Speaker suggestions

[ta240]

I'm looking for something up to the $1000 range for drivers and crossover.
I was looking seriously at: https://heissmann-acoustics.de/en/suzie/
I like the efficiency and the directivity looks decent. It looks like it will run around $900. I'm nervous about spending that much when my prior builds haven't really blown me away. I built Zaph's SR71 and it never really clicked, the lows were amazing but the highs just didn't work for me. His ZA5.2 is one I like at lower levels but it needs a sub and isn't quite as refined as I'd like for everything, the midrange on it is just so nice though.

Other suggestions? I don't currently use a sub for music, the room is about 20x30 and I listen from lots of different locations in the room and different heights. I don't tend to listen very loud.

I prefer bookshelf, mostly because assembling bookshelf ones is a bit easier.

I'm in the US and would prefer ones with the drivers available in the US. I also keep running into designs with discontinued drivers or waveguides.

Is it a fruitless search in a world of $1000 ascilabs and $1400 audiofirst and $1700 ascend speakers?

 

[kemmler3D]

I would say finding something that competes with Ascilab or Audiofirst in a kit at <$1K is a tall order. A lot of the performance comes from the waveguide, the waveguide needs to be designed specifically for the tweeter, and there simply aren't a lot of options on the market that check those boxes.

Especially since you want good off-axis performance, I would set that as a requirement.

If I was going to build a 2-way bookshelf today, I'd hop over to DIYAudio, find one of @augerpro's designs for a tweeter I liked, and go from there. The rest of the build can be dictated by the woofer's parameters. Find one you like and go from there. I wouldn't bother with a kit that doesn't come with a bespoke waveguide.

Hot take, but if you are not 3D printing waveguides for your DIY builds in 2025, you are building a new pair of >10-year old speakers. Even if you don't 3D print yourself, there is very likely someone local that will do it for a reasonable fee.

 

[TimW]

What about the Mechano23? There are many people posting their builds here

 

[ShadowBoxer]

Why wouldn't you just try one of the AsciLabs or AudioFirst (kit) where you can already see how it measures (and reviews) rather than roll the dice on an unknown?

 

[digitalfrost]

I had Mark K ER18DXT before. There is also a Heissmann Acoustics version of it. I might build it someday. Before that I had KEF LS50 that I pimped myself (replaced the woofer crossover). The Audiofirst Fidelia are a big step up on either speaker. It was expensive, especially given the customs I had to pay since the UK left the EU, but I am so happy with these speakers. I wouldn't call them cheap or even a good deal in components alone, I mean the chassis I can buy for around 300€/pair in the DIY market and the speakers cost over 1000€, but the sum is more than the parts. Best speakers I ever had. I could never DIY a baffle like that with the integrated waveguide.

Seeing the AsciLabs that are supposedly cheaper or just as expensive and you don't have to DIY them, I would say that at the moment it's rather hard to find alternatives. Maybe it's just good engineering or there is something special about those SBAcoustics chassis. While the DXT tweeter includes a waveguide, the step up from ER18DXT to Fidela was impressive. I'll never buy a speaker without some form of directivity control, be it waveguide or horn.

I don't know current prices but maybe the DXT-MON RNX could be an alternative? The baffle is hard to build tho.

But really the Fidelia are so good my recommendation would be to save up and get them.

 

[DMill]

I applaud AsciLabs design and transparency with testing. They are not for everyone though. They are extremely power hungry. Buy them and you might find yourself wanting a new amp to make them sing.

 

[ta240]

Why wouldn't you just try one of the AsciLabs or AudioFirst (kit) where you can already see how it measures (and reviews) rather than roll the dice on an unknown?

1) I really enjoy building things. Cutting and sanding are very relaxing to me.

2) Both of those are smaller and would tend to require a subwoofer for just music listening. I don't enjoy trying to get a subwoofer to blend; also a downside of listening all over a room is I tend to end up in a boomy area eventually (and low bass, for some reason, annoys me). I'd likely need a new amp with a high pass to the speakers to avoid having them try to do the low bass.

 

[ta240]

I don't know current prices but maybe the DXT-MON RNX could be an alternative? The baffle is hard to build tho.

That one was tempting but without a table saw, the baffle would be really tricky. If I take my time I can get really good cuts with a circular saw and a guide but angles like that would be really hard.

 

[ta240]

What about the Mechano23? There are many people posting their builds here

That is a pretty good option, it is still a bit smaller than I was hoping for. I don't usually listen at higher volumes and need to take some measurements of just how loud I max out at.

 

[ta240]

If I was going to build a 2-way bookshelf today, I'd hop over to DIYAudio, find one of @augerpro's designs for a tweeter I liked, and go from there. The rest of the build can be dictated by the woofer's parameters. Find one you like and go from there. I wouldn't bother with a kit that doesn't come with a bespoke waveguide.

Hot take, but if you are not 3D printing waveguides for your DIY builds in 2025, you are building a new pair of >10-year old speakers. Even if you don't 3D print yourself, there is very likely someone local that will do it for a reasonable fee.

That is what I keep thinking with so many of the designs out there being fairly old that the design tech and speaker tech has advanced since then.

I'm afraid actually designing a speaker like that is beyond my abilities. I can follow plans but the design work is a bit advanced.

 

[kemmler3D]

That is what I keep thinking with so many of the designs out there being fairly old that the design tech and speaker tech has advanced since then.

I'm afraid actually designing a speaker like that is beyond my abilities. I can follow plans but the design work is a bit advanced.

There are plenty of build threads on DIYAudio that are quite step-by-step that pretty much lay bare the process. I think you can either adopt someone else's design from one of those (halfway between design-your-own and kit, maybe) or just learn from their process.

I am bullish on a DIY job because the hardest thing about building a speaker is getting the tweeter and woofer to cross over cleanly. Having a waveguide already designed for you should make that part a ton easier.

I think if you are willing to do a lot of measurements with mic and Dayton DATS you can get pretty far with VituixCAD or even WinISD which is pretty damn simple. Vituix seems to give reasonably accurate predictions of FR and even off-axis performance.

But I have only observed, not designed or built anything myself... so my advice is worth maybe not much...

Also, I guess if you are willing / able to build a DSP speaker using plate amps or a spare DSP unit, you can attack the project with a lot more confidence. The hardest part is getting the crossover right... so if you can adjust it infinitely and instantly, it really helps things.

That would tend to push the budget a bit, but I personally would not attempt building a speaker without at least prototyping the crossover with DSP.

But if you mostly just want a woodworking project... buy the Ascilabs and build a few subs, or maybe some nice speaker stands...

 

[a4eaudio]

...
2) Both of those are smaller and would tend to require a subwoofer for just music listening. I don't enjoy trying to get a subwoofer to blend; ...

The Suzie "Q" in your first post is a sealed speaker with an F3 of 49Hz...depending on what kind of music you listen too, that is probably not the best choice without a subwoofer. Also, Heismann usually posts polar maps but he doesn't for this one. Looking at the line chart in your first post, there is some "bunching" that would concern me. If he presented a polar map it may show that he managed it fine, but without that data its hard to say. And he does show the Polar map for some of his other speakers.

That one was tempting but without a table saw, the baffle would be really tricky. If I take my time I can get really good cuts with a circular saw and a guide but angles like that would be really hard.

Cutting the facets with a circular saw is really easy. I have never done it with my table saw. Build a jig with two pieces of 1/2" or 1/4" material, one of which needs to be pretty straight. Glue them together with MORE overhang than the distance from edge of the saw base to the blade. Then run the saw down the "guide" and the edge of your jig will be exactly where the blade will cut. Now you can just draw pencil lines and clamp the guide down right on the line and cut away! If you go down this route, feel free to reach out and I can find a better picture. (This picture is staged, as the correct jig would be at an angle, this is actually my DIY track saw I use to rip sheets of wood but it is the same principle.)

 

[alex-z]

2) Both of those are smaller and would tend to require a subwoofer for just music listening. I don't enjoy trying to get a subwoofer to blend; also a downside of listening all over a room is I tend to end up in a boomy area eventually (and low bass, for some reason, annoys me). I'd likely need a new amp with a high pass to the speakers to avoid having them try to do the low bass.

Not only is adding a sub + DSP to your system worthwhile, I would argue it should be done regardless of which speakers you own.
A properly integrated sub gives you more dynamic range, more bass extension, and less seat to seat variation. With standalone speakers the optimal location for stereo imaging and bass quality often conflicts.

For the integration just get a measurement mic, set your crossover point at the anechoic -3dB point of the speakers, and check the performance with various subwoofer locations. You generally want to pick the location with the fewest nulls then use PEQ to reduce peaks. You can experiment with higher crossover points or different filter slopes if you want, I find 50-80Hz at 12dB per octave is a good choice in most applications.

If you don't mind the narrow dispersion, the Flex-8 from MTG Designs is quite good. Heaps of dynamic range, neutral on-axis response, and controlled off-axis. The DA version specifically seems to have the best mid-range.

MTG Designs - Flex-8 (DA)

The Dayton DA215-8 shares the same frame as the DS and SD series woofers but uses an aluminum cone and slightly different style surround the combination of which provide a very smooth frequency response, probably tied with the Silver Flute variant for best overall in that regard (+-1dB 100Hz -

www.mtg-designs.com

 

[ta240]

Not only is adding a sub + DSP to your system worthwhile, I would argue it should be done regardless of which speakers you own.
A properly integrated sub gives you more dynamic range, more bass extension, and less seat to seat variation. With standalone speakers the optimal location for stereo imaging and bass quality often conflicts.

For the integration just get a measurement mic, set your crossover point at the anechoic -3dB point of the speakers, and check the performance with various subwoofer locations. You generally want to pick the location with the fewest nulls then use PEQ to reduce peaks. You can experiment with higher crossover points or different filter slopes if you want, I find 50-80Hz at 12dB per octave is a good choice in most applications.

If you don't mind the narrow dispersion, the Flex-8 from MTG Designs is quite good. Heaps of dynamic range, neutral on-axis response, and controlled off-axis. The DA version specifically seems to have the best mid-range.

MTG Designs - Flex-8 (DA)

The Dayton DA215-8 shares the same frame as the DS and SD series woofers but uses an aluminum cone and slightly different style surround the combination of which provide a very smooth frequency response, probably tied with the Silver Flute variant for best overall in that regard (+-1dB 100Hz -

www.mtg-designs.com

I did a REW measurement awhile back and my current speakers dip into the 30s. As long as I can get to the low end of a cello, I'm perfectly happy.

And, as odd as it may sound, I really dislike low bass, like on a subconscious level, it makes me irritated and anxious. I had a preamp with a filter around 40 hz and, for me, it was heaven.

 

[a4eaudio]

The Suzie "Q" in your first post is a sealed speaker with an F3 of 49Hz...depending on what kind of music you listen too, that is probably not the best choice without a subwoofer....

...And, as odd as it may sound, I really dislike low bass, like on a subconscious level, it makes me irritated and anxious. I had a preamp with a filter around 40 hz and, for me, it was heaven.

Hmmm....maybe that Heissmann Suzie Q isn't a bad choice for you, especially if they are near the front wall. Sealed roll-off is shallower than ported, so while the F3 looks underwhelming they have a decent F6 and F10, and a typical rooms gives some boost around 50 Hz.

 

[Ktacos]

I'm a little stuck with my current builds as I'm wanting to put drivers I have to use, but if I had to pick anything to build with new drivers, it would be mechano23. That is a lot of speaker for not a lot of money.

 

[alex-z]

I did a REW measurement awhile back and my current speakers dip into the 30s. As long as I can get to the low end of a cello, I'm perfectly happy.

And, as odd as it may sound, I really dislike low bass, like on a subconscious level, it makes me irritated and anxious. I had a preamp with a filter around 40 hz and, for me, it was heaven.

Frequency response is arbitrary when you have access to EQ/DSP, assuming your speakers and signal chain have enough dynamic range. If you don't want output below 40Hz a simple high-pass filter will do that.

The multi-tone distortion and time domain performance are also worth considering. With 2 way speakers an 80Hz high-pass filter will usually reduce multi-tone distortion by 3-5dB throughout the mid-bass and mid-range. If your speakers are hitting 30-40Hz in-room but use bass reflex cabinets, a sealed 10-12" sub could deliver the same extension but with reduced group delay.

 

[a4eaudio]

The problem with the Mechano23 recommended in post #3 and #15 is that it is not an upgrade over the OP's Zaph ZA5.2, which actually seem a little bitt better and he doesn't want a sub.

Zaph: Preference score 5.57; F3/F6 = 70Hz / 47Hz
Mechano23: Preference score 5.55; F3/F6 = 78Hz / 56Hz

In my opinion, there is no point in "upgrading" unless you are getting to the next level.
Does the Suzie Q fit the bill? We just don't know. But the 8" discovery woofer is in a different league. Higher sensitivity, higher power handling, displaces 3.60x more air, lower distortion. It uses the same tweeter as the Mechano23.

 

[ta240]

The problem with the Mechano23 recommended in post #3 and #15 is that it is not an upgrade over the OP's Zaph ZA5.2, which actually seem a little bitt better and he doesn't want a sub.

Zaph: Preference score 5.57; F3/F6 = 70Hz / 47Hz
Mechano23: Preference score 5.55; F3/F6 = 78Hz / 56Hz

Excellent point

..... the 8" discovery woofer is in a different league. Higher sensitivity, higher power handling, displaces 3.60x more air, lower distortion. It uses the same tweeter as the Mechano23.

That is one of the things that intrigued me about that design.

....Also, Heismann usually posts polar maps but he doesn't for this one. Looking at the line chart in your first post, there is some "bunching" that would concern me. If he presented a polar map it may show that he managed it fine, but without that data its hard to say. And he does show the Polar map for some of his other speakers.

It is interesting that he left it off on that design.
The other thing that worries me with the Suzy Q is most of his other designs under application list things like "ambitious stereo installations" and it only says "hometheater"

 

[Ktacos]

The problem with the Mechano23 recommended in post #3 and #15 is that it is not an upgrade over the OP's Zaph ZA5.2

Yes it is. The DI on the Mechano23 is a lot better.