The more you know, the less you know

[Lewis Moon]

I've been doing a bunch of reading trying to pick my first speaker design to build. I had finally decided to put a crowbar in my wallet and pop for the no-box kit Zaph SR-71, but luckily I read onward and found that he didn't recommend it for the type of room setting I needed. Compromises need to be made.
I really need some suggestions because I'm striking out. Here are the requirements:

1) 2-way "bookshelf" size (0.5 cf box or smaller) although it will be stand mounted
2) The baffle needs to be ~15" from a wall with a sealed case or front vent. There may be a bit more space behind due to a 2 ft deep alcove but the best I could do is stand it on the outside corner.
3) The top of the speaker box can only be about 36"
4) I'll have a sub
5) I would like the crossover to be pre-built or at least come with absolutely stellar instructions. I've soldered on tube amps before but I really don't have enough electrical background to know if I'm screwing up.
6) I'm a detail guy and like to hear the ice tinkling in the glasses on live jazz recordings. Quality sound matters. That's why I'm here.
7) Listening area is ~ 15' x 17' with the speakers ~ 7' apart and the listener ~ 11' away.

Budget w/o box is around $250 but could be stretched if needed.
I want to build the box from scratch so kit must come w/o box.

I've spent hours looking but I just can't seem to find anything meeting these criteria.

 

[planet10]

Might be a bit radiclal for you, but you coulc consider some of the small 1-way bookshelves (the Fonken, mFonken, CSS FR125 in an aperiodically tuned 7 litre satisfy this criteria) -- and if not enuff sparkle, you can add a super-tweeter. The Jordan would push your budget. There are others but i'm less familiar.

dave

 

[Lewis Moon]

I'd rather stick with a two way if possible. I intuitively think that it is easier to cover and reproduce the entire range with two speakers than making one do "double duty". Am I even near right there?

What about exchanging depth for width? Most of the newer designs are quite deep. If you keep the same volume can you go shallower? Is there a formula for this? I don't want to go too far afield of the original design.

 

[planet10]

I'd rather stick with a two way if possible. I intuitively think that it is easier to cover and reproduce the entire range with two speakers than making one do "double duty". Am I even near right there?

the problem with a typical 2-way is that you end up with an XO right where they are most objectionable -- IMHO this ends up subtracting way more than you gain. I'm working on some 2-ways that push the XO below 400 Hz, but the 1st iteration is active and the drivers exceed your budget. A version with less expensive drivers & passive XO is still in the development phase.

What about exchanging depth for width? Most of the newer designs are quite deep. If you keep the same volume can you go shallower? Is there a formula for this?

As far as the box goes it matters little what side you put the driver on. If the XO has accounted for BSC the XO will thou.

dave