In the next few years I would really like to make a pair of speakers. Perhaps using the Scan Speak components used in the ZRT's.
Heres some specs.
Scan Speak Tweeter (Probably 6600) in its separate movable cabinet.
1 or 2 Scan Speak Revelator mids again in a separate movable cabinet.
Finally a JL Audio sub (13W7)in its own separate cabinet (per channel of course)
I could use my QSC 404 to power the tweeters and mids then obtain a Behringer EP4000 for the subs.
Behringer DCX2496 active crossovers, 1 per channel.
Behringer DEQ2496 for room correction.
Active crossovers would help modify phasing and xover points.
The separate cabinets would allow time cohesion based on different room sizes + sitting positions.
The sub would help pick up where the Scan speak left off to carry into the 20hz area.
Cabinets would have to be REALLY well engineered, I want next to no cabinet resonance.
Is this a realistic build idea here?
Heres some specs.
Scan Speak Tweeter (Probably 6600) in its separate movable cabinet.
1 or 2 Scan Speak Revelator mids again in a separate movable cabinet.
Finally a JL Audio sub (13W7)in its own separate cabinet (per channel of course)
I could use my QSC 404 to power the tweeters and mids then obtain a Behringer EP4000 for the subs.
Behringer DCX2496 active crossovers, 1 per channel.
Behringer DEQ2496 for room correction.
Active crossovers would help modify phasing and xover points.
The separate cabinets would allow time cohesion based on different room sizes + sitting positions.
The sub would help pick up where the Scan speak left off to carry into the 20hz area.
Cabinets would have to be REALLY well engineered, I want next to no cabinet resonance.
Is this a realistic build idea here?
As a generalization more XO points means poorer soundstage & less coherency. One of the reasons why many are moving to, and living with the limitations of 1-way systems. Of at least talking the lessons learned and pushing XOs in a 2 or 3 way system below 300 hz and above 5k.
dave
I strongly recommend that your first pair of speakers be built according to plans published by a well-known DIY designer. It will ease your entry into this wonderful field and guarantee you good results; neither will happen if you try to do everything on your own, even if we tell you that your components are of good quality.
Yes. Active is not a panacea. I value phase coherence... hence my almost exclusive use of full ranges or, when doing 2-ways, and XO ~ 300 hz or lower.
A 3-way would add woofers below 50 hz.
dave
If you choose to ignore this very sound advice (I did), then I would encourage you to start with inexpencive drivers. With a DCX and $50 in drivers, I had a prototype I enjoyed listening to.
However, I do have a mesuring setup, and a copy of soundeasy.
Whatever you decide, good luck.
Doug
nirvana build
One thing I've experienced here is a trend towards consensus bias, similar to the "not invented here", or "my way or the highway" syndrome in high tech business; which I've found can severely taint some of the advise you seek. Be sure that, before spending alot of money on expensive stuff and buying into someone else's idea of what's "correct", you do lots of research and actually listen to as many designs as possible. Also, you may find serious bargains on what was THE BEST a few years back that now seems wanting amongst the early adopters of the latest and greatest fad-designs.
I can think of at least one revered "guru" on this board who believes amplifier quality has almost no relevance to the sound you will perceive, as long at it is competently built and can drive the speaker load. He uses cheap Pioneer amps.
Likewise, many feel "phase coherence" whatever that means, has little meaning since, by definition, the relative phase between the various frequencies you're hearing from the speakers (or in real life, for that matter) is constantly changing, so one has to wonder what the initial wavefront launch from the reproducer has to do with what you actually hear, unless you sit less than a wavelength from the front of your speaker at the highest frequency you care about.
John L.
One thing I've experienced here is a trend towards consensus bias, similar to the "not invented here", or "my way or the highway" syndrome in high tech business; which I've found can severely taint some of the advise you seek. Be sure that, before spending alot of money on expensive stuff and buying into someone else's idea of what's "correct", you do lots of research and actually listen to as many designs as possible. Also, you may find serious bargains on what was THE BEST a few years back that now seems wanting amongst the early adopters of the latest and greatest fad-designs.
I can think of at least one revered "guru" on this board who believes amplifier quality has almost no relevance to the sound you will perceive, as long at it is competently built and can drive the speaker load. He uses cheap Pioneer amps.
Likewise, many feel "phase coherence" whatever that means, has little meaning since, by definition, the relative phase between the various frequencies you're hearing from the speakers (or in real life, for that matter) is constantly changing, so one has to wonder what the initial wavefront launch from the reproducer has to do with what you actually hear, unless you sit less than a wavelength from the front of your speaker at the highest frequency you care about.
John L.
This should be screamed from the highest mountains and the lowest valleys, and perhaps tattooed on anybody considering a first (or even second) speaker project.
There are many things that you need to know about building speakers that can only be learned by building speakers...
Definitely: NOOOO!
Now wait a second here, it is a realistic build idea if implemented correctly. The trouble is doing such a thing without the required knowledge.
I threw myself in at the deep end and learnt a lot along the way, however it was years later when I was actually capable of building a truly competent loudspeaker. Since then it has become a lot cheaper/easier to make your own measurements and there are guides and whatnot all over the place on how to do it too.
Nevertheless I can only repeat;
You say you're interested in the ZRT, well here's a crazy suggestion, build the ZRT!
After having done that you'll have a pair of wonderful, working loudspeakers that you can enjoy. If you want to do more, you can add a sub and perhaps highpass the ZRTs along the way.
I wouldn't use a digital crossover! Only if it is fed with digital signal directly from digital source - e.g. the crossover acting as DAC.
What happens if you have a turntable? Or a big tape recorder? - the almost unlimited fidelity (resolution) of the analogue source will be shrunk to some bit depth and some sampling rate - far from ultimate or what so ever...
If I would use multiple amps per side, I would go for passive crossovers at signal level. And would take into account the respective phase shifts.
A dream system? Well... BIG! Absolute necessity 2x15 or 2x18 for the low octaves, some big, light, strong and sophisticated low mid, some even more sophisticated upper mid, a compression driver and a super tweeter... That's 4-5 way... All time/phase aligned...
And the source is the soul of any dream system... a quality record played on a mediocre good system would outperform any super system playing a mediocre record!
What happens if you have a turntable? Or a big tape recorder? - the almost unlimited fidelity (resolution) of the analogue source will be shrunk to some bit depth and some sampling rate - far from ultimate or what so ever...
If I would use multiple amps per side, I would go for passive crossovers at signal level. And would take into account the respective phase shifts.
A dream system? Well... BIG! Absolute necessity 2x15 or 2x18 for the low octaves, some big, light, strong and sophisticated low mid, some even more sophisticated upper mid, a compression driver and a super tweeter... That's 4-5 way... All time/phase aligned...
And the source is the soul of any dream system... a quality record played on a mediocre good system would outperform any super system playing a mediocre record!
There are Behringer detractors and advocates, if you like it, great. If not and you want to try something else, consider MiniDSP, Thuneau's Frequency Allocator (the only one I have experience with, you can use any ASIO audio interface that meets your needs) as well as other options.
The good thing about a DSP based active system is the freedom to quickly try different crossover configurations. Nothing says that once find it you can't build an analog filter with the same transfer function if that suits your goals. You might prefer the sound of analog.
As a multi year project, I think your goal is reasonable. You've chosen good drivers. You'll spend some time learning to measure, interpret the measurements and learn how to manipulate the response with crossover changes. It may be useful to build a kit with known response and prove out your measurement technique with the kit. I have a set of Zaph designed speakers that I use to verify my setup when I get some unexpected measurement results.
Another issue that your proposal will teach you how to deal with is the diffraction and reflections caused by various cabinet edges as you physically time align the drivers. There's a lot of felt in your future. You may find that the ability to digitally delay drivers to align them on a flat baffle outweighs the down sides of physical alignment. It's all your preference.
Enjoy the journey. Do other new guys a favor and detail your journey in a thread here. As you can see, there are lots of folks eager to help. You will hear advice to take a number of approaches, from Planet 10's preference for single driver systems to T101's 5 way. The nice thing is that you can try many of the apprpoaches digitally at little expense.
The good thing about a DSP based active system is the freedom to quickly try different crossover configurations. Nothing says that once find it you can't build an analog filter with the same transfer function if that suits your goals. You might prefer the sound of analog.
As a multi year project, I think your goal is reasonable. You've chosen good drivers. You'll spend some time learning to measure, interpret the measurements and learn how to manipulate the response with crossover changes. It may be useful to build a kit with known response and prove out your measurement technique with the kit. I have a set of Zaph designed speakers that I use to verify my setup when I get some unexpected measurement results.
Another issue that your proposal will teach you how to deal with is the diffraction and reflections caused by various cabinet edges as you physically time align the drivers. There's a lot of felt in your future.
You may find that the ability to digitally delay drivers to align them on a flat baffle outweighs the down sides of physical alignment. It's all your preference. Enjoy the journey. Do other new guys a favor and detail your journey in a thread here. As you can see, there are lots of folks eager to help. You will hear advice to take a number of approaches, from Planet 10's preference for single driver systems to T101's 5 way. The nice thing is that you can try many of the apprpoaches digitally at little expense.
anal-log sources
especially the unlimited potential for tape saturation, hiss, pops and clicks, overmodulation, skating distortion, warped vinyl, flaking tape and squeal... ah the list of analogs' virtues goes on... and on...
this horse has no legs...
especially the unlimited potential for tape saturation, hiss, pops and clicks, overmodulation, skating distortion, warped vinyl, flaking tape and squeal... ah the list of analogs' virtues goes on... and on...
this horse has no legs...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.