[rwhite]

I am looking to build the Zaph za5.5tt but can't find any reviews or information on what they sound like. It is a mmtmm configuration and looks like a high end speaker, but does it sound like a high end speaker and how does it compare to other speakers? I have two hsu subs that I want to use with them. It looks like they would be good with a sub as they are somewhat shy in the bass region.

Has anyone built these units? They are offered as a kit at the Madisound site.

thanks
Richard

[JLM]

I thought you were stuttering.   

It should be noted that a MTM design promotes listening from exactly the tweeter height to reduce phasing issues between the competing pair of drivers.  But the concept of MMTMM takes the idea too far IMO as imaging would have to suffer.  And you should expect these to exhibit lots of comb filter effects with four identical drivers in line. 

Madisound carries some very good stuff.  I've bought from them without a hitch, but I’m not familiar with zaphaudio.

Personally I’m not a big fan of metal cones or domes and the specifications don’t do anything for me either.  I’m always leery of designs that use multiples of the same drivers.  (Can’t they spend more and get one better quality one to do the job?)  Besides the location of the vents directly behind the midrange drivers assures that the backwave from those 4 cones will be heard.

Overall it seems to be an amateurish design using rather ordinary drivers.  But if you’re hooked on the zaphaudio offerings, I’d go for the sealed ZA5.2 that should integrate well with those Hsu subs you've got.

Seems to me that if your DIY speaker kit budget is around $400 and you want to stick with Madisound, either the Seas Idunn or Mirmir would be a far better choice to go with your subs.  Plus they also sell pre-built and finished cabinets for them.

You could also look at Parts Express or Pi Speakers for more DIY options.

On the other hand there are lots of very nice new and used speakers out there for what you could end up investing in a DIY approach.

[rwhite]

Thanks for the info on mtm designs. I almost think I am stuttering, considering all of the design possibilities to choose from. I didn't realize there were phasing issues to consider on the mtm as compared to other designs.

I do want to build an audiophile grade speaker and am willing to spend more if I have to.

I'll definitely check out the Madisound offerings you outlined.

thanks

Richard

[planet10]

Unless you can cross REALLY low relative to the size of the tweeter & midbasses (ie the separation) an MTM gives what i find a strange sound. The Zaph MMTMM is a 2.5 way with 5" and a small tweeter so won't be as bad as some, but the 3k XO is still high and right in the ear's most sensitive area and that 10k spike in the mid-woofers is going to be heard. The version arranged as an MMMTM makes more sense to me. Still has the issue of the XO.

My idea of a low XO is exemplfied by an MTM i am working on that will XO 300-400 Hz, and another WW(mT)WW with XO 125-150 Hz (woofers on the side)

Here is another thread that discusses the Zaph

For the kind of money the kit is i'd say you'd be way ahead buying a pair of Mark Audio Alpair 12 from Madisound -- and have change enuff to buy plywood instead of MDF for the box.

dave

[rwhite]

It looks like I need to be looking at some other options. I agree the crossover is pretty high and at a critical frequency. I've start looking at two other designs that are 2-way towers.

I noticed that there are two version of a tower kit at Madisound that look very much the same, but from different people and both look very good. One is the zaph zrt revelator 2-way tower and the other is the scan speak rediscovery. Both use scan speak drivers and both are tower speakers. The Zaph version is more expensive and both use different scan-speak tweeters.

Talk about making this decision more confusing!!! They both look like great speakers but how do they compare??? Zaph has alot of interesting design notes on there web site and even shows a 2.5 version with two med woofs instead of one and also show a sealed design with a similar response curve.

Does any one know how these kits compare?  HELP! 

Richard

[ebag4]

Hi Richard,
Not trying to make your decision more difficult but there are great MTM designs out there.  Here is a MTM TL loaded design I built for my sister, it is outstanding:



They are GR Research N3s.  You can find more info in the GR Research circle here on AC.  Here is a link to the N3 webpage:
http://www.gr-research.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=151

Best,
Ed

[rwhite]

Those are beautiful speakers! I hope what ever I build will come close to looking as good as yours.

I forgot to mention on my previous post that I have two hsu subs that i would like to use. Your mtm's have excellent bandwidth. That might make integrating the subs difficult unless i use a high pass filter of around 50 cps. If i did that it also would not be using the bandwidth of a very nice speaker.

Richard

[ebag4]

Thanks Richard.  In my experience the lower the frequency you are crossing in the sub the easier it is to have a seemless integration.

Best of luck with your search.

Ed

[roymail]

Hi Richard,
Not trying to make your decision more difficult but there are great MTM designs out there.  Here is a MTM TL loaded design I built for my sister, it is outstanding:



They are GR Research N3s.  You can find more info in the GR Research circle here on AC.  Here is a link to the N3 webpage:
http://www.gr-research.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=151

Best,
Ed

I second Ed's suggestion of the N3's from GR.  Next to the Salk Songtowers, I don't think you can do much better.  TL bass allows for a lower crossover point to your subs as Ed also pointed out.

Good luck with your decision.

[smnjn]

It looks like I need to be looking at some other options. I agree the crossover is pretty high and at a critical frequency. I've start looking at two other designs that are 2-way towers.

I noticed that there are two version of a tower kit at Madisound that look very much the same, but from different people and both look very good. One is the zaph zrt revelator 2-way tower and the other is the scan speak rediscovery. Both use scan speak drivers and both are tower speakers. The Zaph version is more expensive and both use different scan-speak tweeters.

Talk about making this decision more confusing!!! They both look like great speakers but how do they compare??? Zaph has alot of interesting design notes on there web site and even shows a 2.5 version with two med woofs instead of one and also show a sealed design with a similar response curve.

Does any one know how these kits compare?  HELP! 

Richard

I have built both ZRT and Rediscovery (my own design). Here is the comparison:

1. ZRT is cleaner in the highs (above 2k)
2. Rediscovery is cleaner in the mid (1k-2k)
3. Lows are similar (30-1000 Hz)
4. ZRT is a bit brighter than Rediscovery. Tonal balance of Rediscovery is neutral.
5. Crossover point of Rediscovery is lower
6. ZRT is more directive

SUMAN JANA

[sreten]

I am looking to build the Zaph za5.5tt but can't find any reviews or information on what they sound like. It is a mmtmm configuration and looks like a high end speaker, but does it sound like a high end speaker and how does it compare to other speakers? I have two hsu subs that I want to use with them. It looks like they would be good with a sub as they are somewhat shy in the bass region.

Has anyone built these units? They are offered as a kit at the Madisound site.

thanks
Richard

Hi,

They do what is said on the tin, I trust Zaph, read what he says very carefully.
If you don't like it, there is an alternative MTMMM version, read that carefully.

rgds, sreten.

[HT cOz]

I think the question is why have so many drivers and what does it do to the accoustic center? 

My first real speaker was a TMMMM 2.5 way. I don't think the drivers were worth the impedance dip to add them.

I much prefer an MTM in a cabinet like a transmision line or quarter wave TL to add the lower output.

Plus you have two subs arleady maybe a good TM is a better approach.

What do you plan for amps and how big is your room?

Cheers
Robert

[sreten]

I think the question is why have so many drivers and what does it do to the accoustic center? 


Cheers
Robert

Hi, http://www.zaphaudio.com/ZA5/, discussed in fair detail, rgds, sreten.

[HT cOz]

Hi, http://www.zaphaudio.com/ZA5/, discussed in fair detail, rgds, sreten.

Ok so its a 2.5 way with multiple drivers.  89db efficient and dips to 2-3 ohms in some places.

I understand that using multiple drivers lowers the load on each driver and lessens distortion, but I don't think it is worth it given the impedance dips and complexity when compared to a MTM in a good tuned enclosure.

I really value an easy load as I can then use any amp with the right output for my given room and speaker sensitivity.

Nothing more than my opion based on prior speakers that might be completely irrevelant because they are not the speaker in question.

[sreten]

Ok so its a 2.5 way with multiple drivers.  89db efficient and dips to 2-3 ohms in some places.

I understand that using multiple drivers lowers the load on each driver and lessens distortion,
but I don't think it is worth it given the impedance dips and complexity when compared to a MTM in a good tuned enclosure.

I really value an easy load as I can then use any amp with the right output for my given room and speaker sensitivity.

Nothing more than my opion based on prior speakers that might be completely irrevelant because they are not the speaker in question.

This system is 89 sensitive anechoic with 1 watt input and a solid 8 ohm nominal
impedance, drooping to about 5 ohms for a small range between 2 and 3 kHz.

Hi,

If you don't like the look of them fair enough but your missing the point.
The MMTMM and MTMMM versions by definition are 8 ohm versus 4 ohm
for any MTM or TMM version using the same driver, and will play louder,
if that is what is needed for larger rooms.

The driver is specifically optimised for good midrange over bass performance,
and as such the designs are specifically intended to be used with subwoofers.

The choice of c/o frequency as described is affected by the maximum level
capability of the speaker, it goes up in frequency, as it should, for the louder
versions to maintain low treble distortion. Regarding the drivers "peak",
all c/o's contain a notch filter to control it, its not simply "disregarded".

Two HSU subs mean you could c/o bass to sub a little higher, the sealed
MT version might be fine for this case, depending on the levels wanted.
But there are loads of MT designs out there, not an easy choice.

Exactly the same with sealed 4 ohm MTM's or TMM's.

The MMTMM or MTMMM could be built sealed if so desired by reducing depth.

rgds, sreten.

No subs ? then perhaps other designs are best looked at.

[HT cOz]

Hi,

If you don't like the look of them fair enough but your missing the point.
The MMTMM and MTMMM versions by definition are 8 ohm versus 4 ohm
for any MTM or TMM version using the same driver, and will play louder,
if that is what is needed for larger rooms.

The driver is specifically optimised for good midrange over bass performance,
and as such the designs are specifically intended to be used with subwoofers.

rgds, sreten.

No subs ? then perhaps other designs are best looked at.

I think I do get it... Here is my opinion get GR Research N3 which is an MTM, 8ohm load (lowest dip is ~6ohm), 90.5 db sensitive, and plays to 40hrz. 

I don't think the added complexity is worth it for all those drivers and think the desire for more drivers is driven by the fact that it looks cool.  Layering in multiple drivers does come with a cost, that cost being different loads on the amp and a more complicated network.

Now I have voted with my wallet and am building a version of the N3.  I will run it with a 50w push/pull 6550 tube amp.  So the qualities of easy to drive are very important to me as tube amps in general don't have as high dampening abilities to handle layering in those drivers.

That said I have never heard any Zaph design and it could be totally kick butt. 

Cheers,
Robert

[sreten]

Hi,

The GR uses 16 ohm drivers and so will give you what you want.
Does the OP have the same need ? i.e. an 8 ohm speakers ?
How relevant is what you are actually doing for the OP ?
I don't think you've read the links from the OP's perspective ....

However the thread is about the Zaph design, and as its a family
of designs using the same bass/mid unit of course another option
is to use less larger drivers for the biggest versions, that is a given.

The advantage of using more smaller drivers is a taller thinner
enclosure, and in this case the directivity issues Zaph outlines
in the description, which is why he did the MMTMM, I'd guess
the MTMMM version then just had to offered as an option.

If the  narrow / controlled directivity stuff does not appeal :

The cool thing about a MMTMM is the control over the lobing. I wouldn't say it
minimizes the lobing, it just spreads it over a much wider range of frequencies.
The vertical off axis is beginning to roll off at 200 Hz already. In room, it means
floor bounce is minimized. I've got data showing this, including in-room and vertical
polar plots. What it sounds like is a level of smoothness in the midbass and lower
midrange unlike other types of speakers. Not to mention a system with that many
low distortion drivers sounds completely effortless.

Then by all means look elsewhere for a TM or TMM or MTM.

But he didn't do it just because he thinks it looks cool, far from it.

rgds, sreten.

[HT cOz]

Ok so its a 2.5 way with multiple drivers.  89db efficient and dips to 2-3 ohms in some places.

Reading back through the Zaph site I see that I made a mistake here... It dips to 5 ohms in the 2-3k region.... That is a lot different than dipping to 2-3 ohms.  When I first misread it, I though 2-3ohm dips  Yuck...

[Vapor Audio]

rwhite - to be honest the first couple replies have some bad advice that seem to based more on biases than anything. 

There's nothing inherently wrong with the design, in fact there are more theoretical things 'right' with it than 'wrong' if somebody wanted to argue the case. 

The woofers are solid performers, and the tweeter measures well ... but Zaph smartly didn't cross it too low even though data would indicate that you can.  I've heard that tweeter crossed at 1.8khz and it's obvious that it's strained that low.  3khz is a much better decision.  Lobing is one of those theoretical arguments that has minimal real world consequences, unless you have a habit of listening 30 degrees or more off axis    And even in this case, the tweeter and woofers are small enough that center-to-center distances are small, and lobing is minimized.  On paper there's nothing to complain about with the MMTMM design, and there's plenty of data to back it up.

I will say this, Zaph is a good designer - but IMO his voicing is somewhat questionable.  I've heard 3 of his designs and the only one that left a favorable impression was the ZRT.  But with the drivers in the ZRT, I've worked with them enough to know that even a final product based on nothing but simulation and NO voicing done, they sound very good.  Lesser quality drivers require more finesse to reach the same level of performance.  Does this design achieve that?  I have no idea.  But many of the kits available currently have the same problem, the Seas kits certainly do. 

If you want a kit that you know is voiced by a master, go with something from GR.  But if you like this Zaph kit for whatever reason, there's no reason not to give it a shot. 

[sreten]

Hi,

A "Master Voicer" ? surely (don't call me Shirley) that is a subjective opinion ?
And with any decent design there is enough info for your own "voicing".

rgds, sreten.