Hey all,

Just curious why components are better for SQ than co-axials.
(better according to what seems to be industry standard.. I dont really know why.. thats why I'm asking )

Does it have to do with the tweeter getting in the way of the mid-woofer.. or that splits have a crossover network...???

Reason I ask.. because Boston Z's and Pro's have the tweeter mountable on the woofer.. and they say "this is great cause it makes the path difference ZERO"..etc.etc.... (ok, good reasoning.. makes sense)..

But then I thought.. thats exactly what co-axials do...

Now I'm confused... please enlighten me

Thanks
_Ice

I always thought a separate tweeter allowed different mounting positons to vary the stage height only. And as we see many installs with the tweeter mounted close to the woofer, to reduce "separation", thats the only reason I see.

But I'm no pro

anyone care to enlighten us?

component sets GENERALLY have better quality quality materials in them than co-axials...also, tweeter direction can drastically affect detail, SQ, and not just stage height.

They also come with a proper, external crossover network that usually allows adjustments in attenuation, whereas coaxials might have an inline cap or some such...relatively crap...

so if you got an awesomely constructed co-ax.. with a proper crossover network they would be "kickass" ?

they should be okay, but nothing really compares to a properly set up tweeter , and your not going to get optimal imaging from a co-axial.

also, a decent co-axial's going to cost more than decent splits...dont ask me why, but look at the jaycar co-axial and the jaycar splits. The tweeter in the splits are far superior to the coaxial ones, but the prices are narrowly matched. your going to find this an awful lot.

your final option is to buy a set of splits that have a kit that allow you to mount the tweeter co-axially (ie, in a bracket hanging over the cone face)....

also, co-axials that have the tweeter on a platter over the centre of the cone will have less cone area than a smooth 6.5" woofer face...and hence less bass....

I know for one, some of the focal coaxials come with a directional tweeter, and an adjustable crossover with tweeter attenuation settings.

edit: i type too slow

ah..... so the Bostons will have inherently less bass due to their design..yes.?

I'm guessing. it also depends on excursion, but hmm.

Basically its harder to find a decent set of co-axials than splits, and splits offer more flexibility in installation, is the main reasons i've heard.

and also... the mouting bracket on the boston is pretty large (possibly for strength/reinforcement)... does this impair the sound waves in any audible manner??

I have an old pair of Pioneer 2way coaxials, they sound crap with horrible treble. They have a single coil and single cap mounted right next to the speaker magnet, which I think is the wrong place to have a coil...

I've always wondered if there's splits out there that have a central mounting hole on the speaker grill for the tweeter to sit flush in? This way would be a more rigid mount than a bracket hanging off one edge of the mid, and would look fairly stock/stealth compared to seeing a separate tweeter above the mid or on the dash.

If the tweeter is tiltable surely this would be a brilliant option so that you still have a single point source, with the tweeter is angled optimally? This would make the install much easier and simpler assuming the chosen spot for the mid is fairly suitable to start with?

findog : There are splits with brackets/grills as you have described, its one of the options i mentioned before.

The problem is the optimal position for a tweeter is hardly ever in the location that a mid easily fits, in the doors pod. Also, given most crossovers overlap with their db/oct slopes, having both drivers emanating from the same point source might not actually be the best idea.

But yes, having a swivel tweeter is better than not, for a co-axial, but again. Your flexibility is severely limited by using a coaxial setup, and if you want a stealth look, its not very hard to flush mount a tweeter, and it is very hard to see a flush mounted, dark tweeter, down in the kick panels, through tinted windows.

Plus the woofer isn't sealed with a dust cap so poorer response... and often times you want the tweeters up high for the best imaging.. and the perfect angle for a tweeter is almost going to make it impossible to mould a big woofer into that space... and the crossover network's are next to non-existent...

hmm some odd idea's in this thread..

1: the boston splits (from what i have heard with the pro's) they dont lose out on midbass with the tweeter mounted in the middle.

2: stazed, the dustcap is only there for 1 reason.. Dust

the two main reasons for slits -
ease of installation
marketing

i rather use a coax speaker..
there are a few out there that use the Tannoy Dual Concentric™ idea.
another brand is just about to bring them out..
and if you set the mid's up correctly a coax will probly be alot better than a split system

Im with Bobby id rather use a coaxial as long as it is a high quality speaker such as Boston's Z6, MB Quart Q's etc.

The idea is to have the sound from one point source and this is what coaxial speakers do.

Now if only i could have a 9" 5.25" and a supremo coaxially id be very happy.

you can get 15in midbass with comp horns on a point sorce coax

still trying to find a car that has big enough kicks haha

HAHA
cool, thanks for clearing that up...

so there was a good point to this question after all

dont wanna stir the pot up again, but then why dont we see coaxials on home audio speakers. they are individual speakers?
there must be some advantage. yes they are like coaxs in that the seperation of speakers is minimal and i can see where e320 and bobby is comnig from, but why not just make coaxial home audio?

co-ax might not be necessary perhaps because path difference is miniscule in comparison to car audio.

At home the listener is usually a few metres away (not always), and therefor using a component setup might be cheaper, be easier to assemble/setup and allow more design flexibilty...therefore a more logical solution...

but might not offer any actual sound improvement

just a thought.

Hey liquidity dont wanna start an arguement but i'll owned both jaycar coax and splits (last years models) and personally i found the coax sound better, so i wouldn't say that the splits tweeters are superior to the coax ones. But thats also a taste sort of thing, some may like the splits sure, i just liked there coax more. And cheaper too. And the ease of the install is always good.

About coax in the home i thought some companys make them. Doesn't KEF make some?

1 reason they dont use a coax style setup for home audio is most home audio setups use very large tweeters how are you going to mount that same with a lot of higher end car audio gear think of scanspeek revelator, dyn md130 to mention 2.

www.tannoy.com

tannoy have a patent on proper co incedent tweeter setups, thats the main reason you dont see it in home hifi

Kef i belive did have a licence to make them.

(the Ellipse 10 on the tannoy site are worth $8049 pr)

I won't question KEF gear.. I know that stuff is quality
Won many mag reviews about their splits

I had a set of Kef UNI-Q 6.5" mpoint source speakers many, many years ago...they were an exceptional speaker..the only downside was that they had limited power handling...bet meh...can't have it all can we

so with the boston pro60's, would it be better to leave th tweeter in the woofer and just mount it as one or seperate them and mount the tweeter on the dash or something ?

have a listen the combo with the tweeters in various locations
if it sounds better to you in the mid
mount them there