$500

[Rolex]

I posted this on the PE board, but wanted opinions here also....



So, you have been into speaker building for a while. You have examined Zaph's site closely, as well as Tony Gee and Troels Gravesen. You enjoy 2 way stand mount speakers sans subwoofer.

You have $500 bucks you are dying to spend on your next speaker build. You've built the extremon from Tony Gee...



You've built the Zaph L18:



And you've built the Zaph SR71:




What is your next project?

Do you build another L18 again, cause that is a really cool speaker? Do you do nothing and save up for the Zaph ZD5 in a ported floor stander, or the Troels CNO's? Or, do you wait for your friends at htguide to suggest a really cool design that fits in your budget and sounds better than anything else you have built??

Come on... everyone has an opinion.. even you... feel free to share.

Thanks!

[Jed]

What are your design goals? Comment on bass extension, enclosure size, etc and we can narrow it down for you. Otherwise the sky is the limit. Since you like your current setups you might as well do something a bit different like a 3 way.

[Rolex]

I should clarify a little. I do not have any of the designs posted above. I sold each one to build the next. I don't have speakers right now, so I am trying to figure out which design to build.

My hunch is that if I spend $500 on a stand mount two way, it will exceed the performance of a $500 three with the exception of the bottom end. I have had many, many different speakers, and have always preferred stand mounts.

So another two way is what I'm after. I'm considering maybe Jay's peerless HDS/Usher combo, or maybe saving a little and going after the ZD5 from Zaph.

My design goals are crystal clear detail and great imaging. Punchy bass is nice. I preferred that in Zaph's L18 design over the bass in the SR71.

I had considered trying to design a system with the L18 and a peerless HDS, but I don't really have the time for the learning curve involved with trying to design speakers. Someday I hope to get into that, but I have feeling it will be a ways down the road.

[Rolex]

Sorry, missed a couple of your questions. Enclosure size is not a huge deal. Probably anything under .75 cubic feet. I am of course after the deepest bass I can get from a stand mount. Maybe right around 50 Hz??

[cjd]

I will conditionally disagree with you regarding 2-ways vs 3-ways. Done right you'll gain midrange clarity - however, it IS a bit tougher to hit that $500 price-point. I'm not sure where it falls in price exactly but the ZDT3.5 might get there.

Has Jay started using real data in his designs yet?

[Rolex]

I would be quite surprised if the zdt3.5 would be better in the midrange or upper end than the sr71 though I have not built it so cannot say for certain.

I do not know what data jay is using.

[JonMarsh]

Are you talking $500 per pair, or $500 each?

As one of the local poster childs for two way system designs on stands (ElaineMarie, Modula MT, Modula MTM, NatalieP), I have to say that I feel like my most recent completed design (the NeoD CC) is something of a "breakthrough" for me, and I find it substantially more musical and not "there" (as in, a speaker being there) than any of it's stand speaker predecessors.

I haven't heard Zaph's ZDT3.5, though I think the driver selection is good, mostly based on having the RS5AN. The others could be changed, and the issues with summing versus distance are not surprising- which is why the NeoD CC is configured how it is.

Because the NeoD CC was designed as both a center channel and mains type speaker, it has surprisingly good polar response compared with more conventional designs, including MT's with careful phase control and relatively low crossover frequencies, like the Modula MT. When used as a mains, the vertical dispersion works OK lying down on the floor or standing on an elliptic trainer working out. Lateral polar response works best with the dome mids towards the inside.

The BOM is around $475 each in their current form, though that could get more spendy if the crossover caps were upgraded a bit more. I'd like to do a slightly larger version some day with dual Seas ER18RNX woofers and better caps. As I have some Jantzen 6012's around, I may try those, too. In the relatively small 1 cu ft PE box, the HiVi D6.8 go pretty low, it's just that they're a compromise in sensitivity. Hoffman's iron law strikes again.

The "problem" is that a more optimized design with the ER18RNX should be at least 40 liters, preferably 50 liters- that's getting a skosh big for a stand mounted box, though it could be done mostly in increased depth, I suppose, keep the same width and height. Would look a little weird, but I bet it would sound pretty good. I've still got a half dozen or more D26NC55 around.

The RS52 and the D26 have great distortion characteristics and very clean CSD behavior- key factors for drivers to pull a "disappearing act". Then, the rest revolves around optimizing the crossover behavior and the total room power response as well as the on axis behavior. I just don't think that a 7" two way will hold up against a well executed three way. What's in my living room proves that to me.

These speakers are revealing but not analytical; they pass on surprisingly well what you feed them, enough that every time I've upgraded on a whim or a swap out parts in my family room system, I've kept them there- so now I'm running a set of speakers that cost $1K to build with $1800 speaker cables and a $3000 integrated amplifier. Why- because they clearly sound better with those changes from what used to be in my family room system. :roll:

Not saying that these are what you should go with, but I wouldn't dismiss a stand mounted three way out of hand, if it's done right.

(Picture taken while testing with crossovers outside the cabinet)



Tales of the weird but true...

[Undefinition]

I should clarify a little. I do not have any of the designs posted above. I sold each one to build the next. I don't have speakers right now, so I am trying to figure out which design to build.

My hunch is that if I spend $500 on a stand mount two way, it will exceed the performance of a $500 three with the exception of the bottom end. I have had many, many different speakers, and have always preferred stand mounts.

I had considered trying to design a system with the L18 and a peerless HDS, but I don't really have the time for the learning curve involved with trying to design speakers. Someday I hope to get into that, but I have feeling it will be a ways down the road.

I'd recommend Dennis Murphy's Usher 2-way

http://murphyblaster.com/content.php?f=usher2way.html

[---k---]

CJD does excellent custom designs if you build the boxes and aren't in a hurry. You're not to far away to bring the boxes over.

[Jonasz]

Why not an old school 3-way? Haven't heard this design by Troels but I'm sure it's a very good design and probably beats most similarly priced 2-ways (wich IMHO often sounds undynamic and a little closed in).

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/3WClassic.htm

If you want to stay with a 2-way maybe you can take a look at MarkK's RS225/RS28 design?

https://web.archive.org/web/20091124225016/http://www.audioheuristics.org/projects_gallery/RS225_RS28A_updates/dayton_reference_rs225.htm

[Rolex]

I had seen the Troels design and never really had interest in it. Poor assumption on my part, but it reminds me of Harbeth, which I have never cared for. Not to say they sound anything alike, just a personal feeling that holds no water.

Jon, the NeoD CC is out of my price range. I don't disagree with what you are saying about a well executed three way, but I think that it becomes very difficult when you put a cap on the budget.

[JonMarsh]

Your budget cap wasn't clear to me; per pair or per speaker; the SR71 kit at Madisound is 640 complete and 389 with just basic parts.

In this case I'd vote for the SR71 for you, as the ER18RNX is a very good driver for the money, with very good distortion properties and needed minimal work in the crossover. Again, it depends on what your goals are; a compact 8" two way with the elliptic crossover like Mark's above (quite similar for drivers and crossover to the M8ta two way tower) might appeal. These all seem like somewhat lateral moves compared with what you've built so far- variations in flavor and texture, but basically the same meal. :W

[Paul Ebert]

I will conditionally disagree with you regarding 2-ways vs 3-ways. Done right you'll gain midrange clarity - however, it IS a bit tougher to hit that $500 price-point. I'm not sure where it falls in price exactly but the ZDT3.5 might get there.

Has Jay started using real data in his designs yet?

Since I was the one who suggested Jay's design, I'll answer this one. I'm pretty sure he has not. It didn't occur to me that this might be an issue since I, if I were building it, would take his design as a starting point and do my own measuring / tweaking. Since Rolex isn't able to do so, perhaps it's not as good a suggestion as I thought.

I used to be of the opinion that I would rather have midrange clarity and imaging over bass extension (as evidenced by my long-term use of ProAc Tablettes). Having owned a set of full range speakers now for a while, I've come to realize that, in fact, the midrange is much better. The problem I used to have had more to do with muddy bass negatively impacting the upper ranges. Perhaps what you are really seeking is clean midrange and clean bass. Or, perhaps you should investigate room treatment. Just some thoughts.

It is hard, however, to design a reference level 3-way for $500 a pair.

I think, if I were you, I'd save up and build the Marcato or the ZD5.

[---k---]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the Statement Monitor's. The near wall version is exactly $500. It's not scan speak drivers, but in the ranges that the drivers are being used, they hold up very well. It would be something different for you too.

Jed's M5 is also exactly $460. I haven't heard it, but I'm sure it is good.

[Carl V]

DIY Cable has a 2 way design(kepler) which is quite good....Kevin is no noob.

Rick Craig has some 2 ways & his Tanzinite sounds pretty good.

But getting back to the $500/pair budget...tuff nut to crack.

[---k---]

$500 just isn't what it used to be in this hobby.

[fjhuerta]

$500 just isn't what it used to be

Ain't it the truth. :B

[CraigJ]

Rolex,

Does the "stand mount" have to include a "box"? Do you have four or more channels of amplification?

Craig

[Rolex]

No, it does not have to include a "box".. I do not have four channels of amplification. Two only. Once I have a speaker built, I will be selecting a new integrated, probably something like the Krell 400xi, but it depends on the which speaker I decide to go with.

[Johnloudb]

It seems strange to me that you're spending so much on an integrated amp and limiting your speaker budget to $500. Not that it's any of my business, just curious why you don't go with a more expensive/better speaker design.

[cjd]

Not to mention a better integrated? :P

[Curt C]

I'll have to agree with Chris and John. In general, a system with high end speakers driven by a mid fi amp will sound far better than the reverse. Looking at it another way: Even a cheap amp can provide THD specs well under 0.1% under normal use. Speakers on the other hand, exhibiting THD levels of several percent is not uncommon. I’d suggest at least splitting your available funds between the amp and the speakers you build.

I also agree that a well executed 3 way will be far less compromised in the midrange than a similar 2 way.

C

[Rolex]

Okay, I feel like I need to clear a few things up. First, there might be advantages to three way speaker systems. I don't doubt that, and appreciate people bringing that up. That being said, I have no interest in a three way at this point. I like two way speakers. I always have. Yes, I've heard some very good three ways systems implemented properly in dedicated rooms. However, for this project, my preference is a two way design.

Regarding amplifer vs speaker cost........ the old adage is that a properly implemented DIY speaker is about the same as a commercially available product at 8 to 10 times the cost. So, to reach the level of a $500 DIY speaker, you'd have to spend (potentially) $4000-$5000 on a set of speakers. If that is really the case, I don't see how the krell would be way to expensive for a pair of speakers like that. I never said the krell was what I was going to use. It has peaked my interest. I have been into integrateds as long as I have with speakers. I've also owned my fair share of integrateds. Anthem INT2, Pathos Classic One MKII, Musical Fidelity A3, Audio Refinement Complete, Musical Fidelity A308, Antique Sound Labs 1001, among others. I have never owned the krell, and would like to try it at some point. If the point was I need to spend as much on the speaker as I would on the krell, my question would be since when do dollars equal quality, especially on this forum? And, just because the krell lists for something like 2500 bucks does not mean I would pay that for it, or even half that.

I still maintain that with the right system, I can beat the sound quality of the SR71 in a standard two way speaker, including the midrange. And, that was my intent all along. The basic cost of the SR71 is around $350. Adding another $150 to that for the $500 budget should afford some areas of improvement. Nothing against Zaph, as I think he is a talented designer, and I do firmly believe that the SR71 is a good value.

I am pretty sure I have settled on a design at this point. However, I have been asked not to share the details until they are complete. Once they are complete, I will repost to this thread with the results.

[fjhuerta]

Regarding amplifer vs speaker cost........ the old adage is that a properly implemented DIY speaker is about the same as a commercially available product at 8 to 10 times the cost. So, to reach the level of a $500 DIY speaker, you'd have to spend (potentially) $4000-$5000 on a set of speakers.

I'm not completely convinced about this point. Ever since China entered the market I've wondered time and time again how on earth they manage to hit the price points they are able to.

Case in point: I bought last year a Little Dot amp. It has a tube pre, a Tripath 150W stereo amp, nicely sized coils, discrete volume control, a remote, Mullard tubes... all for $599. I *know* that hitting that price point with a DIY design is too hard or impossible...

[Jonasz]

Okay, I feel like I need to clear a few things up. First, there might be advantages to three way speaker systems. I don't doubt that, and appreciate people bringing that up. That being said, I have no interest in a three way at this point. I like two way speakers. I always have. Yes, I've heard some very good three ways systems implemented properly in dedicated rooms. However, for this project, my preference is a two way design.

Regarding amplifer vs speaker cost........ the old adage is that a properly implemented DIY speaker is about the same as a commercially available product at 8 to 10 times the cost. So, to reach the level of a $500 DIY speaker, you'd have to spend (potentially) $4000-$5000 on a set of speakers. If that is really the case, I don't see how the krell would be way to expensive for a pair of speakers like that. I never said the krell was what I was going to use. It has peaked my interest. I have been into integrateds as long as I have with speakers. I've also owned my fair share of integrateds. Anthem INT2, Pathos Classic One MKII, Musical Fidelity A3, Audio Refinement Complete, Musical Fidelity A308, Antique Sound Labs 1001, among others. I have never owned the krell, and would like to try it at some point. If the point was I need to spend as much on the speaker as I would on the krell, my question would be since when do dollars equal quality, especially on this forum? And, just because the krell lists for something like 2500 bucks does not mean I would pay that for it, or even half that.

I still maintain that with the right system, I can beat the sound quality of the SR71 in a standard two way speaker, including the midrange. And, that was my intent all along. The basic cost of the SR71 is around $350. Adding another $150 to that for the $500 budget should afford some areas of improvement. Nothing against Zaph, as I think he is a talented designer, and I do firmly believe that the SR71 is a good value.

I am pretty sure I have settled on a design at this point. However, I have been asked not to share the details until they are complete. Once they are complete, I will repost to this thread with the results.

Maybe you should just buy the Energy C-500? They seem to be pretty good value these days!

http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=211947

Even Zaph bought a pair to try out... :B

http://www.zaphaudio.com/blog.html

[Finleyville]

Since I love my L18's I am interested in hearing your final choice with pictures!

opcorn:

[savage25xtreme]

I love reading Zaph's blog :lol:

Cracks me up when sets someone on fire like that Steve Mowry guy a few posts down from your link. You have to admire a guy that has the brassies to say whatever he wants and can back it up. :T

[1Michael]

I would say the 8-10 times analogy is a little ambitious. That said I believe we can get a darn good bang for the buck with DIY.
I have been saying since 1983 that 50% of your audio budget should be placed in the speakers, whether you buy them or DIY. I stand on this paradigm today.