ZRT2.5 Revelator vs Mini Statements

[dhanwada]

Hi all,

I am planning to build a pair of Speakers. I narrowed my choices down to ZaphAudio's ZRT 2.5 and Jeff Holtz's Mini Statements. Has anybody listened to these next to each other? Do you guys have any preference of one over the other?

I will be using these speakers 60/40 in favor of music to HT.

I don't have any experience building speakers, this is going to be my first build. Carpentry isn't an issue for me as I am in India and I have access to plenty of wood workshops.

Room isn't a big one, about 12' long.

I am currently listening to a pair of Paradigm monitor's with a Yamaha receiver as the amp (for right now, planning to upgrade the amp pretty soon.)

Any suggestions, either way, are greatly appreciated.

[BobEllis]

Either one sounds a bit big for a room only 12' deep. Is the other dimension less than 12 feet. The mini statements' mid tunnel probably want a bit more room away from the back wall than the ZRT, although both are designed to be placed out in the room. You may not be able to fully appreciate either speaker in a small room. You might want to consider a design intended for on wall or in wall mounting to give yourself a bit more flexibility.

If the reason you want to build large speakers is you're looking for more hard hitting bass than your Paradigms provide, you might consider adding a 12" sub or two if you don't already have a good one.

Sorry if this sets your decision process back a notch.

[oneplustwo]

Hard to go wrong with either one. Another factor to consider is that the statements' sweet spot is a bit narrower given the ribbon tweeter. Some feel like you need to have your head in just the right place whereas the 2-way/dome tweeter of the ZRT would be more forgiving in this regard. Finally, given the size of your room, perhaps you can save some money by just building the 2-way version of the ZRT vs. the 2.5? Just a thought to consider.

[dhanwada]

Thanks for the suggestions BobEllis and oneplustwo.

There is a possibility that I can convince my wife to move this setup to a bigger room, hence wanted to have the best speakers around. Will these sound worse than the paradigms if I were to listen to them in the 12' room?

@oneplustwo: Between the two choices, I was more inclined towards the mini statements because of the detailed drawings on the website. Do you know of any links/files/images of the ZRT 2 or the 2.5 system drawings.

Thanks again

[Jim Holtz]

Another factor to consider is that the statements' sweet spot is a bit narrower given the ribbon tweeter. Some feel like you need to have your head in just the right place whereas the 2-way/dome tweeter of the ZRT would be more forgiving in this regard.

A little clarification on off axis dispersion of the NeoCD3.0 ribbon vs. a dome. Horizontal off axis is one of a ribbons strengths. It is extremely broad. A short ribbon like the NeoCD3.0 is very comparable to a 1" dome vertically in real world listening. There is absolutely no head in a vise listening with any of the Statements series or The Finalists. They all have a huge, natural sound stage.

I won't comment on Mini's vs. ZRT. I think it would come down to usage and personal preference.

Jim

[BobEllis]

Without knowing anything about your current speakers, I will venture a guess that either of your choices will sound better than them even in the small room. You won't get the best out of them unless you get your wish and they can find their way to the living room. Build them into well crafted cabinets in her color and wood preference. You'd be happy with either one.

I built a couple pairs of test mules for the purpose of comparing ribbons and domes with identical woofers and cabinets. I second Jim's comment that horizontal dispersion of the NeoCD3's predecessor JP3 was outstanding, with a broader sweet spot than the dome. Vertical dispersion was noticeably different, too. The ribbons vertical dispersion was wide enough to sound good standing at normal listening distances getting closer to the speaker the top end rolled off as expected. The ribbon worked better in a very live room than the dome.

[oneplustwo]

From: Zaph Audio website.

http://www.zaphaudio.com/ZRT-2way-vented.pdf

http://www.zaphaudio.com/ZRT-2.5way-sealed.pdf

Re: dispersion, I stand corrected. I've heard different things on this but have no quantified backup as Jim and Bob have.

[Carl V]

dleted dbl post

[Carl V]

I'll second the nice horizontal & vertical characteristics regarding the NeoCD3.
I have it in an SSR & have heard it in a number of other designs. Selah's TRT
is a 2.5 design & it too sounds superb. I also like the SSAirCir tweeter and have
it in a two designs. You are fortunate to have a Plethora of "sound" designs from
which to choose. The Finalist is a design that has piqued & whetted my DIY urges.

[5th element]

It's worth pointing out, I believe, that the standard 2 way ZRT will probably have better bass extension than the 2.5 way. The SS revelator works well in large, ported boxes, tuned low and will give very impressive bass extension for it's size. Going 2.5 way reduces the cabinet volume per driver and will reduce absolute bass extension, what you gain though is greater power handling and the ability to go louder. If high SPLs aren't that important to you then you're better off going for the standard two way. Of course you could always build the 2.5 way into a very deep cabinet, to get the volume per driver the same as the 2 way, but that's getting pretty deep.

The mini statements are a different kettle of fish as you're getting a well designed three way. A better comparison would perhaps be the mini statements to Zaph's own ZDT3.5. Both designs use the same bass drivers and then use a small format midrange driver, crossed relatively high to the tweeter. As Zaph says himself, in, this, in and of itself, lends itself to a different type of sound, over the typical 2 way with a 1" dome and 6.5" midbass. Of those types of design, the ZRT happens to use one of the best designed mid/bass units and one of the best designed tweeters that money can buy. On top of this the execution of the ZRT has been done specifically to minimise any off axis issues typically encountered in such designs, by pushing the xover down low. You really are getting one of the best 6.5" + 1" dome tweeter designs that are on offer.

If you extended this sentiment to the mini statements then you'd be looking at a loudspeaker that costs significantly more. Something like Jon Marsh's Ardents (with the illuminator woofers) would be a fairer comparison as that is a three way design, using two 6.5" bass units, a small format midrange and 1" tweeter, all which are world class also. The Ardents cost significantly more and I think almost everyone would be saying build the Ardents over the ZDT, which they should because then what'd be the point in the Ardents?!

But we're not talking about the Ardents, we're talking about the mini statements, which are, depending on how you look at it, designed and orientated more towards getting high performance for a reasonable price, much the same as the ZDT3.5. This is one of the reasons the statement series are as popular as they are and for good reason, both designs achieve their goals and then some. Can the overall designs be bettered? Yes, but you have to pay more.

Now having experienced what good two ways can do and then what good three ways can do, I can say that the main downfall of two ways (large waveguide designs notwithstanding) is that they lose composure and tend fall apart a bit, comparatively, when faced with highly dynamic music and anything approaching a realistic volume. I don't like listening at high SPLs, but I can still appreciate how three ways tend to more gracefully handle demanding material. This might be of greater importance to you if you intend on using the loudspeakers for home theatre. Most action orientated HT stuff nowadays tends to cover a pretty large dynamic range, ie they turn the voices down so there's more way to go up, so as to make the action louder when it occurs. It's not that a two way cannot hit the same SPLs (most of the time) it's just that the three ways tend to a better job of it.

If this was my money, I would most certainly go with the three way. If I could tolerate the slightly wider cabinet, I would certainly consider the finalists too, as these really do give you more of what a good three way is all about. If you are going to add a sub later then having a three way with an 8" bass unit is going to be seen as less of a bonus.

http://www.speakerdesignworks.com/Finalists_1.html

[Paulie]

It's worth pointing out, I believe, that the standard 2 way ZRT will probably have better bass extension than the 2.5 way. The SS revelator works well in large, ported boxes, tuned low and will give very impressive bass extension for it's size. Going 2.5 way reduces the cabinet volume per driver and will reduce absolute bass extension, what you gain though is greater power handling and the ability to go louder. If high SPLs aren't that important to you then you're better off going for the standard two way. Of course you could always build the 2.5 way into a very deep cabinet, to get the volume per driver the same as the 2 way, but that's getting pretty deep.

Zaph has plans on his website to build the 2.5 way ZRT in a ported 65L cabinet. The 2 way tower is 38L.

[Hdale85]

For music I'd feel like the ZRT would be the way to go as those mids are said to be some of the best period. But I have no personal experience with either.

[oneplustwo]

I would consider the zdt 3.5 as well. That one I can speak to first hand. I'm a big fan of the mid range done myself. Really great for female vocals in my (limited) experience.

[dhanwada]

Thanks to everybody for responding to my request. I have decided to go forward with the ZRT2.5 as I read lot of good reviews about the quality of drivers. I will be going for a sealed cabinet and using a sub with them. I was tempted to go for the finalists, but a short discussion with my wife about the width got them ruled out.

Thanks again everybody.

[BobEllis]

Good luck and let us know how you like them. I got tired of "discussions" with my wife always ending up where she started, so I got rid of her.

[5th element]

Good luck and let us know how you like them. I got tired of "discussions" with my wife always ending up where she started, so I got rid of her.

Hah that's one way around it.

I am sure you'll be happy with the ZRTs, especially if you have a sub. Things will get even better if you use the ZRTs sealed and put an active high pass before them. Both of these actions will lower the low frequency demands placed upon the ZRTs bass drivers and the high pass will also lower the demands placed upon the amplifier driving the ZRTs too. One step at a time though and good luck with the build

[dhanwada]

Good luck and let us know how you like them. I got tired of "discussions" with my wife always ending up where she started, so I got rid of her.

Ha ha, that's funny.

[MarkR]

Good choice - I've been running a pair of 2.5 way ZRT's for nearly a year now and they certainly live up to all the good reviews. :T

[miyami]

Hello,
sorry to open this thread after such a long time, but I am pretty much in the same situation: I need to built new speakers (the old ones are now in speaker heaven after 25 years...) and narrowed down my choice to the ZRT2.5 or Mini Statements. I would mostly listen to music with these speakers and my room is maybe 15' x 30' so I would like to know, how dhanwada's choice of ZRT2.5s in a 12' long room worked out?

When compared to the Mini Statements, is it really worth paying double the price for the Scanspeak drivers?
BTW, I was reading all these nice reviews of the Statements, and when I mentioned BobEllis solution during a discussing with my wife about the BIG cabinets (that are of course not wanted) we had a good laugh....

[Jim Holtz]

Hello,
sorry to open this thread after such a long time, but I am pretty much in the same situation: I need to built new speakers (the old ones are now in speaker heaven after 25 years...) and narrowed down my choice to the ZRT2.5 or Mini Statements. I would mostly listen to music with these speakers and my room is maybe 15' x 30' so I would like to know, how dhanwada's choice of ZRT2.5s in a 12' long room worked out?

When compared to the Mini Statements, is it really worth paying double the price for the Scanspeak drivers?
BTW, I was reading all these nice reviews of the Statements, and when I mentioned BobEllis solution during a discussing with my wife about the BIG cabinets (that are of course not wanted) we had a good laugh....

Check out the Finalists. They offer full sized Statements performance plus superior midrange sound quality in a monitor sized speaker.

Jim

[BobEllis]

I'm glad to provide some entertainment.

A room that size begs for Jon Marsh's Avalon Isis inspired three way http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthr...l=1#post583236 or at least an Ardent inspired http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthr...sign-and-Build Either ZRT the 2.5 or Finalists with good subwoofers are good choices, too. I tend towards three ways when given enough to breathe.

[dhanwada]

Hello,
sorry to open this thread after such a long time, but I am pretty much in the same situation: I need to built new speakers (the old ones are now in speaker heaven after 25 years...) and narrowed down my choice to the ZRT2.5 or Mini Statements. I would mostly listen to music with these speakers and my room is maybe 15' x 30' so I would like to know, how dhanwada's choice of ZRT2.5s in a 12' long room worked out?

When compared to the Mini Statements, is it really worth paying double the price for the Scanspeak drivers?
BTW, I was reading all these nice reviews of the Statements, and when I mentioned BobEllis solution during a discussing with my wife about the BIG cabinets (that are of course not wanted) we had a good laugh....

I am really loving the ZRT2.5's, but this is a significant upgrade from what I had earlier. What I like about these ZRT's is the mid-range and the bass. I have these in a sealed enclosure, and am getting enough oomph on the lower end, but the downside is that it doesnt go low enough, bottom line I am very happy with what I built.

[5th element]

That's what subs are for

[miyami]

Check out the Finalists. They offer full sized Statements performance plus superior midrange sound quality in a monitor sized speaker.

Jim

Would it be possible to use ribbons like the ones from the statements with this setup? Also, I assume that the dimensions are pretty fixed on the design, so for converting them into a tower speaker the only option is to leave the volumes as they are and extend the cabinets so that they can stand on the floor?

[Jim Holtz]

Would it be possible to use ribbons like the ones from the statements with this setup? Also, I assume that the dimensions are pretty fixed on the design, so for converting them into a tower speaker the only option is to leave the volumes as they are and extend the cabinets so that they can stand on the floor?

It would be easy to convert the Finalists into a floor standing design as you described. You'd simply have a great place for the crossover to reside in the empty lower portion of the cabinet.

Regarding using a ribbon in the Finalists, no. The NE149 doesn't cross high enough to integrate a ribbon properly. The RS28F is an extremely nice sounding tweeter with a lot of the "air" a ribbon delivers. I think many builders would find it to sound extremely nice on just about any kind of music.

Since you're interested in a larger speaker, how about a Statements II? 8O

Jim

[miyami]

It would be easy to convert the Finalists into a floor standing design as you described. You'd simply have a great place for the crossover to reside in the empty lower portion of the cabinet.

Regarding using a ribbon in the Finalists, no. The NE149 doesn't cross high enough to integrate a ribbon properly. The RS28F is an extremely nice sounding tweeter with a lot of the "air" a ribbon delivers. I think many builders would find it to sound extremely nice on just about any kind of music.

Since you're interested in a larger speaker, how about a Statements II? 8O

Jim

I didn't know that there is a version II of the statements and I can't find it on speakerdesignworks. Sounds interesting. Do you have some more info, or a link?

[sawdust]

I didn't know that there is a version II of the statements and I can't find it on speakerdesignworks. Sounds interesting. Do you have some more info, or a link?

I was wondering about this as well. Is this a teaser?

[Jim Holtz]

Statements II?

More info to come soon. :B

Jim

[5th element]

Ah I wondered if that would happen, out with the TB, in with the Vifa!

[kevinm]

The temptation.......oh dear

[miyami]

More info to come soon. :B

Jim

This almost looks like not being able to decide for one of the speakers in the title of the post paid off. Can't wait to see what you guys are up to! Please leak some more !

[scardeal]

If there's a monitor version of the Statements II, I'll be happy to be the guinea pig.

[miyami]

Jim, I have a question about the TL designs. I have read a lot about minimum distance of 18'' for your TL designs. Is there also a maximum distance? E.g. if the finalists or the mini statements (my wife does not allow cabinets that are almost as tall as she is) are placed in the middle of a room, how would that affect the sound? Bass would be reduced, and the delay of the reflected back wave would be much larger. Would that degrade the sound experience significantly?

[Jim Holtz]

Jim, I have a question about the TL designs. I have read a lot about minimum distance of 18'' for your TL designs. Is there also a maximum distance? E.g. if the finalists or the mini statements (my wife does not allow cabinets that are almost as tall as she is) are placed in the middle of a room, how would that affect the sound? Bass would be reduced, and the delay of the reflected back wave would be much larger. Would that degrade the sound experience significantly?

My experience has been that any of the Statements or The Finalist work great from 18" to about 6' out in the room. They don't work well when they're out in the middle and well away from back walls or in large auditoriums and meeting rooms. I'm usually disappointed when I show open back mid designs at DIY events that are held in large rooms. I know they sound much better at home where they were designed to sound their best.

They're actually pretty flexible but work best in most normal home environments.

Jim