Possibly, but we all know what assumptions count for.
People can assume whatever they like, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's factually correct. And with an Fs of 840Hz, it's not even a midrange, let alone a full range drive unit (which are as noted often described as mechanical coax / triax units since that is what they functionally are) since it doesn't even cover the lower mids. In fact, it can't even manage to get down to one of the traditional 'second best option' XO frequencies favoured by the pioneers. Close, but not quite.From a technical POV all that's really required for a coax is that you have two coaxially positioned radiating devices / surfaces that are in some way decoupled from each other so they are acting to an extent as independent radiating sources. That's essentially 'it'. You can make it more complex with separate coils, motors etc., but that doesn't alter the basic geometry & principle -it's just a more involved way of achieving it. What we appear to have here is a shallow profile cone with a direct-bonded central soft dome which in itself should automatically provide a greater degree of decoupling that you might anticipate obtaining with a uniform material -at least, not without additional work as Thiele did with their own variation a few years back for e.g.
So what's the actual demand of such tweeter? I can just guess... those are the specs of Morel and Dynaudio at the time, so probably made to impress people, such 1000W transient without glowing. And Morel and Dynaudio were big brands in automotive audio, still are.
What's better in car audio ? The subwoofers are in the low sensitivity territory and are self powered and electronically contoured, and class D amps are a reality. I see that high-eff woofers and mids and bullet tweeters are used, so the double SPL for the same power must have been accepted as a standard.
But the horn has its signature and moreover, the focused image ( read also dispersion) might not happen inside a car. So just for parade, SPL races with open doors, i.e. long throw
What's better in car audio ? The subwoofers are in the low sensitivity territory and are self powered and electronically contoured, and class D amps are a reality. I see that high-eff woofers and mids and bullet tweeters are used, so the double SPL for the same power must have been accepted as a standard.
But the horn has its signature and moreover, the focused image ( read also dispersion) might not happen inside a car. So just for parade, SPL races with open doors, i.e. long throw
The myuaudio post is one of a series of four .
https://myuaudio.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/03/02/060000
https://myuaudio.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/03/04/060000
https://myuaudio.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/03/07/060000
https://myuaudio.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/03/10/060000
Keep in mind that when myuaudio discusses crossover frequencies for the TW045WA01, he is using it in a somewhat unusual application, as a tweeter above a Sony SUP-T11 compression driver (which has decent frequency extension for a midrange).
Hopefully driver manufacturers will make more tweeters in this direction of offering large-area diaphragms in comparison to frame size, like Accuton's C51-6-286 or this TW045WA01.
.https://myuaudio.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/03/02/060000
https://myuaudio.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/03/04/060000
https://myuaudio.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/03/07/060000
https://myuaudio.hatenablog.com/entry/2023/03/10/060000
Keep in mind that when myuaudio discusses crossover frequencies for the TW045WA01, he is using it in a somewhat unusual application, as a tweeter above a Sony SUP-T11 compression driver (which has decent frequency extension for a midrange).
Hopefully driver manufacturers will make more tweeters in this direction of offering large-area diaphragms in comparison to frame size, like Accuton's C51-6-286 or this TW045WA01.
To make sure I absolutely understand what's going on here-- This is a coaxial, crossoverless, flat on-axis 1"/2" tweeter with the voicecoils wired together, using acoustic limitations to cross between mid and high range drivers? That is probably the coolest thing I've heard of in years. It looks ready to pair directly to an 8-12" bass driver if I'm not mistaken.
I have speculated fro some time about what a small 3” FR could do if the need to produce any bass was removed/ More sensitivity is expected, and this is an example of that.
But with an Fs higher than many of the larger domes. I would take a but less sensitivity to allow the capabiity of a <1kHz XO.
This concept is not new. A dome with a very large surround. A mechanical XO, so could be called a coax if one stretches the usual definition. Many have preceeded it. Nice to see this one, let's see some more. The Fried Egg tweter and the ubiqitous 24mm Audax dome and its clonesfor instance.
We started playing with 3” FR as midTweeters nearly a decade ago. It works really well. And some do not give up much of anything to really pricey tweeters.
dave
But with an Fs higher than many of the larger domes. I would take a but less sensitivity to allow the capabiity of a <1kHz XO.
This concept is not new. A dome with a very large surround. A mechanical XO, so could be called a coax if one stretches the usual definition. Many have preceeded it. Nice to see this one, let's see some more. The Fried Egg tweter and the ubiqitous 24mm Audax dome and its clonesfor instance.
We started playing with 3” FR as midTweeters nearly a decade ago. It works really well. And some do not give up much of anything to really pricey tweeters.
dave
Single coil. Likely direct-bonded to the central soft dome, which is partially decoupled from the outer cone. The crossover such as it is, is mechanical rather than electrical. Just a variation on how most wideband drivers work, which is why we sometimes call them [mechanical] coax etc. units, but being a tweeter they've sacrificed BW to get sensitivity. The use of differential materials should help there too. I've been trying to persuade Markaudio to produce something similar for a couple of years.
Last edited:
With my encouragement. ie raise the Fs an octave or so of the A5 MAOP (and likely a few other tweaks) and i expect you would have an excellent HF reproducer for > 500 Hz or so (as it is they can be XOed at about 250-300 Hz but sensitivityis about 87 dB.
dave
coaxial loudspeaker common definition relates to coaxially mounted independent (one driver can be operated and the other not) driverS (2 or more).Why shouldn't they call it a coax?That's exactly what it is. The crossover happens to be mechanical, but last I checked, nobody ever said an electrical (passive or active) filter was obligatory in the definition. Most wideband drive units are mechanical coax or triax units for that matter.
From the available data, and depending on context, 1.5KHz should be perfectly feasible, ~1KHz probably okay depending on the filter as you'll be suppressing some of that HD rise as you attenuate.
It's not about how accurate the definition is - it's about communicating what the product is to most readers and (hopefully) potential purchasers. A common definition is common for a reason.
A casual ("common") read of "coaxial" in this instance leads me to think that if I want to use this driver I'm going to need 2 high-pass filters, not 1 high-pass filter: a radically different take on the driver's use-case that could instantly make me disregard the use of this driver.
As it is, only requiring one high pass filter and at a moderately lower freq. near 1 kHz - it starts to get interesting (particularly because it's also higher efficiency).
Different results based on the reading:
1 interpretation: "..eh, PASS."
2nd interpretation: "..oooh, INTERESTING."
A casual ("common") read of "coaxial" in this instance leads me to think that if I want to use this driver I'm going to need 2 high-pass filters, not 1 high-pass filter: a radically different take on the driver's use-case that could instantly make me disregard the use of this driver.
As it is, only requiring one high pass filter and at a moderately lower freq. near 1 kHz - it starts to get interesting (particularly because it's also higher efficiency).
Different results based on the reading:
1 interpretation: "..eh, PASS."
2nd interpretation: "..oooh, INTERESTING."
Last edited:
I'm actually a little disappointed there isn't a 1"/3" for better compatibility between bass/midbass drivers. And for that matter, why aren't more coaxial drivers mechanically tuned or damped for an automatic perfect crossover? Seems kind of like an oversight from the design perspective.
I disagree.
You give up the: ow my ******* ears , ting ting ting, sounds.
Also why don't you like the Vifa 3" TG9FD-10-8? Or you do like it?
I like the paper version, but wanted to try to see if the fiberglass cone is better.
But you are the fullrange guru, so if you don't like the fiberglass cone one (better than the paper cone) I won't buy it
That would be nice, but then there is the marketing department. Sort of opposite of calling fullranges with whizzers such as it is a 2-way, a coax, in the same sense.
dave
Last edited:
The TC9 has very poor DDR, it would be good for low rez TV or such to average out some of the ‘crap’. the fiberglass version is much better.
As to "ting ting ting” not sure what you are trying to express, i am quite sensitive to this kind of stuff, so much i could not live with drivers others love. Jordan JX92s, Eikona, Audio Nirvana Classic 10, stock FExx6 (FFxx5wk to a lesser extent [particualr the smallest 2], many of the same mods work), 1st Gen Alpair 5/6/10 just for example.
dave
As to "ting ting ting” not sure what you are trying to express, i am quite sensitive to this kind of stuff, so much i could not live with drivers others love. Jordan JX92s, Eikona, Audio Nirvana Classic 10, stock FExx6 (FFxx5wk to a lesser extent [particualr the smallest 2], many of the same mods work), 1st Gen Alpair 5/6/10 just for example.
dave
If people decide to make inferences / purchases without actually bothering to read the information provided (which in the case of this Wavecor appears fairly succinct), I'd usually say 'their problem'. That said, I agree in that they could make it clearer at a stroke by simply inserting the word 'mechanical' as a prefix to 'coax'. The title starts getting a bit clumsy by that point though, so they probably thought it was straightforward without, since they'd followed it with 'cone tweeter'.
Last edited:
The narrow dispersion at higher frequencies suggests the outer cone is involved in their radiation, and there are no major transitions/jumps in the polars (I'm not suggesting they are perfect, but just looking for directivity changes). Also, holding the lobing out to 10kHz suggests this was a reasonable choice of size.
Yeah, in this instance I think they “shot themselves in the foot” - being a bit to clever trying to disassociate themselves with cone tweeters (which often have a negative association).
Ironically I rather like cone tweeters (and actually have them in both my stereo system and in my HT), so for me at least “cone tweeter” isn’t a disparaging term.