I 3d print mine. You can also 3d print individual panels. The panels can have curvature so the end result is basically a sphere with flat circular drivers.
The issue isn't fabrication it is finding appropriate drivers which balance even HF dispersion and overall output. The dodecahedral speakers made by B+K have enormous output and produce quite a bit of bass.
To add onto this. I have studied the matter and although there is a certain design appeal to an all-in-one unit, you have a ton of problems with center-to-center distance. Conventionally we consider CTC between for example an M-T-M, but all these drivers are on a single plane in a line. With a spherical array, you not only have interference with the adjacent drivers, which are hopefully pretty proximal, but also with the drivers which are 180 degrees away, facing in the other direction. At a certain point speaker designers like to say radiation of this sort is 'uncorrelated' to paraphrase the late great Jeff Bagby, and many speaker companies include a dash of dipolar or bipolar radiation to augment the mids and highs eaten up by the room.
However, in the case of a spherical array, every driver is interacting with every one, and resolving the HF undulations you see in the technical documents from eg. B+K is not that easy. At the end of the day, even if you miniaturize the HF unit to say 5" diameter, which is tiny compared to these other units, you're still talking about a 5" diameter spherical dome tweeter in some kind of dodecahedral satanic breakup mode, and that's assuming your 2-3" drivers don't break up themselves, which of course they will.
If sound quality can be achieved, and that is a big if, it is because we are proceeding under the assumption that a flat directivity index is good, that all this chaos balances out, and the diverse HF radiation is desirable. But this is probably not the case - we probably don't want to hear a tweeter 2 feet from our wall while we also hear one 2'5" from our wall. This then raises the question - if we were to restrict directivity somewhat, how would we do so? Well - wide dispersion speakers like the Philharmonic BMR do a decent job as well, and dipoles remove the sideways stuff while keeping a nice amount of delayed mids and high frequencies.
My opinion is that omnidirectional radiation has very few uses. It can provide coverage radiating from the center of a large space, or in an outdoor venue (good luck getting serious output without a spherical horn, however - and if you're outside, do you really need to radiate up and down?) It might be nice as a pendant PA system in some tall spaces like a multi level shopping mall - but an array of speakers will always be better, and more easily controlled. For domestic spaces? Plenty of good wide and narrow radiating designs, and let's not forget why we restrict radiation - it makes sound clearer. For stereo or multi channel? Terrible idea in my opinion. The human ear has an enormous tolerance for comb filtering but even I have limits.
To summarize, I am building mine because I am curious about how they might sound, and to form a reference for restricted directivity speakers. We discuss this on ASR a lot - what is the ideal directivity? Some claim it is narrow horns or cardioids, but many people clearly prefer Philharmonic BMRs, Revel speakers, or any number of audiophile speakers clearly designed to accent wide treble dispersion with omni bass. Some prefer headphones, which eliminate the room entirely. This is, to me, a matter of preference, and if I could have any hifi setup in the world it would probably be LX521s or a Philharmonic BMR and a big Horn or powerful cardioid.
TLDR get a Sonos.
