Author Heißmann-Acoustics

Introduction

Welcome back to part 2 of my WaveWall Reviews. To round off and enhance my home theater, the four remaining hodgepodge speakers should be replaced with matching WaveWalls. This means that the front switch to larger WaveWall 182.2 and the remaining eight loudspeakers (including the 4x Atmos height loudspeakers) can be consistently implemented as WaveWall 182.

Since I was probably the first driving customer behind the big WaveWall Alexander has involved me a bit in the development. So we agreed that the case should not only be 10cm deep, but may be a bit deeper (14cm), so that you can do without the bag in the back wall. Furthermore, the sloping sides should be eliminated. As one of the reasons for this, laziness should be mentioned, that is, the whole construction could be a bit easier compared to the small WaveWalls, especially since the LS in my case are hidden anyway later. Another point was Alexander's recommended in-wall instead of on-wall concept, more on that later.

2x TMT + 1x HT were the clear framework, for reasons of homogeneity within the WaveWall family logically the same chassis as before and also closed enclosures. The question of the arrangement TMT / TMT / HT or TMT / HT / TMT still had to be clarified. We chose the more pleasing appearance of TMT / HT / TMT combined with the anticipation of a slight d'Appolito effect and the behavior as a point sound source. After Alexander's simulations, that was also the better choice for the overall sound. The final design suggests an acoustically transparent screen (AT), as the center is obviously not optimized to be placed very narrow below a screen. An AT screen is for a successful home theater in my opinion anyway a must. Since I once tested the center center effect, it is clear to me that this significant improvement in image-sound fusion easily justifies the unavoidable slight quality degradation of image quality.

Construction

Thanks to the rectangular shape and the lack of a back pocket, housing construction was much easier than with the small WaveWalls. Certainly my experience plays a role in the meantime, as I have now built a total of 19 speakers for the home theater and set up a certain learning effect. Surface rolled again with Warnex textured paint. I would call the construction of the angular WaveWall 182.2 beginner-friendly.

Mounting

In order to obtain the in-wall installation, which is strongly recommended for the frequency response, I have simply positioned a few boards around the front of the speaker. The rest is stuffed with rock wool, the result of the measurement is impeccable and thus probably "wall" enough. The agreed with Alexander 3dB tweeter boost the center switch compensated for the attenuation of the screen perfectly. Precision landing.

Klang

My aural expectation of the big WaveWalls in contrast to the "little ones" was a bit schizophrenic. On the one hand you should of course be "better" again, on the other hand, of course, connect as little as possible to the small WaveWalls. A classic conflict of goals that exists in principle with any home theater speaker set. In terms of homogeneity, all speakers are identical, of course, the optimum. On the other hand, there is a suspicion that the resources have not been used optimally. Would not it be better to spend the same amount of money on the more important front speakers? Are the height speakers really as important?

For me the answer is: 3x Front big WaveWalls; the remaining eight as small WaveWalls. This is in terms of the "little" whining on a high level, since they use the same high-quality chassis (better than so make other commercial home theater set, which is only visually similar!). In addition, the "little ones" play anything but small and can quite well provide the sound volume of a medium-level speaker (even the AVR attests "big" as a measurement result).

So what was the first listening impression?

"Same, but different" is an Indian speaking with waggling head in my mind's eye. (Please excuse the stereotypes, I know country and people only superficially, it is not meant evil). My ears were "calibrated" by zigfaches measuring and auditioning well on the small WaveWall speakers. I expected only the smallest differences and I was afraid of the upgrade lack of clear difference afterwards to have to talk nicely. But it turned out differently. The differences were bigger than expected, an immediate WOW effect was there. Greater spatiality in the depth, "airier" sound (d'Appolito sends greetings), as well as a more relaxed punch in the bass range. Now, nothing is in the way of higher levels. Although I should probably come to my senses slowly. Visitors usually acknowledge my performance with disbelieving glances. In the mischievous joy of such a physical, fat sound experience, the fear mixes whether this health still beneficial. Meanwhile, all speakers are connected to external power amplifiers (mostly Crown XLS 1002). A good decision, even to prevent a meltdown or protective throttling in the AVR. The sound thanks it with significantly increased dynamics. Without external power amplifiers, I would recommend the Wavewalls only temporarily, because it just goes too much potential lost. Even a cheap t.amp e400 as I currently use it on height speakers already brings benefits.

What about the potential disadvantage that the speakers are already too different from their little siblings? Again, whining is only possible at the highest level, but then the WaveWalls are too similar. Beautiful, if even the treble speakers with proper bass pressure can go to work. Definitely not a comparison to the frequently encountered saving supplementary loudspeakers "for above", which gladly after the motto "there it does not matter" are sold. But again, hand on heart, the honest answer to homogeneity: Yes, who wants the last bit of homogeneity, must also run the rest of the speakers as WaveWall 182.2. A possible further reasonable compromise could also be in addition to the front SR and SL in size. But then again the question arises whether one would not have better then ... ... you know what I mean.

In terms of volume, in conjunction with the power amplifiers, a high true cinema level with good sound is easily possible (the room has 30qm, 2,05m height, a lot of absorber area, which is indispensable for high levels in my opinion). For the D + M AVR users: My default movie volume is 70, ie action scenes at the 3,5m remote listening site result in 80dBA, from time to time it may also be for demonstration purposes 90dBA. Measured without subwoofer bass overshoot (the bass is linear over a DBA).

Psssst: Of course, the speakers can also play quietly, even if my focus is on medium to high volumes. If you only hear softly, the WaveWalls are already oversized in the small version. Of course, in huge home theaters, the wave-walls may eventually reach their limits. In my middle 30qm I can say with a clear conscience: enough.

Finally, again on my previous Message directed. What stands there is essentially true of the 182.2 too.

Conclusion

Replica recommended! To make it a bit more catchy: The WaveWall 182.2 can easily record it with wall home theater ready speakers of the 1500-2000 € class. At least they have no competition below 1000 €.

My loudspeaker Odysee started a few years ago and was based on various ready loudspeakers in the price range 1000-2000 Euro. Among them were models from KEF, Canton, Nubert, Elac, Phonar and Audio Physic. Of course they were not bad at all, certainly not. However, I have managed in my listening room with none of the speakers even come close to the stereo image that I have experienced while listening to the dealer in an acoustically good room. Consequently, I first dealt with the optimization of my listening room, but of course there are certain limits.

In the meantime, I also learned how important the bundling behavior of loudspeakers is. Here, however, virtually all ready-made speakers are very wide and uncontrolled emitting, apart from studio monitors. About different broadbands, I then switched to the DIY corner. And indeed, the stereo image in my room improved significantly with the increased bundling of broad bands in the treble range. The whole thing was bought with a very narrow sweet spot, audibly reduced resolution in the treble range and tonal errors. So the search went on.

Then I came across bundling concepts with Waveguide and thus very soon came across Alexander Heissmann. A short time later, I had the DXT-RLY at my home to test it, and was very impressed, as it combined controlled bundling with absolutely neutral reproduction, the room image was excellent, the sound was completely detached from the speakers. The only sticking point: I really wanted a small, slim floorstanding loudspeaker and not a shelf speaker ... However, Alexander was quickly convinced that a slim floorstanding speaker would be an excellent addition to his portfolio so And so it came about that Alexander (after a few nights of simulating, I assume ) gave the green light for a floorstanding loudspeaker based on the DXT-MON. I already had 2 Hypex DSP amplifiers from previous projects, so the whole thing should be fully active.

So Alexander put together a kit for me, wood came from the hardware store (28mm MDF for the front, 18mm MPX birch for the body), then it started with milling, gluing and sanding ...

Since I had already knocked a few speakers together, the milling of the chassis with the router and the assembly of the housing was no longer an issue. However, I had never attached beveled bevels, so that was new territory. For this purpose I attached steel strips (from the hardware store) with screw terminals. I first tried the foxtail method (sawing along the edge), but the saw was constantly jammed. I then switched to the orbital sander. With a 40er sheet, the MDF turned rather quickly into dust, the bevel succeeded perfectly. Alexander also told me about a method using a router, but I did not try that since the MDF was so easy to grind.

The second crux for me was the cutout for the bass reflex tube. I can only recommend to everyone to do the milling first on a test piece, because it feels like only a few micrometers can make the difference between “doesn't go in” and “crap, sits way too loose”. The rest then went quickly, damping with Alubutyl attached, wiring, damping in, chassis in.

For the final vote I drove with the two prototypes to Alexander, where we did the fine tuning of the DSP points, the damping of the speaker is still completely optimized and also carried out the final bass reflex tuning.

It was followed by a trial listening in direct comparison with the DXT-RLY. Both great speakers with naturally similar tuning, but the DXT-MON-STAND is already audible deeper into the bass cellar. Otherwise, she has all the virtues mentioned above:

• • absolutely neutral tonality
  • complete detachment of the music from the speakers
  • excellent stereo picture
  • great detail resolution in the treble range
  • crisp and fast basses

After a long day of pink noise and hundreds of measurements, I happily drove home with 2 DXT-MON-STAND speakers and was never disappointed in the process! Thanks again, Alexander!
Oh, I haven't solved one problem yet: since I don't want to go without the speakers for a day, I haven't been able to do the final finish so far, the idea is to paint the front matt black ...

Addendum ...

And that with the matte black finish has finally worked out 🙂

Short review

I became infected with the record virus about two years ago. So a turntable moved in (current status: three dual 701,732,741), then an amplifier (dual CV 1700) and a tube amplifier (Reussenzehn Tube Slave S). Now only the right boxes were missing.
The profile for these boxes was:

• a good bass without sub support
• standing speakers
• suitable for the tube amplifier

After a long reading in various forums, with the usual suspects, I came across the Samuels of Alexander hot man.

During a nice phone call, it was clear they fit like ass on bucket and what can I say ... I was not disappointed, experience music in a new way, hear things that weren't there before.
Since my listening room is also my home theater, it did not take long and they were used as front speakers. After that it was clear the devil theater can take off and a few emails later it was firmly established the HQ Compact.

Baumappe purchased, the wood trim ordered from our hardware store, chassis and components ordered for the frequency turnouts.
Frequency switch soldered ... that was a lot easier because I had made holes in the Samuel's Alexander. The MDF glued according to the construction plan, the chassis milled out with the router + milling compass.

Was not a problem until then, but what I did not like was the solution with the tweeter. The sits normally in a HT tube, I've built a case for it, which has promised me more. The whole thing would then be glued to the box after observing the mass height and depth of the tweeter.

The speakers were then properly sanded first, then they were primed and rolled with black paint. As with the Samuel's Granite Effect paint, I used belton paint for the finish.

Is super easy to process and conceals even small mistakes. You should choose as a basic tone about the finish, so it saves some spraying processes and it covers better. Finally, apply the effect clear coat of belton, marry and enjoy the chassis and box.

The sound of the HQ Kompakt is close to the Samuel's in the high and midrange, the bass is by far not as powerful as the Samuel's. The HQ Kompakt fit perfectly with the Samuel's as it should be.

CONCLUSION

Fit in with me just as well, the Samuel's play alone with records, with films the HQ Kompakt is added and soon also the subwoofer SPH-380TC BR.

Fully active, with the DDRC-24 of Mini-DSP and Ice-Power amplifiers

Some time ago infected with the DIY-LS virus, I followed the development of the DXT-Mon with interest - ultimately designed in "competition" with a widely used reference monitor of the same size. The highest quality LS that I have owned so far were compact Focal with beryllium HT, the current reference for me is mainly Stax and Audeze headphones with corresponding DIY amplifiers.
After I had been looking for new, high-quality speakers for my little “music room” for a while, the finished product fit exactly into my loot scheme.
When it finally became clear that Alexander also released the DSP data for common systems for his projects, there was no stopping him, because I wanted to build actively right from the start. The 9,5l version was built.

Since I lacked a counterweight to the rather unusual front in the standard form, I sat for a long time and figured out the case shape. Soon a nice piece of solid wood was found for the front, 

I built the rest of the MDF according to Alexander's plan. A friend of mine made the "crooked" parts on the CNC milling machine, which made things very easy. 

The solid wood part I have repeatedly sealed with hard wax oil, the
I had the rest of the body painted with "liquid rubber" by a friend.

There was some confusion when taking over the DSP data*, as it seems
nothing wanted to fit - after a few emails (always answered very quickly! by the way) the error was found and I had suitable turnout data (a DDRC24 and a DIY power amplifier with IcePower modules are used as active hardware).

*Note: Initially, biquads were used for the Mini-DSP-HD, which works internally at 96kHz. The DDRC-24 works with a clock rate of 48kHz => the biquads did not fit. The error could then be corrected very easily.

The result inspires me every time again!

I can listen to music for hours without being fatigued, the spatial image is very accurate and dissolves completely from the speakers.
With a little bass boost through the room itself, the LS reach about 45 Hz linearly. With Dirac Live equalized in the bass range, I don't miss a subwoofer, and the “little ones” can easily cope with higher levels.
All in all, a speaker that leaves nothing to be desired for me and has far exceeded the set expectations.

Looking for my perfect home theater speaker

The home theater should be more beautiful and also: sound better. In addition, I felt like a speaker self-made. Since I lack the necessary know-how for my own development, a kit came close. I was looking for loudspeakers that are flat, because they should be operated behind a transparent screen without unnecessarily reducing the space. Also suitable for on-wall if possible. Also for the side and rear speakers, I find flat on-wall speakers optimal, as well as the side seats can still be balanced halfway balanced. If the loudspeakers protrude far into the room, the distance difference to listeners outside the reference space is relatively larger ("the left ear sticks to the left rear LS, while 2m is still on the right side ...").

When radiating, I prefer a good-natured, broad radiation without discoloration. Here too, I am concerned with the beloved ones in the cheap places, since I have to admit that I usually claim the reference place myself.

In terms of level I was certified by friends that I like to hear loud or the first question in a demo is always direction of the neighborhood relations. I myself would say that I like to hear loud, but not extremely loud, so quite similar in terms of level as in a commercial cinema. Of course the speakers should be able to do that. Low bass is not so important to me in terms of music and language. For home cinema effects like explosions, a "small" DBA from 8x 12 subwoofers takes care of that anyway.

In terms of sound characteristics, I now know that bands and AMTs usually sound too soft and horns and piezos too shrill. Say a normal dome seems to be suitable for me as a tweeter. Of course, the speakers should fit into the budget. As high quality, but also so expensive that I can afford to gradually even a full-blown Xnumx Atmos setup, so operate a total of eleven Wavewall 7.1.4 speakers.

All described requirements are met by the Wavewall 182. This was the decision for me to start with three pieces (Left, Center, Right).

The construction

As often as the end result was admired ("great shape"), I swore so much about the sloping sidewalls during the construction phase. The first box I actually built with a borrowed circular saw without rail (...!). What can I say, I had wanted it so and even that went. In the meantime, I have also done the sawing by means of a circular saw, as well as with a dip saw and clamped rail. The latter is definitely the best way. After the sawing followed the milling of the chassis recesses. With a cutting circle and router no problem. But even here, the special design takes its toll. To reach the depth of only 10cm a pocket has to be milled into the back wall. At some point I had a veritable turning worm from the whole milling shop. The glueing was also not quite trivial, as it is oblique boards in several axes to force firmly. But that was somehow in the end. During the subsequent grinding, I also tried a few techniques. To round the corners finally some material must be removed. I can recommend an eccentric grinder with coarse sandpaper for this.

A cardboard flap helped to judge the rounding. An electric planer wears off material very quickly, but requires controlled application or otherwise leaves a mogul slope, that is: rather not recommended. Spatula was not wrong then and as a finish, there was rolled-up Warnex textured paint in black.

What is still missing? Oh, the crossover. As far as I like painting by numbers. Alexander provided me with additional, calculated resistances to adjust the tweeter on the screen (compensate for high tone reduction). Now just phry everything in the tight housing, tighten and ready. First impression: With the whole MDF and the heavy, massive woofers (which make a massive and very high-quality impression), the boxes are surprisingly heavy. Of course, once hung, that's no problem anymore.

How do you sound now?

Measurements are provided by Alexander. There is a scapegoat from me now. The things can play loud and bring over nice punchy bass over. The sweetspot is nice and wide, all seats are subjectively very linear. This is definitely a strength of the speakers. The tweeters sound too dull and not too sharp - fits. The stage is more in depth than forward, or is located between the boxes. Nevertheless, it did not sound perfect at first. The sound did not break 100% of the speakers (figuratively speaking). This has changed after a break-in period, which others confirm. Now it suits and sounds a lot more airy and "liberated" than at the beginning.

Second impression: After a move, the boxes are now in the new home theater active. The new, about 30qm large room is now also equipped with many more absorbers. Eight packages of rock wool and a few square meters of Basotect are installed. In addition to the eight subwoofers of the DBA play there 7x Wavewall 182, as well as other four Sammelsurium speakers from my collection. The three Wavewall 182 front speakers no longer hang directly on the AVR Denon 4300, but on an external, cheap Thomann power amplifier, the E3-250. In terms of hi-fi enjoyment, the power amp is not outstanding, it lacks resolution and dynamics. Nevertheless, it sounds quite ok and has at least greater power reserves than the AVR. The description on Alexander's website already shows the rather low efficiency by uA the closed design, ie a strong amp is recommended for the wavewalls. Nevertheless, I was surprised by the change in sound by the PA power amp. With the additional power, the Wavewalls now play much better again. Above all, the gross dynamics increased sharply, it sounds as if now significantly larger speakers at work.

In addition an anecdote: In a small cinema screening, I played a stereo title (Daft Punk) before and was convinced L and R, as well as the subwoofer. This was a mistake, it only played two Wavewall 182, no sub! The bass boost through the wall installation, as well as a strong amp can bring the Wavewalls out in terms of bass really big. And that even with slightly screwed loudspeakers, FL and FR are bent on the listening position, but this is not absolutely necessary due to the good-natured radiation behavior. So: Played Wavewall 182 powered by a strong amp sounds awesome! As a sound-describing attribute, the word "strong" comes to mind in my heavily insulated home theater.

Status: Worth the whole thing? Hard to answer. It certainly does not hurt to have the homemade really feel like it, otherwise it just is not fun. If you just want to save, you better comb the second-hand market. Conversely, it is of course a great feeling to put self-built speakers into operation! From the resale value, it is always difficult with DIY speakers, as there is no big brand behind it. Looking at material costs vs. Market prices of new speakers, it looks very different. My subjective impression is that you have to lie down significantly above 500 €, maybe even around the 1000 €, for a new home theater speaker with the same performance.

Future

Displacement can not be replaced by anything, except by a stronger power amplifier. That's not true of course, we all know the end of the story, displacement can only be replaced by EVEN MORE HUB! In this sense, I decided to round off the home theater with larger Wavewalls, so demand from Alexander the large version with two woofers. Fortunately, he let himself be moved, half of the development was probably already in his drawer. The development of 182.2 is now complete and it looks like I'm the first customer for it. Since the speakers will be concealed anyway I build this time the simple variant, so rectangular boxes, without pockets in the back wall. So it's planned: 3x the new, large "Wavewall 182.2" with two woofers as front and center. Rear and surround back, as well as 4x Height are populated with the normal Wavewall 182. That should be enough for now ...

Here is a short summary of my experiences in the construction of the DXT-MON. For me as a "newbie" that was a great experience. Also to the effect that as a "city man" without existing workshop and appropriate tools can come to an absolutely convincing result.

I do not think our bar was set low. In the past, an 2.5 walkway speaker from an Italian manufacturer was used. Cost: 3.600 €. In our living room we hear about 25m² with 3m ceiling height.

One day I came - apparently on the edge of mental derangement, what was it that rode me? - on the idea of ​​expanding a driver. That was a mistake that started a thought process. Behind the admittedly “chic” looking leather / MDF front, I found rather disillusionment inside: no insulation, the switch was listlessly “tacked” and the internal milling on the TMT's wasn't really there either.

That left an “unemotional” impression on me. At the same time I made the decision to actively deal with "Plan B": I ask around for other speakers ...

In addition, I came to the realization that we cannot optimally position the existing floorstanding speakers - the existing space simply does not provide that. The loudspeaker cannot help it, but more should be discussed / questioned about it during the consultation at the local dealer.

I did not get any further after many studio visits. The most pleasing, passive solution over a closed compact was already well above the purchase price of the then floorstanding loudspeakers. The other alternative: fully active solution. Had but my tube amplifier as a victim result, since no pre-out is available. I did not bring that over my heart. The fully active variant would not have been so cheap and my better half immediately raised the objection that the full-time people look "modest".

Somehow, the reference to DIY is missing, right? Right. I have not had that to date

Time considered. Theoretically I was informed and knew that there are solutions for the self-construction of loudspeakers. Also how these are technically implemented. And honestly, the "rocket-science" in the speaker construction also interested me somehow.

What then speaks against self-construction? Well, nothing at all. Except maybe:

No usable workshop, too few suitable tools, too many unsuitable tools, soldering the crossover - I'm laughing, changing lightbulbs is still easy and the woodwork from elementary school that I remembered went through with "goes like this" . Oh yes, and I don't really have any time either.

Actually, all traffic lights jump to "red" immediately. As a result, you keep your hands off it and end the project. But not so with people who have their home in the orbit of Stuttgart 21 ... You are used to different things, you step on the gas!

So, make up your mind - it will be built by yourself. I then spent almost a year looking for a suitable concept. In addition, there were considerations as to how I can have the pending work done by professionals as far as possible.

Basically, I was amazed how many building proposals are available on the net. Many of them are well documented. Unfortunately, one rarely finds the possibility that one can enjoy listening to a kit.

At some point I played Russian Roulette and made up my mind to take up the concept most suitable for my impression. In my opinion, this was the DXT-MON of Alexander Heißmann among the last 5 candidates.

I bought the tree cap and asked Mr. Hotman for a partner who made me the case. And indeed tutti kompli. I was then made aware of the joinery Thomaier, which turned out in retrospect as the right place.

Then it actually started already. The housings were commissioned and I ordered all the missing pieces of the puzzle bit by bit.

Except for the insulation, I strictly adhered to the plan of Hr. Heißmann. Only the story with the bitumen was suspect to me. The toenails opened up as I imagined liquefying the bitumen with a hot air gun. The alternative was then found: Alubutyl in self-adhesive execution.

The doubling with 2 layers alubutyl and additionally 4mm plywood was very easy and feasible without problems via the assembly hatch. Which was also very helpful: you could understand the result very well by the well-known in the net "knocking test". It was unbelievable how well the doubling worked.

Then the walk to a professional painter followed. Happy coincidence here: the painter also likes to hear stereo and was immediately hooked by the project. He then invested a whopping eight hours of work and presented me within a week an absolute top result. The drivers I have deposited with the painter, so that he could always check the passability.

And then it was time: "all in" as in poker! Final result:

How does it sound Well. Damn good. I am not missing anything - on the contrary! 100 points - everything done right. Given their size, the speakers can be integrated very well into the living room.

Distance to the back wall with us: about 60cm. Passive membrane (without additional weight) directed inwards. At the lineup I will change something.

I don't write any more now. All impressions are based on our circumstances, so it's difficult to transfer ...

Conclusion

Fits like a fist on our eyes, the speakers are really fun. Many Thanks!

Desirable (from my point of view):

@ SEAS: Sells the tweeter + 10,00 € and installed on the waveguide instead of plastic, please a more valuable material.

What would I do differently:

Definitely choose MPX for the housings. MDF comes to me personally something "strange".

Given the cost of painting (in relation to the housings), I would aim for a different solution in the future.