautiful❤
Excellent presentation Joseph. It clearly demonstrates the differences between the two speakers.
I prefer the sound of the Coax for sure. You do some great work , thank you.
Harry Me Thanks! Yes these woofers can sound very good. Similar sound can be had from the Fostex FW208HS woofer which is smaller and goes deeper. I have cabinet plans here...
josephcrowe.com/products/autumn-bass-cabinet-speaker-plans
Can you please shed some light on the coax build? Looks like an Eminence Beta-12CX driver. Would love to build it. Or somehow get the plans.
Paper cones make a big difference too.
Regular: 1:05
Coaxial: 1:32
Great video thanks. I will go ahead and install dual cone Sony's rather than swapping them for 2-ways. Indeed, the simple speaker is so much more engaging and natural. Interesting how one speaker makes me hate the song and the other makes me love it.
Peter McNull dual cone?
I should have mentioned in the video that the Eminence 12CX is a coaxial driver similar to Tannoy. So it's a 2-way speaker with a high frequency compression driver that projects through middle of the woofer. The dust cap is acoustically transparent and uses the woofer's cone as a horn lens. Other types like this is the B&C 12CXT for Tannoy MG15.
Is there a way to visually display the sound difference between them? The coaxial has a sharper sound which might show up on a waveform as spikier, where the mirage sounds dull, like the peaks are rolled off. Time to build an anechoic chamber!
smart lil girl !
I have discovered there is no such thing as affordable speakers with sensitivity approaching 100db. I think I'm going to try and make my own, I guess. Can we use DSP in our crossovers without having to resort to an external processor? I wonder.
Due to the simple fact that high sensitivity in the bass region means a large enclosure and large driver, it will be more costly than a smaller configuration. 100dB is very high. A good 15” woofer will be 95dB. Why do you want 100dB? Many of my customers are very confused about this specification and don’t realize that 95dB is actually extremely good. The confusion surrounds Klipsch and other companies specifying their speakers’ sensitivity as “in-room” which introduces room boundary gain of +8dB or more from the standard anechoic measurement. I never specify an in-room sensitivity, and neither do driver manufacturers, who specify based on the T/S parameters which is a calculated value.
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding It doesn't have to be 100db, just close. 96db is probably fine. I just want to be able to run my amp at the lowest possible volume level while still getting high output levels, and I figured the higher the better. Am I wrong? Is 96db the sweet spot?
What exactly makes it the sweet spot? Cost vs performance? Diminishing returns? Both? Thanks :)
A 15” driver represents about as large as most people are willing to go for a medium sized listening room. Going any larger presents technical challenge.
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply I was also going 15"- I'll probably go 8 to 10".
Thx
Nice little dem there, got to say I much preferred the coaxial. Would each speaker cost approx the same and would this be a good comparison in general of coaxial vs conventional speakers?
IMHO, the comparison isn't perfect. One speaker is larger. You could compare a KEF speaker with a Polk of the same size and price. I bet that you won't notice a difference.
The comparison is valid in terms of cost. The 12” coaxials are relatively affordable and comparable against a modern 6-12” 2-way stand mount speaker. The coaxial in the test is going to offer much lower distortion through the vocal range. It will also have more controlled coverage off-axis limiting room reflections offering better clarity. However soundstage width will be superior on the other speaker.
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding Okay. So these coaxial drivers are really good for the money.
thank you very much. It's so weird that that coax Eminence 12 sounds... great. But looks so old a ghetto. love it.
it all depending on the constrction of the speakers and placement , room , ect ect .
also on a recorded video all from microphone type , placement ect play a role .
you cant just ask and compare and think that people on a youtube video can hear any difference .
yes in real life you can hear a difference and especially in the highest freqencies there vill be more
distortion due to the vibrations from the bass speaker when placed inside it .
it simple physics . you place a tweeter in the middle of a bass and the heavy vibrations will disturb the very sensitive
tweeter there only moove with fractions of a milimeters precission .
this will always make distortion in the tweeter, and yes you can hear it .
its not for fun that most serious manfacturer they spending lots of time and energy in isolate the tweeter
sometimes in seperate cabinets damped ect .
its to isolate vibrations from reaching the sensitive tweeter
( and in many cases also done with mid reange if 3 or more ways )
i have tried to use coax speakers and i never do that again , personally i stick with well damped and isolated systems
to get as clean sound as possible by eliminate vibrations to the different parts .
It's interesting but I don't think this was fair, the Mirage just doesn't have the surface area to create that depth of sound and actually very few modern speakers come with drivers larger than 8 inch. Most sound very neat and detailed, but lack any gravitas.
It’s not meant to fair. It highlights the difference between the two. It’s interesting because so many small drivers do not perform like the larger driver. Many people do not know what they are missing since they don’t have a chance to hear a larger driver like this. Like all things in audio there are exceptions however. The main attribute to the large driver is pattern controls through the vocal range which minimizes room reflections, and lower distortion since it’s not working nearly as hard to produce the same sound as the smaller driver. Exceptions do exist though.
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding I agree totally. Certainly here in Europe few people have the luxury of space for large standers but even if they do the fashion is to have as many drivers as possible. The best Analogy I could think of is the straight razor vs 5 blade disposable.
coax for the win
Is the coaxial in a box or just a baffle board? Seems like the coaxial lacks top end a bit. It's there but not enough intensity.
Justwantahover Good question. The midrange sounds less coloured, as if it were open baffle. But it wouldn’t have that much low end in a small open baffle without EQ. Maybe a box with the odd shape helping to reduce cabinet coloration?
@@jonathanknight8251 It does reduce coloration. Oblong boxes are bad. So manufacturers put uneven inside (reducing cubic capacity) and they would be nice (just make the box a bit bigger).
About woofers, I don't know if you make speakers ,but the best woofer I heard is nice and cheap ($50 ea) and they are the home 10" "Response" brand by Jaycar (Australia). I don't work for them but I have some in sealed (angled) boxes and it's the best bass I heard. I have a Jaycar 200w+200w (@ 0.1% THD) for $300 brand new and it's magic with the 10" drivers. They are definitely worth checking out if you are a speaker builder.
It’s an enclosed cabinet with two rear ports. I’ve kept it around for ten years or so because it’s my Reference 12” enclosure. The non parallel walls and other features makes it sound really nice.
I think this should have been labeled high efficiency vs low efficiency speaker test. I don't think any of whats happening is because its a coax. Could have been a standard Eminence 12 and the same compression driver in a horn. Just my two cents.
I think it’s related to distortion. You can achieve similar sound from small drivers but they need to be very highly engineered. Check out the Purifi PTT6.5 as and example.
Thanks for the video. I think the coaxial is great. Very interested in more information about the box. What are you using for a crossover, and at what frequency? Thanks!
Just found your video on it! :)
Oh man I scrolled to the bottom of the comments, I'm sorry I did that, that's where UA-cam puts the sludge. Lol
Coax sounds like music, the bipolar sounds like hi-fi.....
difference might be due to size of the drivers, eminence doesn't sound natural though.
the coaxial is noticeably deeper
It are two whole different speakers, they have their own karaktaristic , they should NEVER EVER SOUND THE SAME
Whats the book shelf speakers sensitivity? 85 db maybe 87 db The Eminence is probably around 97 db. That is a huge difference the Eminence is going to have a much higher BL factor giving it more dynamics and of course mid range through a 12" cone compared to the bookshelf 4" or maybe 5" cone again not a fair comparison. The compression driver mounted to the Eminence is probably 105 db sensitivity without a L-pad. This is funny it is like comparing a old ford pinto with a 4 cylinder to a new mustang with a supercharged V8 it makes absolutely no sense.
Are coaxial speakers better than other 2 way or 3 way designs no they are not my Tannoy gold 15" monitors and my KEF get beat easily by some Tekton Double impact and the Tekton are half the price of my Tannoy or KEF better imaging better bass better dynamics better everything. Do my Tannoy and KEF beat a lot of none coaxial speakers hell yea they do.
I guess it comes down to what you like i like all my speakers but my desert island speaker would be the tekton double impact
bogie custer the point is to show that even at domestic listening levels the bookshelf exhibits power compression. It’s also an introductory to a pro audio product for domestic listening since most audiophiles do not have first hand exposure. There are pros and cons to both, but I’ll go through more comparisons in future videos. I’m revisiting old projects from my blog and presenting them as a narrative of my audio journey for the past five years or so.
Joseph Crowe. I think this is an excellent response. There certainly are pro's and con's to both. Exactly why audio can be a great journey for an enthusiast. A direct comparison between two similar speakers, or amplifiers, or source units etc... through UA-cam with different playback devices means I won't hear what another person hears. A comparison like this, however, is useful to me and may help others enjoy options they hadn't thought of or known about. Will be interested on the progress on the channel. Keep up the good work
Linear speaker cone distortion is less with larger cone , how realistic can reproduce a small cone a big kickdrum with full dynamics, listen to bassguitar through a jbl 2235h or a 2245h which are 15 and 18 inch drivers, or mids with big horn mouths for voice....
Yes that’s the main reason for the difference. Lower distortion.
Completely different frequency response. If you had the capacity to equalize them with a DSP so they were similar then hearing the difference would likely be impossible, at least with this listen over youtube test.
Berapa om harga nya
why would you record a video with so much background noise
well that was not a coaxial speaker that i know of,,i think its just a woofer with dynamic range. A coaxial speaker usually has a tweeter in the center of a mid woofer.
Odin Coulombe it does. It has a compression driver similar to Tannoy.
ua-cam.com/video/NK6L4gcpNYY/v-deo.html
The tweeter is hidden behind the dust cap which is probably just thin cloth.
There is alot missing in that box speaker
don't bother with trying to find a better microphone to capture the audio. no matter how accurate your microphone is in capturing an individual speaker's output, the process of compression in video editing will destroy any subtlety ...not to mention UA-cam's complete bastardization of the audiotrack when uploading to their platform. using a bad microphone, like you have in this video, actually does more to illustrate the differences. also, something no one else seems to do but would be hella more effective would be to include in the corner of the screen a live output from a RTA. just one from a phone app would work. that's the only way I can think of to visualize an auditory phenomena 🤷🏽♂️
I dont understand any of the guys that review or talk about speakers and such on youtube. And then let you "HEAR" the difference. Its kind of like showing people on you tube the difference between a 60hz monitor and a 144hz when youtube plays videos at a max of 60 frames per second. It makes so sense the audio will never be what the same as what they hear while in front of them.
Can you hear the difference I’m referring to in my video?
It requires a trained ear. If you were correct, these type of videos would get no views.
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding If I listen to it through my soundbar or my phone. No I can't hear the difference. Only was a can hear a minuscule difference it when I run it through a dac and amp with my sennheiser headphones.
@@hxhdfjifzirstc894 16k views is really considered not many views. It all depends on your equipment, if you would watch this thru a phone you couldnt tell a difference no.
@@hxhdfjifzirstc894 A trained ear tho? Really? We are talking about a sample of sound reordered with what type of recording device? Then sent digitally to youtube to which will convert it to 128-192 kbps AAC. Then plays out of a device that can have a wide range of frequency responses. What you hear will never be the same of what this dude hears.
5 inch woofer.............. Please peoples, gimme a break with 4,5 and 6 inch ''woofers''), they are nothing more then a Chiwawa :). A real Woofahh is 10inches or more.
maybe from a car audio perspective. But when you graduate to big boy audio, the size of the drivers don't often determine efficiency, bass response and overall fidelity. visit a recording studio's control room if u don't believe me. give a listen to their near-field and far-field monitors. acoustical, electrical and cabinet design as well as manufacturing materials is why an 6" coax by Genelec can cost over $10k and produce far superior sound than many 10" drivers.
and it's 'Chihuahua' btw 😏
@@nickloss2377 I have a very simple question for you; why does it take a double bass, to produce bass? why not try it with a violin?.....
@@nickloss2377 Right :)
@Carl Klinkenborg See guys!. Don't talk to me about modern studio monitors, these ''modern'' recordings don't need great monitors, all they do is compression and LOOUUUD music now...
THAT IS NOT A COAXIAL SPEAKER!
www.parts-express.com/eminence-beta-12cx-12-coaxial-driver--290-504?gclid=CjwKCAjw0tHoBRBhEiwAvP1GFdx77y1tcWx-K8Jxy-pkXTIkPG6YZ9ClFtx2nWL4RFntEvHnKhVMdxoCWxIQAvD_BwE
@@JosephCrowesDIYSpeakerBuilding: Check the PDF Spec Sheet, page 2, paragraph 4: BETA 8CX, 10CX, and 12CX are coaxial speakers with tweeter sold separately
It is a coax in the sense that it will reproduce low and mid-range frequencies. It is however not a full range speaker because it will not reproduce highs. A tweeter must be used to achieve a correctly balanced sound if using this driver, as clearly stated in the specs sheet.
? Clearly you can hear 10k+ coming from it. A normal cone that large just won't sound like that even if you EQ it flat. It has to be coaxial.
No youtube videos should contain camera audio ever. To do audio demos, use a pair of omni condenser microphones. Problem solved, that goes for the rest of you youtubers as well. Use 2 omni condensers.
I tried various microphones including a cardioid condensor and it picked up too much of just the direct sound of the speaker. Another issue I’ve found is the preamp inside the canon camera has too high a noise floor. So far the best microphone for this type of recording is the mic inside the iPhone XR. It records stereo and captures what seems like the most natural polar response. The only other option for the canon is to record the audio separately and then mix in during editing.
Nonsense