• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

BEYMA 12XA30ND 12" Coaxial Driver Impressions

Geert

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
473
Likes
577
No, I only asked you. Which shouldn't be a surprise I think, on a forum that appreciates a bit of objectivity.

But I already found the answer I need. From https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...experiences-and-preferences.11377/post-355622:

"I always compare listening to that kind of coaxials to riding a motorcycle, say, a vintage Harley Davidson in this case. A bit rude at times, but a big joy most of the time, there is a character I can enjoy very much. Whereas a perfect studio monitor like a Neumann KH420 is more like a "precision" touring bike of today. It takes you from A to B as perfect as it gets but alas, not much vibe...."
 

KSTR

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
1,537
Likes
3,256
Location
Berlin, Germany
Hi, long time user of the Beyma XA's here, 15XA38Nd in my case.

The XA's sure are controversial drivers. The raw LF and HF drivers measure not very nice, let alone directly on axis, its design is based on HF diffraction to increase HF coverage angle, after all... but IMHO coaxial should never be used and characterized fully on axis where full symmetry only exaggerates everything. Distortions are OK level but nothing special.

With DSP XO and full DRC (+sub) I found they sound quite amazing, though. Clearly not exactly truly natural / neutral but a ton of fun to listen to, there is an increased "dynamic and timbral structuring" that found quite addictive (even if it might be "fake" resolution). They can get a bit rough but are honest to the bone in what they do, so to say. Subs are essential IMHO, the LF cone movement should be restricted to only a few millimeters of excursion. Then again, with the 15" in a large ported box you won't feel the need for a sub ;-)

Lining the compression driver's back chamber with thin felt reduced some HF resonances, and I also tried to damp the ringing phase plug assembly (die-cast parts) with small pieces of stiff rubber. A friend of mine has coated the LF cone with some laquer to reduce/damp breakup to some exent. I woudn't go as far as the guy in the link of post #17 and redo the diffraction ring for less diffraction, I'd rather start from a standard (low diffraction) coax like a Tannoy if I wanted something smoother (which I did in the end).
 

Jokerbre

Member
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
34
Likes
35
#milezone#How is this audio science review site, can you show some of the objective data? Maybe to start with measuring data?
 
OP
M

milezone

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
120
Likes
64
Location
Seattle
Lining the compression driver's back chamber with thin felt reduced some HF resonances, and I also tried to damp the ringing phase plug assembly (die-cast parts) with small pieces of stiff rubber. A friend of mine has coated the LF cone with some laquer to reduce/damp breakup to some exent. I woudn't go as far as the guy in the link of post #17 and redo the diffraction ring for less diffraction, I'd rather start from a standard (low diffraction) coax like a Tannoy if I wanted something smoother (which I did in the end).

Thanks for your suggestions. It was pair of vintage Tannoy Silver coaxials that inspired me to experiment with these. From memory these do feel a bit more raw than the Tannoys. I'm enjoying that aspect to a degree though the difference is obvious. The top end of the Tannoys was less pronounced. Which Tannoys have you settled on or is that also a thing of the past?
 
Last edited:

Geert

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
473
Likes
577
Edit: The speakers are lacking in bass compared to even my 8331s. They sound very detailed and there's minimal if any perceived treble harshness. I find Genelecs to be very lively and exciting compared with other studio monitor brands which is why I prefer them. These Beymas possess that quality to an even greater degree. In addition to that quality, what I like about them is their composure at high listening levels. I believe that speakers measuring well is an important first step to producing a quality speaker and am not suggesting otherwise. I think these speakers have a lot of potential and I'm content with them as is though I intend to put in some effort to improve them further.
Thanks, this description has more nuance and corresponds to what I expected. I guess the Beymas will measure less neutral than the Genelecs, it's up to you to decide how important that is of course.

While it may seem ignorant I never really understood the value of mains monitors in comparison to something like an 8331. After having these set up for two days I can say with certainty there is an obvious advantage to bigger speakers and drivers as listening levels increase.
I always used main monitors to enjoy the results of my mixing efforts, especially when demoing to clients. I didn't use them as a real reference, but nevertheless the mix still needed to sound OK on them.
 
Last edited:

Geert

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
473
Likes
577
The XA's sure are controversial drivers. The raw LF and HF drivers measure not very nice, let alone directly on axis, its design is based on HF diffraction to increase HF coverage angle, after all... but IMHO coaxial should never be used and characterized fully on axis where full symmetry only exaggerates everything. Distortions are OK level but nothing special.
Top notch coaxial isn't easy. There's a reason why companies like KEF have been researching it for more than 30 years.
 

Vandemann

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
26
I've got a similar setup using Lii-15 full range drivers in Caintuck floor baffles with a Jerry Curtis Spud amp being fed by a Topping E30 Dac attached to an Oppo 103D. The detail and soundstage are amazing. Added a single 12" sub to fill in everything under 50Hz and it's now the lowest cost, best sounding system I've ever had.
 
Last edited:

peanuts

Active Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
272
Likes
479
are you sure the "detail" i not a result of a wild FR? a 15" fullrange driver has insane beaming and distortion in the high end.
 

stevenswall

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
967
Likes
739
Location
Orem, UT
Can someone explain how one thing sounds more dynamic than another when operating two speakers not close to their limits?

If one speaker takes a watt to get to 100dB and another takes 2 watts to get to 100dB, and I play them at 80dB average and the music calls for a peak 20dB over that, then they will both be presenting a dynamic range of 20dB to my ears.

Dynamics doesn't seem to have anything to do with sensitivity, high efficiency drivers, or max loudness from what I understand.
 

Zvu

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 1, 2020
Messages
553
Likes
859
Location
Serbia
@stevenswall You are looking at it from an impossible angle. Where will you find a loudspeaker that does 100dB/1w/1m that you'll listen at 80dB ?

Usually it's like this.

You have one loudspeaker that does 83dB/1W/1m and other one that does 96dB/1W/1m. You listen at 80dB loudness from 2m distance with dynamic range of +/-20dB (if you're lucky).

Which do you think will be more responsive, 83dB or 96dB loudspeaker ? Which will sound more effortless and cleaner ?
 

stevenswall

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
967
Likes
739
Location
Orem, UT
@stevenswall You are looking at it from an impossible angle. Where will you find a loudspeaker that does 100dB/1w/1m that you'll listen at 80dB ?

Usually it's like this.

You have one loudspeaker that does 83dB/1W/1m and other one that does 96dB/1W/1m. You listen at 80dB loudness from 2m distance with dynamic range of +/-20dB (if you're lucky).

Which do you think will be more responsive, 83dB or 96dB loudspeaker ? Which will sound more effortless and cleaner ?

Not the point. We could use the figure .1 watt to get to 1000dB. Irrelevent.

If both the 83dB and 96dB speaker have a limit at 120dB where they start to compress and present large amounts of distortion, neither of them will sound more effortless or cleaner.

If it sounds cleaner, it's distortion, not dynamics.

Effortless also sounds like a distortion or compression issue, not related to efficiency and total SPL as I'm talking about speakers operating in their limits.
 
OP
M

milezone

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
120
Likes
64
Location
Seattle
@stevenswall You are looking at it from an impossible angle. Where will you find a loudspeaker that does 100dB/1w/1m that you'll listen at 80dB ?

Usually it's like this.

You have one loudspeaker that does 83dB/1W/1m and other one that does 96dB/1W/1m. You listen at 80dB loudness from 2m distance with dynamic range of +/-20dB (if you're lucky).

Which do you think will be more responsive, 83dB or 96dB loudspeaker ? Which will sound more effortless and cleaner ?

I would say this is sometimes true. The Beymas sound crazy clean despite the measurements pointed to in previous posts. I would definitely attribute this in part to they way I have them set up in open baffles with a low wattage amp resulting in a more treble oriented presentation. For nearfield listening the 8331s sound as good or better. At distances greater than 10' I prefer the Beymas. Their presentation at loud volumes sounds so much more composed.

High efficiency is often achieved in part by minimizing the mass of the driver material. Mylar, Beryllium, and Titanium are going to render more micro detail than a diaphragm made of concrete with equal amounts of amplification force applied. An additional advantage as I perceive it is that higher efficiency also necessitates less power which allows for simpler amplification circuitry. Presumably in doing so, in an analog sense, a more honest (true to the original recording) may be delivered from the source to the driver. THD is THD yes. Though a circuit that relies on advanced filtration to reduce THD is also altering the original signal no?
 

Plcamp

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
363
Likes
298
Interesting discussion. I have PAP Trio 15 with Tangband fullrange.

I believe that can be dramatically improved by using one 15” woofer in h frame crossed out at 200 hz, second 15” woofer up to about 650 hz and a 10” coaxial for the rest, driven by dsp and separate amps. I haven’t identified such a coax, but I think that’s about right size cone area given the Tangband I’ve got is slightly lacking at low end in OB.

That should extend low end to about 30 hz and allow perfect timing alignment.
 
OP
M

milezone

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
120
Likes
64
Location
Seattle
Interesting discussion. I have PAP Trio 15 with Tangband fullrange.

I believe that can be dramatically improved by using one 15” woofer in h frame crossed out at 200 hz, second 15” woofer up to about 650 hz and a 10” coaxial for the rest, driven by dsp and separate amps. I haven’t identified such a coax, but I think that’s about right size cone area given the Tangband I’ve got is slightly lacking at low end in OB.

That should extend low end to about 30 hz and allow perfect timing alignment.

I've heard a few implementations of Pure Audio Project speakers. The horn version I heard sounded a lot better than the TB version. Swapping that out will make a huge difference.
 

stevenswall

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
967
Likes
739
Location
Orem, UT
Mylar, Beryllium, and Titanium are going to render more micro detail than a diaphragm made of concrete with equal amounts of amplification force applied.

I don't think that's true directly. Weight affects things, but if something produces a 500hz signal without audible distortion at 90dB, and another thing that weighs more does the same, then they sound the same.

If two cars can stop and accelerate at the same rate, it doesn't matter that one is heavier than the other. Just like how operating within distortion/compression limits, it doesn't matter how efficient a speaker is, it doesn't make it more dynamic.

I'll concede that dynamic (lively) colloquially is an abstract term that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about and doesn't mean the difference between soft and loud sounds, or transient peaks and the average dB level in a recording.

Back on topic though: Surprised how even the dispersion is at most frequencies:

1625601867614.png
 
OP
M

milezone

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
120
Likes
64
Location
Seattle
I don't think that's true directly. Weight affects things, but if something produces a 500hz signal without audible distortion at 90dB, and another thing that weighs more does the same, then they sound the same.

If two cars can stop and accelerate at the same rate, it doesn't matter that one is heavier than the other. Just like how operating within distortion/compression limits, it doesn't matter how efficient a speaker is, it doesn't make it more dynamic.

All other factors being equal, a hypothetical full range driver with a lighter diaphragm will render more detail from a white noise signal (a signal comprised of infinite overtones) than a heavier diaphragm. I agree an efficient speaker isn't more dynamic operating within its specified limits. I'm sure your 8260s perform incredibly well at high volumes.
 

abdo123

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
4,097
Likes
3,647
Location
Brussels, Belgium
it doesn't matter how efficient a speaker is, it doesn't make it more dynamic.

is this a serious comment? yes the sensitivity determines how dynamic a driver is (among other things) because the drivers also have power handling limits that stops us from pushing the lower sensitivity driver to the same output as the driver with the higher sensitivity.
 
Last edited:

maverickronin

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 19, 2018
Messages
2,029
Likes
2,478
Location
Midwest, USA
Not the point. We could use the figure .1 watt to get to 1000dB. Irrelevent.

That actually is the point though. You can't just pick numbers out of thin air like that since they are a consequence of what materials actually exist for engineers to work with.

If both the 83dB and 96dB speaker have a limit at 120dB where they start to compress and present large amounts of distortion, neither of them will sound more effortless or cleaner.

If that was true, then yes, but it's a really big if. Max SPL is mostly just a function of efficiency since there's only so much power you can put though a a lightweight 1-2" dome or CD voicecoil.

For two speakers to be separated by 13dB in efficiency but have identical maximum clean SPL is essentially intentional pathology. Finding or building two such speakers might be interesting for psychoacoustic research but it's it's not at all representative of comparing high and low sensitivity speakers/drivers available on the consumer and pro markets.

Effortless also sounds like a distortion or compression issue

That's all basically true, but...

not related to efficiency and total SPL as I'm talking about speakers operating in their limits.

Speakers with higher limits will let you keep turning them up louder without distortion or compression and give the impression of higher dynamics.
 

puppet

Active Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
163
Likes
113
I agree ... in the hypothetical example submitted above by stevenswall, 83db vs 96db, the lesser sensitive unit is operating at a 22watt handicap for starters. That equals a lot of VC heat right off the bat.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom