Suggestions in the 1-2k range per speaker

[kareface]

I've been looking through my options. I'm curious what you guys would would suggest in the the 1-2K per speaker range. I have a pair of nats I enjoy currently. My room isn't that large currently, but I'll be moving the theater to a larger room in the future and I can spend my time working on the new speakers till then. Ideally I'd like ones that also can be easily matched or have existing plans for a center channel as well. I think that factor as limited the options for me the most.

[numberoneoppa]

http://clearwaveloudspeaker.com/Dynamic/4T.html



center:
http://clearwaveloudspeaker.com/Dynamic/4CC.html

[Jonasz]

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/orion_challenge.htm

[cjd]

Most of the designs I've done work together well, with mains starting just below your range to going solidly into it - the big 3-ways (right in your budget range) work with both the WTMW center and the Khancenter, which work with the Khanspire, which work with the In-Khans, which work with the less common surrounds I did for my own HT...

the thread Ryan (----k----) put together has all these listed.

[kareface]

The designs I was looking at and was curious about were:

The Orion's (center option?)
Statements
Aria10s (center option?)
Dynamic 4T
Khanspires

I know the price range for the ones I've listed is fairly varied. I don't mind other suggestions outside of the list as well. Those are the ones I'm the most familiar with. I know each one has it's ups and downs and everyone has their own preferences. The question really becomes is it worth several times the cost to build one of the other options. Can anyone provide a critical (and I mean critical, not generically complementary) comparison of the speakers listed above? Even if it is just comparing a couple of them so I can get a reference.

[parodielin]

I'd love to add Duet10ss into the mix.

The designs I was looking at and was curious about were:

The Orion's (center option?)
Statements
Aria10s (center option?)
Dynamic 4T
Khanspires

I know the price range for the ones I've listed is fairly varied. I don't mind other suggestions outside of the list as well. Those are the ones I'm the most familiar with. I know each one has it's ups and downs and everyone has their own preferences. The question really becomes is it worth several times the cost to build one of the other options. Can anyone provide a critical (and I mean critical, not generically complementary) comparison of the speakers listed above? Even if it is just comparing a couple of them so I can get a reference.

[Bear]

I'm in the process of finishing up a pair of Minuet5s from Clearwave. In this price range, you have a lot of options, but you also need to know how much of your own labor you want to kick-in vs. outsourcing key sub-assemblies (e.g., crossover, cabinet).

[kareface]

It depends on the complexity, but my nat p's were from scratch for the most part and I'm willing to do so again. As long as it doesn't require building something unconventional like the nautilus.

[cjd]

I haven't heard most of those designs, but I can tell you one thing that some folks say about my designs: they tend to be almost analytical - no audiophile pretensions, clinical dedication to accuracy. I may be overstating a tad for the sake of clarity, and because it's not like some of the other options aren't also accurate. The WWMTM's are big brothers to the Khans, a bit more laid back through the midrange (Khans are slightly forward, and the RS180 doesn't allow for this - IMHO it's a bit too reserved in the upper midrange, but... that's being picky). I still prefer the larger version. When there's music on the source, it's all there.

My training is classical, and I look to squeeze out details that exist 40 and 50dB below nominal (hall acoustics, etc.) because that's what it takes to bring into my living room.

I know there are comparisons to the Statements somewhere out there, but don't remember what thread.

To your good (or bad?) fortune, you're exploring designs where personal preference plays a large role.

[---k---]

Your budget is more than I typically see. So, I'm not sure I can recommend much. Of course, you can always use fancy caps to make a $1k design into a 2k design.

I would probably recommend waiting until the last minute to decide on your project. There are always new drivers and new designs coming out. Lots of action on the waveguide/dxt front. JonMarsh's Modula Extreme series looks very promising. And, once it is done, I'm sure that CJD will be pimping his new Ansonica design.

And, I think CJD is being to critical calling his speakers "almost analytical". They do seem to be voiced differently than few other designs I've heard. They tend to bring out more of the room and background of the music at the expense of richness and warts. I enjoy mine...

[Hdale85]

I definitely recommend the Dynamic 4T's they are awesome!

[cjd]

Does the Ardent fit into this price range? I'd definitely recommend them if so... Though, no center...

[JonMarsh]

Well, yes, they probably do. I have a compact center system in the design stage, but depending on the need for how compact, am considering revising that.

The original concept I'd worked out over the holidays was two RS225-4 in about 30 liters net, the Accuton C79 again on the midrange, and the SS D2004/6020 for the top. That would give the most compact front panel layout. But considering what a CC has to do, and considering how we wouldn't have any baffle offset in a CC, and the functionality of the H65 waveguide with D2608/9130, I'm thinking about using that on the top, and raising the cabinet height as needed to accommodate it.

It could be done with the ER18RNX, but I'd been thinking about ways to "cost down" the design while improving the functionality in the intended application. So, more sheer output capability in the 50 Hz to 300 Hz area seemed like a good idea, a smaller enclosure seems like a good idea, and the enhanced dispersion/diffraction/output control of the waveguide seems like a possible but not confirmed good idea.

I'll know more about my feelings about that after testing the RS225-4 next weekend.

I supposed the tweeter tradeoff can only be evaluated definitively by building and testing two front panels. Or, we could just have design variants- a less tall, more compact one with the D2004/6020 tweeter, or a taller baffle, slightly shallower version with the waveguide. If the waveguide really does help the launch and avoid diffraction at the edge beyond the waveguide (a murky topic as MarkK puts it), then it would have advantages I think, when flanked by RS225's, which could be real diffraction generators for conventional tweeters. But this is uncharted territory and will require test and evaluation.

Will be getting out the Ardents and hopefully finalizing the crossover next weekend. Then completing the veneering and finishing later in March.

[dlneubec]

I can heartily recommend my current project, the Blades. They fit into the low end of your price range at an estimated $1000-$1100 range, crossovers plus drivers, not including wood and finish. They are close to the wall design. I will be starting on the finish soon.



Here is the thread on them:
Blades Thread

I don't personally have a center channel design, but Rick Craig, over at Selah Audio has a center channel that uses the exact same drivers as the WWMT section of the Blades and they are available as a kit or built:
Selah Audio 35CC

[TacoD]

Wow those blades are nice.

You only name a price range has to be full range, then the blades can be something for you. Your budget has room for a Raal ribbon, so that is what I would use.

[dlneubec]

Wow those blades are nice.

You only name a price range has to be full range, then the blades can be something for you. Your budget has room for a Raal ribbon, so that is what I would use.

Thanks TacoD! The Raal ribbons would fit perfectly, just the right width. The big one is probably overkill since the there is little need for 95db sensitivity in this design and the MDM55 is crossed at 4khz and could go even higher quite comfortably, but the small Raal ribbon might be a natural fit.

I have to say, however, that the Seas 22TAFG is one of the cleanest, best sounding and cost effective dome tweeters I've heard to date, at least when crossed at this point. It's under $35, so it might be hard to justify adding a tweeter that is 8+ times the price in its place just to cover the top two octaves.

[ClosetSciFiGeek]

Here's my two-cents if I had that much money to spend:

Jed's Design

http://clearwaveloudspeaker.com/Dynamic/4T.html

Obviously the Statements

http://www.geocities.com/cc00541/Statements.html

Zaph's ZRT's use some of the very best drivers

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

If you need a high sensitivity system this looks interesting

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/JA8008.htm

I really like this high efficiency interesting and not too expensive design

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/PMS.htm

Like Zaph's ZD5 with an 8" to make it fairly full range

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/jazzman.htm

If you have a really big room this would be awesome

http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=35_425&products_id=8691

One of the king of the hill speaker designs out there, but pricey

http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=77

[ClosetSciFiGeek]

If you really want to match the center Jed's Dynamic design is probably one of the best.

[JonMarsh]

The only drawbacks to the Orion are the need for SL's electronics crossover and six channels of good amplification, and perhaps the quirky esthetics. Otherwise, it's a classic design that has "withstood the test of time" pretty well.

When ever I stroll the high end rooms at CES or visit RMAF, my aural memory of the Orion is one of the benchmarks for comparison.

OTOH, that doesn't stop me from building my own stuff, either, including dipoles. The last two years I've been back on a box speaker kick, but I expect to try a dipole system again before two long. Because of the front to rear cancellation, a dipole will always be more expensive for the SPL because you need more driver swept area, in the low end as much as 4X to 6X. That exacts a cost penalty.

[dlneubec]

My BaSSlines dipole (midrange only) design would also fit in this price category, but I didn't mention it because there is no center channel that matches and the OP suggested this was a major factor. I've never tried it, but I would think a matching center channel with dipole mains would be much harder to pull off compared to an all monopole solution for HT.

Also, dipole designs are generally a harder fit in an HT solution since they must sit well out into the room, which can often be a deal killer.

[Bear]

Also, dipole designs are generally a harder fit in an HT solution since they must sit well out into the room, which can often be a deal killer.

Yep, it can be more "odd" for the soundstage to be significantly far in front of a screen than having the soundstage or LCR panning not track correctly vertically.

[kareface]

I really like this high efficiency interesting and not too expensive design
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/PMS.htm

I love the look of those speakers. I could do a ton with some glossy paint and wood stain. I'd love to build something like that, but has anyone heard them? How do they sound?

Thanks for the suggestions, this is getting me pumped. I might start building sooner rather then later, lol.

[ClosetSciFiGeek]

Haven't heard them, but Troels Gravesen is highly respected in Europe and he claims that,

"This project has turned out much better than expected and listening to a wide range of recordings, CDs and vinyl, I actually wonder if I should quit speaker building here. There's something appealing about simplicity and this is an easy to build speaker. From all the experiences of the past constructions this one very much fulfils a wide range of demands: High sensitivity, an easy load on the amplifier, a flat frequency response, good phase integration between drivers, deep solid bass and a speedy, transient and non-aggressive midrange."
-Troels Gravesen

Of all the speakers on the list I posted you picked the one most appealing to me as well. I am thinking about picking up another couple of sheets of MDF(its cheap) and seeing what I can make of it. If it looks good I'll order drivers.

[Jonasz]

The only drawbacks to the Orion are the need for SL's electronics crossover and six channels of good amplification, and perhaps the quirky esthetics. Otherwise, it's a classic design that has "withstood the test of time" pretty well.

OT, just for quriosity, what could be bettered compared to the original Orion design? There are obviously a lot of tweeters available now that weren't on the scene when they were constructed, but when it comes to the mid I'm sure there are still not much better 8" choices than the W22? The woofers could maybe be bettered by the aluminium coned XXLS or the Seas L26ROY?

It's not easy to find good drivers when you need them to be easily available in most parts of the world.

Oh, and IMHO the aesthetics suck and I will for that reason alone never build them...

[JonMarsh]

Well, as you see yourself, a pair of 26ROY's on the bottom end would be cool... the tweeter is not so simple an upgrade choice as one might think- the Millenium Excel is not state of the art above 2 kHz, but below it probably still is, as regards distortion. That, and having a pair sitting around for 5 years doing nothing is why I'm trying them in waveguides next.

The 8" mid is a tough one to upgrade; it's getting into the energy storage range using it all the way up to 1400, but I personally can't think of an 8" driver with a better top end. I would be inclined to go 2.5 way with a 7" midwoofer to handle that part of the range, but then I don't want to tip my hand regarding the next Arvo Part too much! I need to be more like Apple, keep stuff secret until I drop the bomb, perhaps...

[kareface]

Haven't heard them, but Troels Gravesen is highly respected in Europe and he claims that,

"This project has turned out much better than expected and listening to a wide range of recordings, CDs and vinyl, I actually wonder if I should quit speaker building here. There's something appealing about simplicity and this is an easy to build speaker. From all the experiences of the past constructions this one very much fulfils a wide range of demands: High sensitivity, an easy load on the amplifier, a flat frequency response, good phase integration between drivers, deep solid bass and a speedy, transient and non-aggressive midrange."
-Troels Gravesen

Of all the speakers on the list I posted you picked the one most appealing to me as well. I am thinking about picking up another couple of sheets of MDF(its cheap) and seeing what I can make of it. If it looks good I'll order drivers.

The only problem I could see with that would be making sure the depth of the holes for the drivers was right. Honestly, I'm going to start looking into building them right away. I don't know what I'll do about a center channel tho, lol. What would you suggest receiver wise should I look into for those? I haven't researched driving speakers that sensitive.

[Bear]

What would you suggest receiver wise should I look into for those? I haven't researched driving speakers that sensitive.

Unless you are going high-end for a receiver, you are much, much better off going with a dedicated preamp and amp. Several of the mid to mid-top (e.g., Denon 4308, Onkyo 5007) receivers test well for distortion, but only once you get to significant drive levels. If you are spending the money to have good speakers with low native distortion, you want your amplifier to have a similar or better noise floor at levels where you will actually be driving the speakers (e.g., 10 - 20 watts continuous or less). You don't have to spend a ton of money (I like Outlaw Audio (really ATI)), and a well-designed/executed solid state amp will last for years (e.g., Bryston warrants its amps for 20 years).

BTW, I agree that some of the PMS builds are simply stunning.

[cjd]

I haven't researched driving speakers that sensitive.

90dB is sensitive? Khans and larger RS 3-ways are both there too. :P

I wouldn't use a receiver... check out Emotiva (the Outlaws I have are OK but the transformer hum is unacceptable. Way loud, I'll be replacing them as soon as I can for that reason in particular).

[watersedge]

90dB is sensitive? Khans and larger RS 3-ways are both there too. :P

I wouldn't use a receiver... check out Emotiva (the Outlaws I have are OK but the transformer hum is unacceptable. Way loud, I'll be replacing them as soon as I can for that reason in particular).

To clarify, do you mean you wouldn't use a high end receiver to carry the load alone? You'd go with a receiver plus something like the UPA-5 or UPA-7?

[numberoneoppa]

To clarify, do you mean you wouldn't use a high end receiver to carry the load alone? You'd go with a receiver plus something like the UPA-5 or UPA-7?

Well, a pre-amp + an amp, yeah. Receiver = preamp+amp+tuner = integrated amp + tuner.

[watersedge]

Well, a pre-amp + an amp, yeah. Receiver = preamp+amp+tuner = integrated amp + tuner.

Yeah, just wanted to make that clear in case someone took it literally as in 'no receiver (or pre-amp) required'...

[cjd]

Heh.

I just meant that, all things being equal, I'd put separate quality amplifiers in the mix, paired with a quality pre-amp or pre-pro - Receivers, even the very best, definitely put their signature on the sound in a way the better separates do not do.

These speaker designs are revealing enough to make it quite audible.

In the case of my larger 3-ways, I recommend a 2ohm stable amplifier.

[kareface]

I was thinking of picking up an emo soon anyways, so I guess that'll work out well. I just finished the polish work on the Nat Ps, now all that's left is the feet for them an I'll be done! I don't know what I'll do with the nat's down the line tho. Hate to not use them after putting in all the effort to make them look nice. At very least I'll make good use of them now!

Image not available

The front of that speaker is in my sig (tho the image is before the polish). I was surprised how well they turned out for my first go at building speakers, or doing anything involving woodworking or painting for that matter.

[JonMarsh]

Heh.

I just meant that, all things being equal, I'd put separate quality amplifiers in the mix, paired with a quality pre-amp or pre-pro - Receivers, even the very best, definitely put their signature on the sound in a way the better separates do not do.

These speaker designs are revealing enough to make it quite audible.

In the case of my larger 3-ways, I recommend a 2ohm stable amplifier.

+1
Very, VERY true - even the electronic volume control chips widely used in HT receivers and Pre-pros are a problem.

I did some collaborator work for a high end company years ago, investigating this, and this is why they ended up with either direct switched ladder networks, JFET switched discrete ladder networks, or a transimpedance amplifier with switched resistive loading and buffers. The volume chips from Cirrus and TI/BurrBrown don't cut it for high end music, even at the two way monitor level.

[Bear]

I wouldn't use a receiver... check out Emotiva (the Outlaws I have are OK but the transformer hum is unacceptable. Way loud, I'll be replacing them as soon as I can for that reason in particular).

My 7200 is brand new and replaces a Bryston 9B-ST. I haven't noticed any hum, but it still has that new amp smell (kidding!). Emotiva is another well-liked manufacturer, but I paid a premium for domestic manufacture.

Well, a pre-amp + an amp, yeah. Receiver = preamp+amp+tuner = integrated amp + tuner.

The issue is the quality of the individual sub-assemblies, not the packaging (though that can have its challenges).

Compare:

http://www.ultimateavmag.com/amplifiers/908out/index5.html

http://www.ultimateavmag.com/avreceivers/208mar8002/index7.html

To convert decimal/percent distortion into decibels (which is more useful IMO), use the old SPL formula:

20 * Log(distortion)

This gives you a number in negative dB for how far down the noise floor is at a given point. Some samples:
1.00% -40
0.10% -60
0.01% -80
0.001% -100

Since noise is multiplied at each stage in the signal chain, you want everything upstream to be clean if you are paying for high-resolution (i.e., low noise) speakers. Otherwise, you are hearing more of the accumulated distortion in the signal which, unlike some forms of speaker distortion, generally tends to be quite undesirable/fatiguing/harsh.

[watersedge]

Okay. Bear, bear with me here. (no pun intended ) I want to be sure I understand your point. If I look at the comparisons you suggested, the Outlaw 7500 and the Marantz SR8002, you're referring us to the floor at around 10W, right? At 10W, the Outlaw distortion is just under .002%. The Marantz, at about .005%. Obviously, by looking at these curves, the Outlaw has less distortion. BUT...if I have speakers that have a sensitivity of say, 90dB, I don't have to worry about distortion at the floor (this approx. 10W level) below somewhere around .002% (guesstimating...I didn't pull the calculator out).

So...as far as the distortion at the floor is concerned, the Outlaw is a good bet to provide little or no noticable distortion for a 90dB sensitivity...and the Marantz is going to be marginal?

But if I have speaker with 80dB sensitivity, then I'm really good to go with either of these options, since I can handle .01% distortion?

Am I applying your comments appropriately? Or am I missing it?

[cjd]

I have Outlaw 2200's, and it's a transformer related issue entirely - it may be the electricity in my house that's at fault, to be sure. I don't know. But I could hear it when I had the amps tucked behind the speakers - with the amps right next to me, it's quite distracting. I can't listen to classical with any kind of dynamic range (i.e. it has to just be loud the whole time) right now. And if I'm reading without music on at all I have to switch the amps off entirely.

THD is one aspect. I honestly don't know how to measure the changes I heard switching from an Onkyo playing device-switcher (bypassing volume control AND amp) + relay based attenuator, to the Emotiva USP-1. Just using the attenuator vs the Emo, I can't tell the difference in the time it takes me to swap all the cables around. (it's a TwistedPear Joshua Tree attenuator if you want to look it up).

C

[Bear]

Okay. Bear, bear with me here. (no pun intended ) I want to be sure I understand your point. If I look at the comparisons you suggested, the Outlaw 7500 and the Marantz SR8002, you're referring us to the floor at around 10W, right? At 10W, the Outlaw distortion is just under .002%. The Marantz, at about .005%. Obviously, by looking at these curves, the Outlaw has less distortion. BUT...if I have speakers that have a sensitivity of say, 90dB, I don't have to worry about distortion at the floor (this approx. 10W level) below somewhere around .002% (guesstimating...I didn't pull the calculator out).

So...as far as the distortion at the floor is concerned, the Outlaw is a good bet to provide little or no noticable distortion for a 90dB sensitivity...and the Marantz is going to be marginal?

But if I have speaker with 80dB sensitivity, then I'm really good to go with either of these options, since I can handle .01% distortion?

Am I applying your comments appropriately? Or am I missing it?

Let me try the longer form...

An idealized speaker with 90dB of sensitivity at 1W (we'll leave out the voltage discussion for now) will produce 110dB when fed 1 Watt of power, both at 1m of distance. However, sound pressure level (SPL) is inversely proportional to the square of the distance (roughly) since the wave is covering a continuous area (think of a balloon expanding). At 3m (about 10'), the wave front has reduced that 110dB down to about 81dB (power is 1/9 as the wavefront expands; again, idealizing and not getting into issues of sound power vs. sound intensity).

Since 81dB is not too far off of the "reference" levels that a lot of people listen at (typically in the 70 - 75dB range), we'll leave this math alone for now. Let's turn to the room...

Unless you have spent a lot of time/energy on isolating your room from ambient noises, you will have some level of ambient noise -- even if it is just you moving around. A quiet room might be 20 - 30dB. If you have a refrigerator nearby or a noisy air conditioner, you might have upwards of 40 - 50 dB of ambient noise. How that noise floor works is that anything the speaker tries to reproduce that is below that level will be lost in the general "hum" around you. In other words, it will be hard to distinguish it auditorily from everything else going on. So, let's assume a reasonably quiet listening room of 30 dB. That gives you 51dB of dynamic range from your "reference" listening level (above). You then have incremental dynamic range above this to whatever your amp can supply (and whatever doesn't cause your speakers to bottom out or combust).

If you have a 200W amp, and you listen at 10W, then you have about 26dB of dynamic range at your listening position above your reference (e.g., cannon shots in the 1812 Overture). Your total dynamic range, then, is just short of 80dB between the softest and loudest noises that you can hear and your equipment can reproduce.

Since many people design speakers to have about 40dB of "clean" reproduction, that means that you may hear various types of noise and distortion in that 80dB of range just from the speakers alone (when pushed from peak to trough). Many commercial designs don't even have 40dB of range, so don't take this as criticism of many good DIY designs! For "reference" speakers, you might aim for a bit more dynamic range (50 - 60dB), and especially much lower odd order harmonics.

What it does mean, though is that inside this 40dB range, distortion from the upstream equipment can become audible in-room. Tube amplifiers often have >1% distortion, but people love them "for the sound". The higher the distortion of the upstream components vs. the noise floor of the speakers, the more audible the upstream distortion becomes. It gets hard to pin down just how audible it is because it varies in how objectionable (noticeable) it is depending upon the type of distortion (e.g., even order vs. odd order harmonics). In some cases, distortion and noise may be perceived as "color" or "timbre", but in other cases it will be "fatiguing" and "harsh". However, it is all noise/distortion of some sort, which is not what you want when you are aiming for "reference".

Of course, if your goal in this price range is statuesque cabinetry with sound as an ancillary result, then ignore all of the above.

I have Outlaw 2200's, and it's a transformer related issue entirely - it may be the electricity in my house that's at fault, to be sure. I don't know. But I could hear it when I had the amps tucked behind the speakers - with the amps right next to me, it's quite distracting. I can't listen to classical with any kind of dynamic range (i.e. it has to just be loud the whole time) right now. And if I'm reading without music on at all I have to switch the amps off entirely.

The 2200s are Class G or H, so they have an odd power supply as it is. Let's hope the basic AB amp that I've got lives up to the ATI/Outlaw reputation for no-frills bullet-proof performance.

[ClosetSciFiGeek]

In answer to your earlier question about what receiver. I am more than happy with my Emotiva gear. I have a UMC-1(Pre-Pro) and a UPA-7(Amp). If I were going to do a receiver I would do a Yamaha RX-Z11(they seem to be closing it out and it is a fine piece of gear). I have seen the receiver from $1800-2500 recently(originally $5000). My UMC-1/UPA-7 were $1300 and they are separates. The Yamaha has more "bells and whistles", the Emotiva stuff puts out more power and the pre-pro can be upgraded as necessary while amplification doesn't "go out of style" nearly as quickly.

[watersedge]

In answer to your earlier question about what receiver. I am more than happy with my Emotiva gear. I have a UMC-1(Pre-Pro) and a UPA-7(Amp). If I were going to do a receiver I would do a Yamaha RX-Z11(they seem to be closing it out and it is a fine piece of gear). I have seen the receiver from $1800-2500 recently(originally $5000). My UMC-1/UPA-7 were $1300 and they are separates. The Yamaha has more "bells and whistles", the Emotiva stuff puts out more power and the pre-pro can be upgraded as necessary while amplification doesn't "go out of style" nearly as quickly.

I've been thinking really hard about going to Emotiva separates witht he UMC-1. For HT I'm currently running a Panasonic BD80, decoding in the BD80 running analog outs to older receiver (non-hdmi, which is why I'm decoding in the BD80). The UMC-1 has caught my eye, as has the UPA-7. I don't use "bells and whistles" that are present on most receivers at all.

How are you liking your UMC-1/UPA-7 arrangement? Any regrets?

[ClosetSciFiGeek]

The only issue I have with the UMC-1 I detailed midway down the page on their forum is with the EMO-Q(their room correction). Here's the link if you're interested:

http://emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=preamps&action=display&thread=9299&page=16

All in all the UMC-1 is basic, easy to use, dead quiet and cheap.

The UPA-7 is bulletproof, sounds great, has plenty of power to drive my Zaph ZDT3.5's and is probably one of the best deals in audio.

[64NOMIS]

Here's my two-cents if I had that much money to spend:

Jed's Design

http://clearwaveloudspeaker.com/Dynamic/4T.html

Obviously the Statements

http://www.geocities.com/cc00541/Statements.html

Zaph's ZRT's use some of the very best drivers

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

If you need a high sensitivity system this looks interesting

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/JA8008.htm

I really like this high efficiency interesting and not too expensive design

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/PMS.htm

Like Zaph's ZD5 with an 8" to make it fairly full range

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/jazzman.htm

If you have a really big room this would be awesome

http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=35_425&products_id=8691

One of the king of the hill speaker designs out there, but pricey
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/pro...products_id=77

I read http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/JA8008.htm and enjoyed an ooh and ahhh moment.

[kareface]

I'm digging the emos for this purpose so far. I'm still catching up on all the necessary reading tho.