been lookin for a good set of components for a while well i think ive finally decided to go ahead and buy a set... im gonna list a few and see what you guys think...
http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_5113.html
these here are on a great sale, they have high rms rating and 91db sensitivity @ 2.83v/1meter.. silk dome tweet.
http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_2857.html
have heard the 2way set like these and was very impressed with modest power rating.. not too fond of the aluminum tweet..
http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_7477.html
have not heard this set either but am sure it can run with the big dogs
will probably go with a good 60-125 watt rms 2 channel amp to run these... also plan on going with one 12 inch woofer, probably an alpine type r with my kicker kx600.1 amp. ported enclosure... the bank wouldnt finance me for the new mustang so i think im gonna get the older fox style, lookin for a 92-93 gt... any thoughts would be great... take it easy
Replies (7)
swez on 07/29/2006 11:38:06
Those are all very nice choices CVR! Top of the heap stuff here.
Have you looked at/demo'd the 2-way Comps from JBL and Infinity yet? I have been installing a few of the 2 ohm version Comp models of the Infinity's and find them excellent in performance, good prices if you shop and at 2 ohms loads, a modest amp will drive them very well too.
1. http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_4295.html (2 ohms)
2. http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_2742.html (3 ohms)
3. http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_7433.html
One thing I have noticed about both JBL and Infinity systems, they do have a very distinct type of sound. Some love it while others will pass on them. The tweeters are not silk dome here either. However, with a good EQ system, proper aiming and the use of attenuation circuits in the crossovers, they can actually sound very lively yet natural.
If you wind up with a Ford Mustang GT, most older models use a 6x8 format for stock speakers. Here, you can either go to plate they speakers or fabricate pods for 6.5" Comps.
FYI: If you want above average rear fill performance in OEM formats, consider the Coaxials with outboard crossovers. These sound very good too, but drop into stock holes and speaker locations.
Swez
PS Again, all your current choices are very good stuff. But if you need to shave costs, amp power and not sacrifice crisp, robust performance, these other models seem very up to the task at lower costs for both speakers and amplification.
Ash on 07/29/2006 20:08:39
Top dollar choices there. What is your ultimate goal in this project?
I myself have gone for the more SQ sound with SPL not being so important. With this route, a good set of midbass/midrange & tweets are very important.
I would suggest no matter what set you decide on, before adding anything, listen to them for a while installed. Then you will be able to best figure out if you need rear fill, what size sub, and how much power is needed.
If SQ, often rear fill and/or hefty subs with gobs of power is not needed as they will cause more problems than they will solve. In a SQ install, you would be surprised at how less sub integration you actually need. If you are trying to extend the front soundstage's frequency to lower octaves without "drawing" bass to the back, a "too powerful" sub hinders your ability to do so. This is a common mistake often made.
compvr15s on 07/30/2006 05:11:19
as far as sub power goes, i plan on using just one of my kicker kx600.1 amps. or possible buy a jl audio 500/1 from one of my buddies for a good price.... have not decied on a certain sub yet but im thinkin of going with an alpine 12inch type r. handles 500watts and only costs about 140 shipped. im looking for a clean system but im more interested in the heavy bass, money is really not an issue but if i can get buy cheap then thats great... i about ordered the jl 3ways that i mentioned but not too sure where the 4inch woofer would fit in the mustang, so maybe if i go with the jl 2ways i would be better off... my neighbor had a mustang gt of this year and the guy who owned it before had a set of jl components in there.... this was probably 3-4 years ago and was very impressed with them runnin on about 50 watts, they wernt very good off the head unit but once we added the amp they really came alive, with this being that long ago i would only imagine that performance is equal or better. and i know jl is a top notch manufacture...
with the hatch back body style im sure getting the bass i want will not be a problem hopefully not too much deadening material will be needed. and enclousre size is not an issue either, i never use my cargo space to haul things so if needed i can use the whole trunk area and still go ported.... i guess im lookin for the best overall performance will least amount of equipment, my old system constisted of two 15s which i love but im sure i can achive the same with a 12 inch woofer and proper enclosure in this giving vehicle, i know its like comparing apples and oranges but im not too worried about low end right now, i can handle that later, i just want a good set of speakers that will pump out some good tunes without consuming tons of power... thanx so far guys im gonna head out now im kinda tired ill be back to elaborate more sometime soon.
Ash on 07/30/2006 11:18:23
Available space for a 3-way components are always a issue, especially if the vehicle is cramped and provides no stock locales for each individual speaker. A 2-way is not a bad idea if customizing is a minimal option.
Remember this:
There is no inherent SQ advantages of either design over the other. The only main advantage to 3-ways is the room for extra power handling. This is done by the concentration of power into narrower ranges for each driver in the set. However, this does not guarantee better sound over an audiophile quality 2-way of the same stature. In fact, if not properly placed, 3-ways can present more imaging and phase issues, making them more difficult to work with.
Personally I am working with a 3-way setup in my own vehicle so I won't talk you into shying away from it. It's just important to know the pros & cons in using them.
As for the Alpine, well that's a no-brainer!
swez on 07/30/2006 12:16:15
Right on Ash and CVR... the Less is More approach is always a good one to consider.
The keys to great performance in any 2 or 3-way system are:
1. Adequate amping power
2. Well designed install
3. Phase alignment and avoiding cancellation issues
Item #1 is a no-brainer for anyone who has been on this board for more than 3 months. If we have enough clean power to feed a speaker system, that eliminates one problem.
Item #2 takes more time and experience to figure out. We know that mids and highs are best located in places that keep the aspect ratio between driver and passenger side as even as possible. The driver's side speakers are often very close (1-2 feet) from the driver, while the passenger side speakers are often 4-5 feet away from the driver. Here, kick panels make a lot of sense as now, we can norrow that ratio. (~3 ft on drivers side, ~5 ft on passenger's side and some attenuation/balance control between the two for best stereo imaging)
Item #3 is harder to manage in mobile audio applications. The key here, is that all speaker signals are reaching the same focal point at the same time. This means each speaker element, (woffer, mid and tweets) need to located on a closely matched planar orientation. This allows each speakers' signals to arrive at the listener's ears at the same time, with roughly the same SPL levels.
Finally, we know that low frequency speakers are not very directional. Their signals propagate well from most any location. Mids and high locations are more the isses as they tend to give a foused beam of energy, based on aiming and reflections/diffractions considerations. (Avoid mounting mids/highs in locations and aiming them directly at the listener) This causes "beaming" issues as these speakers operate more like a "line of sight" beam of acoustical energy.
A slightly off axis beam pattern works very well here. Most tweeters will sound very good between 15-20 degrees off axis to listener mountings. Mids can go a bit more, (20-30) degrees off axis and still sound very natural.
Comments?
Swez
Victor on 07/30/2006 16:47:30
ok, i am missing lessismore.... I would wish he is back on CK ASAP..... and i wud apologise to whatever mis-understandings I created between us....
swez on 07/31/2006 01:36:22
"Less" comes and goes as the wind. Just keep an eye out for one of his future postings and see if you can make direct e-mail contact with him to patch things up. He's truly a remarkable and talented fellow.
I too, miss his regular commentaries and inputs at CK. I guess we are not his favorite cup of Java for one reason or another? But if he does show up at CK again, make it a point to bury old hatchets.
Swez
http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_5113.html
these here are on a great sale, they have high rms rating and 91db sensitivity @ 2.83v/1meter.. silk dome tweet.
http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_2857.html
have heard the 2way set like these and was very impressed with modest power rating.. not too fond of the aluminum tweet..
http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_7477.html
have not heard this set either but am sure it can run with the big dogs
will probably go with a good 60-125 watt rms 2 channel amp to run these... also plan on going with one 12 inch woofer, probably an alpine type r with my kicker kx600.1 amp. ported enclosure... the bank wouldnt finance me for the new mustang so i think im gonna get the older fox style, lookin for a 92-93 gt... any thoughts would be great... take it easy
Replies (7)
swez on 07/29/2006 11:38:06
Those are all very nice choices CVR! Top of the heap stuff here.
Have you looked at/demo'd the 2-way Comps from JBL and Infinity yet? I have been installing a few of the 2 ohm version Comp models of the Infinity's and find them excellent in performance, good prices if you shop and at 2 ohms loads, a modest amp will drive them very well too.
1. http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_4295.html (2 ohms)
2. http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_2742.html (3 ohms)
3. http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_7433.html
One thing I have noticed about both JBL and Infinity systems, they do have a very distinct type of sound. Some love it while others will pass on them. The tweeters are not silk dome here either. However, with a good EQ system, proper aiming and the use of attenuation circuits in the crossovers, they can actually sound very lively yet natural.
If you wind up with a Ford Mustang GT, most older models use a 6x8 format for stock speakers. Here, you can either go to plate they speakers or fabricate pods for 6.5" Comps.
FYI: If you want above average rear fill performance in OEM formats, consider the Coaxials with outboard crossovers. These sound very good too, but drop into stock holes and speaker locations.
Swez
PS Again, all your current choices are very good stuff. But if you need to shave costs, amp power and not sacrifice crisp, robust performance, these other models seem very up to the task at lower costs for both speakers and amplification.
Ash on 07/29/2006 20:08:39
Top dollar choices there. What is your ultimate goal in this project?
I myself have gone for the more SQ sound with SPL not being so important. With this route, a good set of midbass/midrange & tweets are very important.
I would suggest no matter what set you decide on, before adding anything, listen to them for a while installed. Then you will be able to best figure out if you need rear fill, what size sub, and how much power is needed.
If SQ, often rear fill and/or hefty subs with gobs of power is not needed as they will cause more problems than they will solve. In a SQ install, you would be surprised at how less sub integration you actually need. If you are trying to extend the front soundstage's frequency to lower octaves without "drawing" bass to the back, a "too powerful" sub hinders your ability to do so. This is a common mistake often made.
compvr15s on 07/30/2006 05:11:19
as far as sub power goes, i plan on using just one of my kicker kx600.1 amps. or possible buy a jl audio 500/1 from one of my buddies for a good price.... have not decied on a certain sub yet but im thinkin of going with an alpine 12inch type r. handles 500watts and only costs about 140 shipped. im looking for a clean system but im more interested in the heavy bass, money is really not an issue but if i can get buy cheap then thats great... i about ordered the jl 3ways that i mentioned but not too sure where the 4inch woofer would fit in the mustang, so maybe if i go with the jl 2ways i would be better off... my neighbor had a mustang gt of this year and the guy who owned it before had a set of jl components in there.... this was probably 3-4 years ago and was very impressed with them runnin on about 50 watts, they wernt very good off the head unit but once we added the amp they really came alive, with this being that long ago i would only imagine that performance is equal or better. and i know jl is a top notch manufacture...
with the hatch back body style im sure getting the bass i want will not be a problem hopefully not too much deadening material will be needed. and enclousre size is not an issue either, i never use my cargo space to haul things so if needed i can use the whole trunk area and still go ported.... i guess im lookin for the best overall performance will least amount of equipment, my old system constisted of two 15s which i love but im sure i can achive the same with a 12 inch woofer and proper enclosure in this giving vehicle, i know its like comparing apples and oranges but im not too worried about low end right now, i can handle that later, i just want a good set of speakers that will pump out some good tunes without consuming tons of power... thanx so far guys im gonna head out now im kinda tired ill be back to elaborate more sometime soon.
Ash on 07/30/2006 11:18:23
Available space for a 3-way components are always a issue, especially if the vehicle is cramped and provides no stock locales for each individual speaker. A 2-way is not a bad idea if customizing is a minimal option.
Remember this:
There is no inherent SQ advantages of either design over the other. The only main advantage to 3-ways is the room for extra power handling. This is done by the concentration of power into narrower ranges for each driver in the set. However, this does not guarantee better sound over an audiophile quality 2-way of the same stature. In fact, if not properly placed, 3-ways can present more imaging and phase issues, making them more difficult to work with.
Personally I am working with a 3-way setup in my own vehicle so I won't talk you into shying away from it. It's just important to know the pros & cons in using them.
As for the Alpine, well that's a no-brainer!
swez on 07/30/2006 12:16:15
Right on Ash and CVR... the Less is More approach is always a good one to consider.
The keys to great performance in any 2 or 3-way system are:
1. Adequate amping power
2. Well designed install
3. Phase alignment and avoiding cancellation issues
Item #1 is a no-brainer for anyone who has been on this board for more than 3 months. If we have enough clean power to feed a speaker system, that eliminates one problem.
Item #2 takes more time and experience to figure out. We know that mids and highs are best located in places that keep the aspect ratio between driver and passenger side as even as possible. The driver's side speakers are often very close (1-2 feet) from the driver, while the passenger side speakers are often 4-5 feet away from the driver. Here, kick panels make a lot of sense as now, we can norrow that ratio. (~3 ft on drivers side, ~5 ft on passenger's side and some attenuation/balance control between the two for best stereo imaging)
Item #3 is harder to manage in mobile audio applications. The key here, is that all speaker signals are reaching the same focal point at the same time. This means each speaker element, (woffer, mid and tweets) need to located on a closely matched planar orientation. This allows each speakers' signals to arrive at the listener's ears at the same time, with roughly the same SPL levels.
Finally, we know that low frequency speakers are not very directional. Their signals propagate well from most any location. Mids and high locations are more the isses as they tend to give a foused beam of energy, based on aiming and reflections/diffractions considerations. (Avoid mounting mids/highs in locations and aiming them directly at the listener) This causes "beaming" issues as these speakers operate more like a "line of sight" beam of acoustical energy.
A slightly off axis beam pattern works very well here. Most tweeters will sound very good between 15-20 degrees off axis to listener mountings. Mids can go a bit more, (20-30) degrees off axis and still sound very natural.
Comments?
Swez
Victor on 07/30/2006 16:47:30
ok, i am missing lessismore.... I would wish he is back on CK ASAP..... and i wud apologise to whatever mis-understandings I created between us....
swez on 07/31/2006 01:36:22
"Less" comes and goes as the wind. Just keep an eye out for one of his future postings and see if you can make direct e-mail contact with him to patch things up. He's truly a remarkable and talented fellow.
I too, miss his regular commentaries and inputs at CK. I guess we are not his favorite cup of Java for one reason or another? But if he does show up at CK again, make it a point to bury old hatchets.
Swez
Copyright ClubKnowledge 2009 * All Rights Reserved
