~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

[ErinH]

I'm looking at options for a coaxial design using a 5.25" or so mid (I'm limited by this OD). I'd prefer the two drivers be able to be amplified separately (ie: active). I found a few options but wanted to pool you guys in case I'm missing any.

[ErinH]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

This seas driver looks very interesting but the FR on the tweeter looks really bad. It takes a nosedive after 7khz.

http://www.seas.no/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=302&Itemid=258

I started looking around and found the Kef Q100 Dual Concentric that Zaph tested. It looks really promising for a multitude of reasons but it's a 6" driver according to speakerexchange.com, though Kef's Q100 speaker details page calls it a 5.25". I'll keep digging to see if I can find more Dual Concentric designs.
Maybe Tannoy?


Edit: I just called speaker exchange. I asked about dimensions of the driver and was asked why I needed to know... am I needing it as a replacement? I replied that I was using it for a DIY design and then was told that they "wouldn't be able to sale that (driver)" for a DIY design. He said I have to use it in a Kef cabinet and provide a serial number. Of course, now that I go back and check the site, I see that information. :rolleyes:
Makes me wonder how Zaph got them. I don't recall seeing that you had to have a serial # to get them before.
Sucks, too, because that looks like the best driver option so far.

[Face]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

The Q100's driver itself is just under 5", but with just under 6" including the frame.

As far as selling for repairs only, KEF probably gave them a spanking for selling so many drivers to DIY'ers. I wonder if AJ has anything to do with this too...

[GranteedEV]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

BMS 5CN160 - for an active crossover you still might want to put an L-Pad on the tweeter to lower the noise floor, since it's ~100db/w or higher.

[ErinH]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

The Q100's driver itself is just under 5", but with just under 6" including the frame.

As far as selling for repairs only, KEF probably gave them a spanking for selling so many drivers to DIY'ers. I wonder if AJ has anything to do with this too...

Yea, kinda figured that's what happened. Sucks. But thanks for that information. I see they offer a 5" driver on the r300 series. Maybe that's something I can pursue. But, I'll not count on it.

BMS 5CN160 - for an active crossover you still might want to put an L-Pad on the tweeter to lower the noise floor, since it's ~100db/w or higher.

interesting driver. crazy drop in output in the HF. might be able to throw a HPF on it to even things up a bit, though.

[winslow]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

The BMS is nice.

BMS also have a 5CN140 too. A simple cap up high should EQ that guy pretty flat and give you a sharper roll off down low.

Durwood over on the car forums is using the CN140s in his car.

B&C has a 5" coax too if you are in the pro audio market. Vance has tested either the 5 or 6 in a recent Voice Coil too.

[ErinH]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

unfortunately finding off axis response of those isn't easy.

I bit the bullet and just pulled the trigger on both the Kef Q100 and the HTS3001SE speakers. Not sure if either will fit, but the only way to know is to gut the speakers and see for myself. May post the data if I find the time. Based on what Zaph found with the Q100, I'm at least hopeful the 4.5" in the HTS3001SE will perform similarly, seeing as how the Q100 probably won't fit.


*my wife is going to kill me*

[sarnella]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

I just found this at PE - Visaton 4800 FR13 5" Full-Range Speaker 4 Ohm

[Whitneyville1]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

www.apexjr.com has the Vifa 120mm (nominal 5") coaxial they call for a .14 cu. ft. ported enclosure for 80-20,000Hz, 87dB/W 8 ohm 50 watt max.
They show a generic cross-over with an L-pad on the tweeter. They go for $15 each. I messed around with the woofer in WinISD Pro and I think 65Hz is doable with a +/- 3dB ripple passband. It looks like their XO crosses pretty high, maybe 5K, but it's both 2nd order and I think you can do better. Not a big investment to play around with.

[bkeane1259]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

www.apexjr.com has the Vifa 120mm (nominal 5") coaxial they call for a .14 cu. ft. ported enclosure for 80-20,000Hz, 87dB/W 8 ohm 50 watt max.
They show a generic cross-over with an L-pad on the tweeter. They go for $15 each. I messed around with the woofer in WinISD Pro and I think 65Hz is doable with a +/- 3dB ripple passband. It looks like their XO crosses pretty high, maybe 5K, but it's both 2nd order and I think you can do better. Not a big investment to play around with.

That's really more of a 4" driver when you subtract the frame. I'm using these in a boom box build and as you noted, they're not really capable of much below 65Hz and at low power as well....let's say 20 watts.

[craigk]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

ErinH, heard the seas in a german design that was around 45000.00. price is crazy, but speaker had a couple of woofers in the cab also. have to say that i was blown away. one of the best soundstages i have ever heard. just a very impresive speaker.

[Pallas]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

unfortunately finding off axis response of those isn't easy.

I bit the bullet and just pulled the trigger on both the Kef Q100 and the HTS3001SE speakers. Not sure if either will fit, but the only way to know is to gut the speakers and see for myself. May post the data if I find the time. Based on what Zaph found with the Q100, I'm at least hopeful the 4.5" in the HTS3001SE will perform similarly, seeing as how the Q100 probably won't fit.

IMO, Q100 driver is quite a bit better all around. It's also much larger framed and larger motored, with slightly narrower directivity in the midband (think ~120deg compared to ~150deg for the 3001). But the HTS3001SE is quite good as well. The main audible weakness compared to the Q100 are that the HTS3001SE's tweeter can compress a bit at the bottom of its passband. I assume you're going active, but for a good directivity match you'll still want to cross that little tweeter at somewhere between 2kHz and 2.5kHz. I suspect there are theoretical and perhaps measureable improvements to be found in the Q100 tweeter's more evolved phase plug and the fixed waveguide "snout," but as for things that are readily audible between the two it's really just a midrange that gets a bit more polite when you really turn up the wick.

It would be cool to see what the Z-flex suspension on the Q100 driver does on the Klippel. (Also, how well inductance is controlled over its stroke, despite not using shorting rings in the motor; the major differences in the "step up" R100's driver are shorting rings in the motor and obviously the radially-ribbed cone. According to KEF's Jack Oclee-Brown the LS50 driver also has some tweaks to the magnet in addition to that awful rose-gold coloring.)

The size of the magnet on the Q100 driver (compared to earlier KEF Q-series drivers) suggests to me that it was originally designed around a neo motor, but then neo prices skyrocketed so they had to go back to ferrite. The 3001SE driver has a neo motor.

FWIW, here's a picture of the HTS3001SE crossover (egg opened up because, as you can see, one of the chokes came loose in shipping; this was a return from one of my KHT3005SE sets, sold on eBay).


Fairly complex for such a small and relatively inexpensive speaker of that finish quality.

The Q100 crossover is much simpler: single air core inductor, single poly cap, single resistor.

In this rough size-class (a bit bigger, because of the frame lip) there's also the Pioneer EX concentric. (See avatar for a cutaway.) But it's frightfully expensive in comparison. Perhaps (debatably, which I write having both drivers in hand and having commissioned cabinets that use the Pioneer driver) worth it for home, but I wouldn't waste it in a car.

[ErinH]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

Hey, Jay. I knew/hoped you'd chime in sooner or later.

I saw the thread on diya regarding the LS50 where Jack briefly highlighted the differences in drivers. I, too, would like to get my hands on the R100 and LS50 drivers to see how comparable they are as we know one difference in those and the Q100 is the shorting ring, among other things. Unfortunately, spending $850+ on a set to gut those drivers is too far beyond my willingness to experiment. :(

I believe the Q100 is indeed larger than I can make use of. That said, I found a good deal for the bookshelves on ebay ($385 shipped) and figure at the least I can sell them to someone who can make better use of them. My main reason for purchasing them is, as you said, to see how the suspension performs while under test on the Klippel LSI. The main difference I see between it and the 3001se driver is the Z-surround. Also worth noting is the ht3001 driver has a ribbed cone while the q100 does not. I would guess this is a hint at it's intended use/design as a midrange with the cone designed to alleviate breakup. On the flip side, I do recall reading the Z-surround design was intended to help the tweeter response by keeping the profile of the surround down; the hts3001se doesn't have this. But, then again, maybe the HTS is intended to be crossed low enough where excursion isn't of concern (kind of makes me wonder why a reverse surround wasn't used but I'm certain it was considered). Though, it's just an educated guess. As you mentioned, the ht3001se has a wider response angle which is just another reason I imagine it's intended use is as a midrange. I'm just curious how well controlled it is and if it's the same/similar to the Q100 driver. Of course, you can probably determine this simply by looking at the size of the speaker/driver itself. The R100 seems to use both these aspects (radially ribbed, z-surround). As noted, the R100 is told to have a shorting ring as well which should help on high frequency distortion over excursion (IMD). Interestingly enough, I recall Jack mentioning there are only "3 Uni-Q" drivers and he noted them by size. He didn't mention the 4.5" size which is used in the HTS3001se. Is it not considered a Uni-Q?

I do intend to use the drivers actively (assuming they pass my criterion). However, I will test passively as well. If they perform well and I don't feel an active setup is necessary, I'd have no problems using them passively.
I've reached out to Kef in regards to obtaining test samples. As well as the Q100 driver did in Zaph's tests, I think it's worthwhile for the audio community to see further independent testing. At the price of the Q100, IMO, given the performance Zaph documented,the speakers seems like a great value. Even then, if you were to gut the speakers for the drivers themselves you have 2 pair of tweeter and midwoofer for about $450-550 (used - bnib). Given the performance, this still seems like a solid option as separate drivers; then you factor in the benefit of the concentric design and it's a double bonus. If the others perform as well, I think Kef would stand to gain a lot of good press from the testing. For instance, look at all the people interested in the Q100 based on Zaph's test. That alone prompted me to purchase the Q100 & HTS3001BL. I spoke with a rep for the company and his take was that they are simply trying to keep driver replacements in stock for customers who own the speakers. Which is reasonable. But there's no reason production can't be ramped up. ;)

Bottom line: I've made the purchase. I'll be testing. Sucks I had to go to the extremes I did but I definitely look forward to the results. If they perform as well as I hope, I can see these being used in a future setup for car/home.

[Face]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

If you have the space, Q100s make excellent desktop speakers.

[Pallas]

Re: ~ 5" Coaxial drivers?

I saw the thread on diya regarding the LS50 where Jack briefly highlighted the differences in drivers. I, too, would like to get my hands on the R100 and LS50 drivers to see how comparable they are as we know one difference in those and the Q100 is the shorting ring, among other things. Unfortunately, spending $850+ on a set to gut those drivers is too far beyond my willingness to experiment. :(

Ditto. I tried hard to get the R300/500/700 concentric (the dedicated midrange 5" variant) but was stymied.

My main reason for purchasing them is, as you said, to see how the suspension performs while under test on the Klippel LSI.

Shoulda just called me. I could have sent you one. I'm using three Q100's up front temporarily at home (in addition to two for background music in the bedroom), which means I have a spare.

The main difference I see between it and the 3001se driver is the Z-surround.

Also the neo motor, and the 3001 has a plastic basket whereas the Q100 has an alloy basket. And the cone material is different; the 3001 has a plastic-looking collar and then a paper cone. The Q100 has a metal cone. (But one of the best-controlled ones around, especially considering the price.)

On the flip side, I do recall reading the Z-surround design was intended to help the tweeter response by keeping the profile of the surround down; the hts3001se doesn't have this.

In the DIYA LS50 thread, Jack commented that the thin surround of the 3001 was the transition to the Z-surround.

But, then again, maybe the HTS is intended to be crossed low enough where excursion isn't of concern (kind of makes me wonder why a reverse surround wasn't used but I'm certain it was considered). *** Though, it's just an educated guess. As you mentioned, the ht3001se has a wider response angle which is just another reason I imagine it's intended use is as a midrange.

Not quite. Remember that the 3005 KEF eggs are "full range" little speakers. As a practical matter, they go down to about 120Hz. And they're fairly inefficient. Not dedicated mids, really. And the HTC3005SE (I'm using two of them as side-surround) "center channel" is not a 3-way design but a 2.5-way design. (They claim both in different places but after tracing the xover it's clearly a 2.5-way.) I don't know if the driver part number is different.

Interestingly enough, I recall Jack mentioning there are only "3 Uni-Q" drivers and he noted them by size. He didn't mention the 4.5" size which is used in the HTS3001se. Is it not considered a Uni-Q?

I wonder the context for that. I can think of way more than three. Maybe he just meant three 5" midwoofers?

In the latest generation, there are 5 platforms: the 5" midwoofer (Q100/R100/LS50), 5" midrange (R300+), 5" flagship midrange (Blade), 6.5" midwoofer (Q300/Q700), and 8" midwoofer (Q900).

And then the older ones (the 6.5" Reference midrange, the 3" one in the 1005-series, the 4" one in the 2005-series, and the 4.5" one in the 3005-series). And the in-wall ones, etc. So there are a lot of Uni-Q's.

At the price of the Q100, IMO, given the performance Zaph documented,the speakers seems like a great value. Even then, if you were to gut the speakers for the drivers themselves you have 2 pair of tweeter and midwoofer for about $450-550 (used - bnib).

That was my thought when I bought them. My original plans were for LCR's using the Q100 concentric and two 6" or so midwoofers. Aura NS6 was at the top of my list, which probably doesn't surprise you given my oft-declared fondness for Aurasound's drivers and of course the cost.

At any rate, I'll be back in a couple weeks. We're going abroad tomorrow. And coming back with new rings on our fingers. Cheers.