# Best 7" midbass for IB



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Title says it all. Just wanting to see the responses here. The ever illusive punch in the chest. Doors are mostly sealed, so IB. 7" max like the midbass to be pretty excessive. Probably playing up to ~500hz


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

most all midbass short of HA gear are made relative to IB installation.. they are speced out, but mainly consider IB as the typical install...


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX said:


> most all midbass short of HA gear are made relative to IB installation.. they are speced out, but mainly consider IB as the typical install...


Awesome, that is good to know. I was looking at the adire extremis and exodus anarchy earlier but wasn't sure if they would be any good IB.


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

Well, with anything in the high end, if you have the EQ and headroom to play with, you can do just about whatever you like..


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX said:


> Well, with anything in the high end, if you have the EQ and headroom to play with, you can do just about whatever you like..


Hmm, well I guess I had never thought of it that way  I just try not to EQ for fear of clipping and distortion etc. But with headroom and xmax to play with I suppose these things are a non issue. Suppose I need to get an external EQ as well... hmmm


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

A little EQ is not a problem... it's when you run a LOT of EQ... 

I try and explain like this... as a general rule of thumb, it requires a doubling of output to achieve +3db, this is why speakers are rated at 80-99db efficient off of 1 WATT.. and you might pull 130db from 1000 watts... dig... very non-linear.. 

At normal volumes, you are at say 1/3 of the amps output.. this allows you a huge amount of headroom to play with... 

Well, if you start EQing heavy, you dig into your headroom... dig... So then that day comes along and you decide to really push on it... bam, headrooms gone, distortion sets in, things go bad... 

so again, IMHO a little EQ to fix things and to make it sound like you like it.. but a lot is asking for it... 

On the flip side of this, the more EQ ability you have, say 32band stereo set up... you can tweak specific frequencies much easier.. specific frequencies are FAR easier to amplify than RANGES of frequencies something like a parametric EQ would work on.. 

I am but just one opinion on the subject too, so please, get some more...


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

The real question is, do you want midbase snap or do you want it to go low. I have found that major xmas drivers or big cone area does not automatically make for great snap or punchyness.

Usually the above simply go lower into base territory.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

I would ask what's the best Mid Bass for X amount of dollars.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

AAAAAAA said:


> The real question is, do you want midbase snap or do you want it to go low. I have found that major xmas drivers or big cone area does not automatically make for great snap or punchyness.
> 
> Usually the above simply go lower into base territory.


Ah, this was one of my concerns. I want the midbass snappy-er. 90hz-110hz punch is very nice. The issue is I want it loud, I figured xmax would play into this and obviously cone area.

I'm starting to get interested in this guy:

http://www.cdtaudio.com/pdf/HD-6_07.pdf


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> I would ask what's the best Mid Bass for X amount of dollars.


Indeed, makes sense  How about under $300


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> Indeed, makes sense  How about under $300


Each or for the pair?


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> Each or for the pair?


For the pair.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

I like Scan Speak these are close to what you want to spend and not to deep:


https://www.madisound.com/store/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=148&products_id=938


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> I like Scan Speak these are close to what you want to spend and not to deep:
> 
> 
> https://www.madisound.com/store/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=148&products_id=938


Holy expensive batman  hear great things about scanspeak. Looks like a nice contender. Always worried about the home audio driver in the car audio scene too but seems like that's what many people are doing. Hmmm


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

Faital Pro 6PR150 6.5" Speakers - Faital Pro 6PR150 midrange speaker that has a lightweight neodymium magnet - Faital Pro 6PR150 300 watt 6.5" has an efficiency of 97dB SPL woofer for all high quality midrange applications. Faital Pro 6PR150


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

Faital Pro 8PR200 Speakers - Faital Pro 8PR200 mid-bass, bass guitar speaker and subwoofer 8" speaker that has a lightweight neodymium magnet - Faital Pro 8PR200 400 watt 8" efficiency of 95dB SPL woofer for all high power mid-bass applications. Fa


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX said:


> Faital Pro 6PR150 6.5" Speakers - Faital Pro 6PR150 midrange speaker that has a lightweight neodymium magnet - Faital Pro 6PR150 300 watt 6.5" has an efficiency of 97dB SPL woofer for all high quality midrange applications. Faital Pro 6PR150


Wow, that's a new one. What a strange driver. FS is 100hz? xmax 2.3mm? What the hell is x-damage? haha, I have a lot of questions about this peculiar driver.


----------



## Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX (Oct 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> Wow, that's a new one. What a strange driver. FS is 100hz? xmax 2.3mm? What the hell is x-damage? haha, I have a lot of questions about this peculiar driver.


check out the root site... 

My guess would be max before damage.. on X damage..


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Aaron'z 2.5RS/WRX said:


> check out the root site...
> 
> My guess would be max before damage.. on X damage..


Wow, a lot of options here. And I haven't heard of most of them. There are so many driver options out there it's insane. I've been messing with audio for a while and still, here is a slew of brands that are new to me! Nice site.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

McDizzle said:


> Wow, that's a new one. What a strange driver. FS is 100hz? xmax 2.3mm? What the hell is x-damage? haha, I have a lot of questions about this peculiar driver.



That is more of a midrange driver. Hell of a lot of sensitivity. X damage is the same as xmech. Just another term for it's excursion limits before motor structure damage (coil slapping the back plate). 11.6mm peak to peak (5.8mm one way) is not a whole lot. It's good but not that impressive. There are several home audio drivers that achieve the same throw or more in xmax alone.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Hmmm, got my eye on this one:

Eighteen Sound Speakers - Eighteen Sound 6ND430 - Eighteen Sound 6ND430 6.5" woofer has a lightweight neodymium magnet. Eighteen Sound 6ND430 6.5" subwoofers are available here. 18 Sound speaker components.

But I have no idea how it stacks up to anything. I want them to blow my shoes off  Seems to be very little information out there on these guys.


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

I am quite fond of these. Doesn't take much to push them either.

Aurum Cantus 7" AC-180F1D

The Massive Audio CK6 is also a wonderful 6.5" midbass. Both are right up there on my list.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

I wanted those Aurum's sooo bad once. Just couldn't fit them in the doors. I think they're nice too.


Mcdizzle, if you want a driver with a heck of a lot punch in IB, you need to look at drivers with a fair amount of Qts, medium FS and modest throw. Understand this is not the norm for those looking for SQ as they like a somewhat smoother response that can go fairly deep. Just going on how you describe and from what I've played with, a higher Q driver will give quite a bit of thump automatically without eq IB. Not a lot of raw drivers on the market for that as most are already manufactured by car audio. There are a few Pro Audio drivers that will work, but not in a 7".


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> I wanted those Aurum's sooo bad once. Just couldn't fit them in the doors. I think they're nice too.
> 
> 
> Mcdizzle, if you want a driver with a heck of a lot punch in IB, you need to look at drivers with a fair amount of Qts, medium FS and modest throw. Understand this is not the norm for those looking for SQ as they like a somewhat smoother response that can go fairly deep. Just going on how you describe and from what I've played with, a higher Q driver will give quite a bit of thump automatically without eq IB. Not a lot of raw drivers on the market for that as most are already manufactured by car audio. There are a few Pro Audio drivers that will work, but not in a 7".


Hmm, I guess in the midbass department then I want some coloration  High Qts... got it. Figured the medium FS and throw, Qts was the missing puzzle piece I guess. Then efficiency for general loudness I would assume. I'm liking being active. I wish there was a site where you could input this information and pull up drivers.

Qts>.4
Eff>90
xmax>5mm
FS>70

Bam, list of drivers. Driver database query based on t/s params, the perfect tool for the enthusiast.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

McDizzle said:


> Hmm, I guess in the midbass department then I want some coloration  High Qts... got it. Figured the medium FS and throw, Qts was the missing puzzle piece I guess. Then efficiency for general loudness I would assume. I'm liking being active. I wish there was a site where you could input this information and pull up drivers.
> 
> Qts>.4
> Eff>90
> ...


Driver database

Pretty close!!

Edit: Looks like a lot of old stuff though, too bad


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Unless I am mistaken, Partexpress does has something like that or at least they used to. I think it is chosen on box parameters rather than driver parameters. If I or anyone else (including you) find it, I would enter in a sealed box @ about 1 cu. ft... Other than that, Win Isd is your best friend in finding what will work best in the frequency range you want. It won't tell the whole tale, but may push in the right direction.


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

I've read a lot of people are very happy with the massives, but my personal favorites are the rainbow profi kicks.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

jcollin76 said:


> I've read a lot of people are very happy with the massives, but my personal favorites are the rainbow profi kicks.


You know it's funny that you mention this. I was too embarassed to say but it is the reason why I'm looking. I have the rainbow vanadium kicks. LOVE the midbass but my yearning for more midbass had me givem a little more juice, now I hear rattling at xmax  which I assumed is voice coil rub  and thus my search began. I've heard many times that a lot of DIY drivers are comparable to fancy name brands at lower prices so now here I am bargain hunting for something a bit beefier.


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

Man that sucks. How much were you feeding them?


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

jcollin76 said:


> Man that sucks. How much were you feeding them?


150 watts but I may have been too agressive with the crossover point though [email protected] -18db. I thought they could handle it, specs say 120 with a 180 max but no such luck.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> 150 watts but I may have been too agressive with the crossover point though [email protected] -18db. I thought they could handle it, specs say 120 with a 180 max but no such luck.


I give my Scan Speak Revelator's 460 Watts each crossed @ 80Hz and they don't mind, my doors aren't that happy *they're rattling! *


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

Huh, I figure I have around 150 going to mine, but my gains are way down. Have it crossed from 80-250, not sure of my slope though. Compared to what I have read some people put to them, I thought I was being conservative. Lol


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

No doubt those are some big wattage numbers, but I wonder what's really being put out. Not saying the amps can't do it, but what is the individual threshold of ouput before things get out of hand for each situation.....


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

jcollin76 said:


> Huh, I figure I have around 150 going to mine, but my gains are way down. Have it crossed from 80-250, not sure of my slope though. Compared to what I have read some people put to them, I thought I was being conservative. Lol


I know right? Here is what I did though. I was trying to get rid of a noise I kept hearing so I want to build some MDF bracers. I had the woofers out and said "hey, I want to see these things move up close and personal"

Put a song on with some midbass and heard ratting while holding the thing in my hand  put my ear up to the vent and I could really hear it. So from here I turned down the gain little by little at max unclipped volume to see when the rattle stopped. The rattle stopped at about 7.5V on the gain knob and my HU is only a 4V. The only other thing I can think of was that I was active and only sending 80-450 so maybe concentrating the power did it? And it was free air, maybe that had something to do with it? I meant I'm pretty much IB so free air shouldn't be that much different. IDK, it's a sad story. I feel like I'll never find a cheap midbass like it.



> I give my Scan Speak Revelator's 460 Watts each crossed @ 80Hz and they don't mind, my doors aren't that happy they're rattling!


Are they enclosed? Qts looks a little low for a door  preaching to the fellas that taught me a thing or two, haha.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> No doubt those are some big wattage numbers, but I wonder what's really being put out. Not saying the amps can't do it, but what is the individual threshold of ouput before things get out of hand for each situation.....


I'm powering the woofers with the cadence ia2. Technically it is rated @ 12.5V so I might be giving them more than I think.


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

But you never heard it when mounted? Or you didn't jack it up till you had it free air? Mine are running of 2 bridged channels of a twister f6. Amps are new to me so hasn't been that way long, maybe I should watch it then.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

That could be true, but from a valid standpoint can you measure exactly how much before mechanical failure occurs. I'm wondering if that's a lot less than you think.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

jcollin76 said:


> But you never heard it when mounted? Or you didn't jack it up till you had it free air? Mine are running of 2 bridged channels of a twister f6. Amps are new to me so hasn't been that way long, maybe I should watch it then.


I heard rattling while they were mounted and while the gains were up and thought it was just the door. Some of it was the door but some was the driver.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> That could be true, but from a valid standpoint can you measure exactly how much before mechanical failure occurs. I'm wondering if that's a lot less than you think.


I'm actually not sure of how one goes about accurately measuring wattage being fed. If all I need is a multimeter and a math problem I'm certainly willing to find out.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Well IB doesn't add power handling, it reduces it in fact. The crossover point & slope would be more of a factor in this case. The key would be how much output before hitting thermal and/or mechanical limits. The true way to measure it would include some quite complex gear most common individuals wouldn't have I'd imagine.


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

But wouldn't manufacturers rated specs be assuming an ib application? In my case, I think rainbow's recommends 80-250Hz @24db slope iirc. I have often heard you can put a little more power to them if you use a steeper slope, but I'm not sure.


----------



## Inferno333 (Mar 29, 2006)

I have a set of these that are brand new for sale. They pretty much fit the criteria you put out.

https://www.madisound.com/store/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=147&products_id=8614

$115 shipped.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> Are they enclosed? Qts looks a little low for a door  preaching to the fellas that taught me a thing or two, haha.


No they're IB and the Scan Speak Revelator is excellent in a car IB. I'm going to seal the doors in a couple of months hopefully it will be better. :surprised:


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Inferno333 said:


> I have a set of these that are brand new for sale. They pretty much fit the criteria you put out.
> 
> https://www.madisound.com/store/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=147&products_id=8614
> 
> $115 shipped.


Oh my, very tempting for a cheap choice. I'm worried how they will sound up to 500hz though. How did you use them? Was the midbass deep or more pop?



michaelsil1 said:


> No they're IB and the Scan Speak Revelator is excellent in a car IB. I'm going to seal the doors in a couple of months hopefully it will be better. :surprised:


Those revelators are like the perfect midbass. I can't stop watching the videos but alas, too expensive for me at this point. I need to buy a house ASAP and the more I spend the more I'm set back  but I can't live without my system.


----------



## rexroadj (Oct 31, 2008)

I have some dyn MW160s that would more then likely fit the bill for you? I have put insane power to dyns running in my doors with zero issues. Certainly give you some pant leg shake


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

michaelsil1 said:


> No they're IB and the Scan Speak Revelator is excellent in a car IB. I'm going to seal the doors in a couple of months hopefully it will be better. :surprised:


they will.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Again I think we could be talking apples to oranges. The op describes his desires as something I would consider to be SPL affiliated. The drivers reccommended I would say are more SQ oriented. Not that they won't work, but with manipulation. I do believe it would be more efficient to use a driver better designed to strongly produce that range from the start..... ones that most here tend not to use. Basically it would be of car audio spec nature, but with much efficiency and/or power handling. 

If it was me I would take a chance and play around with some mid to high Q pro audio mid bass drivers. Test that theory for a bit. There are a few inexpensive drivers like the Pyle on Partsexpress.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> Again I think we could be talking apples to oranges. The op describes his desires as something I would consider to be SPL affiliated. The drivers reccommended I would say are more SQ oriented. Not that they won't work, but with manipulation. I do believe it would be more efficient to use a driver better designed to strongly produce that range from the start..... ones that most here tend not to use. Basically it would be of car audio spec nature, but with much efficiency and/or power handling.
> 
> If it was me I would take a chance and play around with some mid to high Q pro audio mid bass drivers. Test that theory for a bit. There are a few inexpensive drivers like the Pyle on Partsexpress.
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


Thanks for keeping on the subject, I wouldn't have known that :surprised:

So something like this guy?

http://www.cdtaudio.com/pdf/ES-06_07.pdf

Qts doesn't look that high though, but it is higher than the scans anyhow which I guess do ok IB.

I mean, don't get me wrong I sealed up my doors the best I could. There are always leaks but it might be at least somewhat sealed and have a slight air spring. I"m limited on driver knowledge at this point. I just knew that CDT had some dedicated midbass selection and looked them up


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

I really think you should at least give the Massive CK6 a try. You could easily ditch them if you didn't like them for what you paid since they can't be had anymore. I have a lightly used extra set at the moment if interested. Of the many mids I've recently tried, they were head and shoulders above the rest in midbass department.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Ck6 are really good for car doors,i have never used anything that were as nice as these for mid base. Btw the next generation of the ck will only feature a different xover, same mids and same tweet.if one plans on running passive, then waiting for the new set would be the best choice, if not the current ck will be just as good for active users.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

AAAAAAA said:


> Ck6 are really good for car doors,i have never used anything that were as nice as these for mid base. Btw the next generation of the ck will only feature a different xover, same mids and same tweet.if one plans on running passive, then waiting for the new set would be the best choice, if not the current ck will be just as good for active users.


Maybe that is what I will look into giving a shot then! Like Vitty said, I could just sell them worst case.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Not knocking anybody, but how is one to take opinions seriously when the majority of suggestions also comes with "I just happen have an extra pair"..... Sounds more like sales pitch to me.


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

Haha I thought about that as I was posting my comment :-D I took a chance on the Massives though from word of mouth on here and was thoroughly impressed. I run them in my daily driver.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

With all the hoopla on the CK6 set, check out the T/S data and that should tell a thing or two....


http://www.massiveaudio.com/manuals/CKII-manual-final.pdf


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

I wouldn't say the best, but I see a few guys using these:


https://www.madisound.com/store/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=143&products_id=8234


If you blow one it's cheap to replace. 


I still like Scan Speak


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Now if you really want to cheaply test which way to go by way of true experience, there's still a few Jamo drivers left on Partsexpress for $9. Their power handling isn't that great, but the acoustics itself should lend you an idea before diving into some deep cash. I've played around with the ones Zaph reviewed and they were pretty impressive. I still have them and plan on some cheap component sets for later installs (friends, son, gal, etc).


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> With all the hoopla on the CK6 set, check out the T/S data and that should tell a thing or two....
> 
> 
> http://www.massiveaudio.com/manuals/CKII-manual-final.pdf


Yup. That is why vitty's extra set is SOLD! That is exactly what I was looking for


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Hopefully that means you were the buyer....


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> Hopefully that means you were the buyer....


Indeed. Couldn't pass them up for $145 shipped. Thanks again Vitty, I'm sure I will enjoy them


----------



## deadcold94 (Mar 27, 2011)

i dont know if it has been said yet but what about the exodus anarchys?

but im not sure if they run well in IB


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

McDizzle said:


> Indeed. Couldn't pass them up for $145 shipped. Thanks again Vitty, I'm sure I will enjoy them


Good! Keep us posted with the before & after in depth as possible.... cool?


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

deadcold94 said:


> i dont know if it has been said yet but what about the exodus anarchys?
> 
> but im not sure if they run well in IB




With the amount of xmax it has, of course it can. However, you better have your door damped and sealed as much as you can and then some. A driver like that in the doors can take the place of a small sub if you wish and I'm sure there's some doing it.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Here are the TS specs I got from WT3 for the CK6's. Xmax from the massive site is peak to peak and not one way BTW, bit it's still lots.

* This data was exported from the Dayton Audio WT3 Woofer Tester
*
* Manufacturer: 
* Model: 
* Piston Diameter = 105.9 mm
* f(s)= 74.02 Hz
* R(e)= 3.09 Ohms
* Z(max)= 11.58 Ohms
* Q(ms)= 3.559
* Q(es)= 1.294
* Q(ts)= 0.949
* V(as)= 4.155 liters (0.147 cubic feet)
* L(e)= 0.37 mH
* n(0)= 0.12 %
* SPL= 83.04 1W/1m
* M(ms)= 12.13 grams
* C(ms)= 0.38 mm/N
* BL= 3.67


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

AAAAAAA said:


> Here are the TS specs I got from WT3 for the CK6's. Xmax from the massive site is peak to peak and not one way BTW, bit it's still lots.
> 
> * This data was exported from the Dayton Audio WT3 Woofer Tester
> *
> ...




IB for sure...... sensitivity's kinda low huh?


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> IB for sure...... sensitivity's kinda low huh?


I knew it was low from the beginning. Something was "fishy". 
I calculated the sensitivity to be 81.57dB 1w/1m - specs from manual FS 40.7Hz, Vas 11.7L, Qes 0.84 

Kelvin


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Well then, manufacturers specs are never really what they say they are. Unless they need break in time?


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Nope, break-in has nothing to do with it. When a speaker's suspension looses up, there's other parameters that shift but the sum of things remain unchanged (sensivity for one). 

Please search in the myth forum about speaker break-in. 

Kelvin


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

michaelsil1 said:


> I give my Scan Speak Revelator's 460 Watts each crossed @ 80Hz and they don't mind, my doors aren't that happy *they're rattling! *


Michael, I think you mean that your amp is capable of delivering 460 Watts per channel if the output level at which you are playing the music, and the music signal being sent the amp, requires it. Within the band pass range that you are playing your midbasses I would be shocked if any recording you could play would require 460 watts on a continuous basis. A peak or two? Maybe. A lot of people talk about how much power they "send" their midbasses, but the discussion really should be about "headroom" (i.e., having sufficient power in reserve so that the amplifier can reproduce a music signal for short periods without clipping) because in the real world you will rarely play music that requires an amplifier to output hundreds of watts per channel on a continuous basis, especially in the narrow frequency ranges most people utilize their midbass speakers. And, for what it's worth, the amplifier driving my midbasses is rated at 50 watts RMS per channel. Yes, 5 0


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

As far as the OP's question is concerned, there are lots of excellent speakers available within the budget he has set, and for his intended application. But, asking for what is the "best" is really difficult to answer and will only generate a multitude of varying opinions. Is "best" determined from a subjective or objective perspective? There are speakers that when measured electrically possess parameters that make them ideal for IB use in a car door. But, from a subjective standpoint, you may not like what you hear when music is played through them. Ultimately, the OP will have to try a few different speakers to find the one that works best with his other speakers and reproduces the music he likes, to his satisfaction. A number of good recommendations have been made. I think drivers that have a Qts measurement of between .55 and .65 are ideal for his intended use. He should also make certain that his chosen speaker(s) are efficient enough to be driven to suitable output levels by his intended amplifier without it being clipped. That cannot be overlooked. Also, I wouldn't be too concerned with whether the speakers can play flat down to 40Hz because he likely will not be very happy with what he hears coming out of his doors if they are highpassed that low. Let the sub do the work down there.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

subwoofery said:


> Nope, break-in has nothing to do with it. When a speaker's suspension looses up, there's other parameters that shift but the sum of things remain unchanged (sensivity for one).
> 
> Please search in the myth forum about speaker break-in.
> 
> Kelvin


Confirmed, I re measured after lots of use and it's the same.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

I agree with this mega watt idea.... depending on the driver 50-100 watts is a lot and I would like to see proof of actual wattage being pushed to the driver. I know of no mid woofer that can handle 460 real watts in a car door thermally or mechanically.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Bayboy said:


> I agree with this mega watt idea.... depending on the driver 50-100 watts is a lot and I would like to see proof of actual wattage being pushed to the driver. I know of no mid woofer that can handle 460 real watts in a car door thermally or mechanically.
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


Play around with bassbox or something... then you can see that power handling really isn't a fixed in stone figure, it mostly depends on the frequency being played and the driver. I can see mids being able to take lots of power in the 500hz and above. Of course it probably couldn't dissipate the heat very long but thereis no real way for us to know other then pushing it. And if it's only for musical peaks then it shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

AAAAAAA said:


> Play around with bassbox or something... then you can see that power handling really isn't a fixed in stone figure, it mostly depends on the frequency being played and the driver.


Agreed.



AAAAAAA said:


> I can see mids being able to take lots of power in the 500hz and above. Of course it probably couldn't dissipate the heat very long but thereis no real way for us to know other then pushing it. And if it's only for musical peaks then it shouldn't be a problem.


But, you don't want to "push" the speaker with an amplifier that is unable to deliver the necessary current to the speaker to reproduce that peak without clipping, and you want to be certain that the speaker can handle those peaks that it is being asked to reproduce. This discussion really highlights the importance of matching speakers and amplifiers carefully. Similar to your point above about power handling of speakers being relative to music peaks, the power output required of the amplifier will depend on the frequency of the music being played. Significantly greater power is required to reproduce music in the bass region than in the midrange or treble region. And, within the bandpass range that a particular speaker operates, the lower frequencies will require greater power to be reproduced than the higher frequencies. Here are a couple of articles that offer some helpful points on this topic: 

http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/support/getfile.aspx?docid=246&doctype=3

Speaker Selection and Amplifier Power Ratings


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Buzzman said:


> Agreed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Holy cow, that was some good reading! A lot of things I have always heard about but never understood why. And thus the why was answered! Thanks for those!

And thanks to AAAAAAA for the t/s params  I'm surprised you had the drivers on hand and the means to get the params and test after break in as well! I've been into car audio for a while now as a hobby and I'm learning a lot me in this thread than I have anywhere in the past few years!

Edit: a question just cropped up in my mind. Why do people say to feed more power to an inefficient driver? I assume the obvious, because it is inefficient and throws out more heat than it should. But there are obviously thermal limitations sooo.... why go past RMS? Sounds like a terrible idea.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

In a real world with normal passband use down around 70hz or so is what I am talking about. I should hope that is what most are referring to... I have bassbox and have run several drivers through it. All will show mechanical limits within normal passband..... 460 watts?! Not seeing that.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Buzzman said:


> Agreed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...Significantly greater power is required to reproduce music in the bass region than in the midrange or treble region...


Very true. However just to add precision, like you said it takes more power for the bass regions however drivers can handle less and less power as you go lower in frequencies. For our mid that could handle 400 watts at 500hz, well it might not be able to any more at (hypothetically speaking) 80hz.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> But there are obviously thermal limitations sooo.... why go past RMS? Sounds like a terrible idea.


Thermaly speaking we aren't continously putting in heat in the driver and like mentioned before "RMS" power handling is a general use number. So lets say we rate a speaker at 60watts rms... how did they come up with that number? If they came up with that number as a safe use *without* a high pass xover and you are going to use one, then you can safely apply much more power to that driver depending on the xover... but you may also be able to apply more or less power depending on the enclosure being used.

So power handling cannot be one number. The application dictates howmuch pwoer you can give it.

Thermal is more of a problem when an amplifier is cliped because a clipping amplifier limits the cooling abilities of a driver and also "warms it up" faster.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

AAAAAAA said:


> Thermaly speaking we aren't continously putting in heat in the driver and like mentioned before "RMS" power handling is a general use number. So lets say we rate a speaker at 60watts rms... how did they come up with that number? If they came up with that number as a safe use *without* a high pass xover and you are going to use one, then you can safely apply much more power to that driver depending on the xover... but you may also be able to apply more or less power depending on the enclosure being used.
> 
> So power handling cannot be one number. The application dictates howmuch pwoer you can give it.
> 
> Thermal is more of a problem when an amplifier is cliped because a clipping amplifier limits the cooling abilities of a driver and also "warms it up" faster.


I see. I'm starting to realize why people are so pissed at the falsely published specifications some companies put out. I'm wondering if it is safe to assume... well anything at this point. For instance, on the massives they have listed range starting at 40hz. Obviously I would never run the driver that low, but is that their guideline for how they rated it? Based on the driver results I feel I can't really trust anything on their spec sheet :worried:


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

You can look at specs and graphs and charts and crap for days and days. The best method I have come across for speaker analysis is also the most expensive. Simply buy the drivers you are interested in and listen to them in your application. It's a tough pill to swallow money wise, but is infinitely greater in value than any published spec or private test will tell you.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Vitty said:


> You can look at specs and graphs and charts and crap for days and days. The best method I have come across for speaker analysis is also the most expensive. Simply buy the drivers you are interested in and listen to them in your application. It's a tough pill to swallow money wise, but is infinitely greater in value than any published spec or private test will tell you.



Agreed within reason.... that is assuming you know in what direction you want to head. Can't squeeze grape juice from a lemon.

Anyways... Dizzle, don't be so precarious about your purchase. I'm sure they will perform better than you expect. Those specs are small signal analysis anyway, but once you apply some actual power things change a bit. The main thing is you won't necessarily have to boost any lower mid frequencies so that's a plus. Install them and listen for a while..


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Buzzman said:


> Michael, I think you mean that your amp is capable of delivering 460 Watts per channel if the output level at which you are playing the music, and the music signal being sent the amp, requires it. Within the band pass range that you are playing your midbasses I would be shocked if any recording you could play would require 460 watts on a continuous basis. A peak or two? Maybe. A lot of people talk about how much power they "send" their midbasses, but the discussion really should be about "headroom" (i.e., having sufficient power in reserve so that the amplifier can reproduce a music signal for short periods without clipping) because in the real world you will rarely play music that requires an amplifier to output hundreds of watts per channel on a continuous basis, especially in the narrow frequency ranges most people utilize their midbass speakers. And, for what it's worth, the amplifier driving my midbasses is rated at 50 watts RMS per channel. Yes, 5 0


I LOVE the voice of reason. 


I think you guys would be surprised at just how loud drivers get off 3w. For my 95dB harmonic distortion testing most every driver is getting less than 3w to achieve 93-95dB @ 1/2m, which is about the average distance for car speakers nearest to you (driver's side).

If you check the testing I've done, you can see what I'm talking about:
Bikinpunks Product Review Forum - DIYMA.com


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Vitty said:


> You can look at specs and graphs and charts and crap for days and days. The best method I have come across for speaker analysis is also the most expensive. Simply buy the drivers you are interested in and listen to them in your application. It's a tough pill to swallow money wise, but is infinitely greater in value than any published spec or private test will tell you.


yes, but if you understand how to read the graphs and you have experience with the drivers then you can start learning how to gather the information you need. it's not crap. it's a lack of understanding. 

You're just calibrating yourself in the long run. I've done the same thing. After years of buying drivers I've realized just how great data can be, but I do realize it's not a pure substitute for your ears. If you rely on only one it's a mistake. The best driver you've ever heard always seems to be the one you're running... people hamstring themselves out of potentially great drivers because they just assumed they've already got the best.
This is when data helps... if you know how your favorite driver measures, you can get useful data out of the results and use them toward future purchases.

I like a 50/50 split.


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

Vitty said:


> You can look at specs and graphs and charts and crap for days and days. The best method I have come across for speaker analysis is also the most expensive. Simply buy the drivers you are interested in and listen to them in your application. It's a tough pill to swallow money wise, but is infinitely greater in value than any published spec or private test will tell you.


The problem I have with this view is that it encourages making uninformed decisions, which leads to poor economic and music reproduction decisions. Proper research will greatly reduce the amount of ad hoc purchasing and listening you do.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> Agreed within reason.... that is assuming you know in what direction you want to head. Can't squeeze grape juice from a lemon.
> 
> Anyways... Dizzle, don't be so precarious about your purchase. I'm sure they will perform better than you expect. Those specs are small signal analysis anyway, but once you apply some actual power things change a bit. The main thing is you won't necessarily have to boost any lower mid frequencies so that's a plus. Install them and listen for a while..


Yea, I"m not too worried, more curious at this point than anything. Now I want to fool around with these drivers and the other sets I have outgrown and see what the parameters are on all of them. Could be a fun little project


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Like mentioned earlier.... knowing the true specs plus auditioning will work in your favor on future builds and needing to know which direction to take. Just be careful.... could wind up with a bunch of "experimental drivers" in the closet...


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Rep points have been spread to all, you are all extremely helpful and informative!!


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

Speaks are on their way to you. You will have to let us know your findings when you install them. :-D


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

https://www.madisound.com/store/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=173&products_id=1596


Yes everyone's right about Speaker ratings and Wattage, however here's a couple of things I noticed that you didn't comment about:

The Drivers rating for RMS Wattage is based on the full Recommended Frequency Range (look at the SEAS Driver above) it says 80 Watts long term 250 Watts short term and 30-3000 Hz.

*What if your using only a small portion of what the Driver is capable of how much Wattage can it handle?*

The Ohms of the Driver; if I'm running 460 Watts @ 4 Ohms that's roughly 230 Watts @ 8 Ohms (the SEAS is an 8 Ohm Driver).

I never said my Drivers see all 460 Watts RMS @ 4 Ohms I said that's what I give them and they seem to like it.


I was running the same Amps with the Revelators as I was with the SEAS (SEAS 8 Ohm, Revelator 4 Ohm) and I haven't blown a Driver yet and the Revelators are getting 460 Watts @ 4 Ohm RMS.


I don't know about 3 Watts RMS getting as loud as I want?


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

One more thing a car is not a home I like to roll down the windows going 70MPH and crank it up you better have some *quality Drivers* and some Power if you want to drown out the wind especially if you like Classical Music.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

michaelsil1 said:


> Ohms of the Driver; if I'm running 460 Watts @ 4 Ohms that's roughly 230 Watts @ 8 Ohms (the SEAS is an 8 Ohm Driver).
> 
> I never said my Drivers see all 460 Watts RMS @ 4 Ohms I said that's what I give them and they seem to like it.
> 
> ...



I am really not understanding what you just said. You say that you never said they see all 480 watts, but that's what you give them, then the Revelators are getting 460 watts @ 4 ohm. Either you are giving them 460 watts or you're not. If so can you please put a vid or something showing them and the amp metered?


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

Bayboy said:


> I am really not understanding what you just said. You say that you never said they see all 480 watts, but that's what you give them, then the Revelators are getting 460 watts @ 4 ohm. Either you are giving them 460 watts or you're not. If so can you please put a vid or something showing them and the amp metered?


That's what the Amp is rated at and the Gains are set right in the middle. I don't know how much Power is actually going to the Driver, but I do know* it gets loud!*


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Thanks for the clarification....


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

B&C 6NDL44 is king 85hz-500hz
Exodus Anarchy is king 20hz-85hz

in the 7" category. Most output/lower distortion that is.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

cvjoint said:


> B&C 6NDL44 is king 85hz-500hz
> Exodus Anarchy is king 20hz-85hz
> 
> in the 7" category. Most output/lower distortion that is.


Hey George,

I was going to mention you and your old beast. 
George had the loudest car at our meets with a full trunk of Amps.

SQ not thump and bump.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

michaelsil1 said:


> Hey George,
> 
> I was going to mention you and your old beast.
> George had the loudest car at our meets with a full trunk of Amps.
> ...


Haha, not quite true of course. I was never louder than Jim. No point sizing up to the Big Red.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

cvjoint said:


> Haha, not quite true of course. I was never louder than Jim. No point sizing up to the Big Red.


Not talking SPL for that none of us could touch BigRed


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Buzzman said:


> Michael, I think you mean that your amp is capable of delivering 460 Watts per channel if the output level at which you are playing the music, and the music signal being sent the amp, requires it. Within the band pass range that you are playing your midbasses I would be shocked if any recording you could play would require 460 watts on a continuous basis. A peak or two? Maybe. A lot of people talk about how much power they "send" their midbasses, but the discussion really should be about "headroom" (i.e., having sufficient power in reserve so that the amplifier can reproduce a music signal for short periods without clipping) because in the real world you will rarely play music that requires an amplifier to output hundreds of watts per channel on a continuous basis, especially in the narrow frequency ranges most people utilize their midbass speakers. And, for what it's worth, the amplifier driving my midbasses is rated at 50 watts RMS per channel. Yes, 5 0


Your 50 rms is kinda like cheating  

What can you tell us regarding the RE50 and its constant current driving? How different is it from high current? 

Kelvin


----------



## Inferno333 (Mar 29, 2006)

Looks I was a little late on getting back to you. Good luck with your choice in drivers.


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

subwoofery said:


> Your 50 rms is kinda like cheating
> 
> What can you tell us regarding the RE50 and its constant current driving? How different is it from high current?
> 
> Kelvin


Yeah, I guess you could call it cheating. The RE50 and the other amps above it in the RE line utilize a circuit layout like that you see in tube amplifiers. They put out a boatload of current. The difference between them and the other amps in the market of which I am aware that are also capable of high current output, is that the RE amps' current delivery does not fluctuate based on the impedance swings they see from the connected speaker. To put things in context for you, I first used the RE50 on my 4" midranges because I wanted to put my best amp on the speakers that reproduce, in my opinion, the most important segment of music's frequency range. The midranges could not handle the RE50's current output. So, I put them on my midbasses which, with a larger voice coil, cone area, etc. handled the RE50 just fine. I then put the Phass TP 4.100 hybrid tube amp on the midranges bridged so that it could deliver 200 watts per channel. The midranges didn't cry uncle like they did with the RE50. 

And hey, thanks again for the CDs. Tahitian Jazz. Who would have known.  I am listening to "Lovely Hula Girl" as I write this. My wife might not like the images it conjures up in my mind. :laugh: It definitely makes me want to find a beach to lay on.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

That PHASS site if full of awesome quotes

"RE 50 has a exceptional ability to continue to put the power into speakers under the difficult situation that the speaker impedance is increasing. "

Put that power where it belongs in the speakers...yeaaaaah! hehehe

"This amplifier can get the musical signal from the power amplifier in head units directly without any changings of musical signal."

Why go through a middel man...go directly without changes.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Buzzman said:


> Yeah, I guess you could call it cheating. The RE50 and the other amps above it in the RE line utilize a circuit layout like that you see in tube amplifiers. They put out a boatload of current. The difference between them and the other amps in the market of which I am aware that are also capable of high current output, is that the RE amps' current delivery does not fluctuate based on the impedance swings they see from the connected speaker. To put things in context for you, I first used the RE50 on my 4" midranges because I wanted to put my best amp on the speakers that reproduce, in my opinion, the most important segment of music's frequency range. The midranges could not handle the RE50's current output. So, I put them on my midbasses which, with a larger voice coil, cone area, etc. handled the RE50 just fine. I then put the Phass TP 4.100 hybrid tube amp on the midranges bridged so that it could deliver 200 watts per channel. The midranges didn't cry uncle like they did with the RE50.
> 
> And hey, thanks again for the CDs. Tahitian Jazz. Who would have known.  I am listening to "Lovely Hula Girl" as I write this. My wife might not like the images it conjures up in my mind. :laugh: It definitely makes me want to find a beach to lay on.


I'm starting to wonder how high-current amps would sound on a midbass driver. Been reading the topology of some HC amps and been reading the idea behind Phass RE series. 
Do you have any experience with the old Steg Masterstroke MSK 50SC? It's a HC amp that could go as low as 0,25 ohm stereo - meaning running it @ 4 ohm should show a boatload of headroom since it would be using the power supply and output stage at less than 1/10th of their capabilities. I have an italian test that shows a 50% efficiency with a dynamic headroom figure of almost 6dBs  

Glad you love the CDs. They don't make those anymore so take good care of them  

Kelvin


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

subwoofery said:


> I'm starting to wonder how high-current amps would sound on a midbass driver. Been reading the topology of some HC amps and been reading the idea behind Phass RE series.
> Do you have any experience with the old Steg Masterstroke MSK 50SC? It's a HC amp that could go as low as 0,25 ohm stereo - meaning running it @ 4 ohm should show a boatload of headroom since it would be using the power supply and output stage at less than 1/10th of their capabilities. I have an italian test that shows a 50% efficiency with a dynamic headroom figure of almost 6dBs
> 
> . . . .
> Kelvin


Kelvin, I don’t have any personal experience with that Steg amp. From what I can tell it surely is one extremely well built, well designed amp. The stated specs are spectacular, and that Italian test appears to validate that it’s a real beast. Personally, I think using a high current amp with midbasses makes a lot of sense, assuming that the amp is not one of those simply marketed as “high current” and with claims of outputting thousands of watts simply to get your attention. High current and extreme heat, and diminished audio fidelity, are not things I admire. In the frequency ranges in which midbass speakers typically are used difficult loads will be presented an amp, and using an amp that can deliver high current to the speaker when necessary, and do so efficiently, certainly would be advantageous.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Buzzman said:


> Kelvin, I don’t have any personal experience with that Steg amp. From what I can tell it surely is one extremely well built, well designed amp. The stated specs are spectacular, and that Italian test appears to validate that it’s a real beast. Personally, I think using a high current amp with midbasses makes a lot of sense, assuming that the amp is not one of those simply marketed as “high current” and with claims of outputting thousands of watts simply to get your attention. High current and extreme heat, and diminished audio fidelity, are not things I admire. In the frequency ranges in which midbass speakers typically are used difficult loads will be presented an amp, and using an amp that can deliver high current to the speaker when necessary, and do so efficiently, certainly would be advantageous.


Hmm... Looks like I might be contacting you when I would be looking for an amp for my next project  
BTW, do you know how efficient the Phass RE line is? Would it be closer to Class A since it uses push-pull technology? 

Kelvin


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

Did you get the CK6's today!!??


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Vitty said:


> Did you get the CK6's today!!??


Haha, not yet but I see they are out for delivery  I can't wait!!


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

You get those bad boys installed yet?


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Vitty said:


> You get those bad boys installed yet?


Hah, yes and no. Good news, I got them installed. Bad news, one of the channels on my amp up and quit on me 

BUT that said, I'm listening to one speaker right now and the output is surprising for just that one! I'm really excited to get this going but alas, I may be waiting weeks to return this amp and get a new one in. I haven't forgotten about this thread  more updates will come.

So far, I started this driver off at [email protected] and low power (being overly cautious). Later I gave the little guy some more juice and holy cow these are gonna be fun  can't wait to get both sides going.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

With its IB nature you can crossover a little lower. It will handle it. Just keep an eye on power levels and excursion.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

I am actually afraid to set my gains right now, I'm traumatized! I like the speakers at 90hz @24db and they do have nice output when I give them more juice but I'm realizing that maybe my ears are not what they used to be. I'm afraid to turn the gains up at all past extremely safe. The gain is not labeled really, 9v at the lowest and 200mv at the highest. Everything in between is who the F knows. I could hit the 4v mark after a quarter turn or half turn, I'll never know.

I'm thinking about going to walmart and buying a $10 speaker to play with because playing with dangerous levels seems to be the only way I will be able to recognize the signs of stress. I've always played it super safe but now I just want to use my amp to it's full potential.

It really makes it difficult when you can't trust the specs on anything. Can't trust the amp, can't trust the speaker, can't trust a multimeter with a test tone, can't trust my ears to hear low hertz distortion (until its too late) with so many unknowns and untrustables I'd say setting the gain anywhere near where you want it is impossible. I can't tell if I am hurting the speaker or if my door has strange resonance issues or I'm getting a slight clip or giving too much power. Even though the drivers are sitting on 3/4 MDF rings and the doors are covered with deadener things still resonate.

These speakers can hit pretty nicely, but so could the vanadiums... I don't want to make the same mistakes.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Nothing wrong with being cautious... If you have rattles though, you need to chase them down to truly enjoy any speaker stressed or not.

The x-over point and slope you are using is fine if all is blending well enough for you to perceive bass is coming from the front. When it comes to tuning, there are no hard rules....


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> Nothing wrong with being cautious... If you have rattles though, you need to chase them down to truly enjoy any speaker stressed or not.
> 
> The x-over point and slope you are using is fine if all is blending well enough for you to perceive bass is coming from the front. When it comes to tuning, there are no hard rules....


Thanks, sometimes I get so caught up in numbers and hard facts that I just have to remember it is still sort of an art.

So I tested some other drivers I have lying around, like the es620 mid and the jl xr-650 mid and the rainbow mid and guess what. At a certain point they all make that same noise...... I pushed the poor little JL to bottom a little and after messing around for a bit I think what I am hearing is the tinsel leads!!! Do all tinsel leads make a little noise at some point? So far that is my conclusion that yes, they do! The loudest by far was on the rainbows though.... weird.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Another part of the mystery. The back of the rainbow there is a little metal grate looking piece over the vent hole. If I push down on that a little the noise gets louder  what the hell is that? I assume I can just take that piece out if it is making a racket???


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Tinsel lead slap is can happen if the leads are installed sloppily from the factory and the woofer sees too much excursion. I suppose you could glue the leads to the spider if it won't interfere with cone travel. IE you don't want snatch the leads from the coil if gluing will hinder it. Are you sure this is the problem?

Also that "grating" is a screen to keep debris out of the coil & pole piece. Not a good idea to remove it especially in a car door. I'm sorta lost with that one too. The screen may vibrate if its loose, but if you put pressure on it, it gets worse?

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> Tinsel lead slap is can happen if the leads are installed sloppily from the factory and the woofer sees too much excursion. I suppose you could glue the leads to the spider if it won't interfere with cone travel. IE you don't want snatch the leads from the coil if gluing will hinder it. Are you sure this is the problem?
> 
> Also that "grating" is a screen to keep debris out of the coil & pole piece. Not a good idea to remove it especially in a car door. I'm sorta lost with that one too. The screen may vibrate if its loose, but if you put pressure on it, it gets worse?
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk


Hmm, interesting, I'll have to look at the tinsel leads and see if there is something that I could do about quieting that down. As far as the screen yes, that is the symptom I am seeing. The noise gets louder as I press down on it. I thought perhaps there was a chance that it was making a noise and that pressing down on it a bit would stop the noise but I was certainly surprised.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

IMHO, if tinsel lead slap really is your problem, it's best to look at new drivers (not the same ones, assuming this is a design flaw). It's possible the driver is just being asked too much but hopefully you're not killing it. 

This is one of those issues that will nag at you until it's resolved entirely and the only real way to do that is to get something else.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> IMHO, if tinsel lead slap really is your problem, it's best to look at new drivers (not the same ones, assuming this is a design flaw). It's possible the driver is just being asked too much but hopefully you're not killing it.
> 
> This is one of those issues that will nag at you until it's resolved entirely and the only real way to do that is to get something else.


Indeed, I have these new massives to play with for now  And on the topic of asking too much, I probably am trying to ask too much. Eventually once I get myself a house with a nice garage I'm going to start a project to build door skins out of MDF. I have some creative ideas that could make it work. either that or I will try my hand at fiberglass. The idea is to get 2 6.5-7" drivers on each side. One driver doesn't seem to cut it and there aren't many high qts 4 ohm 8" caraudio specific drivers out there.

That is a whole other story though and won't be for a while. Once I get an idea in my head it is very hard to stop it, hehe. I have plenty of time for research on that one


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> One driver doesn't seem to cut it and there aren't many high qts 4 ohm 8" caraudio specific drivers out there.



Hybrid L8


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> Hybrid L8


Haha, this guy?

Legatia L8v2 Speaker Set - 12v Electronics

Is that a low enough QTS for a door? Obviously I would be fabricating so maybe QTS wouldn't matter as much and I would only want to use it from 80hz up anyhow.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> Haha, this guy?
> 
> Legatia L8v2 Speaker Set - 12v Electronics
> 
> Is that a low enough QTS for a door? Obviously I would be fabricating so maybe QTS wouldn't matter as much and I would only want to use it from 80hz up anyhow.


No Hybrid L8:

http://www.hybrid-audio.com/Legatia L8.pdf


QTS.0.765


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> No Hybrid L8:
> 
> http://www.hybrid-audio.com/Legatia L8.pdf


Holy bjeesus if anyone ever needs more than that in their car they must have no ears. That is now my long term goal. What a perfect specimen. Thank you!!


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> Holy bjeesus if anyone ever needs more than that in their car they must have no ears. That is now my long term goal. What a perfect specimen. Thank you!!


Your welcome.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Wait is that one discontinued?

Edit: Just found it on the discontinued page. V2 is the new one with a much lower qts  why do all nice drivers become discontinued?!?!?!?!? drives me crazy


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

McDizzle said:


> Holy bjeesus if anyone ever needs more than that in their car they must have no ears. That is now my long term goal. What a perfect specimen. Thank you!!


Actually it's common sense. You seem to push all your 7s into xdamage, and then you keep buying Hi-Fi 7" which are all alike more than they are different. I recommended you 7"s that have a better chance to stay alive, a dual gap motor and a high efficiency pro audio driver. If you buy roughly the same driver you are going to have roughly the same bad experience. 

Now it seems you KNOW 8" is perfect. How do you figure? I've used a better 8" than that and it still fell apart on some material. Even 10"s fell apart for midbass duty. Hobbyists in this genre get fixated on some speaker and come to cherish it as the best there is and everybody else must be out of their mind for wanting more and thinking they have more. The limitations exist only in your mind and there are plenty car audio brands that manipulate this mindset in enthusiasts to sell you the same basic speaker with more bling and claims.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

cvjoint said:


> Actually it's common sense. You seem to push all your 7s into xdamage, and then you keep buying Hi-Fi 7" which are all alike more than they are different. I recommended you 7"s that have a better chance to stay alive, a dual gap motor and a high efficiency pro audio driver. If you buy roughly the same driver you are going to have roughly the same bad experience.
> 
> Now it seems you KNOW 8" is perfect. How do you figure? I've used a better 8" than that and it still fell apart on some material. Even 10"s fell apart for midbass duty. Hobbyists in this genre get fixated on some speaker and come to cherish it as the best there is and everybody else must be out of their mind for wanting more and thinking they have more. The limitations exist only in your mind and there are plenty car audio brands that manipulate this mindset in enthusiasts to sell you the same basic speaker with more bling and claims.


Well, the limitation is that I don't have a wide knowledge of what is actually out there. This driver is new to me, never heard of it. I don't know where people learn of these random brands but from what I've seen it is word of mouth. So I come to the hive mind that is DIYMA for consultation.

I want LOUD and CLEAN midbass punching me in the face. I figured, after my experiences, that 6.5" drivers wont do this for me, so I looked to either get more 6.5" drivers or up the size. Is the L8 the best driver? I'm not sure, but it looks a hell of a lot more promising than other offerings I've seen so far. So it is the top of the list _at this point_. Plus, I really don't want to take out a second mortgage in order to support my caraudio habit. These are getting pricey as it is but as a long term goal I'm willing to deal with that.

The B&C 6NDL44 that you recommended looked very promising but the QTS threw me off as doors are not easily sealed. Also, my thinking now, that I need bigger to get louder and thus more punch made me think that I was probably just going to do the same with that driver that happened with others.

The drivers I bought from Vitty was mostly for fun and to hold me over while I'm trying to save some cash (short term) until I have the resources and money to put something bigger and better into my car (long term)

That being said, would you still recommend the B&C 6NDL44? For my long term goal?


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

I could be wrong, but the punch you are wanting to feel is a combination of good mid-bass coupled with a subwoofer and a good tune. In my system I feel a solid punch from kick drums when the mid and the sub are working together. Take one or the other out and I lose it.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

McDizzle said:


> Well, the limitation is that I don't have a wide knowledge of what is actually out there. This driver is new to me, never heard of it. I don't know where people learn of these random brands but from what I've seen it is word of mouth. So I come to the hive mind that is DIYMA for consultation.
> 
> I want LOUD and CLEAN midbass punching me in the face. I figured, after my experiences, that 6.5" drivers wont do this for me, so I looked to either get more 6.5" drivers or up the size. Is the L8 the best driver? I'm not sure, but it looks a hell of a lot more promising than other offerings I've seen so far. So it is the top of the list _at this point_. Plus, I really don't want to take out a second mortgage in order to support my caraudio habit. These are getting pricey as it is but as a long term goal I'm willing to deal with that.
> 
> ...


Word of mouth is erroneous for exactly the same reason, most users will tell you that what they are using now is the best they've had. It's a self fulfilling need of being "done" if that's ever achievable. The DIYMA way has been a complete reliance on data to form opinions, something that eroded greatly in the last few years but hopefully is making a comeback with our new tester extraordinaire. With that being said most car audio speakers are just generic overhung drivers with specification drawn out of thin air. These are also the ones that will cost you the most, you are paying for the brand. 

There are two ways of getting more output: more throw or more surface area. If you are sticking with the 7", I recommend a dual gap motor: either the Exodus Anarchy or the CSS SDX7. I'm trying the latter in my car soon. The B&C is great example of a typical overhung motor that's optimized with the best tech there is. The B&C makes up for the shorter throw by having more efficiency. The other two are inneficient, they make up for it with throw. Same principles apply to an 8". You would still want lots of throw for midbass duty or high efficiency. 

The QTS is not that big of a deal if you have EQ. You should be worried if you get a very high QTC like 1.5 in too small of a box. Too large of a box is hardly ever a problem.

Ultimately, there is no easy choice. I do recommend the B&C over all 7"s if crossed 100hz and up. Bellow 100hz the XBl drivers will slightly outpace it. It"s up to you to choose what you want more, lower distortion on the low end or lower distortion in the high end.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Vitty said:


> I could be wrong, but the punch you are wanting to feel is a combination of good mid-bass coupled with a subwoofer and a good tune. In my system I feel a solid punch from kick drums when the mid and the sub are working together. Take one or the other out and I lose it.


Yes, I can see where you are coming from here. The sub definitely helps, but I feel like I'm at the point that even with the most basic subs the midbass can't keep up. My sub control is -15 to +15. I usually keep it 0 to -3 and then I just want more of that 90hz bump and blow some drivers.



cvjoint said:


> Word of mouth is erroneous for exactly the same reason, most users will tell you that what they are using now is the best they've had. It's a self fulfilling need of being "done" if that's ever achievable. The DIYMA way has been a complete reliance on data to form opinions, something that eroded greatly in the last few years but hopefully is making a comeback with our new tester extraordinaire. With that being said most car audio speakers are just generic overhung drivers with specification drawn out of thin air. These are also the ones that will cost you the most, you are paying for the brand.
> 
> There are two ways of getting more output: more throw or more surface area. If you are sticking with the 7", I recommend a dual gap motor: either the Exodus Anarchy or the CSS SDX7. I'm trying the latter in my car soon. The B&C is great example of a typical overhung motor that's optimized with the best tech there is. The B&C makes up for the shorter throw by having more efficiency. The other two are inneficient the make up for it with throw. Same principles apply to an 8". You would still want lots of throw for midbass duty or high efficiency.
> 
> The QTS is not that big of a deal if you have EQ. You should be worried if you get a very high QTC like 1.5 in too small of a box. To large of a box is hardly ever a problem.


Well, I was never a fan of EQ. I mostly try to find specific drivers for specific applications and install accordingly so that EQ is not needed but I suppose that is a crossroad I may have to take. 

So, thinking out loud:

Grab a driver with tons of throw and an amp with lots of headroom and boost a couple dbs between 80-150 (for example, I have no idea )

Theoretically with the headroom on the amp and extra throw I should have a nice punchy midbass driver that has no problem handling the task. 

Is this the general idea? I never like the idea of more processing vs less design and install so these are things I never really think about.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Here is an example why EQ is crucial in a car. I replaced these puny looking Hyundai speakers with an aftermarket coaxial. Look at how similar the frequency response curves look like! The major diffrence is that the aftermarket has a tweeter. Other than that they are highly correlated. Point: the car interior is far more important than the speaker choice in the final frequency response. EQ. is not an option in a car, it's a necessity if you like to get a proper response. 

I think most hobyists adopt an anti-EQ stance because they tune by ear. I don't believe it for a second that you can take a car like this and tune it flat by ear. It takes lots of equipment to properly test and lots of experience to make the right adjustments. That's where you better not EQ. for fear of making it worse. I understand that, but EQ. in itself is great tool in a car. Far more important than in a house.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

cvjoint said:


> Here is an example why EQ is crucial in a car. I replaced these puny looking Hyundai speakers with an aftermarket coaxial. Look at how similar the frequency response curves look like! The major diffrence is that the aftermarket has a tweeter. Other than that they are highly correlated. Point: the car interior is far more important than the speaker choice in the final frequency response. EQ. is not an option in a car, it's a necessity if you like to get a proper response.
> 
> I think most hobyists adopt an anti-EQ stance because they tune by ear. I don't believe it for a second that you can take a car like this and tune it flat by ear. It takes lots of equipment to properly test and lots of experience to make the right adjustments. That's where you better not EQ. for fear of making it worse. I understand that, but EQ. in itself is great tool in a car. Far more important than in a house.


Hmm, okay, that picture sort of just punched me in the face. So maybe THAT should be the next investment because it could ultimately solve a lot of my problems... here I am driving myself absolutely insane looking for drivers and mounting positions (and I carpeted the entire under-dash area to reduce reflections ) and all I really might have needed was a touch of EQ. I need a beer.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

McDizzle said:


> Hmm, okay, that picture sort of just punched me in the face. So maybe THAT should be the next investment because it could ultimately solve a lot of my problems... here I am driving myself absolutely insane looking for drivers and mounting positions (and I carpeted the entire under-dash area to reduce reflections ) and all I really might have needed was a touch of EQ. I need a beer.


Haha, I can always use a beer. I would test people's cars for a beer, heck I do it free! 

Also one thing to note. Can you tell which speaker has a higher QTS? If you could pick any QTS you wanted how would you pick it to improve response? See what I mean? 

Best thing you can do install wise is to put speakers right on your dash or in pillars and aim them towards you. THAT will beat EQ. every day. With speakers mounted low you can only EQ. for one driver position. I don't know about you but I move a lot when I drive.


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

what equipment do you use to get a frequency response curve?


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

I have two.

WinMLS
Dayton Omnimic

I used the Dayton for the one above. 

The common choice is TrueRTA.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Vitty said:


> what equipment do you use to get a frequency response curve?



True RTA is a good inexpensive program. Pairing it with an omni-directional electret mic a old laptop, and mic preamp is a good start for cheap. However, you don't necessarily want a totally flat response. It will be lifeless! Mainly you want the upper midbass to upper midrange (L-R) to play evenly smooth respectively. That is the only part you may accept as flat. The outer ends of the spectrum most like with a little lift (Fletcher–Munson).


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

The Hybrid L8 isn't new to the competition circuit or to DIYMA. 

cvjoint does know how to get the Bass in your face. 


I'm surprised he didn't suggest this driver:

https://www.madisound.com/store/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=143&products_id=1386


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

michaelsil1 said:


> The Hybrid L8 isn't new to the competition circuit or to DIYMA.
> 
> cvjoint does know how to get the Bass in your face.
> 
> ...


I would have suggested the XLS 8". That is the goldmine Npdang found a long time ago. No 8" can touch it in the midbass department.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

cvjoint said:


> I would have suggested the XLS 8". That is the goldmine Npdang found a long time ago. No 8" can touch it in the midbass department.


And it's sooo cheap too!  nice. But of course I need to focus here instead of drooling over drivers  EQ first. Any recommendations for a nice EQ that wont break the bank?


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

McDizzle said:


> And it's sooo cheap too!  nice. But of course I need to focus here instead of drooling over drivers  EQ first. Any recommendations for a nice EQ that wont break the bank?


That's the SLS that is cheap. It's 90% of the performance of the XLS. The XLS is discontinued. The SLS still whoops on the majority of the competition.

Best EQ. is the one that comes built in the headunits. Next up are the ones built in the amplifiers. Separate processors are probably the most expensive way to go.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

cvjoint said:


> That's the SLS that is cheap. It's 90% of the performance of the XLS. The XLS is discontinued. The SLS still whoops on the majority of the competition.
> 
> Best EQ. is the one that comes built in the headunits. Next up are the ones built in the amplifiers. Separate processors are probably the most expensive way to go.


Darn. Well, I'll probably be on the lookout for a head unit I suppose. I have the KDC-X994 which has a lot of great features except for the measly 5 band EQ. For the touch ups I would need to make it sounds like 30 bands are in needed. Thanks, I'll be keeping my eye out.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

I think I already mentionned this but I have never been able to get much better midbase from going bigger. I have found that bigger usually means louder and mostly lower in the base region.

I have run the SLS8's before and they were nice, played low good midbase. But it wasn't until I tried them in the rear deck of a sedan that the midbase became increadible. The large doors they use to be in waren't big or isolated enough for them to shine.

I personally always try and get that exageraed punchyness that I think a lot of others want as well. It's not easy and I kept trying to get more and more by going bigger and bigger until I had 10inchers in my doors. Midbase was alright but not as punchy as I was hoping and new it could be. And I couldn't tune in the punchyness without making the rest sound strange.

So how does one go about punchyness? It's not easy.Definitly an EQ is a must, I think the enclosure plays a big part and that's why some people might have great punchyness with driver X in their door volume y but not necessarely in volume z. The CK set from massive for me is very punchy and satisfying. the punchyest I have ever had was in small kick pods with some 6inch kicker resolution. They were small fragile looking drivers but in the kicks they punched like mad. I loved it.

Another thing I think is important in great midbase is the song itself or the recording. A lot of Micheal Jackson songs always sound nice with lots of midbase, while other artists don't and that's how it was recorded so we can't expect to always have great punchy midbase with all songs.


----------



## CraigE (Jun 10, 2008)

cvjoint said:


> Here is an example why EQ is crucial in a car. I replaced these puny looking Hyundai speakers with an aftermarket coaxial. Look at how similar the frequency response curves look like! The major diffrence is that the aftermarket has a tweeter. Other than that they are highly correlated. Point: the car interior is far more important than the speaker choice in the final frequency response. EQ. is not an option in a car, it's a necessity if you like to get a proper response.
> 
> I think most hobyists adopt an anti-EQ stance because they tune by ear. I don't believe it for a second that you can take a car like this and tune it flat by ear. It takes lots of equipment to properly test and lots of experience to make the right adjustments. That's where you better not EQ. for fear of making it worse. I understand that, but EQ. in itself is great tool in a car. Far more important than in a house.


Truth... Well said bro.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

I'm also thinking that great Mid Bass response comes from the enclosure, leaky IB doors are not our friend. I was so jealous when cvjoint showed up with sealed doors with 10's in them. 

I think my next move is to seal my doors and see how much it changes.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

the thing that really screws people up is their idea of what midbass should be in a properly tuned setup. We start with subwoofers only and expect that a 7" midbass can make us still feel that kick the 12" sub did while still having "great SQ". Simple fact is, it won't. Air movement is volumetric. That means surface area and xmax. If you want stupid loud levels of 'midbass' then you need either of the two or both (preferably). 

But again, realize that what so many of us start out as thinking as the holy grail of midbass is a falacy in a real audio system.

Next time you listen to a real nice home system note just how little 'midbass' there is compared to what you're currently trying to achieve. It's not the same. However, you'll feel like there's more because the whole setup is done right.
I've heard many systems that have great midbass due to a well tuned system. Learn how to tune a system and install and your notion of midbass will change... for the better and likely to your surprise (ie: hey, all of a sudden I don't need the output I thought I did and it sounds friggin' great!).

It's not all about 50-300hz being loud. It's about everything working together.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> the thing that really screws people up is their idea of what midbass should be in a properly tuned setup. We start with subwoofers only and expect that a 7" midbass can make us still feel that kick the 12" sub did while still having "great SQ". Simple fact is, it won't. Air movement is volumetric. That means surface area and xmax. If you want stupid loud levels of 'midbass' then you need either of the two or both (preferably).
> 
> But again, realize that what so many of us start out as thinking as the holy grail of midbass is a falacy in a real audio system.
> 
> ...


Hmm, suppose it is sort of hard to hit a target if you haven't heard said target (like me :blush I just just understood the type of sound I wanted and looked up frequencies, played with tones etc etc.

Anyone with a nicely tuned system live near RI?


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> True RTA is a good inexpensive program. Pairing it with an omni-directional electret mic a old laptop, and mic preamp is a good start for cheap. However, you don't necessarily want a totally flat response. It will be lifeless! Mainly you want the upper midbass to upper midrange (L-R) to play evenly smooth respectively. That is the only part you may accept as flat. The outer ends of the spectrum most like with a little lift (Fletcher–Munson).


What is the point of a mic preamp? Looking into getting a setup going here  

The car audio world is so skewed. If 80% of frequency response, etc in a car is dictated by environment, EQ, and airspace among other things then a means to analyze the spectrum should be a mandatory part of any serious listener's purchase.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

the mic pre-amp provides phantom power to the mic. without it, assuming you're using an xlr phantom powered mic, you won't record anything.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> The car audio world is so skewed. If 80% of frequency response, etc in a car is dictated by environment, EQ, and airspace among other things then a means to analyze the spectrum should be a *mandatory* part of any serious listener's purchase.


I have a RTA!


----------



## BigRed (Aug 12, 2007)

Used sealed Avalon door panels don't have a very high resale value Michael


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

BigRed said:


> Used sealed Avalon door panels don't have a very high resale value Michael


I think all the burn holes trump used sealed door panels as far as resale value goes.


----------



## IceWaLL (May 30, 2005)

bikinpunk said:


> the thing that really screws people up is their idea of what midbass should be in a properly tuned setup. We start with subwoofers only and expect that a 7" midbass can make us still feel that kick the 12" sub did while still having "great SQ". Simple fact is, it won't. Air movement is volumetric. That means surface area and xmax. If you want stupid loud levels of 'midbass' then you need either of the two or both (preferably).
> 
> But again, realize that what so many of us start out as thinking as the holy grail of midbass is a falacy in a real audio system.
> 
> ...


This is the smartest thing I have seen posted yet.

I have learned over time that we / most people listen to music in a car WAY louder then we need. play at normal "rocking" volume and open the front doors... it's most likely loud enough to have the entire block to enjoy, and then we close the doors and sit in it! That's just crazy! No one would do that with a home system and one of the reasons is because the environment is different but also because everything is balanced.

Buying the proper speakers is important when installing in a door. MOST companies use a material that is water proof but too heavy or it resonates in the midrange. IMO getting a flat response is a myth as no one likes a true flat response and trying to achieve that in a car is laughable. There's a reason why all speakers that come with cars are made of paper. A material like paper which is light but can also dampen is ideal in a door install.

IMO only a few company's have hit the nail on the head in design (woofer) and that is hybrid audio technologies, morel, and some lines by hertz. (those are the ones I can think of, maybe there are more). All seem designed to perform in a door (off axis, water resistant, and prevent resonance) Everything else is just made to sell, either because they are affordable or they "pound" / great bass, etc)

It's all just my opinion based on experience but I think most would agree.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

You're not going to hear Mid Range and Tweeter's a block away and that's where most of the information is at least in an Orchestra.


----------



## IceWaLL (May 30, 2005)

Half the block then? The point is still the same.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

IceWaLL said:


> Half the block then? The point is still the same.


........


----------



## IceWaLL (May 30, 2005)

michaelsil1 said:


> ........


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> the thing that really screws people up is their idea of what midbass should be in a properly tuned setup. We start with subwoofers only and expect that a 7" midbass can make us still feel that kick the 12" sub did while still having "great SQ". Simple fact is, it won't. Air movement is volumetric. That means surface area and xmax. If you want stupid loud levels of 'midbass' then you need either of the two or both (preferably).
> 
> But again, realize that what so many of us start out as thinking as the holy grail of midbass is a falacy in a real audio system.
> 
> ...


Couldn't have said it better. Thanks Erin  

It's tempting to use a large driver for midbass but as said earlier, a nicely tuned setup with a 6.5" (heck even a 5.25") can sound powerful in the midbass. 
When I heard Don's system with Phass 6.5" drivers, I was stunned. Made me realize that I was trying to achieve something that wasn't wrong but wasn't right either... :blush:

Unless I need efficiency, I don't think I would need to go bigger than 7" for midbass duty. 

Kelvin


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

subwoofery said:


> Couldn't have said it better. Thanks Erin
> 
> It's tempting to use a large driver for midbass but as said earlier, a nicely tuned setup with a 6.5" (heck even a 5.25") can sound powerful in the midbass.
> *When I heard Don's system with Phass 6.5" drivers*, I was stunned. Made me realize that I was trying to achieve something that wasn't wrong but wasn't right either... :blush:
> ...


Are you referring to Buzzman's S500 Mercedes?


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> Are you referring to Buzzman's S500 Mercedes?


That is correct my friend... 

Kelvin


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

Don probably didn't tell you just how much trail and error he went through to get it.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> Don probably didn't tell you just how much trail and error he went through to get it.


Ohh don't worry. I know... We spoke a good 2 hours about his system while listening to tunes...  

Kelvin


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Looks like a CDA-117 is what I need. I looked at Pioneer, Clarion, Kenwood, Panasonic and Alpine. Alpine seems to have the best current offering. The decline in nice HUs lately is depressing. I guess people need their bling arty:


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

McDizzle said:


> Looks like a CDA-117 is what I need. I looked at Pioneer, Clarion, Kenwood, Panasonic and Alpine. Alpine seems to have the best current offering. The decline in nice HUs lately is depressing. I guess people need their bling arty:


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


>


And I was trying to be so thorough too  I clicked CD receivers. Didn't think to click "stage 4" on their site. Had no idea what that meant, haha. That thing is way out of price range anyhow


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

It's my new toy epper: and I like it!


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> It's my new toy epper: and I like it!


Wow, with that many tuning options I'd tune myself into the grave :blush: I'm not sure I would event want that many options. I spend countless hours now with a quarter of the options :rolleyes2:


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Midbass is the weakest link in a car. I like quick calculations so we get a quick feel for what a 7" can actually do. 

First of all I'll start by saying a 63hz HP is needed to get proper staging. Any higher (underlapping with a 63hz LP sub) and you get a dip. I know this by fighting with more than a dozen 7"s over the years. Move the sub LP up and you get the stage pulled back. So 63hz is necessity for staging and linear FR. 

So let's see what a 7" can do at 63hz. I'll start with a Seas W18 since that is the reference for good sound imo. In a 45 liter door it only takes 50watts to reach xmax. This nets us 104db midbass. How adequate is that in a car? Not very. A basic Peerless XXLS12 sub in a recomended sealed box nets 113db before it runs out of excursion. Take into acount that you have 2x midbasses. so 110db. The sub is still twice as loud and that's just a basic small sealed 12". 

There is a crapload of road noise in the midbass frequencies. I find it useful to boost the midbass to make up for the road conditions. 5db or so would be nice.

Additionally most users would prefer a bottom heavy frequency response. How can you make the sub midbass transition smooth when the midbass is falling behind? 

Because of road noise and preferred low end heavy FRs the midbasses are often out of breath when mixed properly with a sub. That's why I never understood horns in a car. You get loads of output over 1000hz. But what good is that? 1000hz-5000hz gets irritating with only 100db. Any small cone, dome, ring radiator can do that. At 63hz-100hz we can listen to a heck of a lot more than 100db before out ears start complaining. And yet there is no midbass waveguide or horn that can fit in a car for those frequencies. 

Fatigue. Just about any song has midbass and that's where most of your power goes. Bellow 63hz there is little action unless you turn the sub gain far over the midbass. That means that midbass coil is taking a beating constantly. Even if it's hefty it has to be able to dissipate heat continously. It's not unlikely that the midbass amps are the hottest of them all. 

So what would a high throw 10" do for midbass. let's look at the Seas W26 just to keep things constant. Now it takes over 250w to get one to hit xmax, for the pair that comes up to 117db. You now can blend in properly with the 12" sub and still have a bit of headroom. But what if you want two 12"s? Again you are 2db behind the sub. And that's with two proper 10" midbasses!

There are other things such as the door panel not being stiff enough. That means you'll get a lot less spl than you think out of your midbass. There is also a lot of cancelation if the door is not properly sealed etc. 

I used the 10" Seas in my doors of course. They were IB not sealed. Now I HAVE to run 7"s. Would I run 10"s if I could? Heck yes!


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

McDizzle said:


> Wow, with that many tuning options I'd tune myself into the grave :blush: I'm not sure I would event want that many options. I spend countless hours now with a quarter of the options :rolleyes2:


You spend countless hours because you don't have the proper equipment to get it where you would be satisfied! That's for real! I only run a DQX w/ DDC. It works wonders in the tonal department, but as far as making up for placement..... lacks a bit. I can control L-R eq cuts & boosts, but not for driver placement which is not great in my ride. I just don't have the real estate I need to do it properly without electronic manipulation. If the unit had time alignment I could get it where I need, but that's a major jump in price to get to that level nowadays. HU's with t/a and and a wideband eq are limited. External processors that have it are few & pricey... Somewhere along the way a sacrifice must be made to move up to the next level. Either proper speaker placement or a complex processor that can help make up for it. You have to make that call on your own..


----------



## BigRed (Aug 12, 2007)

All this theoretical is great and modeling drivers BUT what about the transfer function of a mid bass and it's location as well as the sub? A computer can't tell u that. U would be surprised what my mid bass looks like in andout of my truck frequency wise. Near field is quite a task to model without actually testing in the environment


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

BigRed said:


> All this theoretical is great and modeling drivers BUT what about the transfer function of a mid bass and it's location as well as the sub? A computer can't tell u that. U would be surprised what my mid bass looks like in andout of my truck frequency wise. Near field is quite a task to model without actually testing in the environment


That is why a RTA has been recommended.... I was astounded too when I found problem ranges that I thought was NOT the problem, and where I thought I needed extra output was actually too much already (peaks).


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

I'm confused at how the dayton mic works. Sounds like the kit is plug and go. Is that good enough to give some nice graphs and help me along or is that the sort of thing where I should invest a buck or two more and get a different setup? I'm almost thinking the analyzer is a better place to start because I do have a (very limited) 5 band eq now, who knows might turn out to be all I need  I doubt it though


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

I have the 

M-AUDIO - Audio Buddy - Budget Microphone Preamp

BEHRINGER: ECM8000 with calibration file.


I would be willing to part with


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> I have the
> 
> M-AUDIO - Audio Buddy - Budget Microphone Preamp
> 
> ...


Well I'm not supposed to spending any money right at this moment!!! But you got me wondering. Quote me in a PM?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

you need to find someone (or do some good research) on how to use the RTA. otherwise, you're flyin blind.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

bikinpunk said:


> you need to find someone (or do some good research) on how to use the RTA. *otherwise, you're flyin blind.*













*The only way to fly!*


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

BigRed said:


> All this theoretical is great and modeling drivers BUT what about the transfer function of a mid bass and it's location as well as the sub? A computer can't tell u that. U would be surprised what my mid bass looks like in andout of my truck frequency wise. Near field is quite a task to model without actually testing in the environment


A lot of these modeling software packages allow you to add a transfer function boost. Let's add a some cabin gain then. Are we going to get more boost in the midbass freqeuncies than for the sub? Does the transfer function:
A) level the playing field
B) keep it the same 
C) gives the midbass an advantage 
D) gives the sub an advantage

You can use the theoretical transfer curve for a car on an actual one. I didn't mean this to be a theoretical exercise only. We can use real data. Anybody down to do SPL midbass burps vs sub burps? I know where my money is going.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Judging from this thread, my definition of mid bass is different. Having a sub low passed at 80hz that plays with authority up there provides all the kick and "in your face" mid bass I could ever ask for. When I run my 7" in the doors down lower I feel it in my legs which ruins the stage for me. Besides, the 7" handles 80hz and above just fine with plenty of snap. Before my current setup I wanted a 10" or even a 12" mid bass. All of that has changed now that it's balanced. It sounds very natural and blends well. I don't feel like I'm missing anything in the mid bass region.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

michaelsil1 said:


> *The only way to fly!*


Haha. I think I'm going to do a ton of research on fiberglassing and using these mics before doing anything. Shouldn't be spending money anyway so I'll use that as my excuse to have to do research only.

I'm thinking, if I get a low qts driver and suffocate it a bit and give it a bit more power wouldn't that yield a punchier result anyway? (Just thinking in terms of what can be done install-wise before EQ)


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

McDizzle said:


> Haha. I think I'm going to do a ton of research on fiberglassing and using these mics before doing anything. Shouldn't be spending money anyway so I'll use that as my excuse to have to do research only.
> 
> I'm thinking, if I get a low qts driver and suffocate it a bit and give it a bit more power wouldn't that yield a punchier result anyway? (Just thinking in terms of what can be done install-wise before EQ)


I'm Learning! Just modeled up the SDX7 in winisd, looks like they are great candidates for a small kick judging by the graph, of course I need to realize that in car response will vary and need to have the tools and the knowhow to get the response right. 

An SDX7 in a 6x6x6 box will give a bit of exaggeration where I (think) I want it and give a steeper slope on the bass side, which is good. Overall QTS will be around 1.0 and I'm looking into software for analyzing and using chicken wire to mold a fiberglass kick. This is all very exciting!! I finally feel like I'm on a track that won't lead to countless hours of "guess tuning." Time to get my research on


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

where's the impedance bump at? Qts of 1.0, to me, is way too high. If it's anywhere within the intended passband, that'll most likely sound horrible.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> where's the impedance bump at? Qts of 1.0, to me, is way too high. If it's anywhere within the intended passband, that'll most likely sound horrible.


I suddenly feel like I'm in over my head again  Impedance bump? Intended passband? I feel like I need to get my head buried in some BCAE1


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

easy, dude... 

check the software. look for a tab that says impedance. there should be something there that shows this. it's basically resistance vs. frequency. Q is a function of impedance. Q is simply a way to tell how steep or narrow the impedance bump is. The higher the Q, the steeper (and higher, typically) the bump. The lower, the more broad and shallow it is. Take a picture of it.

Passband = playing range.
IE: Your mids' passband will probably be 63-2000hz. A tweeter passband will be 4khz-20khz. (throwin' out numbers just so you can get the gist).


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> easy, dude...
> 
> check the software. look for a tab that says impedance. there should be something there that shows this. it's basically resistance vs. frequency. Q is a function of impedance. Q is simply a way to tell how steep or narrow the impedance bump is. The higher the Q, the steeper (and higher, typically) the bump. The lower, the more broad and shallow it is. Take a picture of it.
> 
> ...


Haha, okay. Hmmm, maybe it's because I have "winisd beta" but I cannot find an impedance tab for the life of me. There aren't many options. Got Gain, phase plot, SPL, group delay. Interestingly enough though there is actually a graph here that shows it:

http://www.creativesound.ca/pdf/SDX7-sealed-pass1.pdf

Straight from the horses mouth 

And I would only need it to play to a max of 300hz this is all planning stage. so, assuming a 4" cone of some sort can play down to 300 pretty comfortably, that is the eventual goal. I can see what the impedance would mean at face value but I don't understand the implications quite yet.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

McDizzle said:


> Haha, okay. Hmmm, maybe it's because I have "winisd beta" but I cannot find an impedance tab for the life of me. There aren't many options. Got Gain, phase plot, SPL, group delay. Interestingly enough though there is actually a graph here that shows it:
> 
> http://www.creativesound.ca/pdf/SDX7-sealed-pass1.pdf
> 
> ...


I'm not 100% positive on what a high QTC actually means. From my experience something over .7 QTC always had a lot of ringing to it. Small boxes also have very little space behind the driver and may also be somewhat of a square. To be honest I don't know if the ringing was a feature of the high QTC, rear wave coming back through the cone, or the square box design. It easy to confound the effects of all of these. Now that I have better tools I will once again attempt a small box design.

I'm hoping I can just EQ. out the low end peak for a QTC of 1.0. In practice sealed boxes are manufactured between .577 to 1.0. It is however tough to know what the design goal is. Is it minimizing space, good sound, or both? 

If you want to go for a pure design go for a box big enough for a QTC of .577 to get perfect transient response. Make sure it is not a square so you dont get a standing wave problem. Make as much of the space as you can available right behind the cone. Try to absorb the rear wave as much as possible. That will require a rather large box... Heck, the perfect sealed box is actually a giant sphere. Basically you are going to make some tradeoffs


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

cvjoint said:


> I'm not 100% positive on what a high QTC actually means. From my experience something over .7 QTC always had a lot of ringing to it. Small boxes also have very little space behind the driver and may also be somewhat of a square. To be honest I don't know if the ringing was a feature of the high QTC, rear wave coming back through the cone, or the square box design. It easy to confound the effects of all of these. Now that I have better tools I will once again attempt a small box design.
> 
> I'm hoping I can just EQ. out the low end peak for a QTC of 1.0. In practice sealed boxes are manufactured between .577 to 1.0. It is however tough to know what the design goal is. Is it minimizing space, good sound, or both?
> 
> If you want to go for a pure design go for a box big enough for a QTC of .577 to get perfect transient response. Make sure it is not a square so you dont get a standing wave problem. Make as much of the space as you can available right behind the cone. Try to absorb the rear wave as much as possible. That will require a rather large box... Heck, the perfect sealed box is actually a giant sphere. Basically you are going to make some tradeoffs


You could have a micro enclosure and still have a very low Qtc so I don't see the relevancy there. As far as "ringing" in car audio, I don't find it a problem as much as I find frequency suckouts. Qtc in a car is not as relevant as FR. Although it does matter some, shooting for such a low Q will not guarantee the best results. I would rather find the the corner frequency and start from there which should be used to determine if a certain sub is fit for your design goal in the first place.

Remember, we are talking about midwoofers here so let's stay on point.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Bayboy said:


> You could have a micro enclosure and still have a very low Qtc so I don't see the relevancy there. As far as "ringing" in car audio, I don't find it a problem as much as I find frequency suckouts. Qtc in a car is not as relevant as FR. Although it does matter some, shooting for such a low Q will not guarantee the best results. I would rather find the the corner frequency and start from there which should be used to determine if a certain sub is fit for your design goal in the first place.
> 
> Remember, we are talking about midwoofers here so let's stay on point.


The relevancy here was to get a feel for what the CSS would sound like in the box size posted earlier. A 1Q requires only a 10th of a cubic foot, whereas .577Q requires half a cubic foot. I doubt our member is indifferent between the two kick panels sizes. The difference in FR is between 0-3db. Any EQ. can beat that into shape. Suckouts are not a design parameter in that picking a different midbass is not going to change that. We can vary the speaker, or the box it's going in. There's not much you can do about a null.


----------



## Jay412 (Apr 14, 2011)

Dynaudio has always been one of my favs.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

cvjoint said:


> The relevancy here was to get a feel for what the CSS would sound like in the box size posted earlier. A 1Q requires only a 10th of a cubic foot, whereas .577Q requires half a cubic foot. I doubt our member is indifferent between the two kick panels sizes. The difference in FR is between 0-3db. Any EQ. can beat that into shape. Suckouts are not a design parameter in that picking a different midbass is not going to change that. We can vary the speaker, or the box it's going in. There's not much you can do about a null.




The problem here is you will be crossing up not down. It is not so easy to predict what it will do when shoe horned then corner loaded. You can model all you want, but a mic & RTA will tell the truth. Personally, if I were to try a kick midbass it would be a driver with a very small enclosure requirement. Yes roll-off may be somewhat high, but it should not matter since the range it will be intended for will be above 80hz anyway. Couple that with corner loading and cabin gain and you may be surprised. Seal it up and shoot for a smooth FR within it's passband. Qtc is not entirely important, but anywhere from .6-.8 should do.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Bayboy said:


> The problem here is you will be crossing up not down. It is not so easy to predict what it will do when shoe horned then corner loaded. You can model all you want, but a mic & RTA will tell the truth. Personally, if I were to try a kick midbass it would be a driver with a very small enclosure requirement. Yes roll-off may be somewhat high, but it should not matter since the range it will be intended for will be above 80hz anyway. Couple that with corner loading and cabin gain and you may be surprised. Seal it up and shoot for a smooth FR within it's passband. Qtc is not entirely important, but anywhere from .6-.8 should do.


Did I say an in-car test is irrelevant anywhere? A few posts back I took an FR for the same car and simply swapped drivers. The results made it clear I hope that the car interior is the largest predictor of the response, not the choice of speakers. 

The problem I see throughout this forum is that at times people see box modeling as a sort of when lightning strikes kind of prediction. WinISD just like RTA is a tool. None of them tell you everything you need to know about how the speaker will sound but they will all guide you to a certain extent. You recommend a Q of .6-.8? How is your member going to get that without software modeling? Can you tell me the QTC of a speaker by looking at the RTA plot?


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Not to derail the conversation but just had to throw this out there (driver soft p0rn):

More info on the CSS FR125SR-- - Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com

Read the last post   probably won't be out for some years.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

cvjoint said:


> Did I say an in-car test is irrelevant anywhere? A few posts back I took an FR for the same car and simply swapped drivers. The results made it clear I hope that the car interior is the largest predictor of the response, not the choice of speakers.
> 
> The problem I see throughout this forum is that at times people see box modeling as a sort of when lightning strikes kind of prediction. WinISD just like RTA is a tool. None of them tell you everything you need to know about how the speaker will sound but they will all guide you to a certain extent. You recommend a Q of .6-.8? How is your member going to get that without software modeling? Can you tell me the QTC of a speaker by looking at the RTA plot?




Don't wad your panties so soon..... The fact of the matter is YOU seem to have some misunderstanding of Qtc or box building if ringing is consisitent to higher Q's to YOU. I have played with all and find no such problem that could not be solved with a little stuffing. Stuffing will not bring Q down that much so just to clear that up before you jump the gun on that. 

Now on to clarification, I never said that box building is invalid! The fact is regardless of Q, you need to know what you are up against in the frequency response. If you are familiar with designing you would know that if you are targeting a certain response or roll off, it can be had in more ways than one and that's without electronic manipulation. Q If you want to be anal about it, which is actually the proper way is to take a known driver with a known FR (open field) and test it in the vehicle (closed field) to find the corner frequency as well as dips and peaks. However, we are going to keep on a real world plane here. Do you know where the problem frequency is? Just picking a speaker, extracting a Q on a program, and enclosing it doesn't mean jack if you are not addressing the FR problems. 

However, you mentioned about the "problem you see throughout this forum?!" If it's a personal rant, rage, or something that sparked that, I'm not sure but sounds suspect to me and I'm not the one to engage in that type of discussion or debate. 

With that......:inout:


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

My answer to the only question you have in you post is the following. No, I do not know the FR of his car. Do you? What if the left and right FRs are drastically different. Would you recommend a Morel on the left side and a CSS on the right? Don't misquote me on the QTC, I was clear that I can't say for certain the ringing came from the high QTC. In fact I gave alternate explanations. 

On the other hand I don't see you answering any of my questions. Here they are again: 
You recommend a Q of .6-.8? How is your member going to get that without software modeling? Can you tell me the QTC of a speaker by looking at the RTA plot? 

I can model a speaker before I make a recommendation. I cannot RTA the guy's car. If that's your first step strictly then what's the point of commenting on a thread?


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

cvjoint said:


> B&C 6NDL44 is king 85hz-500hz
> Exodus Anarchy is king 20hz-85hz
> 
> in the 7" category. Most output/lower distortion that is.


I'm gonna have to correct this. The best midbass out there that I have tested to date is the Peerless SLS 6.5. It beats the B&C under 100hz and ties 100hz to 200hz in distortion testing. The CSS XBL driver, Anarchy's twin didn't look so hot on the Klippel. Odds are the Anarchy doesn't have the suspension goods either. SLS is a sure bet. The only way to know whether the Anarchy test better is to klippel test it. 

Another option I discovered is the TB 6.5" sub. On paper this looks the best.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Scan illuminator 18w (paper cone). Ohhhhhh, yeeeeeaaaahhhhh.


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

cvjoint said:


> I'm gonna have to correct this. The best midbass out there that I have tested to date is the Peerless SLS 6.5. It beats the B&C under 100hz and ties 100hz to 200hz in distortion testing. The CSS XBL driver, Anarchy's twin didn't look so hot on the Klippel. Odds are the Anarchy doesn't have the suspension goods either. SLS is a sure bet. The only way to know whether the Anarchy test better is to klippel test it.
> 
> Another option I discovered is the TB 6.5" sub. On paper this looks the best.


George, it would be helpful if you listed what you have tested considering the vast number of speaker options available to the consumer.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Buzzman said:


> George, it would be helpful if you listed what you have tested considering the vast number of speaker options available to the consumer.


The only two I have distortion plots for in the same install are the B&C and the SLS. The testing rig was released just recently from Dayton. Cali Test Bin probably has a few 7"s but it would be tough to compare given people's varying degrees of installation prowess. On the other hand I have installed many 7"s in my cars:

Polk MOMO carbon fiber edition
Seas Lotus
Dayton RS180
Infinity Kappa Perfect 6.1
Seas Excel W18E
Seas Excel W18EX
Polk DB
Morel
Boston Acoustics Z6
Peerless HDS Exclusive

I've also used 8" and 10" midbasses in many trims:
B&C 8"
Scan Speak Kevlar SD1
Forgot the Peerless XLS 8", how could I?
Excel W22
Peerless XXLS 10
Vifa 
Excel W26


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> Good! Keep us posted with the before & after in depth as possible.... cool?


Well, very late, I know, but I finally got my amp repaired  months of time, _months_... Anywho..

I have to say that _for the price_, I am really enjoying these as midbass drivers! And they aren't half bad in the midrange department either. Currently running them in a 2-way active configuration with the cal 26 titans.

There is definitely more of a pop and snap than a boom to these guys, still can't stack up to the vanadiums by any means but the vanadiums are a metal cone and have some more authority in the midbass department by default. A little apples to oranges. Still, I really think that for the price these things rock! I can really tell now that the vanadiums were lacking a bit in the midrange after switching to these as well  They really blend pretty easily with the sub.

Same door, same tweets, same crossover config, better midrange response, more natural sounding frequency response in the midrange. This can probably also be attributed to the cone material.

So, I miss the rainbows. If I ever have the money for another pair of rainbow mids I'd run them 90hz @24db in an IB configuration mostly out of paranoia :worried: and I would also have a plan for a 3-way setup because a nice midrange makes me smile.

I am apparently a midbass freak though. Future plans will include much better equalization capabilities/the means to test frequency response/distortion, etc.

My dream setup would be a 3-way including a rigid 8", soft 4" and cal 26 titan tweets. Having the 8" in something like a door skin made of MDF of fiberglass would be most desirable :laugh: but I'll never have the time or skill for that :mean:

That is my story. Let me know if you have any questions!


----------



## Vitty (Feb 26, 2011)

Glad to see you liked them and that I didn't steer you completely in the wrong direction  Great drivers for the price for sure!

I had Rainbow Profi kickbass 6.5" mids and they couldn't hold a candle to these and are insanely priced. I was not a happy camper after having dropped all that money only to find out my relatively cheap massive audio components kicked the snot out of them! You obviously had a better experience though I can imagine the profi vans aren't too much different than the profi paper cone mids.


----------



## McDizzle (Jan 17, 2008)

Vitty said:


> Glad to see you liked them and that I didn't steer you completely in the wrong direction  Great drivers for the price for sure!
> 
> I had Rainbow Profi kickbass 6.5" mids and they couldn't hold a candle to these and are insanely priced. I was not a happy camper after having dropped all that money only to find out my relatively cheap massive audio components kicked the snot out of them! You obviously had a better experience though I can imagine the profi vans aren't too much different than the profi paper cone mids.


I think for midbass rigid cone > soft cone makes a big difference in impact. Of course it made these drivers generally suck in the midrange department though. 

These massives are pretty frikin beastly for the price though. I would recommend anyone buy the whole set and just use the mids (barring individual driver sale) because they are well worth it. At this point I say who cares what the specs are the results are right in front of me and I likey epper:


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

bikinpunk said:


> Scan illuminator 18w (paper cone). Ohhhhhh, yeeeeeaaaahhhhh.


Erin is right, the Illuminator is the best performing midbass driver given that you have the depth. It's currently the test bench king in industry OEM reviews. It's good for 10mm of throw using the strictest Klippel guidelines and shines in performance based testing as well. Then it does other things nice like uses an open basket and weighs a fraction of other heavy hitters like the Exodus drivers and SLS.


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

cvjoint said:


> Erin is right, the Illuminator is the best performing midbass driver given that you have the depth. . . .


George, to be fair, such a statement should be qualified as follows: "the best performing midbass driver *that I have tested*, or "the best performing midbass driver *that I have used*." I find it disconcerting when absolute statements such as this are made and there are innumerable speaker choices available that haven't been tested or used by the person making such a statement. I am sure you will agree because you are both smart and reasonable.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Buzzman said:


> George, to be fair, such a statement should be qualified as follows: "the best performing midbass driver *that I have tested*, or "the best performing midbass driver *that I have used*." I find it disconcerting when absolute statements such as this are made and there are innumerable speaker choices available that haven't been tested or used by the person making such a statement. I am sure you will agree because you are both smart and reasonable.


Better. It was tested in the April 2010 edition of the Voice Coil Magazine by Vance Dickason. It counts as pretty absolute to industry professionals.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Any link to the results, George?


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

bikinpunk said:


> Any link to the results, George?


PM sent.


----------



## Buzzman (Jul 26, 2007)

Hey George, I don't know if your PM included a link to the test, but I (and I am sure others) would certainly like to read it.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Buzzman said:


> Hey George, I don't know if your PM included a link to the test, but I (and I am sure others) would certainly like to read it.


I do not have rights to distribute the magazine around. You will get a PM from me however so sit tight.

It should be noted that these are not the sort of reviews you find on a car forum. It's just test after test with no interpretation. Could be done by a robot really, which of course is fantastic. Quite possibly the first audio mag I ever liked.


----------



## DAT (Oct 8, 2006)

Vitty said:


> Glad to see you liked them and that I didn't steer you completely in the wrong direction  Great drivers for the price for sure!
> 
> I had Rainbow Profi kickbass 6.5" mids and they couldn't hold a candle to these and are insanely priced. I was not a happy camper after having dropped all that money only to find out my relatively cheap massive audio components kicked the snot out of them! You obviously had a better experience though I can imagine the profi vans aren't too much different than the profi paper cone mids.



I agree totally, I was not a big fan of the Rainbows that is one reason I dropped the line. Sold all of my remaining stock. I could go into detail but it would not be right on here.

Massive CK6's are major improvement over the rainbow vanadiums or Profi to me.

I still feel the Audible Physics Xr65M's are a delight to listen to and always in the mix is Scans, DLS, Morel Elate, and a few others in no particular order . Heard the Phass is great, need to contact Buzzman


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

DAT said:


> I agree totally, I was not a big fan of the Rainbows that is one reason I dropped the line. Sold all of my remaining stock. I could go into detail but it would not be right on here.



Really Dave, that is what you are going with ? You dropped the line ? As well as " not a big fan" ? You do recall asking for the line and how much you did, right ? 

Please, by all means start a new thread to open it up ...


----------



## Niebur3 (Jul 11, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Really Dave, that is what you are going with ? You dropped the line ? As well as " not a big fan" ? You do recall asking for the line and how much you did, right ?
> 
> Please, by all means start a new thread to open it up ...


Seems like an underlying story here...	:lurk:


----------

