Diy 101

If you are just starting out, I'd say a kit is probably the way to go. I'd leave the crossover design to those who have the experience and test equipment, a crossover is much more complicated that simply soldering components on a board. There are many many factors that go into crossover design, and they are very driver dependent. A couple good places to start investigating kits are www.partsexpress.com and www.madisound.com

You don't necessarily need a kit, but just a guide. Over at htguide.com they have some wonderful designs. The Natalie P and Modula MTM are very nice. I myself have Mark K's RS225/RS28A design, and that was my first DIY speaker project. They came out a lot better than I expected, so don't be too shy to follow someone else's design.

Like everyone said, going DIY isn't bad at all. It's extremely rewarding, in fact. If you have some basic wood working skills/tools and some gusto, you can pretty handily complete a previously designed DIY project like the one Gir_1337 was talking about.

Putting a crossover together is extremely easy. If you can't read a schematic, I'm sure someone could "decode" it for you and explain how to solder the parts together.

I'm looking forward to trying out the all metal Seas project on Zaph's site, personally.

1. Don't go for the kits provided by Partsexpress or Madisound. Some proven DIY designs are generally much better than those.

2. "Timbre matching" for multiple speakers is usually achieved by using the same set of drivers for the speakers, especially the tweeters, provided that the employed crossovers don't produce far different responses from one speaker to another.

3. If you want to have DIY speaker building as your lifetime hobby (^^), you'll have a lot to learn just for crossover design. If not and you just want to build nice performing speakers for less money, it'll be wise to use other well-known DIYers' design.

4. It depends on a design. We cannot generally say 5" is better than 6" or vice versa.

5. Vertical MTM configuration gives you better power handling than MT. But what it pays for the advantage is the anomaly of its vertical off-axis performance, which is called lobing. If you have no reason for listening off-axis, MTM is a good compromise. Say, within 10 degree off-axis should be okay even with MTM. And an MTM placed horizontally for center channel is not a good idea. But this is sometimes an unavoidable compromise because horizontal MTM gives good power handling, which is required for HT center ch use, and fits many people's setup (e.g., under or above a TV). The best center ch speaker is probably a 3-way WMTW, preferred by many DIYers.

As said above, visit some well known DIYers' websites or HTGuide forum to see varisous designs:

www.rjbaudio.com
www.zaphaudio.com
www.htguide.com/forum/forumdisplay.php4?f=6

If I were you, I'd consider Roman's 2.5 way MTM design for both main and center channel use.

For building a crossover from a design, this article will guide you:
http://www.parts-express.com/project...ver/xover.html

You know, I've always wondered why more emphasis is put on the tweeter w.r.t timbre matching, when the midwoofer in a two-way design is almost always responsible for the same # of octaves and arguably more of the actual program material as well. What gives?

I hear you Willd... I never understood that either. I would think that the midwoofer in a 2-way, or the dedicated midrange driver in a 3-way is the most important to match.

My guess is that your ears don't hear the characteristics of it as much as you hear the tweeters. Tweeters tend to have a wide variety of sound characteristics and create all the detail in the sound, which may explain why those are more important to match.

Just speculation

Eh? Mid-woofers/mids have the same wide variety of sound characteristics and IMO are just as if not more responsible for the detail in the sound.

I haven't looked into this issue seriously, either. In the above I just passed what I heard before. This issue should be addressed by psychoacoustic research. Maybe some relevant study is already conducted? Anyway I'd say both midwoofer and tweeter should be matched to be safe and perfect Let's go back to the OP's concern.

In Roman's 2.5 way MTM, the same RS180 midwoofers are used except they don't share the same network components. Both midwoofers cover bass/midbass and one of them also covers midrange but the other is less involved in midrange reproduction. The one that only covers bass/midbass is called .5 woofer. That's way it's called 2.5 way. This design is by nature bass heavy. So you don't want to place them close to walls in a small room. Also, usually an MTM design results in a low impedance and it's not a good idea to use a low or mid quality 7.1 receiver with them.

And I understand that Roman's 2.5 way MTM has a bit complicated XO.

His mini monitors with RS125 and Seas 3/4" tweeter will sound excellent. But they may not be so appropriate for HT use especially if you want to turn your volume up. Their power handling and dynamic range should be limited unless you cross them high (say 120 Hz or even 150 Hz) with a subwoofer.

If your receiver can handle, Zaph's Bargain Aluminum MTM is also a good choice. I think they can be used as a good center channel, too. Although not ideal, some MTMs are fine as a center channel when they have a low crossover point (as BAMTM does). Their lobing issue is less severe with a low XO point.

I don't know about Onkyo's products these days. But I heard that HK receivers are high current capable.

If you need something small, I still love augerpro's Bose Busters. Those little guys are cute