bookshelf speaker project advice

[milen007]

i am ready to build my next project. My preferences and goals:
- clear Warm sound rather than analytical
- Clear bass rather than lowest notes
- smooth treble
- small room size
- range of music mainly jazz, vocal
- amp 100W valve amp per channel
- other components are cyrus cdp 8x, amc amp and pre(tubes 12ax7 and 12au7)
- bookshelf

there are three choices. please help me choose:
1. AR.COM kit using the Seas parts (27TDFC (H1189) Textile dome and P18RNX/P (H1350) 7" Poly Cone Woofer)
2. Selah Audio SA1 kit. This uses the Vifa XT18WO09 woofer and the Fountek NeoCd3.0M tweeter.
3. Zaph Audio kit. This kit used the new Seas reed paper cones and the 27TDFC tweeter. http://www.zaphaudio.com/SR71.html

Erwin

 

[milen007]

anyone idea?

 

[peter_m]

1. I can't find the site to look at them. The drivers are nice though.
2. XT18 is very nice in the midrange but limited in the lower frequencies. Ribbon tweeters are a no no for me.
3. Do it, do it now!

 

[bastek]

I have built the SSR from Selah Audio. It's a great sounding monitor.
The sa-1 should sound a little warmer.

 

[Cacophonix]

Echo bastek's comment.

I've built the SSR and its a wonderful monitor. Has the right amount of warmth and detail. I'd go with Selah's design.

 

[milen007]

two confliction ideas, sa1 and sr7. that means no to ar.com. anyone? thanks guys

 

[Jay_WJ]

If you room is small, you may not want too much baffle step compensation. More so if the speakers will be placed close to walls or in a real bookshelf (or in whatever place with significant boundary gain).

Because you use a valve amp, depending on its damping factor, you will need an impedance compensation circuit.

Regarding these issues about the SR-71 kit, see this (section "Comparison to Zaph's design):

http://www.geocities.com/woove99/Spkrbldg/ER18RNX_2Way.htm


Also, you may want to consider the PE Usher 701 kit. If you like low-distortion yet warm tonality, the Usher woofer is a better choice, IMO. To know better about this kit, read my web page:

http://www.geocities.com/woove99/Spkrbldg/Usher_701.htm

 

[milen007]

Hi Jay

About the sr71, madison also offer crossover with impedance compensation. is it the same as you suggest?

usher 71 got rave reviews, yep, that should go into the consideration. but i got no idea how to evaluate the frequency graph, so any advices is appriciated

forget to mention that i already own a pair of spendor s3/5. would any of the suggestion above turn out an improvement over spendor s3/5?

 

[sreten]

Hi,

One could argue a high quality subsystem (mono but two boxes,
one with the amplifier, the other simply a speaker) added to
the Spendors would be the sensible way to proceed.
The above done properly will give you genuinely deep bass.

However the more efficient speakers with larger drivers
will outperform the Spendors at high levels / large rooms.

Given you description in post #1 I'd say go for the added sub.
A high quality compact solution is advised. The Spendors are
very difficult to better for purpose in small rooms.

🙂/sreten.

 

[Jay_WJ]

How small is your room? Room shape? What kind of speaker placement are you planning?

 

[milen007]

Hi Jay

room around 11feetx13feet with speaker placement on the wide side. 2 feet from the back wall and 3 feet from side wall. speaker is toed into the listener forming triangle that roughly the same length

erwin

 

[milen007]

Hi,

One could argue a high quality subsystem (mono but two boxes,
one with the amplifier, the other simply a speaker) added to
the Spendors would be the sensible way to proceed.
The above done properly will give you genuinely deep bass.

However the more efficient speakers with larger drivers
will outperform the Spendors at high levels / large rooms.

Given you description in post #1 I'd say go for the added sub.
A high quality compact solution is advised. The Spendors are
very difficult to better for purpose in small rooms.

🙂/sreten.

Hi Sreten, from your suggestion to add sub, the room sound boomy. maybe need more furniture. how bout adding supertweeter?

 

[Jay_WJ]

Hi Jay

room around 11feetx13feet with speaker placement on the wide side. 2 feet from the back wall and 3 feet from side wall. speaker is toed into the listener forming triangle that roughly the same length

erwin

Although your room is small, you have space for the speakers far enough from the walls. You use stands for them, don't you?

In this case, SR-71 with impedance compensation will be a good choice.

If you want the Usher 701, which I'd prefer to the SR-71, go with my increased BSC modification. I can design an impedance compensation circuit for your valve amp use if you ask me to.

 

[milen007]

Although your room is small, you have space for the speakers far enough from the walls. You use stands for them, don't you?

In this case, SR-71 with impedance compensation will be a good choice.

If you want the Usher 701, which I'd prefer to the SR-71, go with my increased BSC modification. I can design an impedance compensation circuit for your valve amp use if you ask me to.

Hi Jay
Thank you very much for the offer, just to make sure as the impedance flattening circuit is avail on http://www.zaphaudio.com/SR71.html in crossover section. the kit offer at madison? for premium crossover with impedance circuit?

or modified version of yours? erwin

 

[milen007]

browsing the forum and stumble accoss northcreek kitty cat. price abit high but is it worth it? compare with sr71? though they are two diff league thx

 

[Jay_WJ]

Yes, the impedance compensation circuit is in the Madisound optional xover list. Or if you're interested in my version of ER18RNX/27TDFC xover (w/ less heavy tonal balance in a small room), you can find an IC circuit in my page.

The North Creek Kitty Kat uses a ScanSpeak Revelator midwoofer, which is considered to be the best of all. But much more expensive. BTW, is it still available?

The Usher 8945A woofer in the 701 kit provides nearly ScanSpeak level performance at a much lower price. That's why I recommended it over the SR-71.

 

[milen007]

Yes, the impedance compensation circuit is in the Madisound optional xover list. Or if you're interested in my version of ER18RNX/27TDFC xover (w/ less heavy tonal balance in a small room), you can find an IC circuit in my page.

The North Creek Kitty Kat uses a ScanSpeak Revelator midwoofer, which is considered to be the best of all. But much more expensive. BTW, is it still available?

The Usher 8945A woofer in the 701 kit provides nearly ScanSpeak level performance at a much lower price. That's why I recommended it over the SR-71.

Hi Jay, i missunderstood you. i though you suggesting sa71. in this case, usher 701 is my choice of project. however i have no emperience at all with crossover design as this is my 1st project and i only have couple of soldering experience.

so buying speaker kit is my preference. looked at your suggested usher 701 mods, madisound no longer have Peerless 810921.

as i need the kit to ship to indonesia, buying from 1 source is my prefered option to save shipping. hence, hows the original usher 701 kit compare with your mod version performance in term of sound musicality etc?

 

[Jay_WJ]

You misunderstood me once again. 🙂 My modified version of the Usher 701 kit does not require different drivers. It simply needs additional xover parts. Read more carefully:

http://www.geocities.com/woove99/Spkrbldg/Usher_701.htm

 

[EUVL]

Jay,

How would you go about designing an active crossover for the Usher-701 or the SR-71 (i.e. crossover between pre and power amp, and separate power amp for each chassis) ?
Any hints most appreciated.


Patrick

 

[Jay_WJ]

Jay,

How would you go about designing an active crossover for the Usher-701 or the SR-71 (i.e. crossover between pre and power amp, and separate power amp for each chassis) ?
Any hints most appreciated.


Patrick

I don't design active filters. I can only provide transfer functions.