Troels Graveson Faital-3WC-15

[Jim Taylor]

@Xathrepsy please don't take it out on Jim. Clearly you walked into a snake pit without warning,

Please be apprised that this forum is not a "snake pit". We are not poisonous animals, and we don't attack those who approach us. This is a site on the use of science and logic to examine and enjoy the hobby of audio. That's why the name is "Audio Science Review".

If you post on one of the NASA forums that the moon landing was faked, you will get quite a good deal of ... kickback. To put it plainly, you will be quick to be corrected.
If you post on the medical forums associated with the Mayo Clinic that alternative medicines are preferable to conventional practices, you will get a good deal of kickback, also. As I have pointed out in this forum previously, that attitude was responsible for the death of Steve Jobs ... and possibly a good number of other, less famous, people.
There are also forums on the Web that are dedicated to discussions of various mechanical processes, such as machining and thermal transfer equipment. If you post on those forums that the human sensory system is either adequate or even preferable to the use of measuring equipment , you will be laughed off the forums.

For those who may wonder why I'm taking the time to point these things out, here is the translation of the post (above) in French:


@Jim Taylor, you're the first victim of cognitive bias by self-persuading yourself that I'm a subjectivist influenced by my internet reading.
Quote from post # 9

I find that calling my subjectivitivist criticism "useless" is very unfriendly.

It's convenient, it allows you to pour out your prefabricated discourse without even taking the time to try and understand.
What's more, you're insulting me, because indirectly you're calling me an idiot

It is a strawman argument to exaggerate, to claim injury or insult where none is present, in order to twist the meaning of posts and gain an advantage. From Wikipedia:

Straw man - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

who can't tell the difference between the positive reviews on the TG website and those I read on the forums when I was looking for help to solve the problem detected by my ears, and who can't question all the other elements of the Hi-Fi system, even the listening room I was working on in the first place.
Because, yes, it's thanks to our ears and our brains that we actually enjoy listening to music.
Did I say there was no place for science? Never! It's indispensable, but in this field I don't master it, so I use the formidable tool that is the human brain, the same one that gave birth to science.

In addition, the following four sentences are all strawman fallacies:

How presumptuous to think that humanity in 2024 is capable of measuring and demonstrating everything scientifically.
If it survives, we'll certainly look like medievalists in a few centuries' time.
How many scientific certainties regularly fall by the wayside thanks to the equally scientific advances made by mankind?
Simply saying that if it hasn't been proven by science, it doesn't exist, isn't scientific.

Your life must be very complicated if you can't objectively analyze what your brain perceives through your senses.

This ^^^ sentence ignores the well-known biases (previously cited) that the brain has, and the heuristics (also previously cited) that provide the brain with information.

Is your car the color you think it is? Aren't you a victim of the salesman's influence?
And isn't the meal really good - isn't it the context that makes you appreciate it?
Is your flatulence really nauseating? After all, it only bothers other people, not you, and it might even smell of violets. Let's analyze it.
And the skin of my loved one, is it really soft or is it love that makes me perceive it as such?

I'm well aware that this debate is sterile; you're more extremist than objectivist, and not so far removed from those who think that a cable or a fuse revolutionizes their audio system.

This is another example of a strawman argument, arbitrarily assigning logic and science to the extremist category.

Of course, you're not entirely wrong, but your extremism makes you inaudible and counter-productive.

Ad hominem.

I'll leave you to deal with the translation, I won't be taking part in your forum any more, I'll just be reading the tests, and sorting things out.
Sincerely .
Xavier

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

The attacks on ASR are a small part of the wider war on science and logic that we see today. The defense of old-wives-tales remedies and "alternative" medicine, the wrong-headed logic of sects like the Flat Earthers, the paranoia regarding chemical compounds without trying to understand their proper place and function, all are symptoms of a vast database of information that many people cannot adequately grasp. It is my firm belief that there are swaths of our population that feel apprehensive, without firm anchor and without secure vision in a world that is rapidly accumulating information at a rate that was considered incalculable during their childhood.

For these reasons, they reject science and logic - either partially or totally. To put it bluntly ... they don't understand it so they don't trust it.

I have a great deal of sympathy for these people. In regards to bodies of knowledge wherein we have no experience, I believe that we all have a kernel of this doubt and uncertainty. I know that I did in times past, and still have the residual effects.

But we can't throw out the baby with the bathwater. The most effective cure that we have right now is to correct those who use pseudo-science, whataboutism and emotion to denigrate science and logic, and point out that they have no basis in facts.

If doing that is unfriendly, then we're in for a world of hurts.

Jim Taylor.

 

[caught gesture]

For these reasons, they reject science and logic - either partially or totally. To put it bluntly ... they don't understand it so they don't trust it.

At the risk of stepping into realms banned on this site, I would suggest that people are being led to reject science and logic by the same people who attack institutions of higher learning as being elitist/woke/extreme left-wing, or whatever is the fashionable term of the day. It is a saddening and sobering step back in time.

 

[Jim Taylor]

At the risk of stepping into realms banned on this site, I would suggest that people are being led to reject science and logic by the same people who attack institutions of higher learning as being elitist/woke/extreme left-wing, or whatever is the fashionable term of the day. It is a saddening and sobering step back in time.

Because of Amir's directives, my comments were not meant to address this aspect of the subject, either directly or indirectly.

Jim

 

[Mart68]

Epilogue

As I said in post #13 I went ahead and commissioned the build despite never hearing them and there not being a full suite of measurements. What can I say, I'm one of life's gamblers

Got them delivered last week:



They do sound pretty much as I expected. Big, smooth, effortless. Not felt any need to EQ so far, but still early days.

I specified a couple of changes from the stock design. Matt black fronts for the 'studio look' and a rebate on the back for the binding posts so they're not sitting proud of the cabinet.

Also specified better looking binding posts than the supplied ones, which are fine, but look cheap. Note the resistor, you can change this to reduce or increase the attenuation on the tweeter:



That cost a little extra but for material value I can't think of anything commercial that comes close. They are a lot of fun, especially with rock music.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

Epilogue

As I said in post #13 I went ahead and commissioned the build despite never hearing them and there not being a full suite of measurements. What can I say, I'm one of life's gamblers

Got them delivered last week:



They do sound pretty much as I expected. Big, smooth, effortless. Not felt any need to EQ so far, but still early days.

I specified a couple of changes from the stock design. Matt black fronts for the 'studio look' and a rebate on the back for the binding posts so they're not sitting proud of the cabinet.

Also specified better looking binding posts than the supplied ones, which are fine, but look cheap. Note the resistor, you can change this to reduce or increase the attenuation on the tweeter:



That cost a little extra but for material value I can't think of anything commercial that comes close. They are a lot of fun, especially with rock music.

Nice of you to follow up.

 

[Mart68]

I wrote this review for another site but will post it here - warning - there is subjective content:

I've had these loudspeakers now for getting on three months so thought it might be time to put all my thoughts together in a formal review.



This is a three-way ported passive loudspeaker using an 8'' driver for mids and a 15'' driver for bass. Crossover points are 230 Hz where bass hands over to mid, and 2800Hz where mid hands over to tweeter. Crossovers are 2nd order Linkwitz-Riley.

This is a DIY design and can't be bought off the shelf. Plans and crossovers can be purchased from Troels Gravesen, you buy the drivers and build the cabs. Or pay someone to do that. There's some serious woodworking involved which will be beyond the skills and equipment available to many of us, including me.

I commissioned the whole build from Arke Loudspeakers and had a finished product delivered to the door, but any local woodwork shop could build the cabs and you do the rest, which would probably work out a little cheaper.

So, on with the show.

Hoffman's Iron Law states that with any speaker system you can only have two of the three options below:

1) Small Size
2) High efficiency
3) Low bass

So it would seem that if space and aesthetics are not considerations, it's option 1) that can best be sacrificed. A large speaker allows for both deep bass and high efficiency. So that is what we have here.

Both mid and bass units are intended for professional applications so don't have 'audiophile' price tags and this keeps the cost down. The three-way configuration means no driver is\ having to work into an area where it isn't linear, and starts to break up. The advantage of using large drivers is they move less distance to shift the same volume of air, meaning lower distortion.

So that's the theory, but how does it work out in practice?

The first thing you notice about this speaker is that any recording that has bass instrumentation is underpinned by low frequency 'weight'. The speaker is not a bass monster but it does reproduce low fundamentals meaning pretty much any rock recording, even if it's a bit lean in the bass, has that 'authority' down below.

Listening to Smashing Pumpkins 'Siamese Dream', a record I have owned for 30 years and played countless times, it occurred to me that I have never previously fully heard what is on there, despite owning many large speakers capable of low bass in the past.

With pop music and R&B the 'fruity' mid-bass common on such music is fully reproduced. These speakers have the sort of bass response you want with such music, but which isn't really delivered even by many quite large and expensive tower speakers. A Luther Vandross 'Best Of' album which I'd previously thought was a little bland and boring became a much more enjoyable listening experience as a result.

One recording which became quite a notably different experience with these speakers was Daft Punk's 'Random Access Memories'. There's a number of quite boppy tunes on this one, such as 'Give Life Back To Music', 'Get Lucky' and 'Lose Yourself To Dance.' Compared to the Focal 926 towers I was using previously I thought some of the 'boppiness' was reduced, and replaced by more of a club-like wall of sound hitting me as one entity. That's hard to describe in words but again it was a case of thinking that was what I was supposed to be getting rather than a more light-weight but propulsive sound.

Using an 8 inch for the mids may incur issues in other areas, which we'll get to later, but it does have the advantage of reproducing vocals and everything else that happens in the mids with very low distortion and with 'body' or 'fullness' to the sound. Especially noticeable with vocals. There was a sense of almost disturbing clarity to vocal, depending on the recording of course. Like there's nothing between you and the vocal booth.

With acoustic music or any simple recording these loudspeakers are explicit - shockingly so. Not just the clarity, which some other speakers can also deliver as well, but with the physical presence. The Kira Mac acoustic set - just her and an acoustic guitar - put her and the guitar right in the room, seated between and behind the speakers, in full three dimensions. A visiting musician friend described this as 'Astonishing.'

With all acoustic recordings from Jethro Tull, whilst not being as simply and directly recorded, the speaker did not glaze over the subtleties and the delicacies. The sound was quite real and beautiful. These are not just a rocker's speaker.

But rock music is their party piece and if you put on something with serious bass guitar work - Korn, Rage Against The Machine, Red Hot Chilli Peppers - the depth, control and accuracy of the bass response is breath-taking.

So what are we sacrificing here? I know many people are very much into stereo imaging and sound staging. These things are not a priority for me though, and my room is not ideal for setting up speakers far apart and getting that 'holographic' soundstage (where it actually exists on the recording). Really the only demand I make in this regard is that the sound seems to exist independent of the speakers rather than coming directly from them. This is more a room acoustic thing than a property of speakers, but this test was passed.

However the wide baffles, the lack of contoured edges to the baffle, and that an 8 inch mid has to marry up to the tweeter, and will inevitable start to 'beam' as it gets to its highest frequencies, suggests to me that if you place soundstage and imaging as a very high priority, these will probably not be the speaker for you. Likewise I suspect that the 'sweet spot' for stereo imaging will not be so large as a result. Although these are not 'head in a vice' speakers and do have a reasonably wide listening window.

The only other criticism I could make is that the sound presentation is a little 'dry' especially in the top end. As an example if you take a recording with very well recorded cymbal work, you get the hit, the ring, the shimmer and the decay. The hit and ring are fine, the shimmer and decay are perhaps not quite as beautifully resolved as I have heard on some speakers. It's still better than on most though, plus most studio monitors I've experienced also have that 'dry' quality. So this is to an extent personal taste, but I do like a little bit more 'wetness' myself. Not a deal breaker though, in the grand scheme of things.

Ultimately these speakers pull off the trick of being explicit, but at the same time very easy to listen to for long periods. That's a rare quality IME.

Compatibility:

The speakers have an estimated sensitivity of 94dB and (as per graph below) a fairly flat impedance response. Most amplifiers, including push-pull valve amps will be working at their optimum with these loudspeakers. I use a Krell but I could just as easy swap in a much cheaper and lower powered amplifier and get good results.



As long as the amp is comfortable with 4 ohm loads, which is most modern amps, you can use pretty much anything with 20 watts and up.

Due to room layout I have to use the speakers well out from the front wall (8 foot or so), this does reduce the level of low bass. I suspect they would be fine used around 1 foot from the wall, assuming the room was large enough in volume that the main mode does not become an issue, although these days that can of course be resolved with the use of PEQ or DRC.

Cost:

Obviously this will vary depending on how fancy you want the cabinets finished. Arke Loudspeakers advises that you'd be roughly looking at between £5K and £6K depending on the specifics, that's for a totally finished speaker where you have to do nothing but make payment and take delivery.

If you look at the price of the drivers, plus the cost of the crossover components, wood for the cabs and other sundries, and use the rule of the thumb that says a commercial product must retail at between ten and twenty times the cost of materials in order to be profitable, this is a speaker that would retail somewhere between £10,000 and £20,000 pounds.

I think it is safe to say that this speaker will make anything commercially available around £5K sound like a toy in comparison. The 'bang for buck' is off the charts - assuming, of course, that this is a speaker that will appeal to your own tastes in presentation.

 

[cavedriver]

I wrote this review for another site but will post it here - warning - there is subjective content:

thank you for the review, subjective or not- there is terribly little out there on Troels' speakers from third parties. A couple questions:
- I see you selected the non-Be tweeter (ring radiator?). I gather that you have not experienced the shrillness or other criticisms mentioned in the other thread cited earlier?
- What other speakers have you listened to at any length that you could contrast these to besides the (Focals?) you mentioned earlier?
- Since you aren't using a mic, are there other pieces of music commonly used in speaker demos for their known responses that you can use to describe these? This thread below here on ASR has a number of people's common choices for testing speakers and sometimes people describe exactly what they are looking for. Other notable reviewers like John Atkinson at Stereophile have also published track lists and listening criteria.

Critical (Best) Music Tracks for Speaker and Room EQ Testing

I post the list of tracks Harman uses after literally decades of research to detect fidelity of speakers and room Auto Equalizers in another thread but thought it deserves its own thread. I have had the fortunate luck of sitting through a couple of their blind tests and can attest to the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Mart68]

thank you for the review, subjective or not- there is terribly little out there on Troels' speakers from third parties. A couple questions:
- I see you selected the non-Be tweeter (ring radiator?). I gather that you have not experienced the shrillness or other criticisms mentioned in the other thread cited earlier?
- What other speakers have you listened to at any length that you could contrast these to besides the (Focals?) you mentioned earlier?
- Since you aren't using a mic, are there other pieces of music commonly used in speaker demos for their known responses that you can use to describe these? This thread below here on ASR has a number of people's common choices for testing speakers and sometimes people describe exactly what they are looking for. Other notable reviewers like John Atkinson at Stereophile have also published track lists and listening criteria.

Critical (Best) Music Tracks for Speaker and Room EQ Testing

I post the list of tracks Harman uses after literally decades of research to detect fidelity of speakers and room Auto Equalizers in another thread but thought it deserves its own thread. I have had the fortunate luck of sitting through a couple of their blind tests and can attest to the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I didn't go for the Be tweeter since it adds significantly to the cost, also I have always been sceptical of the benefits of 'fancy' tweeters.

Not had any shrillness, harshness etc.

I've owned dozens of speakers over the past 40 years, the Focal 926 were easily the best of those.

I do have a Umik mic but I use an old Sony digital pre-amp with no USB

Of the music listed on that thread I own the Tracey Chapman and the Steely Dan albums. Where do I find the listening criteria? The Tracey Chapman record in particular does sound stunning on these speakers - in fact first time I played it through them I could barely believe it. I played it again just to be sure I wasn't dreaming.

 

[dedobot]

Hah Aria 926 - I had 948 , biggest disappoint so far . 5 years tried convince my self they sound good, ended listening particular records . That drove me crazy and finally sold them with great relief. Half of my muzic had "carton" beat on the Focals. I can bear anything but this.
Now Im with Kali LP-UNF which I bought just for TV companiment. Suprisingly thoose little fuc***rs fascinated me and I listen them continuously . They have the tonality of my beloved Jamo d365 with 15 inch drivers . I don't have the capacity to explain this miracle.

P.S.
The wadding in my 948 can be seen through the front port, particularly blocking it. In some online pics of the speakers it was visible too. I went to the local focal dealer for in person comparison , he had 936 or 926 ,cant remember correctly and saw the same, even worse - the wadding completely clog the port. Finally I'd opened the focals to sort it and what I saw inside stressed me.. everywhere smeared with glue, the cotton wool seems just to have been thrown inside.

 

[Mart68]

Hah Aria 926

No, I have the Electra 926 - much older, from when they were 'JM Labs Focal'.

Focal Electra 926 Floorstanding Speakers user reviews : 5 out of 5 - 3 reviews - audioreview.com

Focal Electra 926 Floorstanding Speakers user reviews : 5 out of 5 - 3 reviews - audioreview.com

www.audioreview.com

With the 'W' cone drivers as used now in the Sopra range. But with inverted titanium dome not a Be.

 

[dedobot]

No, I have the Electra 926 - much older, from when they were 'JM Labs Focal'.

Focal Electra 926 Floorstanding Speakers user reviews : 5 out of 5 - 3 reviews - audioreview.com

Focal Electra 926 Floorstanding Speakers user reviews : 5 out of 5 - 3 reviews - audioreview.com

www.audioreview.com

With the 'W' cone drivers as used now in the Sopra range. But with inverted titanium dome not a Be.

Oo my bad. I will dig my pics of the inside aria 948 . Just for the curious and for your pleasure to compare the focal build with your own

here they're:

mid range driver:

and my own "fixes: :

 

[sometimesuk]

Hello,

I made these speakers a few months ago and I am not fully satisfied with them.
They sometimes seem "Shrill", it is with the piano that I have the most discomfort.
If I had not read other reviews from disappointed manufacturers, I would have thought I had made a mistake in the assembly of the components.
Some blame the BE tweeter but I think the problem comes from the high midrange, the filtering and maybe a little its sound signature.

Hi, I know this thread is a few years old but I thought I'd share my experience / findings.

About 9 years ago, I built Troels Audio Technology Classic 3 way, with the beryllium tweeter. I has similar observations but found the following helped.

I made the speakers with 18mm birch ply. I later decided to line the inside walls with a 4mm sound deadening vinyl/rubber matting material. I found this very beneficial, the whole speaker just sounded a lot quieter, as if before I were listening to sound leaking through the whole box.

I still found the speaker a bit too bright for my taste and did change one of the resistor levels which helped. Years later troels did also suggest another change I could have made (I can't remember what) as I told him, I managed to get rid of the high end fatigueness but filling the cabinets tweeter and midrange section with dense rock wool batt material (45-60kg/m3). This took the edge off the speakers and also made them more detailed. I'm assuming this is because it's absorbing the rear energy, rather than it bounce around the inside of the cabinet and straight through the driver membrane itself which would only be fractions of mm thick.

I've since built Troels The Loudspeaker 3, but have made the same changes... 4mm lining to the cabinet, midrange cabinet stuffed with rockwool, 50mm rock wool lining to the cabinet walls (wrapped in hessian, don't obstruct the bass port) 2 layers of 2mm sound dreading material to the horn that I also wrapped internally with rockwool.

I have no idea how the speakers measure, but they don't sound bright / fatiguing at all. I did use an attenuator on the horn and my room does have lots of treatment in, so when using room correction it does bring forward the midrange

 

[MAB]

Hi, I know this thread is a few years old but I thought I'd share my experience / findings.

About 9 years ago, I built Troels Audio Technology Classic 3 way, with the beryllium tweeter. I has similar observations but found the following helped.

I made the speakers with 18mm birch ply. I later decided to line the inside walls with a 4mm sound deadening vinyl/rubber matting material. I found this very beneficial, the whole speaker just sounded a lot quieter, as if before I were listening to sound leaking through the whole box.

I still found the speaker a bit too bright for my taste and did change one of the resistor levels which helped. Years later troels did also suggest another change I could have made (I can't remember what) as I told him, I managed to get rid of the high end fatigueness but filling the cabinets tweeter and midrange section with dense rock wool batt material (45-60kg/m3). This took the edge off the speakers and also made them more detailed. I'm assuming this is because it's absorbing the rear energy, rather than it bounce around the inside of the cabinet and straight through the driver membrane itself which would only be fractions of mm thick.

I've since built Troels The Loudspeaker 3, but have made the same changes... 4mm lining to the cabinet, midrange cabinet stuffed with rockwool, 50mm rock wool lining to the cabinet walls (wrapped in hessian, don't obstruct the bass port) 2 layers of 2mm sound dreading material to the horn that I also wrapped internally with rockwool.

I have no idea how the speakers measure, but they don't sound bright / fatiguing at all. I did use an attenuator on the horn and my room does have lots of treatment in, so when using room correction it does bring forward the midrange

Getting a mic would help you identify what actually is going on.

For example, adding the internal material likely had no impacts on the treble. Very possibly changed the midrange. With a mic you can determine what is unflat to begin with, and what changes actually made. The availability of cheap and accurate measurement microphones and programs like REW are game-changers for the hobby.

 

[mikewxyz]

I built the Troels Gravesen Ekta-7741 about two years ago. I did make an adjustment to one of the mid-range resistor values to tone it down some. I'm more than happy with the results. However, all the caveats re: DIY speakers apply. If you're primary reason for building is to save money, just buy a nice pair of used speakers.

Measuring speakers accurately is difficult. I posted the measurement result here - https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/diy-spinorama-turntables.53480/post-2346844

If your interested in the build details, they can be found at DIYaudio - https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/troels-gravesen-ekta-7741-speaker-build.408902/

 

[Mart68]

I built the Troels Gravesen Ekta-7741 about two years ago. I did make an adjustment to one of the mid-range resistor values to tone it down some. I'm more than happy with the results. However, all the caveats re: DIY speakers apply. If you're primary reason for building is to save money, just buy a nice pair of used speakers.

Measuring speakers accurately is difficult. I posted the measurement result here - https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/diy-spinorama-turntables.53480/post-2346844

If your interested in the build details, they can be found at DIYaudio - https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/troels-gravesen-ekta-7741-speaker-build.408902/

A friend had the Ektas built and I thought they were very good. We gave them a good workout with tough recordings!

That was instrumental in my deciding to try the 3WC-15 since I then had proof that Troels knows what he's doing on the design side. I had previously heard an open baffle design of his but I always think there is something wrong with the bass from open baffles so couldn't really judge from that.

I would have bought something 'commercial' either new or used but I was looking for a while and there was nothing really out there that was pushing my buttons.

I've no complaints about the 3WC, they are one of the most impressive speakers I've heard in 40 years doing this.

 

[mikewxyz]

@Mart68 I was trying to decide between the Revelator 851's and the Ekta MkII's when deciding on a kit. I asked Jason from Arke Audio and his friend (for whom he had built the Ekta MkII for) which one they recommended - both said the Revelator 851. I suspect you know these guys.

Subsequently, Troels released the Ekta-7741's and I went with that thinking the transition from the 18WU to the 12MU would be seamless and doubling up on the 18WU's would provide enough bass.

I'm sure the Faital 3WC-15's sound fabulous.

 

[Mart68]

I suspect you know these guys.

Indeed I do.

 

[Waxx]

Troels makes more than decent designs. I did build the speaker mentioned years ago for someone and they are quiet good. But for that price you can buy better speakers that are more controlled in dispertion, because there are some issues in the mid/tweeter transition like said. But they are not crap designs and do a lot right in that style of speakers. They are not worth the price he is asking altough, especially as diy speakers. But it's an easy route to make at least decent speakers without any knowledge about the design and for some that is worth the expnsive price he is asking.

Also don't bother the upgrade kits for the crossover, those are bullshit, the basic crossover sounds as good, and no expensive part will make a difference there.

And know that you can build such a speaker way cheaper with other kits that are arround. The Tarkus speaker from Paul Camody is as good, and uses a lot cheaper parts, and the plans are free and well documented on the forum of Parts Express. And on DIY audio you got an as expensive design, that is done fully right and fully documented, the Open Source Monkey Box. And there is more if you google and read arround enough. You don't need an expensive kit today to build a good 3 way speaker.

 

[cavedriver]

Troels makes more than decent designs. I did build the speaker mentioned years ago for someone and they are quiet good. But for that price you can buy better speakers that are more controlled in dispertion, because there are some issues in the mid/tweeter transition like said. But they are not crap designs and do a lot right in that style of speakers. They are not worth the price he is asking altough, especially as diy speakers. But it's an easy route to make at least decent speakers without any knowledge about the design and for some that is worth the expnsive price he is asking.

Also don't bother the upgrade kits for the crossover, those are bullshit, the basic crossover sounds as good, and no expensive part will make a difference there.

And know that you can build such a speaker way cheaper with other kits that are arround. The Tarkus speaker from Paul Camody is as good, and uses a lot cheaper parts, and the plans are free and well documented on the forum of Parts Express. And on DIY audio you got an as expensive design, that is done fully right and fully documented, the Open Source Monkey Box. And there is more if you google and read arround enough. You don't need an expensive kit today to build a good 3 way speaker.

while I don't doubt that several (many?) of his more expensive designs, particularly the ones using the most expensive drivers and ones that they still sell as unpublished kits, are more expensive than other options, he has a number of designs that are now open source and use common drivers that could make them competitive with designs by Carmody and others. I'm thinking of examples like the "poor man's strad" and others. It's possible that he has made these open source because he knows they aren't as good as his later designs, but I would still like to see a couple of them built and measured as they could compete well with other designs out there for similar cost.

I do have to say that when you look at efforts like the OSMB it gets at an important idea- there are a plethora of excellent drivers available off the shelf, there is well understood science behind speaker design that is readily accessible, and building speaker cabinets, while it requires decent woodworking skills, isn't exactly rocket science - and so there should be a design that people can build that can compete with the best commercial speakers. Look at the leaderboard here of measurements and try to imagine a 3-way speaker that could be built that would emulate the performance of the Revel R328Be or something along those lines.