# SEAS Lotus Reference vs. Hybrid Legatias



## jboz (Feb 16, 2008)

I need some input from those familiar with the Hybrid Audio drivers. I need to pick a 2 way front stage to be driven actively in my new install. I have listened to the SEAS Lotus Reference tweet w/ 6.5" mid duo and they sound great. I also have read so many great reviews of the Hybrid L1 Pro / L6 duo, but have not heard them. The Hybrids are much less expensive, and I would like to know how they compare in quality construction and sound to the more expensive SEAS pair. Just the Euro/$ exchange can almost account for the difference in price. I understand that the SEAS are made in Europe and the Hybrids designed in the US and manufactured in China, but just how better a duo are the SEAS, if at all? By paying more, am I getting a substantially better sounding set of speakers, or just payiing primarily for an exchange rate conversion?

Any thoughts from those who have listened to either or especially both sets would be very helpful.

Thanks.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

The build quality on the Legatias is very good. I would send Scott an email or visit his website http://www.hybrid-audio.com to try and locate a dealer near you. Its definitely a good idea to take a listen to them if you have the option to. Also, maybe another member in your area that has them installed would be willing to let you have a listen to their system...


----------



## BigRed (Aug 12, 2007)

If you are at the bbq, I should have a set at the bbq you can check out along with some other things


----------



## jboz (Feb 16, 2008)

I want to try to make it to Marv's, but I need to see if I can get away from my girls [wife and daughter] that weekend. If BigRed will be going all the way from SoCal, then I have no excuse since I am much closer in SF. I may just have to find a way to get there since all you great folks will be there. I doubt it will be tough to spot BigRed's truck, so I hope to meet you there.

Oh, and by the way, great job on the truck. How do you find the free time to put in so many hours working on that truck???


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

JBOZ - if you are running active I would also look into some Seas drivers from Madisound.... you can get some DIY drivers that would have great performance at lower prices..... and if you do it right you can find use stuff on here and save yourself a ton of money.

the drivers I have used retail for about $1500 and cost me about $550


----------



## MIAaron (May 10, 2005)

Getting a good transistion between the mid and tweet in the 2-4k range can be tricky. If you are an experienced tuner or have someone near you that is a good tuner, either set will give you great results. But if you're new to this, I would recommend the hybrid stuff based solely on the fact that you can bump the xover point between the mid & tweet above the vocal range.


----------



## jboz (Feb 16, 2008)

Where exactly is that crossover point? I assume that the natural crossover point for a 2 way system with a tweeter that can play pretty low is somewhere in the 2500 range?


----------



## flying bong (Apr 27, 2008)

Sorry for going slightly OT but another good option you may want to consider is the Image Dynamics XS-65 2-way component set.

I've been using them for the last 2 days, running passive off a Genesis Series 3 amp. I also briefly heard the Seas Lotus Reference running actively (also off Genesis amps).

My initial impression (caveat - based on limited experience with both sets) was that the ID sounds rather similar to the Seas Lotus - very detailed, fast & articulate.

WRT crossover points b/w tweeter & midbass for running this set active, there seems to be quite a bit of info on the ID forum. To summarize, between 3khz-5khz has been recommended depending on tweeter location.


----------



## MIAaron (May 10, 2005)

jboz said:


> Where exactly is that crossover point? I assume that the natural crossover point for a 2 way system with a tweeter that can play pretty low is somewhere in the 2500 range?


For the Seas set, you gotta be down in the 2k-2.5k range due to the cone breakup. Maybe this isn't as big of an issue on the new ref set, but it was on the old. IIRC, the hybrid stuff can be crossed at 5k and higher.

I only base this off of my experience. I myself have a much easier time getting things to sound good with a xover point above 5k.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

flying bong said:


> Sorry for going slightly OT but another good option you may want to consider is the Image Dynamics XS-65 2-way component set.


Both the ID and Legatia stuff are really, really primitive compared to the Seas Lotii. If Seas Lotus is too expensive, consider standard Seas Excel drivers and active crossovers.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

DS-21 said:


> Both the ID and Legatia stuff are really, really primitive compared to the Seas Lotii. If Seas Lotus is too expensive, consider standard Seas Excel drivers and active crossovers.


but with todays music do you really want EVERYTHING coming through? i guess if you listen to esoteric stuff all the time the more revealing the better but if you listen to stuff that sounds like cold ass on a forgiving system and even worse on a revealing system you will learn to REALLY hate something like the lotus drivers. i've been there done that and you (ds21) would most likely turn your nose up and most of my cd collection for its recording quality aka i rarely turn down listening to something i like because the recording quality isn't the best. anyone who does has some serious issues.


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

DS-21 said:


> Both the ID and Legatia stuff are really, really primitive compared to the Seas Lotii. If Seas Lotus is too expensive, consider standard Seas Excel drivers and active crossovers.


Primitive in what way?

Just curious, because by my research, the Lotus offers only faraday rings as a feature in exceedance of the Legatia L6 design. Everything else is in equlibrium between the two models (basket, phase plug, T-yoke, etc.), and in several cases, one could argue the Legatia is better from a sonic and/or installation perspective:

Primitive (your word) slide connections on the Lotus verses binding posts on the Legatia;

Higher Mms cone with cone break-up mode at 2,500 Hz on the Lotus verses stiff lower Mms cone for edge mode damping and soft-breakup on the Legatia;

Reverse roll high-loss surround on the Legatia for easier installation behind grilles;

Lower Fs (by ~15 Hz) on the Legatia for better midbass authority;

Significantly higher sensitivity on the Legatia (88.5 dB verses 91 dB---that's almost doubling the power);

Significantly higher peak to peak excursion (8mm verses 12mm - 33% difference) on the Legatia;

Larger effective piston area on the Legatia.

Let's be fair at least. At almost $800 less, you could pick up the Legatia set, and a Zapco DC Reference amplifier (sorry, I couldn't resist!) and still have money left over to take the wife out for dinner.

Scott


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

Scott Buwalda said:


> Primitive in what way?
> 
> Just curious, because by my research, the Lotus offers only faraday rings as a feature in exceedance of the Legatia L6 design. Everything else is in equlibrium between the two models (basket, phase plug, T-yoke, etc.), and in several cases, one could argue the Legatia is better from a sonic and/or installation perspective:
> 
> ...


but but but but but BUT


it musthave a faraday ring to be capable of sounding good in ds21's eyes. from a user friendly standpoint i'd choose the legatia mids or id xs mids over the lotus any day of the week.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Scott Buwalda said:


> One last point, the Lotus Performance set scored lower in the Car Audio & Electronics sound quality and product review than the Hybrid Audio Clarus series, *our entry level offering*.
> 
> Scott


Was the reviews done by the same person ? No? Then, it's not a comparison, is it? :rolleyes

Besides, the break up is at 4500hz not 2500hz


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Hillbilly SQ said:


> but with todays music do you really want EVERYTHING coming through?


I prefer it does. I've tried numerous speakers to replace the Magnesium Excels and nothing comes close. If bad music sound better is because details get damped by the cone, you loose nasty background noise you also loose parts of the recording. I hate to turn the music up to try to regain lost detail, I'm sticking to Excels so far.



Scott Buwalda said:


> Primitive in what way?
> 
> Just curious, because by my research, the Lotus offers only faraday rings as a feature in exceedance of the Legatia L6 design. Everything else is in equlibrium between the two models (basket, phase plug, T-yoke, etc.), and in several cases, one could argue the Legatia is better from a sonic and/or installation perspective:
> 
> ...





Hillbilly SQ said:


> it must have a faraday ring to be capable of sounding good in ds21's eyes. from a user friendly standpoint i'd choose the legatia mids or id xs mids over the lotus any day of the week.


Faraday rings do have a purpose. Let's not take a needed feature in todays top of the line offerings and bash it. It's in the Excel because it does what it does. The loss in output and breakup behavior is due to the implementation of the surface treated magnesium cone. What would you give up to have the most revealing, lowest distortion driver on the market? Since we're on this subject, I haven't seen a distortion plot for an L6 before.

If output and ease of filtering is your priority why not compare it with the Seas Nextel? Somebody do the math


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

dual700 said:


> Was the reviews done by the same person ? No? Then, it's not a comparison, is it? :rolleyes


Same photographer, same criteria, but different reviewer. Point well taken. I'll remove that last comment.

Scott


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

we all have different goals. with me it's an install, tune, and forget setup. my drivers are easy to work with and don't need the settings tweaked with every song. actually, i've had the same settings ever since i got my id mids broken in and did the final tuning. nothing else has let me do this and those drivers all got ditched.


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

Hillbilly SQ said:


> but with todays music do you really want EVERYTHING coming through?


That's like asking if I wanted true uncolored sound quality....who wouldn't?


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Hillbilly SQ said:


> we all have different goals. with me it's an install, tune, and forget setup. my drivers are easy to work with and don't need the settings tweaked with every song. actually, i've had the same settings ever since i got my id mids broken in and did the final tuning. nothing else has let me do this and those drivers all got ditched.


You're a prime candidate for PA drivers. I've recently tried some B&Cs instead of the Seas with some very good results across the board. If you like treated paper cones might as well go with pro audio stuff and gain a health dose of output over any hi fi drivers, low compression and low distortion. These were more shallow, had accordion style surround (low profile), and were built with high grade materials such as neodymium, a light weight chassis, and did include shorting rings. It seems like a no briner for anybody willing to loose some detail to achieve forgiveness and dynamics.


----------



## Fellippe (Sep 15, 2006)

Scott Buwalda said:


> Primitive in what way?
> 
> Just curious, because by my research, the Lotus offers only faraday rings as a feature in exceedance of the Legatia L6 design. Everything else is in equlibrium between the two models (basket, phase plug, T-yoke, etc.), and in several cases, one could argue the Legatia is better from a sonic and/or installation perspective:
> 
> ...


Haha....picking fights with manufacturers will bring out the WRATH. 

I have heard a Seas Lotus set but never a Legatia, but even so, need to have identical installs to truly compare. Either way, I judge by ear not by specs. 

Scott, didn't you aim to make the Hybrids on the warmer end of things like Morel and DLS?


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

I did indeed. This is an apples to oranges discussion. 

Scott


----------



## schuey_1 (Nov 11, 2007)

Can somebody say RADIO SHACK speaker

oooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

I would pick the Lotus over and over again. Just personal preference, though. Either option would probably be satisfactory for most users.


----------



## tyroneshoes (Mar 21, 2006)

It took some time getting the tuning right but I really cant find any reason to switch out my Lotus mids now that they're set up to my liking. Just needs to be set up with a low fs tweeter and tuned up to liking. This breakup really isnt that bad in a car. 

I also have some ID xs 6.5s on my floor but I dont see any reason to use or even try them at this point. So theyre for sale. 

I have never heard Hybrid speakers so I cant compare.


----------



## Dangerranger (Apr 12, 2006)

The SEAS drivers make a lot more sense in a 2 way application. The breakup has to be dealt with but realistically you want to cross a 7" driver that low when off axis anyway due to issues with beaming, whereas the Hybrids, while very capable, are designed more for a higher crossover frequency, to the point that you'd want to put the midbass more on axis in order to get desirable dispersion characteristics. 

The Hybrid offerings are a very logical choice in 3 way applications where their midranges do most of the gruntwork, covering the main spectrum. It's coherent, crossing the tweeter above the 6-7k region is logical because the human ear localizes those frequencies by intensity rather than phase (aka great for pillar/sail panel installs), and having a midrange that goes down to 200-300hz or so comfortably allows you to run a midbass that's actually designed for midbass and not a jack of all trades. It's the same reason the DLS drivers got such good accolades, the whole package just makes sense in the car environment in a variety of applications, and even though the drivers weren't the greatest performers out there the implementation overcame that.

As far as pure performance potential from drivers, it's going to be hard to top Excels. The driver is a pure piston in it's intended frequency range and has pretty much unbeatable clarity, your ability to enjoy them will however be fully dependant on your experience with more difficult drivers and if you're capable of taking care of the breakup node.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

Scott Buwalda said:


> Primitive in what way?
> 
> Just curious, because by my research, the Lotus offers only faraday rings as a feature in exceedance of the Legatia L6 design. Everything else is in equlibrium between the two models (basket, phase plug, T-yoke, etc.)


Well, well-executed Faraday shielding in the motor is more than just a minor difference, of course. Any cursory glance of Le-X graphs (or a serious listening test!) will quickly tell one that drivers with them track will track dynamics more faithfully than drivers without them. And really, it's quite an inexcusable omission in a product with pretensions to high fidelity. 

But besides that, you probably know better than I do that there's more to the Seas Excel motor design (or any other) than ticking check-boxes. In a given size class, measurements show that there's little that can compare with the Seas Excel motors. B&C, PHL, Aura at their best, certainly; Thiel & Partner/Accuton, AudioTechnology, ScanSpeak, BMS, 18Sound, arguably; Peerless Exclusive, Dayton Reference, maybe. But to call anything clearly better would be very hard to support. 

Being generous, your midwoofer seems more comparable to the Peerless 830875 or Seas CA18 than to any Seas Excel variant such as the Lotus car line. (Though I'm probably being hard on the Peerless HDS, which does after all have a Faraday ring in the motor.) Hardly bad company, to be sure. But not elite company, either.

(Note that I didn't write that I personally like the Excels very much. In fact, I'm not a huge fan of them, and wouldn't specify them for any system I designed. Then again, I'd never use a 7" woofer lacking a coincident tweeter for anything other than a car midbass to augment a wideband driver playing at the very worst everything above ~400Hz, anyway. For that kind of design a dedicated midbass such as the Peerless SLS6.5 makes much more sense than the typical jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none 7" midwoofer design. And in a home system, if I wasn't allowed to use at least a 10" driver and a suitable waveguide or an 8" coax and supplemental woofer, it wouldn't be a project interesting enough to be worth my time.)



Scott Buwalda said:


> Primitive (your word) slide connections on the Lotus verses binding posts on the Legatia;


My word indeed, but you're using it in an entirely different manner. Binding posts and tabs are functionally identical, whereas motor designs with and without Faraday rings are not functionally identical. Not that examples of "primitive" connection schemes don't exist, the prime example I can think of being the flat plate on the Aura Whisper, which requires direct soldering to use the driver. 

Binding posts are more expensive and look better, but may somewhat hinder mounting options because they're bigger/bulkier. Much easier to bend tabs than posts! As far as ease of installation, it's pretty much a wash. Crimping/soldering spades or bananas onto a wire is no easier than crimping/soldering wires to quick-disconnect terminals. (I wouldn't use bare wire with either one, because I don't like the thought that the wires might corrode. Not entirely rational, of course, because it would probably take 200 years or more for that corrosion to waste away the wire to the point where anyone could hear a difference, but here we are.)



Scott Buwalda said:


> Higher Mms cone with cone break-up mode at 2,500 Hz on the Lotus verses stiff lower Mms cone for edge mode damping and soft-breakup on the Legatia;


Lighter cones aren't necessarily a virtue. Depends on the motor strength and inductance linearity. For the Seas motor, those are known quantities.

And the Lotus has a clean high-Q breakup that's fairly easy to notch out to the point of inaudibility in a car, if not perhaps in a nearfield studio-type setting. That said, I do generally prefer the sound of paper and even poly cones to metal, personally. So I'll give the Seas Prestige line with G- or ER-cone, or Peerless's HDS Exclusive, the edge over all three of the above much more expensive alternatives (Lotus, you, ID)! And then there's the Nextel-coned Excel...



Scott Buwalda said:


> Reverse roll high-loss surround on the Legatia for easier installation behind grilles;


That is a fair point in your driver's favor, for some installs. One that may cross the line from necessary to sufficient in select cases. You'd know better than I how much so, but if you went to the trouble of specifying an inverted surround I suspect it can be a big issue in some cars.



Scott Buwalda said:


> Lower Fs (by ~15 Hz) on the Legatia for better midbass authority;


I assume anyone using high-quality expensive drivers would also use EQ to appropriately shape the response, in which case the Fs of the drivers is basically irrelvant. If not, then the obvious conclusion is that such people care more about having brand names to brag about than listening to music, because they're wastefully allocating resources instead of efficiently pursuing the highest possible fidelity. 



Scott Buwalda said:


> Significantly higher sensitivity on the Legatia (88.5 dB verses 91 dB---that's almost doubling the power);


Assuming everything else is equal, a strong point in your favor, because a more efficient driver should suffer less from power compression. But, of course, everything else is not equal. Given how well the Seas Excel motor design measures, and the lack of public data on yours from which to draw a fair comparison, it would be really hard for you to make an argument on any ground other than "mine gets louder" here.



Scott Buwalda said:


> Significantly higher peak to peak excursion (8mm verses 12mm - 33% difference) on the Legatia;


Maybe. The Klippel data I've seen on the 7" Seas Excel drivers here and in Voice Coil suggests a throw of about 9mm [edit] each way, for a p-p value of maybe 17-18mm depending on how one rounds.[/edit] And that with excellent vc centering and practically textbook Le-x/BL-x curves. I don't know the conditions under which you specify excursion, and neither you nor a third party has to my knowledge made available proper excursion data, so one can't rationally compare the drivers' linear excursion.



Scott Buwalda said:


> Let's be fair at least. At almost $800 less,


Scott, you are kidding, right? If not...wow! I had no idea the Lotii were so insanely expensive. I've never bothered to check, because the whole idea of car speakers for midrange/treble that are not either small widebanders or coincident/concentrics a la KEF Uni-Q or Tannoy Dual Concentric makes no sense to me at all, and I've yet to hear a car system with mid and tweet separated in space that didn't sound incoherent to me. Then again, I also prefer - big - dual concentrics at home...

But given the outlandish pricing, it seems then that smarter people who want that sort of thing (as opposed to an augmented wideband or coincident setup) would use the regular Seas Excel drivers, which are probably better overall drivers than the Lotii anyway. It's not like the Seas kit (or yours, or any other non-coaxial one) offers any useful value added over just buying raw drivers anyway. Generic passive crossovers are worthless no matter how much goes into audiophool voodoo brand-name parts for them, because its designer can never know how the midwoofer and tweeter will be related in space compared to each other or compared to the listeners' ears. A passive crossover designed based on in situ measurements, or a passive crossover designed for a set of drop-in replacement speakers for stock locations a given car, sure, but the latter is extreme niche marketing, and the former seems seems it more trouble than it's worth given the prevalence of reasonably-priced DSP active crossover/EQ options.



Scott Buwalda said:


> still have money left over to take the wife out for dinner.


Speaking of which, the gf and I are headed to Floataway Cafe tomorrow night. I love the place. At its best it's better than Bacchanalia, to be honest, especially when Annie's on site to supervise the kitchen, as she told me she would be tonight. (It's also a whole lot cheaper than Bacchanalia; I don't think I've ever had a bill of more than $100 for two, but admittedly I don't drink.) But we haven't been in a few months and it's only about 10min away, so it's about time.



Hillbilly SQ said:


> but with todays music do you really want EVERYTHING coming through?


Sometimes, sometimes not. If you don't, I would recommend spending a whole lot less on gear than anything discussed in this thread. There's just no need. One would do just fine with $150 or less in drivers and a decent DSP unit. Or, for that matter, just rip apart a pair of those $70 or whatever Best Buy Insignia KEF knockoff bookshelf speakers, put the drivers and crossovers in the front doors, and add an amp and cheap-but-well-designed sub such as a Peerless SLS12 in back. Assuming the levels are set right, one will also end up with better sound than most the of flashy "competition" systems out there.

Indeed, given that my daily driver is fairly loud (as a proper sports car should be) and as often as possible topless, I didn't think it necessary or even particularly wise to spend money on elite quality (if not necessarily snob value) components such as B&C or PHL midwoofers. Rather, I focused on getting the midrange/lower treble right and having enough linear volume displacement for acceptable bass from ~40Hz up with the top down, while looking stock. And a single driver playing from 250Hz up (currently dialing in some Peerless 2" widebands I bought from John Krutke on a whim, though I may go back to the old Aura Whispers) augmented by a pair of cheap but solid 8" woofers in the doors (Peerless SLS8 - thanks, Mazda, for giving me a nice, deep 8" woofer mount in the doors!) certainly provides that.



Hillbilly SQ said:


> I've been there done that and you (ds21) would most likely turn your nose up and most of my cd collection for its recording quality aka i rarely turn down listening to something i like because the recording quality isn't the best.


Unless your idea of "music" is the acrid infantile screeds of blowhard thugs such as Sean Hannity or Neal Boortz, what would possibly make you think that?

I'm hardly a guy who just listens to the stupendeously-recorded, insipidly-played piano and small jazz combo recordings that seem to make up the entire "audiophile" repertoire outside of Dire Straits and DSotM! Music comes way, way, way before audio in my book.


----------



## schuey_1 (Nov 11, 2007)

Wow somebody got owned baby

Somebody mentioned radio shack speakers


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

I agree with DS-21.
I DID tell Seas to get rid of the binding post on Lotus drivers long time ago, because they are annyoing and majority of people prefer regular terminals.

Here is a caveat with binding post: You wire your speaker, turn on your music to make sure they play right?
Then you forgot to turn the system off, instead, you want to bolt the speaker right away. Sometimes binding posts touches door's skin, guess what? 

One more thing, the prices we posted on website are MSRP, who pays for MSRP these days? We all got hit by weakened US $ towards Euro. We got 33% price increase, while Madisound got 12% - nearly 20% due their much much larger order.


----------



## rhinodog00 (Jul 1, 2007)

These threads are ridiculous! Blah,blah,blah.

Reply: blah,blahblah bbbblah


I have owned and used both as well as many others. Listen to both sets and see what you like more. Don't get to rapped up in the OPINIONS in this thread unless the person responding has actually used both of the speakers in question. Otherwise you will just have responses that are biased because they either sell or own one of the brands mentioned. I hate to tell ya ,but the only way to know which is better to your ears is to listen to them. Someone elses dream set of speakers may not be what you are looking for.


----------



## beerdrnkr (Apr 18, 2007)

rhinodog00 said:


> These threads are ridiculous! Blah,blah,blah.
> 
> Reply: blah,blahblah bbbblah
> 
> ...


Thank you! If people haven't tried both sets in the same vehicles w/ the same equipment than they have no real facts to base their opinions on. There's always going to be people to whine and complain about something. It reminds me of (jayballhwks?) thread where he was saying how great his new dyns sound and everyone was jumping down his throat for spending so much on his speakers and for half the price he could sound just as good. He's had a lot of nice equipment and he felt that those were the best speakers he's owned, there was really nothing more to say in that thread (unless a difference in opinion if someone had owned the same sets he had) but it got blown way out of control for no good reason. Pretty childish IMO.


----------



## unpredictableacts (Aug 16, 2006)

Just to add.....trying both sets is one thing......but trying both sets with hours of tuning a testing is another. I am sure this has not happened. I know some peoples thinking is why spend $150 on speakers several times brfore you find that keeper, possibly spending $600+ before that happens when you can pick a already highly praised non DIY set, which makes sense to a point, but you lose the hunt for the treasure and the thrill of having your own deadly penny pinching combo. One of my biggesat petpeeves is people hyping the brand that they have personaly experiencing with and putting down the unused brand or model because of the lack of use. Something I do enjoy though is when people show the balls and have no problem finding flaws is setups, but still enjoy them.....and can say its midrange is great, but the midbass wil not rip your face of....so I am able to look passed the lack of mid bass and willl use these until someone steals my car.


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

Thanks for keeping this post civil! At the end of the day, I agree wholeheartdely with Rhinodog00 and beerdrnkr...it all comes down to what sounds good to your ears.

Scott


----------



## unpredictableacts (Aug 16, 2006)

Scott Buwalda said:


> Thanks for keeping this post civil! At the end of the day, I agree wholeheartdely with Rhinodog00 and beerdrnkr...it all comes down to what sounds good to your ears.
> 
> Scott


LOl in all honesty how would one not keep this civil? Kinda like asking which is better titties or ass? Is there really a loser at the end of the day?....I for one think not. We alll know it is the mind we are after.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

DS-21 said:


> Well, well-executed Faraday shielding in the motor is more than just a minor difference, of course. Any cursory glance of Le-X graphs (or a serious listening test!) will quickly tell one that drivers with them track will track dynamics more faithfully than drivers without them. And really, it's quite an inexcusable omission in a product with pretensions to high fidelity.
> 
> 
> (Note that I didn't write that I personally like the Excels very much. In fact, I'm not a huge fan of them, and wouldn't specify them for any system I designed. Then again, I'd never use a 7" woofer lacking a coincident tweeter for anything other than a car midbass to augment a wideband driver playing at the very worst everything above ~400Hz, anyway.
> ...


Indeed I look at reasonable attempts for manufacturers to lower inductance though the use of faraday rings as a pass no pass, no shorting ring, no purchase. There are so many drivers employing them on the market there is no reason to stop and look at stripped out versions. 

I believe the 7 inch Excel Mag cones are thermally limited as much as suspension limited about 200hz or so. 400hz is being harsh ,there is no reason not to use them down another octave.

I see you like the Auras too, aren't those metal cones?  Honestly I don't like metal either, if it wasn't for the Magnesium cones I'd disregard all of them. Now, you restrict the Excels to play where they like (imo 150hz-1500hz, or as much as 2200hz off axis) and they'll reward you like none other.



dual700 said:


> I agree with DS-21.
> I DID tell Seas to get rid of the binding post on Lotus drivers long time ago, because they are annyoing and majority of people prefer regular terminals.
> 
> Here is a caveat with binding post: You wire your speaker, turn on your music to make sure they play right?
> Then you forgot to turn the system off, instead, you want to bolt the speaker right away. Sometimes binding posts touches door's skin, guess what?


HA! That happened to my set too. I had both posts touching the door frame and shorted out with an annoying tone when I turned them on. I do agree smaller connection posts rule in the end, and I have spades for easy swapping. The best connections so far have been on the B&C btw, overbuilt like no other yet small form.




Scott Buwalda said:


> Thanks for keeping this post civil! At the end of the day, I agree wholeheartdely with Rhinodog00 and beerdrnkr...it all comes down to what sounds good to your ears.
> 
> Scott


I remember the old days where my first Polk Db set sounded the best in the world for me. Then I got Polk Momo - best in the world. Then I got Infinity Perfects - best in the world. Did that make those sets the best in the world, not by a long shot. An Excel is superior in all areas to my first sets at the end of the day. It's part of learning, some folks are just at a more primeval stage.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

unpredictableacts said:


> Just to add.....trying both sets is one thing......but trying both sets with hours of tuning a testing is another.


I agree.


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

unpredictableacts said:


> Kinda like asking which is better titties or ass? Is there really a loser at the end of the day?....I for one think not.


Quoted for truth! 

Scott


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

beerdrnkr said:


> Thank you! If people haven't tried both sets in the same vehicles w/ the same equipment than they have no real facts to base their opinions on.


That's rather ignorant. You're saying without listening one can't make an educated determination of a driver's suitability and relative position in the "pecking order" based on its measurements, or reasonable inferences based on the lack of real data from others? 

And of course, "the same equipment" is quite irrelevant, as anyone with more than the least cursory understanding of research into audibility of audio components has known since 1983 or so at the latest.

Your standard is perfect for people who are trying to sell overpriced and under-designed audio equipment! (Not saying that is the specific case here, just the general case.) After all, the number of such comparisons will by necessity so small as to essentially never happened. That niche excepted, your "just listen" standard is without merit or utility.

The fact of the matter is, once one has a fair amount of listening experience _and_ has correlated that experience to measurements, one will rarely if ever be surprised by how something sounds if s/he has seen valid measurements of it.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Personally, I have the perception Scott's products are top-notch good stuff... from what I've heard in one of his team cars (eclipse).  daaaaang! Actually his drivers remind me of some Seas drivers I've seen with the inverted surrounds.. but that's looks, and I'm no speaker expert.

Scott, here's a thought.. Everyone loves to refer to Zaph's reviews.. Ever thought of sending him some mids to do a write-up on his 6-7" driver page, or tweeter page maybe in comparison to the others?

http://www.zaphaudio.com/6.5test/
http://www.zaphaudio.com/tweetermishmash/

That would keep it objective for those that like distortion graphs and freq plots and reading opinions. Then it's out there to see the data next to Seas Excel, Prestige, scanspeaks' etc etc.

Then again.. would it just be apples to oranges? ... without having the language of driver construction, I wouldn't know if your drivers have specific characteristics purposely in the design for in-car application, rather than the other hifi drivers designed for speaker cabinet builds.

I dunno.. I also get the impression the quality you get from a driver is 1/3 driver, 1/3 how and where it's installed and 1/3 tune and environment. Is it overkill to split hairs over 1/3 of the equation? Just go quality and concentrate on good install work.

.... also.. by the way, just look at the level of quality we enjoy in our choices now compared to when I was a kid looking at the crap hanging on the 12volt wall at circuit city as pretty much my only options to stick into the oldsmobile cutlass (shooooo). my my has the world changed.. competitive as hell but exciting as well.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Babs said:


> Scott, here's a thought.. Everyone loves to refer to Zaph's reviews.. Ever thought of sending him some mids to do a write-up on his 6-7" driver page, or tweeter page maybe in comparison to the others?
> 
> http://www.zaphaudio.com/6.5test/
> http://www.zaphaudio.com/tweetermishmash/
> ...


Outstanding recommendation! I don't think it being a car audio mid makes a big difference. In fact, if I remember correctly there is a Lotus tested on there as well 

I like to start out with a good driver. Install is gruesome, it takes months sometimes and plenty of $ in excess of driver costs. Might as well start with a good driver, I don't like to go back in there and chop fiberglass, it's bad for the lungs.


----------



## Foglght (Aug 2, 2007)

DS-21 said:


> That's rather ignorant. You're saying without listening one can't make an educated determination of a driver's suitability and relative position in the "pecking order" based on its measurements, or reasonable inferences based on the lack of real data from others?
> 
> And of course, "the same equipment" is quite irrelevant, as anyone with more than the least cursory understanding of research into audibility of audio components has known since 1983 or so at the latest.
> 
> ...


I completely understand what you are saying, not in theory, but your main point. Sometimes though, you might want to put it all in perspective. There just really aren't all that many people that know how to draw out these conclusions before hearing anything. 

Of course, as many members on here suggest, your install has everything to do with it, including gear. I think I can count the number of people that I even know (around here) that can tune a system the right way on my fingers and not use them all. So, 15hz of lower Fs and a higher sensitivity may just be the kicker which would make the Hybrid sound better. 

For the price, in a car, driving 50mph, are you going to hear the $800 difference? That question isn't really rhetorical either. 

Don't shoot me for the post, I was just trying to relate to the rest of us peons that don't have the same level of knowledge you do. I think one of the real main keys here is that Seas is not on this site providing feedback, and also isn't going to give you advice when installing. Scott is. And we all know how important it is to make sure the listening device is installed properly.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Foglght said:


> I think one of the real main keys here is that Seas is not on this site providing feedback, and also isn't going to give you advice when installing. Scott is. And we all know how important it is to make sure the listening device is installed properly.



Yes we do. 
We even tune systems that doesn't have Lotus in it when asked..


----------



## beerdrnkr (Apr 18, 2007)

DS-21 said:


> That's rather ignorant. You're saying without listening one can't make an educated determination of a driver's suitability and relative position in the "pecking order" based on its measurements, or reasonable inferences based on the lack of real data from others?
> 
> And of course, "the same equipment" is quite irrelevant, as anyone with more than the least cursory understanding of research into audibility of audio components has known since 1983 or so at the latest.
> 
> ...


How many people on here can look at specs and say, wow, that driver is going to sound awesome? An educated guess from the specs of a speaker is ok, however, if I hear 2 sets of speakers in the same car and say the one with worse specs sounds better, what would you say then? To me, what it comes down to is listening for yourself and comparing it to other speakers you've heard. Unless you've heard the Legatia's or the Seas you don't really have any merit to tear them down. Scott has been into car audio since probably before I was even born and has a good track record with competing. I'm personally going with Hybrid Audio because of the reviews and because a lot of sq competitors are going with them as well. Could I get better sound from some really cheap daytons or peerless speakers? Maybe, but I'd rather choose something that has been proven than just looking at specs and telling myself that (blank) speaker should sound great with what I listen to. I might get flamed for this but I truly think sq is subjective and varies with music. By the way, I had a similar problem before with speaker terminals touching the door and making intermittant noise, electrical tape took care of that. I'm sure some ensolite or something would probably work better.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Reviews and opinions of those that have actually heard them... Good enough reasoning for me if they can be afforded. I'd have personally more confidence in lagatia's or clarus comps than mix/matching raw drivers, based on track-records and rave reviews alone. Trick is, the raw drivers can be a fraction of the cost, if you're brave in abilities to match up components. 

This or that mid with this or that response and upper mid break-up with this or that tweet at this or that crossover points in this or that location. Verses the other 85% of us that appreciate the ability to just deaden the door, slap it in with a good baffle and good wiring, plug it up and call it a day. I'm sure my ears might tell the difference, but I'm also sure I'd be freakin' thrilled with a set of Clarus comps passive OR active either.


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

beerdrnkr said:


> How many people on here can look at specs and say, wow, that driver is going to sound awesome? An educated guess from the specs of a speaker is ok, however, if I hear 2 sets of speakers in the same car and say the one with worse specs sounds better, what would you say then? To me, what it comes down to is listening for yourself and comparing it to other speakers you've heard. Unless you've heard the Legatia's or the Seas you don't really have any merit to tear them down. Scott has been into car audio since probably before I was even born and has a good track record with competing. I'm personally going with Hybrid Audio because of the reviews and because a lot of sq competitors are going with them as well. Could I get better sound from some really cheap daytons or peerless speakers? Maybe, but I'd rather choose something that has been proven than just looking at specs and telling myself that (blank) speaker should sound great with what I listen to. I might get flamed for this but I truly think sq is subjective and varies with music. By the way, I had a similar problem before with speaker terminals touching the door and making intermittant noise, electrical tape took care of that. I'm sure some ensolite or something would probably work better.


Again, we are coming down to the difference in definitions.

For example, you mention judging something by "specs". I believe many people confuse this term and imagine "specs" as something on a paper and nothing more. First, we must look well beyond the Thiele/Small parameters of a driver. For example, Scott mentioned earlier that the Legatia has a lower Fs: I don't have the Legatia parameters in front of me, but I can tell you that, in practice, it is the total alignment that specifies low frequency extension and this includes both Fs AND Qts. I have used several drivers with a lower Fs that have the same F3 as something with a higher Fs because of their Q.

Second, we must understand that the type of judgements people like DS-21 and myself make are not based on a simple glance at Thiele/Small parameters: they are judgements made based on real, verifiable distortion.

People will argue all day about the ability to hear distortion (and as I have argued before, our ears are not equipped to tell us what driver is actually better than another in terms of accuracy to the original signal). However, my personal goal (and the purported, but not realized, goal of SQ competitions) is to design a system that will reproduce the source as accurately as possible. This is my only goal and will always be my only goal, and if this is, in fact, what people mean when they say "SQ", then SQ is not subjective at all.

My earlier post was less pointed than I should have made it: those who wish to casually please their ears are likely to be satisfied with either driver provided the implementation is reasonable (in fact, Hybrid Audio has an excellent track record in this respect). However, those who seek a more accurate system will choose the SEAS drivers. And the truth is that people do choose the SEAS drivers for exactly that reason.....and they choose it in droves for the best systems. There is both rhyme and reason behind why drivers from SEAS are used in some of the most accurate (and often, most pleasing) systems in the world.


----------



## beerdrnkr (Apr 18, 2007)

DevilDriver said:


> Again, we are coming down to the difference in definitions.
> 
> For example, you mention judging something by "specs". I believe many people confuse this term and imagine "specs" as something on a paper and nothing more. First, we must look well beyond the Thiele/Small parameters of a driver. For example, Scott mentioned earlier that the Legatia has a lower Fs: I don't have the Legatia parameters in front of me, but I can tell you that, in practice, it is the total alignment that specifies low frequency extension and this includes both Fs AND Qts. I have used several drivers with a lower Fs that have the same F3 as something with a higher Fs because of their Q.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the easy to understand clarification, I'm pretty new to the sq field and I'm really not on the same level as a lot of people on here. Would you say that the (deterioration?) of your hearing would have an ill affect on what someone 20yrs old and someone 40yrs old hears? Just a random question I thought I'd throw out there  It sounds like both of the drivers are great dependant on installation of course. I think I make up a majority of the people on here as far as not being a competitor but wanting the most out of his music. If I had to choose between the two, it would come down to the processing in my vehicle, where the speakers will be installed, and price. I guess the speaker that is better in 2 of the 3 categories would be the best choice for the average joe. I really don't get involved in too many conversations, I usually just observe. It just gets to me sometimes when people think they can pass judgment and put down a product that someone worked very hard to develope and is doing well in competition with, without ever listening to for themselves. 

So to answe the OP: I don't know which is better


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

The only misunderstanding here is that people take subjectivity to heart. Just because some of us can read parameters to guide our purchases does not mean we don't use our ears at all. It is sound decision making to to make use of free diyma scientific knowledge to guide yourself through thousands of choices. 

This is what this forum is about, to help you make better choices of equipment. More clearly stated, educated choices. There is a time to hear the speaker, no one in their right mind would tell you that parameters alone are enough. At the very least we have preferences in cone materials. You'll find that many are split in the metal and paper camps, that's totally alright, nobody is going to ask you to back up that choice with a spec sheet.

It is up to you to figure out the subjective part. I find it appalling that many seek subjective reviews before a third party Klippel test. There is no standard to which you can judge the subjective part. It is beyond me why some folks would put someone else's biased opinion before science.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

In my experience, if something sounds good, it usually measures well too... but the reverse may not necessarily be true. Still, having good measurements tells me there's a possibility worth investigating. In other words I use it to narrow the field, but not necessarily make any conclusions.

I also don't put much, if any faith in subjective car audio reviews. The reason being that there are so many confounding factors involved... the placement, interior of the vehicle, tuning, etc. which have a profound impact on the sound quality. A subjective comparison under controlled conditions... much different story, but I've yet to see any. Where I do find subjective reviews to be helpful is when someone has roughly the same install, level of skill, listening preferences, and vehicle as you. It still doesn't tell you much about the speaker itself, but maybe useful in making a purchasing decision.


----------

