ambitious stereo applications in small to medium-sized rooms
passive near-field monitor
In home theater aplications as a main, center or rear speaker. With DXT-MON and DXT-Wave perfectly combinable
Features
extremely neutral and precise reproduction
outstanding uniform directional behavior
lowest harmonic and non-linear distortions
the built-in drivers are of the highest quality
very impressive and effortless reproduction of even the lowest notes
Thanks to the passive membrane (Dayton DSA-215 PR or Seas SP22R) there are no problems frequently encountered with ventilated systems in terms of flow noise or "mid-range waste"
Components
Wavecor WF182BD09
Hobby Hifi 03 / 2014
These drivers (Note: WF182BD09 and WF182BD10) offer outstanding value for money. For audiophile and living room-friendly two-way floor boxes, they are simply perfect.
Hello Matthias!
Yes, according to the simulation, it should work! The Seas SP22R would also work.
I chose the Dayton because it works very well, in my opinion it looks good and it's cheap. The tin basket doesn't bother me, mounted there behind.
The tuning of an alternative PM (Accuton / Seas) could be done with a simple impedance measurement.
To the "Brummer"
The nada of sound and tone, just to give an example, is ~ 45% larger 😉
DXT-MON 182 is reflected in terms of directional behavior. What is, in my view preferable, but calls for some more attention in terms of room acoustics.
So DXT-MON-182 does outperform Cinetor-Evo in terms of bass performance. It goes noticeably deeper + passive radiator vs. BR
If I wanted a high level home cinema I'd choose Cinetro-EVO with subwoofer support. I also would prefer it if my room was ´cold´ in acoustical terms.
Listening distance also may play a role. If it is very large Cinetor Evo maybe is to be preferred.
So, to sum it up: For a 'simple and high quality stereo system' my choice would be, under most circumstances, DXT-MON 182..
Nice LS, but it is noticeable that you are already sticking to a concept (which admittedly also works well).
For the station wagon with the Seas ER18RNX, I would take a look at the new SB.Acoustics PM (SB13PFCR-00, SB16PFCR-00, SB20PFCR-00), which should also look perfect!
For a change, how about a real 3 Weger (with SB Acoustics, Sica or B&C chassis + DXT or similar)
Hello "NoWay"
No, I don't adhere to any concept. This one that I found (Seas DXT + oblique bevels) works so exceptionally well that I decided to make it a series.
And this series was still missing the 7 ″ 1 ″ combination ...
I consider it critical that practically every loudspeaker, regardless of whether it makes sense or not, has become oblique in the meantime.
DXT-Wave is a real 3-way with the Seas DXT, and it will soon be followed by another 3-way speaker in a classic arrangement.
When choosing the drivers in the middle and low range, I see no reason to stray from the Wavecors. I simply consider it to be the best that is currently available to buy, and at a very moderate price.
Hi Alexander,
are the struts of the DXT-MON 182 pi times thumb,
or did you also do investigations / measurements?
Wouldn't glued-in wooden struts have a similar effect?
Is there a possibility to listen to one or the other kit on site?
Hi Detlef,
Yes, measured very extensively. Here is just one of many measurement series
The mic was ~ 15cm away from the side wall. Red is the untreated case.
And yes, the threaded rods could, for example. be replaced by logs.
Unfortunately I don't have a screening room at the moment.
Hi Alexander,
I like the concept very much. Do I have to pay attention to something when I make a floorstanding speaker out of baffle width / chamfer, chassis position, maintain volume?
And can you recommend other measures for sound insulation, e.g. Hawaphon? If they cost a little more, it would be worth it to me.
best regards
Hello Rüdiger!
Yes, you can do that. I would make minimal adjustments to the switch. I would then tell you and publish it here.
The absorption measures with the DXT-MON-182 are quite complex and in my opinion quite close to the optimum. No improvement is expected when using other / more expensive materials.
Regards
Alexander
Hi Alexander,
was the DXT-MON-182 project actually implemented as a slim floorstanding loudspeaker? I would also be very interested, but couldn't find any information on your website.
Best Regards
Hello Arne
Yes, some variants have already been built as floorstanding loudspeakers. The switch is only adjusted minimally. The volume remains the same or is increased slightly. The PM vote remains the same.
I am happy to help with the implementation!
Best Regards
Alexander
http://www.audiosciencereview.com is a very interesting website. The DXT mon is often mentioned there in the forum as a very high-quality alternative, for example to the Genelec. Armin has very advanced test equipment such as a Klippel near field scanner (NFS). Maybe an idea to let him do a test? I prefer the DXT-mon 182 😉
I just want to say thank you. I previously had a kit with a Satori chassis in d'Appolito technology.
The feeling that this cannot be the best was always there.
After a reasonable break-in period, I can say: the sound of the DXT182 in my living room is at least one class better. In addition, the boxes are half the size and cost less.
The biggest abnormalities in the sound impression: no matter how many are on the recording, you can always follow each and every one with ease.
Always suitable for the long term, although they also clearly differentiate between good and bad recordings. Subwoofer: superfluous. Nothing booms or buzzes here.
I have a lot of fun with the boxes. For the first time I can say: I can hardly imagine that it could be better.
So thanks to me for the selection and very special thanks to the developer!
Hi Alexander!
Is there any difference in sound between this model, and original DXT-MON, other than deeper bass on DXT-MON 182?
Is it a good idea to make front baffle from solid piece of wood, or may be it would cause some unwanted resonances?
Hi Alexander
They sound very similar :).
Due to the thickness of the front I would say solid wood (if not sth. Very light) is perfectly doable. A very beautiful example in walnut: DXT-MON in walnut
What do you have to pay attention to when setting up the DXT-MON 182 with regard to the passive membrane on the back? What distance to the wall should be kept here? Are there any big differences in the setup compared to the normal DXT-MON with the side PM?
Whether the PM is at the side or at the back makes practically no difference in terms of the set-up. Both variants would like to have some space to the rear.
I would recommend> = 20cm ... In some listening situations, however, less can work. I wouldn't go under 10cm.
You can experiment.
I would recommend the DXT-MON-182 up to 25-30m² ... depending on how loud it should be.
Regarding wall placement:
Give them> = 20cm ... Less could also work, but in most cases> = 20cm is better.
It doesn't make a huge difference if the PR is on the side or in the back.
It would be helpful if you can subjectively define sound differences little bit to make it easy to decide, i think 182 uses the more expensive 182bd. using it without subwoofer in music should also be considered.
I am currently using gr-research x-sls encore, which has unfatiguing, slightly warmer sound, you can listen to this speaker all day. these qualities i would like to have in any other speaker i try.
Hi there!
In terms of deepest bass: DXT-MON 182 => DXT-MON Stand => DXT-MON RLY
In terms of MAX-SPL: DXT-MON 182 => DXT-MON Stand = DXT-MON RLY
In terms of distortions: DXT-MON 182 => DXT-MON Stand => DXT-MON RLY
DXT-MON 182 is the best overall performer if you have enough space to place it properly.
DXT-MON Stand also performs outstandingly also without subwoofer … the rly version could (sometimes) benefit from a subwoofer.
In terms of deepest bass: DXT-MON-182 => DXT-MON-RNX equals DXT-MON Stand => DXT-MON RLY
In terms of MAX-SPL: DXT-MON-182 equals DXT-MON-RNX => DXT-MON Stand equals DXT-MON RLY
In terms of distortions: DXT-MON-182 equals DXT-MON-RNX => DXT-MON Stand => DXT-MON RLY
(RNX performs slightly better in K2, 182 in K3)
Hi Alexander,
Is there actually still hope for the 3rd? Way of Dxt Mon 182. That would be nice to hear! I think some are looking forward to it or are still waiting for it!
Thank you and best regards
Hello B.
No, there is no 182rd option planned for the DXT-MON-3. He never was. It goes deep enough… 🙂
For little DXT-MON, the third way will come soon. An SB-3 partial active as a side bass with a Hypex Fusion amp.
Stay tuned 🙂
Hi Neb
Impedance drops down to 3,2Ω @20kHz which is absolutely in the range of a 4Ω Speaker and does not pose problems any.
Your measurements are perfectly congruent to mine.
Holy Shit,
After initial doubts and getting used to (or burn in) and different stuffings and tweeter-attenuation, I finally settled on the original. I did add 20g to the PR. And I really like these speakers.
Tonight I could place them on some stands and further away from walls.
It blew my mind! These speakers are amazing in every way, bass, stage, neutrality, detail. And can be listened to the entire night. Can't find no end, don't want to stop listening!
No expensive components or gear needed! Simply amazing.
Thanks and awe to the designers.
Hello.
I just decided to build the DXT-MON-182 and was wondering if it would be OK to replace the M14 threaded rod with an M16 threaded rod without affecting the sound quality?
Buy this kit on Lautsprechershop.de
Nice thing, but also a really nice roar 🙂
Could you also use the 220iger Accuton-PM?
It is really expensive, but also visually and haptically
a blast.
gruß
Matthias
Hello Matthias!
Yes, according to the simulation, it should work! The Seas SP22R would also work.
I chose the Dayton because it works very well, in my opinion it looks good and it's cheap. The tin basket doesn't bother me, mounted there behind.
The tuning of an alternative PM (Accuton / Seas) could be done with a simple impedance measurement.
To the "Brummer"
The nada of sound and tone, just to give an example, is ~ 45% larger 😉
Regards
How it performs compared to Cinetor -Evo?
What would be your choice for a simple but high quality stereo system?
Regards
Adam
Hi Adam
It depends 🙂
DXT-MON 182 is reflected in terms of directional behavior. What is, in my view preferable, but calls for some more attention in terms of room acoustics.
So DXT-MON-182 does outperform Cinetor-Evo in terms of bass performance. It goes noticeably deeper + passive radiator vs. BR
If I wanted a high level home cinema I'd choose Cinetro-EVO with subwoofer support. I also would prefer it if my room was ´cold´ in acoustical terms.
Listening distance also may play a role. If it is very large Cinetor Evo maybe is to be preferred.
So, to sum it up: For a 'simple and high quality stereo system' my choice would be, under most circumstances, DXT-MON 182..
Nice LS, but it is noticeable that you are already sticking to a concept (which admittedly also works well).
For the station wagon with the Seas ER18RNX, I would take a look at the new SB.Acoustics PM (SB13PFCR-00, SB16PFCR-00, SB20PFCR-00), which should also look perfect!
For a change, how about a real 3 Weger (with SB Acoustics, Sica or B&C chassis + DXT or similar)
gruß
Hello "NoWay"
No, I don't adhere to any concept. This one that I found (Seas DXT + oblique bevels) works so exceptionally well that I decided to make it a series.
And this series was still missing the 7 ″ 1 ″ combination ...
I consider it critical that practically every loudspeaker, regardless of whether it makes sense or not, has become oblique in the meantime.
DXT-Wave is a real 3-way with the Seas DXT, and it will soon be followed by another 3-way speaker in a classic arrangement.
When choosing the drivers in the middle and low range, I see no reason to stray from the Wavecors. I simply consider it to be the best that is currently available to buy, and at a very moderate price.
I like to look at the SB PMs. Thanks for the tip!
Merry Christmas!
Hi Alexander,
are the struts of the DXT-MON 182 pi times thumb,
or did you also do investigations / measurements?
Wouldn't glued-in wooden struts have a similar effect?
Is there a possibility to listen to one or the other kit on site?
Greeting Detlef
Hi Detlef,
Yes, measured very extensively. Here is just one of many measurement series
The mic was ~ 15cm away from the side wall. Red is the untreated case.
And yes, the threaded rods could, for example. be replaced by logs.
Unfortunately I don't have a screening room at the moment.
Regards
Hi Alexander,
I like the concept very much. Do I have to pay attention to something when I make a floorstanding speaker out of baffle width / chamfer, chassis position, maintain volume?
And can you recommend other measures for sound insulation, e.g. Hawaphon? If they cost a little more, it would be worth it to me.
best regards
Hello Rüdiger!
Yes, you can do that. I would make minimal adjustments to the switch. I would then tell you and publish it here.
The absorption measures with the DXT-MON-182 are quite complex and in my opinion quite close to the optimum. No improvement is expected when using other / more expensive materials.
Regards
Alexander
Hi Alexander,
was the DXT-MON-182 project actually implemented as a slim floorstanding loudspeaker? I would also be very interested, but couldn't find any information on your website.
Best Regards
Hello Arne
Yes, some variants have already been built as floorstanding loudspeakers. The switch is only adjusted minimally. The volume remains the same or is increased slightly. The PM vote remains the same.
I am happy to help with the implementation!
Best Regards
Alexander
Hi Alexander,
http://www.audiosciencereview.com is a very interesting website. The DXT mon is often mentioned there in the forum as a very high-quality alternative, for example to the Genelec. Armin has very advanced test equipment such as a Klippel near field scanner (NFS). Maybe an idea to let him do a test? I prefer the DXT-mon 182 😉
I have been thinking the same.
Should I send mine to the Amir?
If it weren't so cumbersome ...,
That would be great!
I just want to say thank you. I previously had a kit with a Satori chassis in d'Appolito technology.
The feeling that this cannot be the best was always there.
After a reasonable break-in period, I can say: the sound of the DXT182 in my living room is at least one class better. In addition, the boxes are half the size and cost less.
The biggest abnormalities in the sound impression: no matter how many are on the recording, you can always follow each and every one with ease.
Always suitable for the long term, although they also clearly differentiate between good and bad recordings. Subwoofer: superfluous. Nothing booms or buzzes here.
I have a lot of fun with the boxes. For the first time I can say: I can hardly imagine that it could be better.
So thanks to me for the selection and very special thanks to the developer!
Hello, would it be ok to round off all outer 90 degree corners of the housing (for looks)?
Sincerely, Daniel
Hello Daniel
Yes, that would be possible! No problem …
best regards
Alexander
Hello,
Would it be ok to round off the 90 ° edges of the box soundwise?
Sincerely, Daniel
Yes 😉
Hi Alexander!
Is there any difference in sound between this model, and original DXT-MON, other than deeper bass on DXT-MON 182?
Is it a good idea to make front baffle from solid piece of wood, or may be it would cause some unwanted resonances?
Merry Christmas!
Kind regards,
Alexander
Hi Alexander
They sound very similar :).
Due to the thickness of the front I would say solid wood (if not sth. Very light) is perfectly doable. A very beautiful example in walnut:
DXT-MON in walnut
Best regards
What do you have to pay attention to when setting up the DXT-MON 182 with regard to the passive membrane on the back? What distance to the wall should be kept here? Are there any big differences in the setup compared to the normal DXT-MON with the side PM?
Hello
Whether the PM is at the side or at the back makes practically no difference in terms of the set-up. Both variants would like to have some space to the rear.
I would recommend> = 20cm ... In some listening situations, however, less can work. I wouldn't go under 10cm.
You can experiment.
Regards
Alexander
Hi Alexander,
I am also interested in the answer regarding the wall placement. Furthermore, until what room size would you think the DXT-MON 182 would be suitable?
Hi Cameron
I would recommend the DXT-MON-182 up to 25-30m² ... depending on how loud it should be.
Regarding wall placement:
Give them> = 20cm ... Less could also work, but in most cases> = 20cm is better.
It doesn't make a huge difference if the PR is on the side or in the back.
Best regards
Alexander
Hi Alexander,
I would also be interested in an answer regarding the distance to the wall (also in comparison to the DXT-MON).
Greeting Peter
I like this concept very much.
Would love to see a slim floorstanding version with Hypex DSP amplifiers.
mon 182 vs mon rly vs mon (mon stood).
It would be helpful if you can subjectively define sound differences little bit to make it easy to decide, i think 182 uses the more expensive 182bd. using it without subwoofer in music should also be considered.
I am currently using gr-research x-sls encore, which has unfatiguing, slightly warmer sound, you can listen to this speaker all day. these qualities i would like to have in any other speaker i try.
Thank You.
Hi there!
In terms of deepest bass: DXT-MON 182 => DXT-MON Stand => DXT-MON RLY
In terms of MAX-SPL: DXT-MON 182 => DXT-MON Stand = DXT-MON RLY
In terms of distortions: DXT-MON 182 => DXT-MON Stand => DXT-MON RLY
DXT-MON 182 is the best overall performer if you have enough space to place it properly.
DXT-MON Stand also performs outstandingly also without subwoofer … the rly version could (sometimes) benefit from a subwoofer.
Hi Alexander,
Where would you place the DXT-MON RNX in your previous comparison (bass, spl, distortions)? 182 vs MON RNX vs MON Stand vs MON RLY…
Have you developed any stand version of the DXT-MON RNX or planning to do so?
THX!
Hi Frederick
In terms of deepest bass: DXT-MON-182 => DXT-MON-RNX equals DXT-MON Stand => DXT-MON RLY
In terms of MAX-SPL: DXT-MON-182 equals DXT-MON-RNX => DXT-MON Stand equals DXT-MON RLY
In terms of distortions: DXT-MON-182 equals DXT-MON-RNX => DXT-MON Stand => DXT-MON RLY
(RNX performs slightly better in K2, 182 in K3)
Best regards
Hi Alexander,
Is there actually still hope for the 3rd? Way of Dxt Mon 182. That would be nice to hear! I think some are looking forward to it or are still waiting for it!
Thank you and best regards
Hello B.
No, there is no 182rd option planned for the DXT-MON-3. He never was. It goes deep enough… 🙂
For little DXT-MON, the third way will come soon. An SB-3 partial active as a side bass with a Hypex Fusion amp.
Stay tuned 🙂
I have built them and measured impedance – it seems to drop to 3ohm at higher frequencies which is a bit worrying.
Hi Neb
Impedance drops down to 3,2Ω @20kHz which is absolutely in the range of a 4Ω Speaker and does not pose problems any.
Your measurements are perfectly congruent to mine.
Best regards
Holy Shit,
After initial doubts and getting used to (or burn in) and different stuffings and tweeter-attenuation, I finally settled on the original. I did add 20g to the PR. And I really like these speakers.
Tonight I could place them on some stands and further away from walls.
It blew my mind! These speakers are amazing in every way, bass, stage, neutrality, detail. And can be listened to the entire night. Can't find no end, don't want to stop listening!
No expensive components or gear needed! Simply amazing.
Thanks and awe to the designers.
Hi Frido
It makes me happy to read these words!
Best regards
Alexander
Hello.
I just decided to build the DXT-MON-182 and was wondering if it would be OK to replace the M14 threaded rod with an M16 threaded rod without affecting the sound quality?
With kind regards,
Axel
Hello Axel
That pleases me!
This works without any problems. Have fun building it.
Alexander