Just finished a ZRT 2-way build - Page 2

Could be the above mentioned three items. Makes sense to me.

I do plan on listening more and trying different configurations before coming to a conclusion.

I can't easily convert these cabinets to 2.5 so I have to run with what I brung so to speak.

I saw that early on and asked madisound several times, quite emphatically, if the tweets were electromechanically different given the different reported t-s specs from scan speak and they reassured me repeatedly that they are identical in performance and would work with the kit. That doesn't mean they were right... just saying that's what I was told. As I don't feel the so-called issues are in the mid-tweet transition, or even the upper mid octaves I am inclined to think even if that were true its probably not the issue. I think the bsc in the xover is more likely. Those are simply my thoughts on the matter- I am open to being wrong.

looking into measurement tools. would appreciate some more great feedback on these options:

1) get the dayton omnimic kit from parts express
2) get a dedicated mic, outboard mixer with phantom power, and true rta software on my laptop.

price comes out about the same...

looked up the mic part you referenced and found a site showing how to wire one up.

does the holm software have provisions for sound card and mic calibration?

awesome references. i like spending less $$$ if it works the same.

will check out the thread to get learned

thanks fellas (and gals)!

I am actually in the process of drafting communication to both zaph and scan speak

understood, but i'm not expecting measurements to magically change the efficiency. i am looking for the possibility of inappropriate BSC and/or the wrong xover design for the tweeter selected (I have emailed scan speak to see what the manufacturer says about material parameter variance). If I find either of the above, that can be addressed through xover or driver changes, which I'm willing to do if the performance increase is tangible.

i do appreciate that this is a damn good speaker for what it is, and if i find that there are no inherent design issues i will accept the performance of the system- though i do think a little more power with better headroom would help vs. an integrated amp.

thanks again everybody!

140 claimed wpc. But that's with only two of seven possible channels driven. I'm guessing the power supply is dinky compared to separates.

The sepakers I replaced- jamos- were clearly more sensitive. To the tune of four or five dB. But they didn't have the overall transparency, or brilliance of the high end. I just gotta figure out this "missing" link. It may well just be me. But I will figure it out. I'm persistent. :-)

Update!

I'll start by getting right to the point: the speakers sound way better and I'm quite happy with them now. They're not yet fully "there" but they're damn close.

What changed:
1) Probably my ears
2) Maybe "break-in" (but I've never fully believed in the merits of prolonged break-in and I'm fully aware of the controversial nature of that topic). With the couple of weeks that have gone by, there is noticeable (to me and my girlfriend) added clarity and impact that wasn't there before.
3) Better level-matching across all channels
4) Better material for auditioning
5) last but not least, a revision of my expectations- or rather, my interpretations- of what the speakers should do

I found that with really good material, the speakers sound fantastic (and with the sub dialed down another 3 dB!). With mediocre material, guess what... they sound mediocre. I kept remembering the earlier post where a wise person stated I might be missing the distortion that I'm used to. I think there's some merit to that. This speakers are revealing, and they do not seem to lie. They're not "clinical" but they clearly do care about the material quality.

Next, I really do think a beefier supply of power with more headroom is needed. Maybe the speakers will just compress, maybe not. I just feel like the power being delivered isn't adequate. I'm looking into separates later this year.

Finally, I did reach out to Scan-Speak and had a less-than-stellar experience, which was disappointing. I emailed the firm, asking if the two tweeters were electromechanically identical and therefore could use the same crossover design interchangeably and this was the response:

While I get what was being said, I found this to be a weak move. I emailed back asking for a simple statement of clarity and my email went unanswered. How unfortunate.

I tried to find a way to contact Zaph via his site but all I could find were discouraging pages requesting I do nothing of the sort.

So I'm just going to continue to tune by ear (and by instrument if and once I'm ready to). Madisound did say repeatedly that the tweeters were equivalent, and now with the changed performance I am inclined to believe them. I am now focusing on paying attention to the baffle step and whether it's appropriate.

Thanks again!