It occurred to me when fitting some new car speakers that a dual
concentric design would be ideal for this use. But they all seem to have
tweeters just stuck on the front. Any reason why this design has fallen
out of favour?

--
*Pride is what we have. Vanity is what others have.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:17:30 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

It occurred to me when fitting some new car speakers that a dual
concentric design would be ideal for this use. But they all seem to have
tweeters just stuck on the front. Any reason why this design has fallen
out of favour?

Cost of manufacture would be my guess. With the tweeter stuck out in
front mixing and matching between models is easy - just change the
cosmetics.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

It occurred to me when fitting some new car speakers that a dual
concentric design would be ideal for this use. But they all seem to have
tweeters just stuck on the front. Any reason why this design has fallen
out of favour?

More complicated to make perhaps ? Greater depth would be a disadvantage in
ICE too.

Graham

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
It occurred to me when fitting some new car speakers that a dual
concentric design would be ideal for this use. But they all seem to have
tweeters just stuck on the front. Any reason why this design has fallen
out of favour?

**Perhaps people have finally discovered what I found a few decades ago:
They sound like ****. Given that midrange frequencies are being bounced off
the back of the tweeter, the result ends up sounding like a pig's breakfast.
I've never heard a decent dual concentric car speaker. Perhaps it's due to
the shockingly bad crossovers used. Maybe it's just the cheap, crappy
drivers.

Trevor Wilson

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
It occurred to me when fitting some new car speakers that a dual
concentric design would be ideal for this use. But they all seem to have
tweeters just stuck on the front. Any reason why this design has fallen
out of favour?

**Perhaps people have finally discovered what I found a few decades ago:
They sound like ****. Given that midrange frequencies are being bounced
off the back of the tweeter, the result ends up sounding like a pig's
breakfast. I've never heard a decent dual concentric car speaker. Perhaps
it's due to the shockingly bad crossovers used. Maybe it's just the cheap,
crappy drivers.

Trevor Wilson
what about in home audio then......cant say ive liked the sound of any of
kef d/c designs that much

"corks" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
It occurred to me when fitting some new car speakers that a dual
concentric design would be ideal for this use. But they all seem to have
tweeters just stuck on the front. Any reason why this design has fallen
out of favour?

**Perhaps people have finally discovered what I found a few decades ago:
They sound like ****. Given that midrange frequencies are being bounced
off the back of the tweeter, the result ends up sounding like a pig's
breakfast. I've never heard a decent dual concentric car speaker. Perhaps
it's due to the shockingly bad crossovers used. Maybe it's just the
cheap, crappy drivers.

Trevor Wilson
what about in home audio then......cant say ive liked the sound of any of
kef d/c designs that much

**AFAIK, the KEF (and other) products don't bugger up the sound by placing
the tweeter in front of the bass/mid driver. Having said that, I can't get
excited about any dual concentric driver I've ever heard. Including the much
vaunted Tannoys.

Trevor Wilson

Trevor Wilson wrote:

Having said that, I can't get
excited about any dual concentric driver I've ever heard. Including the much
vaunted Tannoys.

Trevor Wilson



Dunno why. The Tannoy Monitor Gold series are stunning in their stereo
stage management. I heard them a lot in UK studios in the 70s and the
only thing that came anywhere near then were the big JBls. We had 15
inch Golds in huge Lockwood cabinets on wheels at Neve for checking the
sound of consoles. I still use a pair of 2 inch Monitor Golds to this
day. Best speakers ever invented IMHO.

Cheers

Ian

Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

Having said that, I can't get excited about any dual concentric driver I've
ever heard. Including the much vaunted Tannoys.


Dunno why. The Tannoy Monitor Gold series are stunning in their stereo
stage management. I heard them a lot in UK studios in the 70s and the
only thing that came anywhere near then were the big JBls.

Can't agree at all. To my ears the Reds actually sounded a little more natural.
The Golds seemed to squawk a bit to me.


We had 15 inch Golds in huge Lockwood cabinets on wheels at Neve for checking
the
sound of consoles.

And rubbish they are too. Especially with all that polished wooden floor.
Lockwoods are vile cabinets. As you might expect from a coffin maker.


I still use a pair of 2 inch Monitor Golds to this
day. Best speakers ever invented IMHO.

You must be deaf. I got that impression about quite a few people at Neve,
especially those in the top jobs. Deaf, incompetent or just not bothered sums them
up.

Graahm

"Ian Thompson-Bell" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:

Having said that, I can't get
excited about any dual concentric driver I've ever heard. Including the
much vaunted Tannoys.

Trevor Wilson

Dunno why.

**I do. They 'honk'.

The Tannoy Monitor Gold series are stunning in their stereo
stage management.

**Perhaps. They do so many other things wrong, though.

I heard them a lot in UK studios in the 70s and the
only thing that came anywhere near then were the big JBls. We had 15 inch
Golds in huge Lockwood cabinets on wheels at Neve for checking the sound
of consoles. I still use a pair of 2 inch Monitor Golds to this day. Best
speakers ever invented IMHO.

**That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. Speakers tend to be a
personal choice product. What works for one person, doesn't for another. I
don't like dual concentric speakers. Mind you: I am partial to a properly
executed and set up pair of ESLs.

Trevor Wilson

In article ,
Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:

Having said that, I can't get excited about any dual concentric
driver I've ever heard. Including the much vaunted Tannoys.


Dunno why. The Tannoy Monitor Gold series are stunning in their stereo
stage management.

Yes - they could produce a stunning sound stage. One of the benefits of a
point source design.

I heard them a lot in UK studios in the 70s and the
only thing that came anywhere near then were the big JBls. We had 15
inch Golds in huge Lockwood cabinets on wheels at Neve for checking the
sound of consoles. I still use a pair of 2 inch Monitor Golds to this
day. Best speakers ever invented IMHO.

But in general I didn't like them. They could never produce natural speech
- too honky by far. IMHO down to the main unit being well out of range at
the top end. I'm not keen on any 15" driver that tries to go above about
300 Hz. I reckon the 12" ones sounded better.

My last permanent work place had Monitor Reds in the studios and dubbing
etc. Didn't like them either. And the Little Red Monitors they used
elsewhere were positively vile.

That's not to say Lockwoods weren't quite good in their day compared to
the opposition as pop monitors. But never in any way accurate.

--
*I don't suffer from insanity; I enjoy every minute of it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.