My Tannoy Dual Concentrics make vocals more legible than any speaker I've had beforehand.
They also crossover unusually low at 1kHz.
Coaxials - Reality vs. Experience?
Should say "hype vs. reality" in the headline.
Coaxial speaker design has been around in one way or another for a long time. I often think I’ll be absolutely blown away by them, but in practice traditional vertical layout speakers often have sound as good, or have other features that make them sound better.
Thiel, KEF, Monitor Audio, Tekton, Seas are among the many players attempting such designs, but none has, by the coaxial drivers alone, dominated a segment of the market.
What are your listening experiences? Is it 1 coaxial speaker that won you over, or have you always preferred them?
Showing 4 responses by cd318
@tomcy6 For me: Coherent, natural sound with solid & sharp imaging, because the tweeter and mid/woofer covering the critical midrange crossover point act more like a single point source rather than a tweeter and woofer barking at you from different locations.
Yes, coherent is the word. I'd say it's a little bit like listening to a mono sound source like a single driver kitchen radio. It's a less busy sound, more laid-back and one that's easier to follow, but one that still strangely seems to have plenty of detail. As you said earlier, "Tannoys are not for everyone - you either "get them" or you don’t."
|
As far as Tannoy tulip vs. pepperpot waveguide: pepperpot (usually paired with a single alnico magnet which is VERY expensive) is capable of a more vibrant, lifelike and gorgeous midrange with very fast transients and "startle" factor, but on the flipside its top end can get a bit rough and requires careful system matching to keep this in check!
Agreed. The occasionally sharp treble sting of my Tannoy Berkeley’s was reduced by 2 things. The first was the use of isolation under the 4 feet, especially the front pair which carried most of the speaker’s considerable weight. And secondly by gently loosening the 4 drive unit bolts to hand tightness. Otherwise, I don’t know if even all of their alnico midrange glory would have been enough for me to stay with them for so long. |
Clinical sound and i could never get emotionally involved with any tracks no matter what electronics I tried.
I think I know what you mean, but how exactly do we define "clinical"? Especially when we're talking about some of the most admired and costly loudspeakers out there? Yet, there is little doubt that far too many designs fall into this category, but is "clinical" even something that can be measured? I suspect this is a hugely important question to all of us who regard tone as king. Wasn't it Harry F Olson, one of the acclaimed greats of audio, who first suggested the importance of "good tone"? Yet here we are some 60 years later, and still without a good means of defining what that exactly means. |