DIY vs Finished speakers vs Used market

[a4eaudio]

...After a steep learning curve on how to measure (outside on a turntable) and import the measurements into Virtuix Cad and start optimising my design I realized how futile DIY speakers really are and ended up buying some Neuman KH 310's instead. When you see Amirs measurements of the top performing speakers they look impressive but when you try to build speakers yourself to "match" this performance you realize how awesome the engineering and performance of some of these speakers really are. ....

This is interesting as it is the opposite of what I have found, other than the fact that it definitely takes a lot of work and time to design your own speaker. Other than some unique speakers like the KEF Blade and a small number of rare drivers that aren't readily available to DIYers, most of the commercial stuff is just like what a DIYer can build. "Most" commercial and DIY speakers are just TM, TMW, TMWW, etc. in a rectangular prism using dome tweeters, cone woofers and maybe dome midranges. Of course there are exceptions, Genelec's aluminum cabinets would not be easy to replicate, but a pair of Genelec 2-way speakers like the 8040B (a 3/4" tweeter +6-1/2" midwoofer) is $2500 a pair and probably has less than $200 of drivers. If you make a living in audio and need studio monitors, of course they make a lot of sense, but for just Hi-Fi music listening you could make something like these (passive) for under $500 (if you have the tools). I think Revel is a great example of well regarded, well measuring speakers that in the past used off the shelf drivers (SB Acoustics until they moved the drivers in house) that are available to DIYers in pretty simple rectangular cabinets. (Similarly, Ascilabs, Audio First, Ascend Acoustics, Philharmonic, etc., are using mostly drivers that can be ordered online in 5 minutes.) When I see Amir's top performing speakers, I basically see what my DIY friends build.

Thanks for this - It was where I was leaning but I was also very interested in trying to build... so it's more of a side hobby than actually achieving a good sounding system with good ROI. This was the kind of experience I was after! So I will continue scouring the used hifi sales pages in my country to find my "optimal" deal.

I think to Levimax and several others point, unless you really want to make it a hobby, building a "proven" design is the best way to go, if you go the DIY route. But, yes, second hand market will be hard to beat, especially if you are not invested in woodworking capabilities.

 

[Roland68]

ooooh! this looks really nice but it's a bit expensive. It'll be 1350 Euro delivered unassembled... for that price I can buy the Q Concerto Meta and save a couple hundred euros

Over the past two years, a friend had brought over several loudspeakers, some costing up to €2500 per pair, to compare them to the Satorique S1. The kit price for a pair was €1570, including a precision-milled MDF cabinet. Multiplex plywood was available as an upgrade.

A few months ago, he also brought over the Q Concerto Meta. After that, he was finally ready to order the Satorique kit. Unfortunately, it was too late, as the Satorique kits are no longer available. Since then, he's been searching again.

There are already good, and even expensive, loudspeaker kits that can compete with significantly more expensive ready-made speakers.
However, Satorique also had over 40 years of experience in professional/commercial loudspeaker development, including so-called high-end loudspeakers.

 

[Multiway]

I'm guessing just over 50cm square + single sub tucked away somewhere, is too big?
Could be corner / high up mounted.

If you are up for a proper DIY challenge..

Multi Entry Synergy Horns

Driver wise per channel;
- HF 1 X 1" compression driver, something like BMS4550 or better
- MF 2 X 4" closed back drivers or 2 X 5" if you mount on the other 2 faces
- LF 2 X 8" drivers.

15mm plywood. Bitumen damping sheet. Soft filler for the square to round HF throat progression.
Screw, T Nuts etc.

Rear enclosure not shown that makes them into an effective horn / reflex hybrid LF system.

miniDSP flex 8 to set up the best zero order flat phase between ~100Hz and 10KHz.

Measuring mic and REW essential.

These are my plans but feature a 1.5" throat compression driver.
Exact placement of the MF and LF taps and ports could be revealed.

Cost - under your budget.

Listening quality - the highest, depending on Compression driver chosen.

I have made 50° ones and 60° also, but in a larger 70cm square format.

Having had a large 5 way horn system the 60° synergy ones are my end game speakers!

 

[kemmler3D]

It also enables a few things that are difficult in wood without CNC, like waveguides and ports that aren't just a tube. There are a few designs that take advantage of the ability to do compound curves like the Genelecs too.

Yes. Definitely, that does improve the value prop but only if you actually have a design for those things that are applicable to your build... if you happen to find designs for your drivers, you can download stuff and print them without serious skills. But if you can fully DIY a performant waveguide from the ground up, you are already so far up the learning curve that this thread is of no relevance to you.

I could personally CAD something that LOOKS like a good waveguide, but I've actually not done acoustic simulations before, so case in point, even if you are good with 3D software, there's a skillset involved in that kind of design that verges on professional engineering just to get started.

 

[kemmler3D]

(Similarly, Ascilabs, Audio First, Ascend Acoustics, Philharmonic, etc., are using mostly drivers that can be ordered online in 5 minutes.) When I see Amir's top performing speakers, I basically see what my DIY friends build.

The magic of these speakers is not in the drivers, but in the waveguides and crossovers. Put the Ascilab drivers in a box with no waveguide, random box dimensions, and just a basic crossover and you'll end up with something two notches up from total crap. The difference between an average DIYer and Ascilab is not just CAD skills and a 3D printer, it's also months of klippel scans and FEA (?) simulations.

I'm not saying DIYers can't do this, there are threads on DIYAudio that compare favorably to Ascilab's stuff. But I don't want anyone to come away from this thread thinking building a SOTA speaker is largely a matter of driver selection. That's a necessary but far from sufficient step toward SOTA.

 

[levimax]

This is interesting as it is the opposite of what I have found, other than the fact that it definitely takes a lot of work and time to design your own speaker. Other than some unique speakers like the KEF Blade and a small number of rare drivers that aren't readily available to DIYers, most of the commercial stuff is just like what a DIYer can build. "Most" commercial and DIY speakers are just TM, TMW, TMWW, etc. in a rectangular prism using dome tweeters, cone woofers and maybe dome midranges. Of course there are exceptions, Genelec's aluminum cabinets would not be easy to replicate, but a pair of Genelec 2-way speakers like the 8040B (a 3/4" tweeter +6-1/2" midwoofer) is $2500 a pair and probably has less than $200 of drivers. If you make a living in audio and need studio monitors, of course they make a lot of sense, but for just Hi-Fi music listening you could make something like these (passive) for under $500 (if you have the tools). I think Revel is a great example of well regarded, well measuring speakers that in the past used off the shelf drivers (SB Acoustics until they moved the drivers in house) that are available to DIYers in pretty simple rectangular cabinets. (Similarly, Ascilabs, Audio First, Ascend Acoustics, Philharmonic, etc., are using mostly drivers that can be ordered online in 5 minutes.) When I see Amir's top performing speakers, I basically see what my DIY friends build.

In the past for DIY you could buy good quality drivers and build a good quality enclosure and with some work on the crossover end up with a competitive speaker. The big improvements in speaker design and performance over the last decade or so is not so much to do with better drivers or better enclosures but rather using complex wave guides and baffle geometry along with sophisticated crossovers to optimize not just on axis FR response but off axis FR and directivity as well. Currently trying to optimise the geometry of wave guides and the baffle is difficult for DIY as it take a lot of engineering, modeling, and specialized expertise.

 

[terryforsythe]

The magic of these speakers is not in the drivers, but in the waveguides and crossovers. Put the Ascilab drivers in a box with no waveguide, random box dimensions, and just a basic crossover and you'll end up with something two notches up from total crap. The difference between an average DIYer and Ascilab is not just CAD skills and a 3D printer, it's also months of klippel scans and FEA (?) simulations.

I'm not saying DIYers can't do this, there are threads on DIYAudio that compare favorably to Ascilab's stuff. But I don't want anyone to come away from this thread thinking building a SOTA speaker is largely a matter of driver selection. That's a necessary but far from sufficient step toward SOTA.

Having worked both passive filters (extensively) and active filters. I am of the opinion that DSP is the way to go, especially for DIYers starting from scratch without a tested and proven crossover design. VituixCAD is fantastic, but models are models. They only are as good as the data they contain. Get something off, and the crossover will not perform as well as intended. Sure, passive components be replaced, but with DSP it is a matter of changing parameters in software.

 

[a4eaudio]

...I'm not saying DIYers can't do this, there are threads on DIYAudio that compare favorably to Ascilab's stuff. But I don't want anyone to come away from this thread thinking building a SOTA speaker is largely a matter of driver selection. That's a necessary but far from sufficient step toward SOTA.

We are mostly in agreement, I just come down as a stranger proponent of DIY. But I did start my post with "the fact that it definitely takes a lot of work and time to design your own speaker" and ended with "unless you really want to make it a hobby, building a "proven" design is the best way to go."

...The big improvements in speaker design and performance over the last decade or so is not so much to do with better drivers or better enclosures but rather using complex wave guides and baffle geometry along with sophisticated crossovers to optimize not just on axis FR response but off axis FR and directivity as well. Currently trying to optimise the geometry of wave guides and the baffle is difficult for DIY as it take a lot of engineering, modeling, and specialized expertise.

None of this is easy, but none of this requires a lot of engineering or specialized expertise.

• You can buy waveguided tweeters, 3D print waveguides developed by Somosonuse or others, or design your own waveguide (which is not easy but not as hard as people are making it out to be). Also, although it is almost blasphemy on ASR, you don't need a waveguide on a lot of speakers.
• We know a lot about optimal baffle geometry. Just make prototypes out of foamboard or particle board and measure and tweak. All of the speakers I listed above were deliberately rectangular prisms with little edge treatments but are still near the top of the Spinorama list.
• I don't think there has been any developments in the sophistication of crossovers since Linkwitz and Riley in 1976. But we do have much better tools now, VituixCAD being a great example.

 

[kemmler3D]

Having worked both passive filters (extensively) and active filters. I am of the opinion that DSP is the way to go, especially for DIYers starting from scratch without a tested and proven crossover design. VituixCAD is fantastic, but models are models. They only are as good as the data they contain. Get something off, and the crossover will not perform as well as intended. Sure, passive components be replaced, but with DSP it is a matter of changing parameters in software.

I fully agree, but even with unlimited free redos, a crossover doesn't design itself.

 

[ShadowFiend]

In the past for DIY you could buy good quality drivers and build a good quality enclosure and with some work on the crossover end up with a competitive speaker. The big improvements in speaker design and performance over the last decade or so is not so much to do with better drivers or better enclosures but rather using complex wave guides and baffle geometry along with sophisticated crossovers to optimize not just on axis FR response but off axis FR and directivity as well. Currently trying to optimise the geometry of wave guides and the baffle is difficult for DIY as it take a lot of engineering, modeling, and specialized expertise.

Complex waveguides and baffle geometry has an impact only on mid high frequency. If you want bass (quality and quantity) as well as high dynamic capability, then better driver is always needed, especially on two way system.

That is why I don't understand all the fuss on Audio First Fidelia or Asci labs F6B/ C6B in this forums. I have a feeling that great amount of people on this forums just see the spinorama, harmonic distortion graph over 100Hz and price then declare a loudspeaker is good or bad one without paying attention to bass extension/bass distortion. Meanwhile, multiple researchs shows that bass quality is an important factor when evaluating loudspeaker.

While I admire their optimized waveguide and baffle geometries, their woofer choice is questionable, apart from cost perspective. SB15NBAC/CAC (Fidelia) or SB16PFC (F6B) or SB17NBAC/CAC (C6B) are good midrange drivers, even great ones (SB15, SB17). But they are not up to task if needed to produce low frequency (under 70Hz) based on my extensive experience with them as well as measurements by multiple trustworthy sources (Erin, Hobby-Hifi). So all of them should be use either in near field (Fidelia) or with subwoofer.

As evidence, by measuring with Klippel machine, Erin shows that SB17CAC has only 2.8 cm xmax while WF182BD14 has 3.97 cm xmax (Dickason)
And the distortion measured by hobby hifi is below at 90dB
SB17CAC:
H2 0.32% at 100Hz, 1% at 70Hz, 3.2% at 50Hz and below that rises linear
H3 0.32% at 100Hz, 1% at 70Hz, 3.2% at 50Hz and below that rises linear
H5 0.1% at 100 Hz, 0.32% at 50Hz, 1% at 35Hz and below that rises linear

WF182BD09
H2 0.4% at 100Hz, 1% at 40Hz, 3.2% at 25Hz and below that rises linear
H3 0.1% at 100Hz, 1% at 48Hz, 3.2% at 35Hz and below that rises linear
H5 0.02% at 100 Hz, 0.32% at 32Hz, 1% at 25Hz and below that rises linear

WF182BD14
H2 0.35% at 100Hz, 1% at 60Hz, 3.2% at 40Hz
H3 0.1% at 100Hz, 1% at 50Hz, 3.2% at 40Hz
H5 0.03% at 100 Hz, 0.32% at 32Hz, 1% at 25Hz

H3/H5 by SB17CAC rises much earlier compared to Wavecor driver, especially with WF182BD09. Only H2 is fine but still reached 1% sooner than both Wavecor drivers

I recommend a great diy-design like DXTMon-182. It controls diffraction with waveguide tweeter SEAS DXT H1499-06, and beveled baffle. It also has WF182BD09 which is a great midwoofer for 2-way loudspeaker. Crossover is optimized as showns by measurement on the kit webpage. Price to build will be around 1 kilo USD if fully diy with new components. The quality (measurement and sound) will compete with 2.5k-3.5k loudspeaker like KH150 or A6B. Size is not too big and one can veneer/paint/lacquer it to match with room aesthetic and get WAF.

 

[jayapple]

Recently, I also made one for myself purely to play games. I chose the speakers based on my own preferences and didn't go for the kits that were for sale.

After actual testing, it was surprisingly smooth, almost in a straight line. This was a bit unbelievable... However, the volume was relatively low, only maintaining around 80db. It's just a 6-inch bookshelf speaker, so I didn't have high expectations.

 

[Maxim-ICOM]

...

As evidence, by measuring with Klippel machine, Erin shows that SB17CAC has only 2.8 cm xmax while WF182BD14 has 3.97 cm xmax (Dickason)
..

Complex waveguides and baffle geometry has an impact only on mid high frequency. If you want bass (quality and quantity) as well as high dynamic capability, then better driver is always needed, especially on two way system.

That is why I don't understand all the fuss on Audio First Fidelia or Asci labs F6B/ C6B in this forums. I have a feeling that great amount of people on this forums just see the spinorama, harmonic distortion graph over 100Hz and price then declare a loudspeaker is good or bad one without paying attention to bass extension/bass distortion. Meanwhile, multiple researchs shows that bass quality is an important factor when evaluating loudspeaker.

While I admire their optimized waveguide and baffle geometries, their woofer choice is questionable, apart from cost perspective. SB15NBAC/CAC (Fidelia) or SB16PFC (F6B) or SB17NBAC/CAC (C6B) are good midrange drivers, even great ones (SB15, SB17). But they are not up to task if needed to produce low frequency (under 70Hz) based on my extensive experience with them as well as measurements by multiple trustworthy sources (Erin, Hobby-Hifi). So all of them should be use either in near field (Fidelia) or with subwoofer.

As evidence, by measuring with Klippel machine, Erin shows that SB17CAC has only 2.8 cm xmax while WF182BD14 has 3.97 cm xmax (Dickason)
And the distortion measured by hobby hifi is below at 90dB
SB17CAC:
H2 0.32% at 100Hz, 1% at 70Hz, 3.2% at 50Hz and below that rises linear
H3 0.32% at 100Hz, 1% at 70Hz, 3.2% at 50Hz and below that rises linear
H5 0.1% at 100 Hz, 0.32% at 50Hz, 1% at 35Hz and below that rises linear

WF182BD09
H2 0.4% at 100Hz, 1% at 40Hz, 3.2% at 25Hz and below that rises linear
H3 0.1% at 100Hz, 1% at 48Hz, 3.2% at 35Hz and below that rises linear
H5 0.02% at 100 Hz, 0.32% at 32Hz, 1% at 25Hz and below that rises linear

WF182BD14
H2 0.35% at 100Hz, 1% at 60Hz, 3.2% at 40Hz
H3 0.1% at 100Hz, 1% at 50Hz, 3.2% at 40Hz
H5 0.03% at 100 Hz, 0.32% at 32Hz, 1% at 25Hz

H3/H5 by SB17CAC rises much earlier compared to Wavecor driver, especially with WF182BD09. Only H2 is fine but still reached 1% sooner than both Wavecor drivers

I recommend a great diy-design like DXTMon-182. It controls diffraction with waveguide tweeter SEAS DXT H1499-06, and beveled baffle. It also has WF182BD09 which is a great midwoofer for 2-way loudspeaker. Crossover is optimized as showns by measurement on the kit webpage. Price to build will be around 1 kilo USD if fully diy with new components. The quality (measurement and sound) will compete with 2.5k-3.5k loudspeaker like KH150 or A6B. Size is not too big and one can veneer/paint/lacquer it to match with room aesthetic and get WAF.

Drivers is a set of compromises. If one goes lower, means that it is heavier and not that detailed on midrange. That is the price for better bass. You cannot say if speaker A is better then speaker B just because B use driver what have better distortion at 25Hz in a 6-7" bookshelf that typically roll-off at 50Hz. SB 17CAC frequency response, power handling looks better then MW16P Satori, but Satori based speakers are more musical, while do not provide that good bass like SB17 drivers.

 

[terryforsythe]

That is why I don't understand all the fuss on Audio First Fidelia or Asci labs F6B/ C6B in this forums. I have a feeling that great amount of people on this forums just see the spinorama, harmonic distortion graph over 100Hz and price then declare a loudspeaker is good or bad one without paying attention to bass extension/bass distortion. Meanwhile, multiple researchs shows that bass quality is an important factor when evaluating loudspeaker.

I fully agree that bass quality is a very important factor. That is why I would not run a small bookshelf speaker without a subwoofer. But, with a subwoofer, that opens possibilities. Every use case is different. What works for one person may not work for another. That is OK and to be expected.

EDIT: I just looked at the DXT-Mon-182. Based on the manufacturer's measurement data, it looks like a very good speaker the OP should consider if still looking to do a DIY project.

 

[ShadowFiend]

Drivers is a set of compromises. If one goes lower, means that it is heavier and not that detailed on midrange. That is the price for better bass.

I don't agree with your idea that a driver goes lower then it is not as detailed on midrange. Purifi PTT6.5W and WF182BD09 are both as detailed in midrange as SB17, and definitely more detailed in bass than SB17. And it is back up by measurement also. In midrange frequency, PTT6.5W have lower distortion number than SB17, while WF182BD09 have comparable distortion as SB17.
The problem is that SB17 has weaker motor compare to WF182BD09 as well as PTT6.5W, so it distorts more at low frequencies.

You cannot say if speaker A is better then speaker B just because B use driver what have better distortion at 25Hz in a 6-7" bookshelf that typically roll-off at 50Hz.

I can because we don't talk about arbitrary loudspeaker. Our focus is two way loudspeaker. If frequency response is smooth on and off-axis, and distortion is low in mid-high frequency, which my recommend choice like DXT-Mon 182 definitely has, then bass quality should be an important point for evaluation. And even when bass limiting to 50Hz, WF182BD09 sound more dynamic and alive than SB17 if feed by low frequency. SB17 hits still hard but sound much more slow and less responsive.

SB17 is fine when use only higher than 80Hz, or even great when over 200Hz. In fact, I am using it as lower midrange driver (200-1000Hz) for my upcoming 4-way centre loudspeaker. But as midwoofer in 2-way speaker with the duty to produce both bass and midrange, I do not think it is up to task compared to Purifi PTT6.5, Wavecor Wf182BD09, Scan speak Revelator or Seas L19RNX1,...

 

[Wolf11Man]

WIth DIYS there are many ways to do it.
Stupid for most people is buying some combination of drivers and deciding to "just learn" a simulation software and "just make an x-over"for it. If you spend little money on drivers it is useless and if you buy expensive, world class units, it becomes tragic. First speaker DIYS rule: You need years to build something that matches even low price industry products. Speaker design is a multifaceted art that, apart from practical woodworking, requires electronics, statics and a great deal of physics, something that only a few master in combination. In fact it is often hard enough just to build a solid, living room capable cabinet. No one is born as a perfect carpenter.
Some think that an active setup is much simpler, this is only part true. In fact there are still some tough problems, even when you do not need any passive parts, because you can program a DSP with a mouse click. Finding a good baffle design is just as essential, the cabinet design can screw up the best combination.

The smart, safe DIYS way is to get a kit that has been made by some real speaker designer, tested by others and build 100% following the plan. If you invest something like $1000 you will match any Hifi speaker 3 to 4 times the price. If you spend even more, these kits are rare, things get ridiculous, you may find no match even if you look in the 10 to 20 grand region.
With HIFI speakers, at least 50% of the recommended retail price are just for the retailer. Newcomers like ASCILAB which seem to reduce the price for really good factory speakers, are experiencing how expensive it is to sell speakers. They struggle to keep their promised prices and don't like to deliver to retailers. Their prices will soon be industry standard I promise. The cost of the service chain the customer wants and constand need to redesign the lineup make factory speakers so expensive, not drivers, crossovers, wood, DSP's and amps. This is the great advantage of DIYS. Service, dealers share, warrante cost, consumer rights, technical regulations and requiered test procedures for safety, advertising, redesign, transport fees, custom and sales taxes for the finished product are nonexistant in DIYS. That is the money you don't pay, even high quality drivers are not even 15% of a HIFI product

Ha, last there is a category of speakers that are cheaper and better than HIFI speaker and are a good alternative to DIYS. This is real pro gear for studios and music production. Those speakers don't spend a lot of their production costs on expensive design, looks and finish, also they are often produced for many years, even decades, hardly unchanged.
If you can live with a black casket, the inner value and sound reproduction are delivered at about half the HIFI price or less. If you don't like burning money, but have no workspace under your house, this may be an option.

Ok, last, buy used. Can save huge. Anyone knows about risk and fun.

 

[CD2]

Having worked both passive filters (extensively) and active filters. I am of the opinion that DSP is the way to go, especially for DIYers starting from scratch without a tested and proven crossover design. VituixCAD is fantastic, but models are models. They only are as good as the data they contain. Get something off, and the crossover will not perform as well as intended. Sure, passive components be replaced, but with DSP it is a matter of changing parameters in software.

This is really interesting. Has anyone done a DIY design or kit with DSP crossover, and amplification between that and the individual drivers?

 

[terryforsythe]

This is really interesting. Has anyone done a DIY design or kit with DSP crossover, and amplification between that and the individual drivers?

Seas has some: https://www.seas.no/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=66&Itemid=250

Here is a video of one that is a little expensive:

There probably are others of which I am not aware.

 

[JPA]

WIth DIYS there are many ways to do it.
Stupid for most people is buying some combination of drivers and deciding to "just learn" a simulation software and "just make an x-over"for it. If you spend little money on drivers it is useless and if you buy expensive, world class units, it becomes tragic. First speaker DIYS rule: You need years to build something that matches even low price industry products. Speaker design is a multifaceted art that, apart from practical woodworking, requires electronics, statics and a great deal of physics, something that only a few master in combination. In fact it is often hard enough just to build a solid, living room capable cabinet. No one is born as a perfect carpenter.
Some think that an active setup is much simpler, this is only part true. In fact there are still some tough problems, even when you do not need any passive parts, because you can program a DSP with a mouse click. Finding a good baffle design is just as essential, the cabinet design can screw up the best combination.

The smart, safe DIYS way is to get a kit that has been made by some real speaker designer, tested by others and build 100% following the plan. If you invest something like $1000 you will match any Hifi speaker 3 to 4 times the price. If you spend even more, these kits are rare, things get ridiculous, you may find no match even if you look in the 10 to 20 grand region.
With HIFI speakers, at least 50% of the recommended retail price are just for the retailer. Newcomers like ASCILAB which seem to reduce the price for really good factory speakers, are experiencing how expensive it is to sell speakers. They struggle to keep their promised prices and don't like to deliver to retailers. Their prices will soon be industry standard I promise. The cost of the service chain the customer wants and constand need to redesign the lineup make factory speakers so expensive, not drivers, crossovers, wood, DSP's and amps. This is the great advantage of DIYS. Service, dealers share, warrante cost, consumer rights, technical regulations and requiered test procedures for safety, advertising, redesign, transport fees, custom and sales taxes for the finished product are nonexistant in DIYS. That is the money you don't pay, even high quality drivers are not even 15% of a HIFI product

Ha, last there is a category of speakers that are cheaper and better than HIFI speaker and are a good alternative to DIYS. This is real pro gear for studios and music production. Those speakers don't spend a lot of their production costs on expensive design, looks and finish, also they are often produced for many years, even decades, hardly unchanged.
If you can live with a black casket, the inner value and sound reproduction are delivered at about half the HIFI price or less. If you don't like burning money, but have no workspace under your house, this may be an option.

Ok, last, buy used. Can save huge. Anyone knows about risk and fun.

Your first paragraph is complete nonsense. I taught myself how to design and build 3-way, active DIY speakers in a little over a year. That included buying woodworking tools, learning how to build and finish the cabinets in lacewood veneer, learning about and buying crossovers, and learning how to use CLIO to test. It's not nearly as hard as you make it out to be, and the speakers are great. I'd put them up against any commercial speaker <$5000.

 

[Wolf11Man]

Your first paragraph is complete nonsense. I taught myself how to design and build 3-way, active DIY speakers in a little over a year. That included buying woodworking tools, learning how to build and finish the cabinets in lacewood veneer, learning about and buying crossovers, and learning how to use CLIO to test. It's not nearly as hard as you make it out to be, and the speakers are great. I'd put them up against any commercial speaker <$5000.

Congratulations, you are one of the rare, real talents in speaker building. Others, that earn their money with that art, needed years to get so far. Usualy after visiting an university for a physics or electronics exam.

 

[Roland68]

Your first paragraph is complete nonsense. I taught myself how to design and build 3-way, active DIY speakers in a little over a year. That included buying woodworking tools, learning how to build and finish the cabinets in lacewood veneer, learning about and buying crossovers, and learning how to use CLIO to test. It's not nearly as hard as you make it out to be, and the speakers are great. I'd put them up against any commercial speaker <$5000.

Then you were either incredibly lucky, or you're an absolute prodigy. If it's the latter, you should consider a career change or starting your own company.

Because how difficult that usually is can be seen in the hundreds or thousands of mediocre loudspeakers worldwide, even from experienced companies and developers, and the fact that only a few truly stand out.
But there is a third possibility...