• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Sica 6.5 Coaxial Speaker build

RickS

Moderate Moderator
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 14, 2020
Messages
4,434
Likes
9,271
Location
North Coast, USA
While designing Directiva r2, we considered a coaxial driver instead of the Seas DXT tweeter. At the time nothing fit the r2 target well, but one was noteworthy. Since its availability in North America was almost nonexistent, we decided to forgo it. However, as r2's passive resistance enclosure optimization is taking longer than I hoped, I found this Sica driver at TLHP in France. At around 120 euros, it seemed like a reasonable risk, so ordered a couple from here. While not the same cutout as other woofers I have considered, it still fit Directiva r1's cabinet well. Since I had them around, it meant a quicker build for me....

Parts Express redesigned its .56 ft3 cabinet flat pack and so used the newer one. Due to the redesign, the cabinet builds nicely by using one of thes sides as a build foundation. The baffle comes with a rounded edge. While convenient for someone without a router, I find it easier to round later so I used my own blank baffle. Sica includes a passive crossover design so decided to use it initially. Since I did not have some of the parts, I had to order them and they arrived last week.

Since I had the cabinet, I started with it. Am not going to post all the build steps as it is very straightforward once you do a dry fit. Since the new brace is no longer centered, I marked the front baffle so I could center the driver on it. However, due to Sica’s unusual mounting pattern, took a different approach so I could still take advantage of screwing into the brace. Note it is important to drill pilot holes into the brace to prevent splitting. Here are some pics starting with the front baffle…

IMG_0719.jpeg


Aligning the lower mounting holes with the brace determined the driver offset on the baffle. Sica’s design calls for dual 2 inch round ports. I pondered this and after modeling, decided one would suffice. I also wanted enough room to have a longer port, so I located to the bottom portion away from the driver. Would have preferred the connectors and crossover below port but the port would block access, so relegated them to the top half…

IMG_0720.jpeg


This meant the crossover would be mounted on the inside top of the back. This allows for easy access to the crossover and main connections. Here is an inside view as I prepped to fit damping material before I glue the front baffle on…
IMG_0721.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Next I needed to layout and build the crossover. The woofer crossover is 2nd order and the tweeter is third order. Both inductors required some unwinding of coils to get the specified values. I cut a piece of pegboard to fit the space I had allocated. I originally did the layout from left to right with the lower portion being the woofer filter. When I went to mount, access to the wiring was better upside down. Here is that look…

IMG_0718.jpeg

In the lower left, you can see where I marked the input connections and a negative buss that runs along the bottom edge. The black coil is the woofer filter. Obscured by the angle, a resistor runs just under it and is attenuation for the tweeter. The driver connections are the clear wire for the woofer and the tweeter ones are shown in the lower left.

I mounted the crossover, added the damping along the interior panels and glued on the front baffle. Once the glued sets, will trim the front baffle to fit, round the edges and mount the woofer.
 
Last edited:
Here is the first pass…

IMG_0849.jpeg
Initial impedance test checks out. Have tried shorter and longer ports.

More measurements to come!
 
Curious, please:
What made you choose the 6.5 over the 5.5 for your project?
 
Curious, please:
What made you choose the 6.5 over the 5.5 for your project?

Mainly availability, but also the added bass. The 5.5 appears a bit smoother. If wanted to match with a woofer, it is the better choice.
 
Here are initial measurements. First is on-axis frequency response...

1742136472393.png


Actually looks pretty good although does not match the published Sica response (notably above 10k Hz) and exhibits some of the typical coax droop above 10 kHz. If so, expect it will flatten out off-axis.

Here is the impedance chart...
1742136838170.png


This is with a 2 inch diameter port that is 4 inches long. This tunes the box close to the Sica target. Both drivers are 8 ohm and the result is a fairly easy amplifier load. No major kinks indicates resonances are well controlled.

A quick listen sounds quite pleasant (am sitting slightly off-axis). The bass is better than I expected and anticipate tuning further. Notably pretty good for a speaker sitting in the middle of the room. There is not a lot of bass but deeper than I expected.
 
Last edited:
Looks great. I wouldn't worry about the 10Khz stuff either. That is a small compromise given the benefits of the coaxial. There are no big swings in frequency response and it's pretty flat. Might be a slight bit bright, but maybe not if it falls off properly off-axis. Impedance is excellent. Nice work.
 
I've been looking at the Sica coax drivers myself lately. Very good response for a coax. Would love to see some distortion measurements for it.
 
This is the 5.5" version at 92db@2m, så in reality 98dB@1m, so 2dB higher than the highest level Amir usually tests, and note that it's even a bit higher than that towards the bottom end, around 99dB. But this is in our SBS speaker so there's a second 5.5" driver below 600hz. So I guess you can expect roughly twice the distortion shown here below 5-600hz if it's only the coax.

If you cross to a second driver at 3-400hz or above you'll likely see below 1% at 96dB, again this is with the 5.5".

We use the 5.5" in our Manta crossed at 600hz, and it plays stupidly loud without audible compression.


1742194185767.png

1742194265981.png
 
ok, now with a 6 inch port...

1742226848476.png

As expected, just a lower box tuning. Will have to do some nearfield measures to look at the bass closer. Here is a quick set of off-axis as I get my rig back in position. These are just my UMIK-1 and a roughly aligned rig...
1742227187923.png


Looks good through most of the midrange and do get some off-axis flattening as expected. A little less ideal directivity above 7k Hz, but pretty good overall.
 
Last edited:
ok, now with a 6 inch port...

View attachment 436953
As expected, just a lower box tuning. Will have to do some nearfield measures to look at the bass closer. Here is a quick set of off-axis as I get my rig back in position. These are just my UMIK-1 and roughly aligned the stands...View attachment 436954

Looks good through most of the midrange and do get some off-axis flattening as expected. A little less ideal directivity above 7k Hz, but pretty good overall.
Seems like it falls off after 10khz, off axis speaking. So quite a bit beaming in the top register. But for the rest seems pretty nice :)
 
ok, now with a 6 inch port...

View attachment 436953
As expected, just a lower box tuning. Will have to do some nearfield measures to look at the bass closer. Here is a quick set of off-axis as I get my rig back in position. These are just my UMIK-1 and roughly aligned the stands...View attachment 436954

Looks good through most of the midrange and do get some off-axis flattening as expected. A little less ideal directivity above 7k Hz, but pretty good overall.
Looking very good here, especially from 6Khz and down as it's really spectacular there. There is a bit of bunching in the 7Khz region. What does the "average the responses" look like with all of this? I'm thinking the 7-9Khz stuff might be a bit hot. But maybe that's the trade off. How far is each increment on the off-axis measurements? Maybe 5 degrees each? This is a cool project and I bet this speaker is going to be really "room friendly".
 
Looking very good here, especially from 6Khz and down as it's really spectacular there. There is a bit of bunching in the 7Khz region. What does the "average the responses" look like with all of this? I'm thinking the 7-9Khz stuff might be a bit hot. But maybe that's the trade off. How far is each increment on the off-axis measurements? Maybe 5 degrees each? This is a cool project and I bet this speaker is going to be really "room friendly".

These are 10 degree increments and the red trace is on-axis. As I mentioned, it has the characteristic coaxial droop and may look like bunching around 7 kHz. Factoring that out, not really much bunching at all. As for beaming above 10 kHz, it pretty normal for a dome tweeter.

PLEASE NOTE: These are some initial rough measurements. Will be refining more as I switch to better measurement gear.
 
This is the 5.5" version at 92db@2m, så in reality 98dB@1m, so 2dB higher than the highest level Amir usually tests, and note that it's even a bit higher than that towards the bottom end, around 99dB. But this is in our SBS speaker so there's a second 5.5" driver below 600hz. So I guess you can expect roughly twice the distortion shown here below 5-600hz if it's only the coax.

If you cross to a second driver at 3-400hz or above you'll likely see below 1% at 96dB, again this is with the 5.5".

We use the 5.5" in our Manta crossed at 600hz, and it plays stupidly loud without audible compression.


View attachment 436863
View attachment 436864
Thanks for the data!

Wow. These are good. Like, give KEF a run for their money good. How come these guys aren't talked about more?
 
These are 10 degree increments and the red trace is on-axis. As I mentioned, it has the characteristic coaxial droop and may look like bunching around 7 kHz. Factoring that out, not really much bunching at all. As for beaming above 10 kHz, it pretty normal for a dome tweeter.
If they're 10 degree increments then that's excellent. Well done.
PLEASE NOTE: These are some initial rough measurements. Will be refining more as I switch to better measurement gear.
 
Thanks for the data!

Wow. These are good. Like, give KEF a run for their money good. How come these guys aren't talked about more?
They specialize in pro gear. Who other right mind would use pro gear for HiFi?

:p

For me, it was their use by Sigberg Audio that opened my eyes to their potential. Coupled with an active XO, especially, you can see he makes excellent use of them exclusively in two of his designs, and again with one Driver in a 3rd.

Completely stoked to see Rick looking at this model, too!
 
They specialize in pro gear. Who other right mind would use pro gear for HiFi?

:p

For me, it was their use by Sigberg Audio that opened my eyes to their potential. Coupled with an active XO, especially, you can see he makes excellent use of them exclusively in two of his designs, and again with one Driver in a 3rd.

Completely stoked to see Rick looking at this model, too!
I've been wanting to make a set of workhorse monitors for a while now and finally settled on a 2 way design, but after seeing this I'm having second thoughts lol
 
I've been wanting to make a set of workhorse monitors for a while now and finally settled on a 2 way design, but after seeing this I'm having second thoughts lol
Agreed.

If you are not familiar, look at Sigberg’s gear. The SBS.1 by itself is a standout 2.5-way design that really is impressive on paper. The reviews are just as impressive. I wish I could hear them for myself.

So yes, using pro gear in HiFi isn’t just possible, but can be astoundingly successful. :)
 
Agreed.

If you are not familiar, look at Sigberg’s gear. The SBS.1 by itself is a standout 2.5-way design that really is impressive on paper. The reviews are just as impressive. I wish I could hear them for myself.

So yes, using pro gear in HiFi isn’t just possible, but can be astoundingly successful. :)
Oh for sure. Just look at the use of compression drivers. TAD is a great example of this (even if their stuff is exorbitantly expensive). A lot of their HF drivers make it into high end studios all over the place. https://www.technicalaudiodevices.com/pro-hf-units/
 
Back
Top Bottom