# Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance & iphone source.



## Elgrosso

Hello guys, my presentation became my build thread so I restart here in the right place.
And again thanks to all members here, I knew nothing about caraudio when I arrive in US.
Never even imagined doing something like that, always thought it was kind of dumb… Now I'm addicted 

Just to explain the background, I'll try to keep it short:
- I tried many many different layouts, first in a xk8 convertible, and then applied to this last one, in chronologic order I think it was something like:
simple speaker speaker replacement w/ focal K2 way for few months (before I discovered the audio DIY world), then MS8, first amp, added 3"krx, Exodus anarchy in enclosures, several raw drivers for mid/tweeter, jumped on a good deal on 660gti so added a 2nd amp, then IB12au with another amp, later a pair of 560 with again another amp, 500gti, ms52, or stock on rear…. etc etc I can't remember everything, I have a pair of horns bought here for example, that I never used... yet!
- With many combo every time, 2 or 3 way front, w/ or w/o 2 or 3 way center channel, w/ or w/o 1/2/3 way rears, w/ or w/o sub etc with driver in all places/angles/pods or flushed etc. Never really finished any installs since everytime I found an excuse to try something else.
The big game changer was the ms-8, since I am a newbie, this piece allowed thousands of calibration for all set ups, this was fun, learned a lot.

The most crazy was 660/560/tweet in custom door panel.
The 560 directly shouted at me and the waveguide were a perfect fit in place of the door handle (basically perfect 3 way aligned in the door).
Waveguides in sails panels were pretty good too. This really was the best I got, but the car was… hum not very easy for everyday ￼

All other mounting options were not as good (mid or waveguide in corners or firing up in dash, in pillars facing each others, in pods aimed to me/passenger/both etc
Maybe because this car has a huge dashboard, symmetrical so that's cool, but big and high, with very reflective wood front surface, very angled windscreen, a big tunnel + small cabin. To fit the sub was a real pita too.

Then I got a bit tired of it and focused on other things, oh and also, I had to change my home system, picked the LSR305 w/sub.
This stopped the car stuff for few months… I remember I was like, "really? Just 2 small boxes like that and you get this sound in a room?"
It's the time I went back to simple 2 way, with 660 down in doors, OW1 firing up in dash corners with stock rears and no sub, and I enjoyed it for a while.
The Hiquphons were much more manageable than the gti waveguide, and it sounded pretty good, of course I missed the real "presence" of the 3 way, but it was a compromise.
The 660s well, I can't imagine using something else one day, or maybe a 8" like JLzr I may have enough room, or even better build an enclosure for the gti.

Headphone upgrade also changed the deal... But I guess it's part of the learning, I sure have better ears now, and can compare.
But slowly the addiction came back, I first reinstalled the sub, in a cleaner way this time. and I was ready for another round. 
And clearly Audiofrog is responsible for that!
So bought myself a set of gb25 & 10 to try again the 3 way in door, "stealthier" this time.
To find a better compromise in the car. Cause it's really a special experience there, it's so fun.

Ho yeah and I'm a frog eater... in LA now, so please excuse my unperfect english.
So pics now 

Here we go, the brit' :
Really cool car, real GT not a sport car, but still more than enough power, a bit heavy but very good handling.
Lovely interior and pretty quiet (I love Jag', I now have 3 )










Very first, just to show the door.
Now I covered the holes with fiberglass panels, bigger HDPE rings for the 660gti + dynamat. will update pic later if I can find some.










Good thing in the coupe, I could fit a real sub.
The hole for the original 8" sub, on top of the reservoir
Had to cut to 10", maximum possible, and use a stack of mdf rings of different sizes to fit the big AE 12"










Recently covered it with fabric and new suede for the parcel shelf. Not perfect but good enough for me.





The original interior, nice, but pretty dull in my mind...










First changed the wood stuff (to fit 3 gauges) and then colors to get more contrast.
With leather on dash top, black carpet, wheel and few details. You can still see the OW1 in corners, I was ok like that for a while.



original doors:



One of the old door panel, made to fit the 560gti.
I learned a lot about fiberglass here, was clearly not so easy to get a clean finish.
Here with vinyl removed since I first tried to reuse them for the GB25.



and new ones for the Audiofrog.
Much easier since it's only a 2,5"
And the mounting options were a GREAT help, thx for that








I really wanted to fit all of them in the door on almost the same plan.
So the idea was to put the mid as high as I could (unfortunately no room in the black portion of the panel).
Tweeter in the handle trim, it fits nicely, just had to cut the handle (here a bit too short )
Mids aimed a bit to me, like 30 degres, to avoid firing at the steering wheel, and allow more flexibility in crossover settings.
Mounted flat it might be ok, but I don't really have enough depth.
I'll try to aim a bit more the tweeter soon, to see if it moves the stage.
As you can see I didn't covered anything yet, still studying placement etc.
Had to cut the armrest, still need to find a clean place for the switch.
Once done with adjustments, I'll probably cover the small panels with suede. Will also cover the grey rings, to make them a bit more stealth. But I'll keep the chrome ones, they're a great match with my gauges!
At the end I'll optimize the woofers, with probably new rings, thicker to mount it more "flush"
Or best an enclosure… but that may take few months.

About the rears I just have a 5" woof in sides with tweeters in rear glass corners with passive crossover.
I'll probably try a small mid around the same spot later.




Last update I changed the dash to carbon.
But then had back the big hole for the useless oem GPS, had to find a way to use this. 
It appeared the iphone 6 was the perfect size, so with the help of soundmanCA stuff I replaced an old gps internals.
Pretty cool to have this UI in the dash, and perfect handy place.
Works with an istreamer in the glovebox.
I also always missed a real knob with the ms-8, so tried to integrate a preamp one between HRT & MS8.
Works well!
No picture of the phone in the dash, obviously my phone is my camera 
But you get the idea, slide inside and pull back to plug, 2 sec!














And then the amps in the trunk. Back battery so that was cool.
And big trunk here so I could use a "second" floor. The wheel is still accessible.
Nothing fancy, not that I don't care but not my competence.
But very useful and accessible, that was the goal, to be able play with the ms amps.





Please if you see something bad jump on it!
I studied a lot here and on different forums, but I'm sure I've made some mistakes that I maybe carried from the beggining. I could add some details if needed.
Thanks!


----------



## Coppertone

Very nice install and creative use of equipment.


----------



## Elgrosso

Thank you!
That's maybe what I really like in caraudio, there are so many compromise that you really have to stress your brain to find a way.


----------



## optimaprime

I like your door panels a lot how do you like the audio frogs ? They look very tempting .


----------



## Jesus Christ

How hard is it to get to the spare?

I hinged the rack on my XJ


----------



## Elgrosso

optimaprime said:


> I like your door panels a lot how do you like the audio frogs ? They look very tempting .


Thanks!
Oh man I love them, but I know I'm biased.
First because I had great experience with Andy's stuff at JBL.
And because I'm impressed with the Audiofrog story.
Also I'm a noob, and never heard any other custom car so...

If I try to stay objective:
I'm far from done with settings and all so it's very early to have final words.
Also hard to compare apples and oranges since I changed layout in the same time.
Their sizes and mounting options allow very good placement.
Also a big frequency range to play with, way better than the focal 3" for example (or all raws that I tried from PE).

What I can say for sure, it's a real difference to go in doors. the sound is much cleaner.
It was a bit disturbing at the beginning, like when I first listen to the LSR, no more chaotic interactions I was used to with the windshield. 
I lost a bit of depth compare to the dash, but have more width.
Depth I got it partially back with L7, or maybe I also had a "false" sense of depth due to the windshield.
The mid/tweeter cohesion is much better than before, localization almost impossible.

I had hard time with level match and calibration, with a hole in mid bass.
ms-8 thing or my car? Sub is plugged on mid bass channels, Kaigoss style.
So dedicated channels for the 3 way, at least the time to easily play with ms8.
After I may use the amp Xover for the highs.

So I'm first focusing on midbass/midrange and sub integration, last is 80-200hz/24db, but I'll try higher again. 
I had to convince myself to go that low for the 2,5" and not use the gti higher.
I almost fixed the hole now, it's a bit incredible to see this small speaker kicking like that, really powerful.
And man the gti are super killers. 
For the high I'm using 3,6khz/12&18db.

So, best midranges I ever had (but only had 3 or 4 pairs)
For the tweeters I can't say I didn't focus.
But I loved the Hiquphon, I hope to get something as good.

I know it will be long process, but it's already super pleasant 
In fact, I didn't touch it in a week, only EQ, but I'm not confident in my microphone (Imm6) that is not consistent.

Oh and no distortion heard, at all!
It may be a bad thing because I crank more and more I may lose my ears 
Damn it's good, BIG smile every time. :laugh:


----------



## Elgrosso

Jesus Christ said:


> How hard is it to get to the spare?
> 
> I hinged the rack on my XJ


Ho cool almost the same setup!
I wanted to use a hinge as well at the beginning, but in fact I don't really need it.
I have the small spare like you, with deeper floor.
But since the trunk is also made for the real size wheel (regular xk8) I just had to find another xk8 floor to cover everything.
The "first" floor is stuck in front, I can open it high enough to get the spare, but less than you, the ms-8 in front limits the clearance.

Since I started all this in the xk8, I wanted an easy way to remove the entire board, a bit like you.
Just unplug +/- on battery, and I can switch the amps between both cars


----------



## timbo2

Looking awesome! Love the carbon.


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah a good color match!
I was surprised I liked it that much because the wood was cool too.


----------



## gijoe

I'm not a fan of the carbon, but that's just me being picky. I've always thought of Jaguars as classy and elegant, carbon strikes me as fun and sporty, not at all classy. The carpet and leather were huge improvements though, overall the interior looks much better now. And, the rest of the project looks good.


----------



## Elgrosso

Thx, yeah I agree it's less classy, but I was bored after 4 yrs of wood...
And the phone mod changed my view. Even if I miss my (useless) gauges.

At the beginning I wanted to go crazy and try a complete color change (photoshop):


















Orange/apricot, to go with the exterior green.
Could have been cool with a green veneer.
But waaaay too expensive...


----------



## Elgrosso

Hi guys, 

I'm actually playing with my RTA app/phone/dayton small mic and pink noise, trying to learn a bit about EQ.
I have few questions since few things don't make sense, and hope someone can help.

I tried already last year with my 2 way, but the ms-8 did a great job at that time, the result was closed to the JBL curve without touching anything.
And when I touched, if I heard a difference I was never sure I liked it better or not, so I just left the original one.
And just played with the bass boost when I needed.

But now with this 3 way different story.
I prefer its sound to the 2 way (more important you'd say), but RTA was a bit crazy, and lacked of mid bass.
It was too low around 300Hz, and some peaks around 600Hz and/or 1KHz.
Played with different Xover, from 200/24 to 800/24:
200 was the best to my ears, for 2 weeks, and minimized the dip&peak
300/400 increased the dip
600/800 decreased a bit the dip, but didn't sound as good
I am now at 500 and I try to EQ this dip
If important I have now:

*- Gears
*Sub IB12AU on MS-5001 
Midbass 660gti bridged on MS-1004/#1
Midrange GB25 on MS-1004/#2 
Tweeter GB10 and rear 500gti+ms52 tweeters both on MS-1004/#3

*- MS-8
*is set as 3 way + rears, sub on the midbass amp.
In my experience it's not the easiest for sub integration, so why?
First I need L7, it's really great for added depth and even width.
Then I wanted to easily try different settings for the mid/tweeters with the auto EQ.
And I also wanted to keep the independant output per Left/Right on midrange.
But if I don't get good result I'll try 2 way + sub + rear (active mid/tweeter).

*- Xovers
*Sub at 20Hz/12db to 80Hz/24db
Midbass at 80Hz/24db to 500Hz/24db
Midrange at 500Hz/24db to 3.6KHz/12db
High at 3.6KHz/18db

*- Level match
*There's not so many things we can adjust with MS8, so I tried the best to give it all the room it could need.
So clean level match / ms8 hidden menu + Xovers on amps.
Output settings on MS amps are now: (with sensitivity per driver @2.83v for info)

Sub (92,5db) 58 (this was adjusted at the end of everything in fact)
Midbass (92,6db)	Left 48, Right 56
Midrange (86db)	Left 63, Right 72
Tweeter (90db)	Left & Right 80 (my baseline)
Rears (91db) Left & Right 60 

Midbass and midranges are at +/-1db L&R.
Tweeters with +2db on left
Rears +6db on right rear, they should be at 74 to match the front, but I adjusted with L7 off, to get what I like when ON.
I guess my seat block almost everything from the rear left, except the tweeter at ear level behind.

*- Calibration
*Nothing special here, just playing with my head angle & side mirrors, seems to change a bit the width.
Other than that it's pretty consistent.
Cal at -35 or 40db
Sub was unheard during Cal.

*- Target
*Still the JBL curve, but it seems I like a bit more sub with my music.
Mostly jazz and electro, with other types I can sometime have way too much sub.
Engine off, in my past experience it doesn't change the Calibration
I just use the bass boost when driving.

*- RTA / FFT results
*First, I have no idea if it's relevant to use this app/mic combo, especially for sub.
So I started to play pink noise (stereo) and play with the EQ and sub and mid bass amps output.
And maybe I did it wrong, so big grain of salt, the starting point:










the result (sorry not the same range):









and zoomed









Profile as the JBL curve, I tried to match it but it was hard to keep it smooth in the same time > too much sub (+20db) but highs look ok.
But on the display I had:










I tried to only cut but it was impossible, so 6db cut sometimes, 3db added, except the boost on low end.
Is it too crazy? It seems to me. Especially since I could have a big cut near a boost.
For the sub I will probably forget the mic, flat it out and just play with level during few days.

Of course I then listened with real music, my usual songs.
It is clearly different, I would say for sure a bit less "nasal".
And "cleaner" but I don't mean better, just more separation, maybe too much, deconcerting in fact after a month without EQ.
But other than that…
Not sure I like it, I think I need to keep it 2 weeks to get a real idea.

So to investigate more I tried the FFT, EQ applied.
Few screenshots, from 1/3 octave to no smoothing:





































I was surprised with the differences with the RTA.
First, the midbass boost ends higher (400Hz), and this huge dip around 730Hz (15db).
I learned here that dips are not that important, but it may be the reason why on the RTA I had to cut at 500/630Hz, and boost besides...?

I will continue but now my ears are done for today.
Am I overthinking here? 
And of course did you see anything strange or a mistake in the process?
*Thx!*


----------



## Elgrosso

ok, got a lot of good info here: http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...first-timers-guide-measuring-your-system.html

Also I tried a little test on my RTA apps, tried the same one (Studio Six Digital) on iphone 4,5,6,6+, ipad nano and air2... pretty inconsistent results, with or without the external mic (calibrated only on half of them).
Everything in between 100Hz-10Khz looked about the same (pretty flat with JBL LSR), but still with +/-3db difference peaks and dip between each device, everything below or above was way off. It's maybe good enough to get a big picture, but not to adjust anything on EQ. Same for the SPL meter feature (tried only 2 phones).
So I'll just drop the app.

Then in the car I just leveled match again, with sub +10db, and rear same levels as front, recalibrated, and it's better again with no manual EQ!


----------



## Elgrosso

A little update on the doors, just cleaned the tweeter mounts, cut the handles at the right length, bit of paint… much nicer.
Also Modified the mids angle for two reasons:
- Beaming… initially I wanted them around 30 degree to be able to try high crossovers without beaming.
And since I'm now pretty happy @3,6khz, where they should not beam being 2,5" drivers, I just wanted to hear by myself.
So flat on doors (quick and dirty enclosure with hot glue and cardboard)
- Psycho acoustic… They were a bit prominents on both sides previsously, impossible to miss them.
And I always wondered if this added an effect of the perception of my soundstage.
Soundstage that felt too low at the begining. I was able to move it a bit with xover combinations, just not high enough yet.
But maybe I just have a wrong souvenir of my old setup with tweeters on the dash top.
For the same reason I might try to hide them under acoustic fabric, like for the woofers.

I just had time to calibrate and listen for few minutes.
Everything seems fine. Don't feel like I miss anything on the left mid.
I'll receive soon the minidsp mic so I'll measure all that too.
And honestly, if I can't fix my soundstage height, no big deal, it sounds much better than in the dash.


















(I'll probably match the final angle on the tweeter one, just to make it clean and consistent)

A pic of the door skin too (old and now).
I fact I first wanted to build an enclosure here, enough room and the door panels have a good shape for that.
But it was my first fiberglass job, I messed up and ended by only covering the holes only.
To attach them I couldn't convince myself to drill the skin.
So it's mostly double face tape and dynamat around the edge. Panels are the size of the holes + 2/3cm around, in one part.
They don't seem to move or "breath" too much, once the door panel is in place, it really press on everything.
But maybe I can improve here, what do you think?
The effect on mid bass was really good, but still, after the mid range I may come back here to improve again anyway.


























Before all this I quickly re-tried the midranges higher in doors, and tweeters in sail panels with tape.
So mids just behind the handle first (the big hole) were too closed to me, and not enough depth to mount them clean.
Or in the handle opening like on the pic, but here it will need a lot of work on the handle.
Since I stopped using my rta app I only relied to my ears… but the tweeter in the sail panel had a different tonality.
I was not convinced, didn't see direct benefit in the sound, so I just stopped there.


















Please go ahead on your comments guys, good or bad it always helps, thx!


----------



## Elgrosso

Bump for my fiberglass covers,
do you guys think I could improve by screwing them?
The dynamat and tape start to get loose after few months, it's not super extra rigid, but it still holds.
Or maybe a different kind of double tape? 
i'll have to rework on the mids this week end, so it' the good time.


----------



## el_bob-o

I wonder how the super Velcro that Sound Deadener Showdown sells would work? Here's a link Velcro® Strips | Sound Deadener Showdown


----------



## Elgrosso

Ho nice! I should have tried this before I messed with all this dynamat... Last time I had to adjust my window motor it was a pain.
I think I'll try, maybe with some MLV in the same time.
But it may add few mm, in some place I don't have room behind the door panel, they're already hard to reinstall.
I've used thinsulate at the beginning, to fill all empty cavities in the door panels, but it was messy everytime I worked on doors.

I expect the goal is to get the door as airtight and rigid as possible, to simulate a real enclosure. but which of the two is most important?


----------



## Elgrosso

EBR looks to be the perfect solution!


----------



## Elgrosso

Rhaaaa big problem today, crackles in left tweeter... 
I think I noticed this few days ago but wasn't able to reproduce.
Today it happened again, and stayed.
Though I've blown it while messing with REW...

So I swapped the ms8 to amp rca left& right > crackle on right tweeter
I used different channels of the amp > same
Different channels of ms8 > same
Checked input sensitivity, recalibrated > same
And finally I just replaced the rca itself > gone! 

How is that possible? A wire that never moves can go bad?


----------



## Elgrosso

Bump for the rca!
Do you guys always switch off the amps before unplugging-replugging rca interconnect?
I think during my rew session I forgot a few times, maybe that's why one wire went bad (ms8 to amp)


----------



## Elgrosso

I was wrong on the rca, I was sure the crackles disappeared the other day when I changed it. I must have been really tired to miss it...
Whatever, after long REW session this week end it was clearly back again.

I have it only on few tracks, female voice, and high volume.
But it's very obvious on one especially, even at regular level:
Portico quartet / B&W sessions / November / starts @1:47 / and only on left

So I tried on my home system, I could not hear it, but I can't say it sounded super clean.
With +12db at 4k I could hear it lightly.
Then I opened the file in Audition: signal is clipped in few places on left channel (I tried to declip but no success / newbie on audition)









Do you have an idea why the car tweeter could emphasize this and not the home system?
Too much EQ boost from ms8 at that point? (around 4k)
Just a bad record? (I bought the .wav on B&W society of sound)


----------



## Jesus Christ

I had a similar issue with my ms8, in my case I found lowering the volume on the ms8 from -8 to -15 and then bumping my gains up a little to compensate fixed the issue.


----------



## Elgrosso

Thanks Jesus, will try just now!

Edit:
Well, it didn't do it.
I turned the input sensitivity at 25% to start (was at minimum).
MS8 ON I had a crazy noise already, I was super gentle on starting, began to hear it at -60db and was obvious at -50db :/
Really strange because on others songs they seem fine, even if I start to get paranoiac now, thinking I hear now new things etc...

Just a note, today I also heard many distortion/clipping with my headphone.
And not only on these track, on many, what the hell?? 
I may have to check all my library  :laugh:


----------



## thehatedguy

Not doing it is a good way to pop some speakers.



Elgrosso said:


> Do you guys always switch off the amps before unplugging-replugging rca interconnect?


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> Not doing it is a good way to pop some speakers.


Wow than I was lucky! ok message received


----------



## Elgrosso

Great news, it's not my tweeters! :jester:

Jesus gave me the idea this morning 
I use iphone and istreamer, so logically I should not be able to adjust volume on the phone since it sends digital signal.
But strange thing, I was always able to with this DAC (never searched about this).

So far I always used the max volume, just with the idea to maximize voltage output. Old habit from when I didn't have external DAC when the phone was plugged directly on ms8.
This morning I tried to lower it a bit, and the crackles disappeared!!!!! Yalaaaaa :laugh: 
Even just one step, like 90% did the trick!
Of course I lost few db in the total chain, but I still could increase the ms8 volume to insane level without anything disturbing.
Happy man here 

I also tried the AUX input setting in ms8, min or max > no effect
I alsways assumed that with iPhone, ms8 and ms amps I would not have to deal with gain etc
I guess I was wrong.

I'll try another DAC soon, the audio engine d1 (with a knob)
this one I know that the phone volume is bypassed.
Just found this about the istreamer:

"_The iPod volume control does affect the volume coming out of the iStreamer. By default, it's at the top, so the iStreamer puts out a 2.25 volt signal. But if you need a weaker signal going into your amp, it's great that you can reduce the volume.

At work, my current headphone amp is a portable and the 2.25 volt signal is too strong, causing distortion. Turning down the iStreamer volume a touch eliminates the distortion and the sound is great.

At home, in the bedroom, my integrated amp is 50 watts and my speakers are sensitive (92 dB). If I'm listening very quietly at night, the only way to get the sound quiet enough is to turn down the iStreamer volume.

The iPod is probably just sending a signal to the iStreamer to attenuate the analog output signal. Since the iPod is sending the iStreamer raw data, you can't reduce the "volume" of that data. But you can send extra info along with the data to control the volume once it's been converted into analog sound. It must work that way somehow._
"


----------



## Elgrosso

So last week I still had the gb25 in doors and the result was really great to my ears. I just played with XO and levels for few weeks.
Just 2 flaws:
- I am struggling to get something clean on this door panels (and integrate door switch etc, didn't really want to relocate them in the center console for a clean look).
- soundstage was not high enough, even if got better with few weeks playing with ms8. Esthetically I love the tweeters in handles, but it's probably not the best place for stage height.
Would be a great place for the mids, but too big without serious modifications.
So I decided to try some other positions again, and this time measure them, just for confirmation (ms8 bypassed).

Grabbed all small mids I have around: gb25, pioneer Stage 4, some beefy B&W 3" from an old zeppelin, the old stock 2.5" and even my old friend 560 gti (but only in door )
All in different places/angles (kick/dash corner/dash oem hole/pillar, while firing up/aimed to me/facing each other etc)
Here we go:

first, all in left door:


The rest will be only pioneer since tulse is interested

All pioneer overlay


Left pillar, aimed to me


left pillar, facing each other


left dash corner oem hole, firing up


left dash oem hole, aimed to me


Left kick


central channel (just in case I wanna destroy my dash one day ):


Right pillar, aimed to passenger (or me, not sure)


Right pillar, facing each other


Right dash oem hole, firing up


Right dash oem, aimed to me


Right kick



By far the flattest was here:


























Ok it's 1/3 smooth but look at that! 
It's probably biased since only the pioneer had a perfect enclosure. For the others I had to play with tape/towels/foam etc to simulate either enclosure or IB.

I was so surprised I wanted to try for a week (that's why they're taped and glued).
But first listenings were really not nice, in fact I hated them.
Too bad because it's much easier to modify the pillars!

I tried without tweeters and it worked, but sounded thin.
It gives a better stage height than in doors, but it's too much in my face.
I think the width suffered, not in boundaries, but in "distribution".
If I continue in this way I'll put the tweeters very close to mids, like in sails.

And I just realized today while driving that the top part of my dash was at the same height than them (symetric bump), creating a barrier in between.
Not sure it's that though.

Next time I'll measure with ms8 ON to compare.


----------



## tulse

Thank you for posting all those! Some stuff I would not expect. Just goes to show (again) you should do you own testing and listening, with your own divers, in your own car.


----------



## Elgrosso

You're welcome, it's probably not useful for a different car like you said (my windhsield/dash angle is pretty accute), but tendencies should here.
Also I realized that the chase for flat response is just one step, like here to avoid craziest placement, but that's it. Especially with a dsp.
(call me captain obvious? )

Next I think I'll install the 4 pairs, door mids&tweeters versus pillar, and swap/calibrate quickly to compare each pair.


----------



## Elgrosso

So after some work on the pillar version http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/2489657-post1338.html
I finally decided to go back to the door mount.

Last work was to re-built the enclosure.
All in fiberglass, few layers without filler for now, and then polyfill and quickly covered with headliner.
I'll re-work later on the finish, for now it's enough.
They're about 0.4 liter


















before it was just cardboard and hotglue (a lot) & just 0.2L, it was ok to get the feeling on the placement, and I tried several angles here.
But at the end I just used them flat on the panel, not aimed to me, just same angle than the tweeters.


















Now that it is solid, the improvement is massive I was surprised.


----------



## Elgrosso

So now I want to build a midbass enclosure…

Well for few more reasons in fact:
- to integrate the door switch (probably here where they are on previous pics)
- the woofer is actually obstructed and I have sounds going into the panel.
- to get a clean finish
- it's fun 
So if I have go into all the work, why not an enclosure?

I tried once already, when I had 560&660 in doors. but it was a hell of a job
For this first tentative I tried to make it in two parts.
One filling the holes in the doors, to use the maximum volume I could.
And another part based on the interior of the door panel.
I totally messed up and ended up with this only:









So I just used the fiber panels to "seal" the door holes (in red).


























But I have few questions now.
here's the original door:

































You can see that is has a good usable volume already (the door itself is almost flat).
So everything under the armrest line is usable, probably around 3 or 4 liters just for the rear part near my hand, but I didn't measure yet.
If I optimize the "inner" fiber-panel, by going into the door the maximum I could, I could maybe add 1 or 2 more liters.
Then the idea is to cut the front triangle of the panel and re-build around the driver to find a few liters again.
If I make it going "into" the cabin or keep it flat to the door panel, like:








[/URL]

But not ported, sealed, and by using the rest of the door panel volume.
So a mix of wood and fiberglass work, then cover the triangle in suede like:



Initially I planned for 4/5 liters, based on their T/S and the manual.
But LBaudio gave me real life feedback on the necessary volume for the 660s to be happy.
And it's closer to 12l. than 4.5, so I'll really try to get the most volume I could
12 will be hard, but maybe 7/8?


So the questions are:
Should I make it independent or included in the door panel?
Integrated would:
- maximize volume use
- be easier to build (I could fiber directly inside the panel)
- panel will be harder to attach, It is only clipped, no screw anywhere, and the added weight will probably destroy the existing plastic things.
when I had both 560 & 660 in my previous custom panel it was super heavy (also super ugly )

Separated:
- would mean a double shell construction (like Gary's one, harder to close/finalize?)
- easier for the mount
- able to add some foam/decoupler everywhere
- probably less volume

Thanks!


----------



## LBaudio

you can go both ways, depends on your skills. In both casses put a lot of dynamat on doorcards and onto enclosure walls.
If you choose the first plan, than you can bolt doorcard to the door metal from inside of enclosure on few spots, but in that case put some neopren or rubber between door metal and enclosure to prevent rattles.
Maybe you ban also use carbon grill holders to compliment carbon parts on your dash.

good luck with project!


----------



## LBaudio

you can go both ways, depends on your skills. In both casses put a lot of dynamat on doorcards and onto enclosure walls.
If you choose the first plan, than you can bolt doorcard to the door metal from inside of enclosure on few spots, but in that case put some neopren or rubber between door metal and enclosure to prevent rattles.
Maybe you ban also use carbon grill holders to compliment carbon parts on your dash.

good luck with project!


----------



## Elgrosso

LBaudio said:


> you can go both ways, depends on your skills. In both casses put a lot of dynamat on doorcards and onto enclosure walls.
> If you choose the first plan, than you can bolt doorcard to the door metal from inside of enclosure on few spots, but in that case put some neopren or rubber between door metal and enclosure to prevent rattles.
> Maybe you ban also use carbon grill holders to compliment carbon parts on your dash.
> 
> good luck with project!


I feel like it's a bit over my skills in fact, but I really want to try.
If I plan well the process I might succeed.

Ok for the dynamat & decoupler, in any case I'll have to keep in mind the thickness needed for this.
Either the foam between door and "enclosed" panel, or between enclosure and door panel.
Maybe the "independent" option for the enclosure would make it easier to filter all vibrations to the armrest.

So I'll take time to study all mounting options first.
See where I could add & keep access some new holes in the door.
I'll try to draw something to share my options.

I forgot about the carbon rings! They're a bit too "techy" for me but I'll check if they match.
For protection I could try something minimalist like this on the center part:


----------



## Elgrosso

Checked the volume, with just the stock panel I get 9 liters already!
(and the foam didn't go everywhere)
Even with let's say 10% margin of error it's a good start.

If I add what I can get inside the door by curving the panels in the holes
+ around the driver by moving it a bit into the cabin I'm sure I can go really close to 12L.
That leaves me a good marge for the thickness and damping/decoupler material around.
I'm surprised!

So maybe I could try ported...


































About the aiming:
I know at that frequencies it's not important, but can it have an impact on any null effect?
It sounds silly to ask...
But could it change something if I aim them differently than horizontally like actually? More off axis to the front, or slightly aimed over the tunnel (the transmission tunnel is large, but not too tall so few degree will make them fire over it).
Any of these ways would help me to get a cleaner line on the door (It could also give more rigidity to the box I think).


----------



## LaserSVT

I love me those XJR and XKRs so much. Just great cars and really are pretty robust. Always wanted to do a system in one of mine. I think I may have to buy another one. LOL

Love the XKR 100s though. Being only 300 still exist i would have a hard time performing that level of surgery on the doors.

Kudos man, wish i could form panels like that but dont have the time, skill, patience for it.


----------



## Elgrosso

LaserSVT said:


> I love me those XJR and XKRs so much. Just great cars and really are pretty robust. Always wanted to do a system in one of mine. I think I may have to buy another one. LOL
> 
> Love the XKR 100s though. Being only 300 still exist i would have a hard time performing that level of surgery on the doors.
> 
> Kudos man, wish i could form panels like that but dont have the time, skill, patience for it.


Yep, I can use reliable and jaguar in the same sentence!  
(100kmiles this one, and 120k the other)
Everything is well done, not too much plastic, a lot of leather or vinyl, no rattles etc. well honestly a bit more now since I disassembled it so many times... 
That's the only way I hurted it I think, didn't cut the doors, and I have every parts to put it back to stock if I need.
In fact I did it once, but I just couldn't find anything else that I like enough (except an Aston... :laugh


----------



## Elgrosso

Today I tried to make a copy of the door surface on the other car, to get an idea of the work later.
On the volume/attachments/relation with door panel etc.
Same car, same door, but with much less dynamat and stuff to deal with (and I can keep my sound system while building ).
(It's a bit hard to be syntethic and not taking an hour to type, so please excuse if it's messy)

So first, one of the issue ont my actual door:













The driver is already really low in the door, but 1cm top is still hidden by the panel (rough cut here).
I can add 1 or 2 cm to go lower and inside the cabin. but not sure it will be enough.
I say that because I want to minimise the work on the external part of the door panel.
For good looking results (by experience )
If I can avoid to cut or add some fiber on the outside I'll be glad.
So if you follow me, this means I will have to move lower/more inside the driver, while using fiberglass from the inside of the door panel, to the outside of the new ring of the speaker. Not sure it's clear…
That's why I asked about aiming previously. If i can aim it differently I could save few mm.

Then, here I have a solid point to attach everything (the hole on top right, missing a strong metallic L bracket)
The armrest is fixed here, but the armrest is attached to the door panel somewhere else behind, by below.
So I'll have to create some kind of tunnel in the box, to get to the screws













On the next door, spare panel, cutted, to show some of the oem speaker holes I'll try to reuse to attach the box/panel.













Here just a layer of foam to add some space for later, for any kind of decoupler or dampener I'll want to use.
It also smoothes out the surface, so easier to fiberglass:













Then taped and fibered, just enough to give me an idea.
I'll probably re-do a better one later













Then check on the door panel, where will I have to cut/add some fiber, especially for the last step, coupling of both panels:



























A lot of space, and I optimized the maximum:










Maybe about 2 more liters added with the internal poachs.
I grabbed all i could to keep room for any added thickness of the fiber. 
About this, what's more important: weight or rigidity?
Because I could use much less fiber if I brace everywhere.


And then just free try to get an idea of how I could mount the driver.










An old K2 destroyed by the couple ms8 & flat battery 












I don't have so much room behind, maybe 1cm, and the gti is larger, so I'll have to increase the "spacing" for this "triangular" part. a bit more in the cabin.

A detail of the skin:










My experience with vinyl is that it's really not that easy to get a clean finish. So I don't want to recover the entire door.
So I'll try to destroy the actual one the least I can to re-use it.
Should be ok here since it's the bottom. The idea is to glue both panels and recover the corners here.




Next step: MDF












I have no experience on mdf, except with rings.
I'll grab some during the week at home depot probably.
If I can cut it like that, fiber on the oem cover (marroon here) and filler in the gaps.
At the end I'll try to make some kind of clipped cover on this whole front part to simulate a rear-mount of the driver.

Clearly a lot of work, I guess few week ends.
But it seems accessible!




PS:
Also something I tried yesterday, the lost foam technic.
I really wanted to avoid to fiberglass the panel so it seemed a good idea for an "independent" enclosure.
I used Joann styro blocks, super easy to use, few minutes gave me this shape:










But finally I don't think it's the way to go.
Too much steps to make it to perfectly match the door, too much lost space at the end, and no obvious solution for the mounting.
Also I would have had to work with epoxy, and I never did that.
The only thing I really like about this technic, is that I could have easily added some rigidity with internal braces (like crossing chopstick everywhere in the foam before I dissolve it for example, if you see what I mean).


----------



## Elgrosso

A little update on the doors, few pics should tell the story:










































































Finally I'll go the independent way. It was too hard to try to save volume everywhere and save the original door card. 
So I cut the panel, on an horizontal line, just below the armrest, and will use mdf as backbone, FG to the cut panel with added depth. (1cm move = 1 or 2 liters added)

The pile of cups were here to help to find the right depth, considering volume needed, global look, and of course practical side like door that still close etc
Since it will be one piece, simple shape, I'm ok to recover it in vinyl or even just acoustic fabric. And I don't plan for the best look, just something ok since i'll have anyway to replace them one day.
I just hope the armrest will cover any ugly thing, the midrange enclosure that sits just upper could help too.
The very front part will need to be clean though.

I have more than 13 L. without the speaker hole that I could easily use.
So depending of the volume used for bracing & FG thickness etc I have room enough I think!

Have to say, I had very great feedback from LBaudio here, many many many good advises, a very nice guy. 
His site: Custom Installs | LBaudio or his build threads here should illustrate his level.

Actual basic plan to join and close both parts of the enclosure is to use fleece, then cut flat among the mdf, FG inside, and glue or put filler to close back, then filler outside to clean the lines.

But still studying the questions now, about bracing, mounting holes, rigidity needed etc.
Most of the mounting points will be in front, 4 strong ones around the oem speaker hole, then the L bracket in the middle + others around.
But I'd still really like it to be light, like super light, while keeping priorities for the sound.
So I'm studying any kind of solution:
core mat/honeycomb/aero mat or bracing with mdf/thick cord/FG panels etc

It's hard to find a common agreement on this, most here use mat apparently, to build weight, then strength.
But it seems to me that using a real sandwich would give the same rigidity for much lower weight.
But then what about the effect on sound?

Also I'll probably try ported first, but I'm not there yet.

For now the idea is:


----------



## Elgrosso

Some news about the door midbass enclosure:
This thing is damn' long to build! I spent maybe 4 or 5 weekends already, only on the right one and it's not finished.
I had to change my plan 5 or 6 times, made a lot of mistakes but at least I learned a lot in the process. 
I wanted to end it with some more cloth all around but it's solid enough I don't need and I get tired.
The shape is like the original door panel, just 1.5" deeper in the cabin for the whole bottom part, so a bit intrusive but not too much

But it's just super heavy, more than 5 Kgs without the driver and I wonder if my door will appreciate… I may have to reconsider the attachment points, and reinforce the inner skin.
The original plan was to go ported, Winisd and other online calculators gave me about 10/12L. for ported, or half only for sealed.
But since it's hard to measure cabin gain, and I have a dsp to shape the final curve I wonder if I should still go ported.
Also the port tube itself (2") might be hard to install inside with enough clearance around (should be 2" around the tube too no?). Or could be not compatible with the wool stuff.

I quickly tried to mount everything on the right door, and just listened a bit.
Nothing was adjusted of course, box without the port yet so probably too big for sealed (but is there such a thing?)
And didn't change anything on ms16 but I just couldn't resist.
Midbass only, playing with balance to compare L&R:
The sound is muffled, maybe too much sound absorbant inside, or just the bad settings, or box too big.
But the most impressive was the resonance, or the absence of resonance!
At pretty loud volume, level that I rarely listen to, the left door was crying her mother, bzing boing whoom everywhwere!
On right… nothing! Even louder, just a little ringing on one of the metal bracket that attach the box (temp).
That is really cool! 
And a bit disturbing, I thought my doors were ok, not perfect but ok. I think the skin is just not rigid enough.

So I really think I'll continue on this, but ported or sealed… don't know.
Sealed would be much easier, I can find up to 8 liters in the original panel easily.
Just FG the inside of the panel and close with mdf > lighter, much simpler to build, and stealth look.

Any thoughts guys?


----------



## Elgrosso

Anybody can help on this?

*- too much felt?*
or maybe I should not focus on this at all for now.
I read that it's not that important for low FR, but I'd like to be able to use this box to play higher in midrange for a 2 way later if I want to try.

*- ported vs sealed* when with a dsp
I consider this first box as a draft.
I could either cut the hole and place a port,
or fill it with something solid to find the right volume for sealed

I wonder if I should buy the Dayton measurement tool, to get the real T/S. I found very different specs online for the gti (between JBL and ErinH for ex).
To get the right VAS/FS/QTS especially.

I also have some old sealed cabinets about 8L., I think I'll try them in the car just to see.

*- weight*
Anyone who destroyed his door hinges with too much weight?


----------



## vwjmkv

very interested. SUBd!


----------



## Elgrosso

vwjmkv said:


> very interested. SUBd!


Thanks vwjmkv!




Majik said:


> Eager to see the final product. I'm in the planning stages of my 04 XKR build and was considering a similar enclosure design for my midbass.


Great news, did you start anything yet, what's the plan for now?
I found it really easy to work on.




Majik said:


> How did you make this speaker pod?


By hand, few years ago, with drill/jigsaw/file, and that was loooong.
Now with a dremel it should be much faster.
Basically the same shape than the oem one.
They're solid, but I realize now that the door skin itself is not strong enough.
Maybe a sandwich with a ring behind could help.
But adding/spacing more the mounting points would be better.
The bottom part is ok, but the top one moves few mm when you press firmly over it.


----------



## Elgrosso

So I tried quickly the old cabinets with the the gti installed inside (no tweeter):





I think they're about 7-8 liters, so not too far off.
I calibrated as 1 way front, and just played a bit, normal to high volume, and different high pass (no sub).
I took some measures with REW but I messed up with the settings so don't want to share my graphs now.
I'll have to find the exact same settings that I used for "IB in doors" and re-do them with the cabinets soon to really compare apples to apples.
So far, the curves didn't look exactly the same, on the cabinet ones the High pass is stronger, I mean there's less informations below the high pass point.
And on phases (I measured ms8 on/off) the ms8 seems to have fixed everything below 500Hz, two holes, at 80 and 200Hz.
But I need to double check on this, too many .mdat files...
Maybe it's just because the ms8 doesn't apply the same filters to a 1 way VS 3 way + sub, even on the same limited FR window.

But the obvious improvement is the ability to go very low without rattles/resonances from the door.
Before I couldn't high pass at 60Hz, or even 70Hz. With the cabinet no problem, it's still clean and tight.

Not related, but I was surprised to hear also some highs. Even on the left one almost in front of me due to its size.

I think I'm on the right path here, will continue with the enclosure solution for sure.


----------



## LBaudio

cool! thanx fot taking test and report!


----------



## Elgrosso

Majik said:


> Thanks! I haven’t started yet as the equipment is currently installed in another vehicle. The XKR is new to me as of April and I’ve been focusing more on performance upgrades for the last few months. My goal was to have the stereo build completed by August…but you know how things go. I'm probably still a month out until I even begin...


Cool, I'm glad to find a X100 buddy here.
What did you change on the car so far?
I didn't feel the need for any mechanical upgrade personally… since I fall in the audio stuff 
And I have another one for the fun.




Majik said:


> Source: Rework stock radio housing and cage to accommodate the CD7200, as no pre-fab mounting kits are available for this car and I don’t mind doing the work. This way I can add my USB port and sub-level control on the same faceplate.


I found one few years ago, just a plastic adapter to fit a regular DIN.
It has a curve that follow the rest of the controls.But never used, I think I found it on Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum




Majik said:


> Front stage: Tweets in dash pods or A-pillars…depending what sounds better.


I tried many layouts in this one, and I remember the two way was good with tweeters in sail panels.
But it was a long time ago, and totally personal, taste/dsp/driver dependent etc




Majik said:


> For the 6.5 mid I was thinking of glassing a tunnel that just barely extends through the existing speaker cover; still using the door as the enclosure. Sealed and deadened of course. This would allow me to keep the speaker cover and cloth by simply cutting a hole to accommodate an angled face of the driver/mounting surface, and rewrapping the cover panel with the same OEM fabric. Simple and lightweight but should still look tasteful. See your image below and imagine there is a sealed tunnel behind the speaker, “connecting” it to the door...essentially a fiberglass extension of the stock speaker mount.



I see what you mean for the woofer.
A solid ring will already be a big step compared to the flimsy plastic one.

The OEM cover (triangle part) has a plastic ring to "seal" it onto the foam around the oem driver, but I couldn't re-use it.
There was some kind of leaks around this area into the door panel, that I just try to fix with foam etc.
So if you can get a clean flush mount on the panel side it should be a success.

But the door panel itself is not exactly cut all around the driver, few cms on top are covering the ring and the very top of the driver. So it might be hard to place some fiberglass there and still be able to plug back the panel.
See here on the pic, the top part. I cut it a bit but it was still an issue:


Had the same issue with the enclosure, but I put the driver lower so it fits.

I'd also humbly suggest to rigidify the door around the speaker hole as possible. There's too much opening around for it to be rigid. You should be able to feel it by pressing just by hand.
That's what I would do now if I had to.

For the sealing part of the door holes, the top rear "square" opening was a bit tricky, since there's only very little room between the door skin and the door panel. Maybe you could try by inside.
The yellow one here:


I also curved the fiberglass panels inside the holes when I could, so they got a bit more rigid while still not too thick.
Because all this + the foam and the thinsulate…. made hard to put the panels back!







Majik said:


> I do like your independent fiberglass enclosures in the empty space behind the door panels…but I’m not exactly sure how much it will improve the sound over a well deadened and sealed door. I’m looking forward to your results!


The last one is bigger than the door itself, about 1" more into the cabin, but same shape, or close.
But if finally I decide to go sealed, I'll just FG the door panel itself, there's good volume there and it would be clean!
Now does it worth it or not…?
For the sound I'm pretty much convinced now, for the few reasons in previous posts about the door isolation.
Of course I need to finish everything.
And will it worth the time and effort? This I'm not so sure haha 





Majik said:


> Subs: I like your idea of using the rear deck for the sub (is that an IB install btw? I’d like to see more pics of that)…


Not sure I have more I'll check. But yeah this was fun.
OEM hole is 8" so I had to cut a bit to 9", then stack of mdf from 9" to 12", it ends up at few mm of the windshield on top, and few others from the fuel pump below.
The whole thing is a bit angled back. It was a pain to fit and tighten.
But it works well, you can check on my pics the measurements.
Maybe due to some kind of horn effect with the windshield?
I should take some more time to deaden more the rear cover itself since I can get some rattles around 20Hz.
But the metal sheet itself is rigid enough.
I searched for a while for a good 12" IB that would fit.
All the shallow one, at that time, didn't fit.




Majik said:


> but since I’m using a pair of 12” subs, and we have fuel tanks in our trunks, I’m not sure how effectively the bass would penetrate in to the cabin with traditional trunk mounted subs. I’ll try them in the trunk first…BUT…I’m pretty set on replacing the back seat cushion with down-firing dual enclosures. The back seats in these cars are useless anyway…might as well make a true 2-seater. I’ve never installed subs inside the cabin of a vehicle, so I’m not exactly sure what to expect. Fingers crossed I guess. Anyone else have experience with down-firing subs in a small coupe?


Ha yes a nice rear seat delete!
Have this in mind since the beginning… Maybe you saw some on the jag forums?
There's not so much room just below the bench, but the entire volume could converted to a big box, XJS style.




Majik said:


> My amp rack will be similar to yours. It just makes sense in these vehicles.
> 
> Rear fill: basic install in stock location. It’s just fill...
> 
> Deaden both doors, floor and ceiling.


Yep it's deep and big enough. And always good to fit everything low. Speaker wires are long enough to go anywhere in the trunk if you need, fuse block, battery, everything, just waiting for you!
I guess you have the donut too?
If so you should be able to find a truck floor for xk8, totally compatible to cover everything.
Do you plan to keep the oem amp in place or use both corners for the subs?

I didn't do ceiling, just front floor, doors, rear shelf/seats and around the rear fill.
The floor could have used a bit more, it's a bit flimsy on big impacts. I tried to double the carpet thickness, it worked but it was too messy with the pedals.

There is for sure many more things to say, so MP if you need!


----------



## Elgrosso

Nope, did nothing since a while (build OD and just too hot to work).
For the wires, since almost all my stuff is temporar I didn't bother to run them cleanly. So oem wires for woofers and tweeters, and passed the midranges ones through the fuse panels on both dash sides. Clean enough for now.


----------



## Elgrosso

Few news on here,
Some time ago I removed all the stuff from the green car to prepare it for resale (but I still don't know what will be the next one).
In the meantime I couldn't live without decent sound so I just dropped some of the stuff in the convertible.

First just the iphone/dac in dash with ms8 and oem speakers.
I had to buy few 6.5" since I missed some, started with basic woofers on PE.
Like the one from the dayton 652 monitors.



It was ok but sensitivity was too low, and a bit "nasal" (no eq).
So I tried the PRV, much higher sensitivity (and only $10), bigger motor, still 4 ohms, drop in replacement.
With ms8 amp it worked well, a good step. For sure one good woofer for cheap oem replacement.
But then lack of sub bass after few days, oem sub = just two 6.5" in small enclosures on each sides in the back.

So I decided to instal my jbl SQ pro, tried quickly in the trunk, but it was useless.
It had to go in the cabin so: rear seat delete, found some heavy straps so it won't find my ass in an accident, and a nice black blanket to cover the ghetto instal.




Wow way to go, this guy pushes so much!
Not clean as the IB12AU in the coupe, nothing really below 40Hz, but over that it's great! (once EQed)
In the now empty sub enclosures I installed some gs63 coax to enjoy L7, not the best spot with the sub in between, but it's a drop in.

But system was not balanced, again, I needed more in front.
I quickly tried some scanspeak 5f in the dash (perfect drop in replacement)
But it was really thin, something was not right (again I didn;t EQ at that time) 
I then installed temporarly a gmd1004 for the front 2 way, to see if the scans wanted more.
See, started as a simple temporar instal, now it gets ugly :



But it made things worst, and my oem tweeters really didn't like the power increase (they share the same channels with the dash mids, with just a cap).
So since I still had the green car handles trim ready for the gb10, I decided to install the gb15 for a simpler 2 way.
Just enlarged a bit and cut the handle even more, it fits:



I always liked that look, and everything in the door is way easier to tune, for me.
I think I said it already about the green car, but in the door the soundstage is larger, just a tad less deep and high.

Then my strange episode about tweeter crackles…

Solved today! So I finally spent some time on EQ
I've never really messed with the ms8 EQ on the other install, since I didn't know what to do.
I usually just played with amp level/xo, speaker placement etc
But I just tried to learn the ms8 behavior with REW and optimize what I understood.
And it seems to work well, process was:
- measure left/right dsp off/on just to see what it does, to get the big picture, check XO, levels, distortion
- then look at dips/peaks/phase > what do I understand?  Where can I do something?
- and start with sweeps for both sides around the head (only front, and just one per ear, me inside, it's consistent enough and I don't focus on highs))
- then EQ a bit and remeasure, loop like that 10/20 times
I first wanted to cut only, but the sub needed too much cut so I had to boost the midbass.
Sub is now at the minimum on EQ, and few dbs less on the sub menu, maybe like -15db in total.
(gain is at the very limit of turning it off)
- then listen some music and adjust, usually cancel partially what I did in previous steps.
For example I cancelled everything I first did over 1K, it didn't sound right. Like trying to fill the large dip around 4/5k.
So here's the last step, red before/purple after, VAR if I remember, still wip:

EQ:



Now I need to listen more, but it's a good change, not perfect (phase issue on midbass) but better than before.
Even not perfect, the sub/midbass integration is still very enjoyable, it hits hard and clean, on a much broader type of tracks too. Ms8 is really a great piece.
Highs are great, even with some strange stuff on very high some time.
But mids are not good enough yet.
But clearly these little woofers are doing their job. I really wanted to try cheap drivers, to see if I can really hear the difference.
They first distorted a lot, but now with the EQ they're getting better.
It's certainly not like with the 660gti, but it's also a much simpler instal. I can probably live like that few weeks.


----------



## 1FinalInstall

Just found this thread, love what you did with the tweeter and inside door handle. It turned out killer!


----------



## Elgrosso

Thanks!


----------



## LBaudio

...aha.... restart


----------



## Elgrosso

Well I try not to!


----------



## Elgrosso

Maybe I should make a new thread, but both cars are so similar, and this one is more a lab to test few things for the next car.
So some news about the APL1 I just got:

I'm getting there!
Yesterday I finally found a way with my drivers on //desktop, don't know what I did but it worked the apl is now recognized (what a pain windows seriously…)
So I could try the first serious measures/filters.

The process of "painting" with the mic to get multiple points is not super easy at first.
How to position the mic, how fast to move, how long etc. 
I'll need more tries to get an idea of the minimum to do.

So far I've made 4 or 5 measures per side during last days, from 15 point to 400 to get an idea (30sec to 5min maybe).
There's no major difference between the results, mostly different amplitude between them.
I think 250 points is advised.

I also have to adapt my time window to the IR, the sub needs a bit more apparently. But here I don't really know what to read/do, so I'll keep for later.
And I did a mistake of going too close to the drivers on each side (like 1cm, maybe the mic clipped)
I'm not sure, but I think I got some disturbing signal, appearing as distortion on the left (around the XO), previous measures didn't show that.
But I'll check all drivers later to day, to be sure they're good. At ears they seem ok.

Here 400pts from side glass to glass/roof to knees, windshield to my face (yesterday):

left:


















right:

















Any comments on these?




So all following has to be taken with a big grain of salt.
I'm no expert, always try to take shortcut to make it easy, so maybe big flaws in the process:



1 - reset ms8 and new calibration, measured L/R with workshop, then installed apl1 in trunk, feeding the ms8.
Created 3 filters with targets as following:
- es1 (close to a headset curve I'd say)
- mp1 (close to jbl but smoother)
- 000 (flat)
installed apl1, loaded filters

I don't know what happened but the first tentative was a bit deceptive, nothing really obvious, except the flat one.
Also I didn't know how the bypass button worked (3 positions), so I had to find out myself if the apl was on or off 
Trying not to overthink, and with apl in trunk I always had to go out/change the button/re-listen etc, not the easiest for an A/B.
That was a good but hard exercise! harder than I thought, and that's why I was deceived a bit, the results were not night and day.
Also I have a little "otitis" on left ear since few days, that didn't help.
If I could hear differences, it was harder to say which one I preferred 




Then today, restarted everything, but with apl1 installed already (so in the sound chain, before it wasn't):
2- reset ms8, calibration with apl1 off (well I think )
Then loaded same filters (so old ones, made without apl1 in the sound chain)

Result:
Yeah! I got real midbass! hahaha cool!
With these drivers/setup, I was never able to get good midbass from left.
So the soundstage always shifted to right on low FR.
EQ had helped a bit before, but mostly the right one reacted well.
With the gti it was also the case, but much less, I don't know why (the center console?)
I have tried once to cal for passenger, and listen on right side, it was the same but mirrored issue.
Everything else was quite good, not the dynamic of the 3 way but good enough.

This time I re-calibrated ms8 at -40db since it was quiet at 7am, instead of -30/-35db usually, depending of the sub gain (no gain setting on front amp).
By experience with playing with the volume for calibration, I could have zero to big differences, especially on sub/midbass.
But here I've already tried -40db before, it didn't change anything.
It's not always exactly replicable, so I guessed it was more external variations (external noise/my head movement), and most of the time the first cal is ok.
But here in my actual setup the woofers' are less sensitive than the tweeters, I mean much less than the previous ones, so maybe they needed to be even lower to get more attention (boost) from ms8, don't know.
So maybe most of the job was done by ms8, but at least I know now they can work together.
Not sure they work in the same direction though, I'll have to try to understand with REW later.
But for sure I can use both:
- ms8 for easy TA, L7, and fast EQ/sub management while driving
- APL1 to tweak the target curves per channel, tweak delay later with TDA EQ (If I understand it)


Anyway, now this simple install sounds better with the mp1 curve. And I now have a lot of tool to improve it.
I can't say anything yet on the soundstage etc I need to listen much more.
I feel like it's flatter on higher.
Just tried again on heavy bass songs, it's for sure cleaner. Still too much sub, and probably some delay to fix.
Center looks good, before with this setup it was offset few inches on right (playing with head angles during cal never fixed it, used to compensate w/ 1 or 2 clic on balance).
The es1 is not bad, surprisingly, but too much highs.
And the flat one, does not appear that flat, especially on sub.
I'll have to modify the curve for the sub, he is always too strong, and probably lower the top highs too (gb15 don't shine there).

So I'll now listen like that for a while, and will restart the process with new measures w/ workshop.
Also some REW measurements soon to check if all this is not psychoacoustic again


----------



## thehatedguy

What are your XO points? Looking at some of those nulls, a couple of them look like reverse nulls where the driver is reversed polarity.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> What are your XO points? Looking at some of those nulls, a couple of them look like reverse nulls where the driver is reversed polarity.


80/1800 both at 24db.
I tried higher already but prefer here, the gap was too big for the woofer.
But I could try 12db


----------



## thehatedguy

Have you tried reversing the polarity of the midranges to see if the nulls go away?


----------



## Hanatsu

*Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*

Don't ever go as close as 1cm of the drivers with the APL measurements, you need to keep the mic away from the direct response of the drivers. The plots in post 53 show that you got interference and the "noise" in the IR at 200ms show that your measurements are corrupt.

Mic should be pointed towards windshield, between 15-50cm, move the mic like you paint a picket fence up and down going to the next one etc, try collect 10-15points on each vertical line...

I will do a video on this soon.

Nice build btw ^^


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> Have you tried reversing the polarity of the midranges to see if the nulls go away?


Nope never, but wouldn't a reverse of the polarity also cause some troubles somewhere else in the FR?
I always thought, based on Andy's comment, that ms-8 already fixes this kind of issue.


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Hanatsu said:


> Don't ever go as close as 1cm of the drivers with the APL measurements, you need to keep the mic away from the direct response of the drivers. The plots in post 53 show that you got interference and the "noise" in the IR at 200ms show that your measurements are corrupt.
> 
> Mic should be pointed towards windshield, between 15-50cm, move the mic like you paint a picket fence up and down going to the next one etc, try collect 10-15points on each vertical line...
> 
> I will do a video on this soon.
> 
> Nice build btw ^^
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Yes I was definitely at 1cm of the left tweeter.
Ok I'll try that, so not too close to windshield/glass, and speaker!


----------



## Elgrosso

I had some long drives during the week end, so I could get a better judgement on the APL1.
It is subtile, but I'd say for sure that everything seems to be more stable.
The soundstage is much less "tracks" dependant. Jazz/rock/female/big band etc, it is always good. Before, I could have a lot of variations.

Then I had to clean the mess in my trunk, that I think caused a little noise on the tweeters, and wanted back my rears.
So in the mean time I installed another amp I had since a while and never tried.
This guy is really strange, it seems to boost the highs a lot! Or is it that all my previous amps didn't well rendered the highs?
Anyway for now it works well, but I'll have to remeasure everything etc.










So I reused the gmd1004 for rears, just to see if more power would solve the clipping/distortion issue.
My rear tweeters (gs63) still bring some troubles with ms8 ON and L7.

I can't understand what's the issue here:
- The rears are the most sensitive ok
- they are also the closest drivers to me
> so I would imagine ms8 to cut them a lot, especially with L7, so why do I have some kind of clipping/distortion issue?

- Fader full front doesn't change anything
- not a bad ms8, I tried 3 it's always the same
- it's not the drivers since they have no problem with dsp off


----------



## Hanatsu

The stable image is one of the reasons I like the APL. It improves staging dramatically for me in all dimensions. It's more subtle in my home audio system but it does fix the stage rainbow effect and stage wandering with all material I've tried. I'm really picky with such things and it can be hard to get rid of with "conventional means".

Speaker placement is really important, never tried the APL on any system with midranges placed other than in ear height. Not saying your midrange drivers are badly placed but it does set the bar how your staging will be. Door midranges tend to have wider stage but lose a little focus, I prefer putting them in dash or sail panels if possible. 

Have you remeasured again? I saw the Russian guy in the APL thread measuring his Volvo but he did it too fast and wasn't considerate enough too keep the mic off the speakers directly. I only move the mic horizontally near the dash, otherwise I move the mic vertically in different "layers", sideways and towards the windshield.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> The stable image is one of the reasons I like the APL. It improves staging dramatically for me in all dimensions. It's more subtle in my home audio system but it does fix the stage rainbow effect and stage wandering with all material I've tried. I'm really picky with such things and it can be hard to get rid of with "conventional means".
> 
> Speaker placement is really important, never tried the APL on any system with midranges placed other than in ear height. Not saying your midrange drivers are badly placed but it does set the bar how your staging will be. Door midranges tend to have wider stage but lose a little focus, I prefer putting them in dash or sail panels if possible.


Well it's only a 2 way now. 
In this car I always preferred in doors (2 or 3 ways), the very vertical and woody dashboard is really a strong obstacle to depth cohesion.
Tweeters and midranges far in the corners dash/windshield worked, but it always felt like a "dual stage".

That's also why I enjoy L7, it brought back some of the lost depth.

But I still have my custom pillars for GB25&10.
Maybe the APL could fix some of their inherent issues.
Hummm... then I'd need another amp, or XO block, then it's not a simple install anymore... 





Hanatsu said:


> Have you remeasured again? I saw the Russian guy in the APL thread measuring his Volvo but he did it too fast and wasn't considerate enough too keep the mic off the speakers directly. I only move the mic horizontally near the dash, otherwise I move the mic vertically in different "layers", sideways and towards the windshield.


Not yet, I need a bit more time than with REW.
I agree he went really fast!


----------



## Elgrosso

New measures yesterday with new amp etc
Getting used to moving the mic all around.
These results are very close to what I had before, consistent.
But again I forgot to increase the window for the sub.



Now I need to study how to create my own targets.


----------



## Hanatsu

Still interference 

The light blue curve must be at the bottom everywhere. Peaking in the IR outside the window means high non-linear distortion. I think the microphone/soundcard or preamp is clipping the input. I'm a little worried the measurements might not be accurate with that much interference.

What window are you using? 50-100-200ms?


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Still interference
> 
> The light blue curve must be at the bottom everywhere. Peaking in the IR outside the window means high non-linear distortion. I think the microphone/soundcard or preamp is clipping the input. I'm a little worried the measurements might not be accurate with that much interference.
> 
> What window are you using? 50-100-200ms?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Ok I'll try 100ms or even 200ms.
My sub is ported, so maybe it's needed.
Strange thing: the very first measure I've made showed the sub starting at +5db compared to all following ones, where the sub starts at -5db (like last pic). But I don't remember having changed the settings.

About distortion, which driver do you think it is?
I though it might be the tweeter, that I measured again too close of the left one.
But I know my $10 woofers can easily reach 10% THD


----------



## Hanatsu

Can't say from looking at the IR what driver it is or if it's the measurement gear...

I used 100ms for my car, I did some additional corrections using the c1 peq after done some measurement in rew. Sound power average isn't as accurate in the lowest octave.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Can't say from looking at the IR what driver it is or if it's the measurement gear...
> 
> I used 100ms for my car, I did some additional corrections using the c1 peq after done some measurement in rew. Sound power average isn't as accurate in the lowest octave.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Could it be other resonances in the car?

I started to play with C1, trying to replicate the jbl curve (a bit sharper than es1).
But I'm not so familiar with PEQ, so I'd like something more confortable to use.
Especially on a laptop in the car.
Do you happen to know any cool EQ software than can export in xps?
Raymond said Waves q10.

I tried to define some curves in fabfilter proQ (super easy and intuitive) then reused the Q/gains/fr values in C1, but didn't get a perfect match.


----------



## Hanatsu

*Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*

Hm tell me what you want and I can create curves for you...

The interference is too high, I got some too, -25dB down or so at cabin resonance.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Hanatsu said:


> Hm tell me what you want and I can create curves for you...



Thank you!
My mistake I didn't use C1 yet, but PE1
I wanted a copy of the jbl, just as a start to give the same target to both dsp and compare results:

20 9.2
25 9.2 
32 9.2
40 9.2
50 9.2
63 9.2
80 8.0
100 6.0
125 4.0
160 1.0
200 0.0
250 0.0
315 0.0
400 0.0
500 0.0
630 0.0
800 0.0
1000 0.0
1250 0.0
1600 0.0
2000 0.0
2500 0.0
3150 0.0
4000 -0.5
5000 -1.0
6300 -2.0
8000 -3.0
10000 -4.0
12500 -4.5
16000 -5.0
20000 -6.0

I saw that _ConnectPE1_ could load .xps, and save as .txt for _workshop_, but not load .txt directly.

I also tried to update an xps file, but it needs all values for each FR... 40 thousands number to fill up 
There's is an option for interpolation in _workshop_, but I didn't manage to use it rigth.



Hanatsu said:


> The interference is too high, I got some too, -25dB down or so at cabin resonance.


Ok I'll take time to make clean measures next week end.
I'll probably change my woofers too.


----------



## Elgrosso

And from your thread:


Hanatsu said:


> The IR is the same but the window the software calculates the fft from is different


I see now. Here's the result, based on the same old measurement (measure/measurement?):



It clearly got a better picture of the sub, and tweaked it differently.
I figure the top high change is a trade off.

I loaded this flat curve this morning, sub was almost inaudible!
But the rest was pretty clean.
Anyway next steps: change gain/remove dac and use digit-in/set new targets

Do you know a way to use the bypass as a preset?
I'm still waiting for my knob, but it would make everything easier to compare.


----------



## Hanatsu

100ms window gives you better accuracy already at 200Hz but doesn't seem to impact HF ^^

Flat response in a car will render sub very low in level. Try mp1 setting.

You can use a bypass setting in the hardware upload program. It already got a preset called bypass I think. You could also use an "empty" IR file, flat at all frequencies.


----------



## Hanatsu

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fz65hbe9ccmixb1/jbl_APL.txt?dl=0

There you have an APL version of the JBL curve you posted.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> https://www.dropbox.com/s/fz65hbe9ccmixb1/jbl_APL.txt?dl=0
> 
> There you have an APL version of the JBL curve you posted.


Awesome! Tack tack Hanatsu
What did you use for this?


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> 100ms window gives you better accuracy already at 200Hz but doesn't seem to impact HF ^^
> 
> Flat response in a car will render sub very low in level. Try mp1 setting.
> 
> You can use a bypass setting in the hardware upload program. It already got a preset called bypass I think. You could also use an "empty" IR file, flat at all frequencies.


There's a drop at 9k on the 100ms instead of 15k+ on the 50ms.
Well on the targeted curve only I'd say, I didn't hear it.

The flat was not too bad honestly, but I'll boost it.
I quickly tried mp1 last day, didn't convince me.
So far I prefer es1, but top highs were a bit too much.

Ok I'll try the bypass thing.
I didn't really study the presets yet, just used one curve per day, loaded in the morning at the trunk (also need to plug a long usb to the cabin for ease).


----------



## Alextaastrup

Hanatsu said:


> https://www.dropbox.com/s/fz65hbe9ccmixb1/jbl_APL.txt?dl=0
> 
> There you have an APL version of the JBL curve you posted.


Respect!


----------



## Alextaastrup

Elgrosso said:


> There's a drop at 9k on the 100ms instead of 15k+ on the 50ms.
> Well on the targeted curve only I'd say, I didn't hear it.
> 
> The flat was not too bad honestly, but I'll boost it.
> I quickly tried mp1 last day, didn't convince me.
> So far I prefer es1, but top highs were a bit too much.
> 
> Ok I'll try the bypass thing.
> I didn't really study the presets yet, just used one curve per day, loaded in the morning at the trunk (also need to plug a long usb to the cabin for ease).


Regarding mp1 preset. it might seems to be little bit "dark" due to the dip around 1-3kHz, but i a long run this preset works perfect as it does not stress ears in the range of the highest sensivity. I have been using mp1 for a couple of years and already used to its sound. Perfect for me for EVERY music ganre.


As I understand from Raimonds, this target curve has been created for many years ago in connection with big concert halls. I know that it is still in use in the prosound world. Surprisingly it works also in a small audio environment - car cabin, where it is normally difficult to separate direct sound and earlier reflections.


----------



## Elgrosso

Alextaastrup said:


> Regarding mp1 preset. it might seems to be little bit "dark" due to the dip around 1-3kHz, but i a long run this preset works perfect as it does not stress ears in the range of the highest sensivity. I have been using mp1 for a couple of years and already used to its sound. Perfect for me for EVERY music ganre.
> 
> 
> As I understand from Raimonds, this target curve has been created for many years ago in connection with big concert halls. I know that it is still in use in the prosound world. Surprisingly it works also in a small audio environment - car cabin, where it is normally difficult to separate direct sound and earlier reflections.


So I tried it this morning, mp1.
The midrange attenuation makes it a bit dull yes, but it was not so perceptive on higher volume (loudness curve effect?).
So I think I could learn to live with this part, easier on long listening probably.
But the low end sounded muddy, and this I can't stand.

Also, my tweeters didn't like it!
Now I have crackles in front tweeters (disconnected the rears).
And it's really strange since mp1 is lower everywhere for them!
But it comes and goes depending of settings/tracks etc
The more it goes the more I think they're shot...
Do you think I could try more power to check if it's clipping? (50W now)

About the curve, I think I'll shoot for a mix between es1 & jbl:


----------



## Hanatsu

You can input filter settings manually from RoomEQ auto setup into coneq. Not as pro as a XPS format load but it works until I can find a better alternative. I rather make some manual corrections in the 20-80Hz range using a single point measurement. Then this method works fine.


----------



## Babs

Hanatsu said:


> You can input filter settings manually from RoomEQ auto setup into coneq. Not as pro as a XPS format load but it works until I can find a better alternative. I rather make some manual corrections in the 20-80Hz range using a single point measurement. Then this method works fine.


Man that's one thing I sure wish the Helix tool could do.


----------



## Hanatsu

Babs said:


> Man that's one thing I sure wish the Helix tool could do.


It's a powerful tool. You can combine IIR and FIR processing to fix group delay and FR at the same time making more efficient use of the available taps. Coneq tool can also create any arbitrary filter response and export it as a curve to use in APL workshop for example. Really nice to do some extra correction in the lower two octaves this way.

Working on a thread of advanced usage of these tools. I need to master rePhase and how to apply correction without messing other things up before doing a thread... hopefully I will learn some stuff myself from it =/


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> You can input filter settings manually from RoomEQ auto setup into coneq. Not as pro as a XPS format load but it works until I can find a better alternative. I rather make some manual corrections in the 20-80Hz range using a single point measurement. Then this method works fine.


Of course! I'm an idiot I didn't think of that.
Thx!


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> It's a powerful tool. You can combine IIR and FIR processing to fix group delay and FR at the same time making more efficient use of the available taps. Coneq tool can also create any arbitrary filter response and export it as a curve to use in APL workshop for example. Really nice to do some extra correction in the lower two octaves this way.
> 
> Working on a thread of advanced usage of these tools. I need to master rePhase and how to apply correction without messing other things up before doing a thread... hopefully I will learn some stuff myself from it =/


Waiting for this thread then!
I need to rethink the whole process and make a better start.
Not enough time actually and I changed too many things in the same time without paying enough attention.


----------



## fullergoku

Hanatsu said:


> It's a powerful tool. You can combine IIR and FIR processing to fix group delay and FR at the same time making more efficient use of the available taps. Coneq tool can also create any arbitrary filter response and export it as a curve to use in APL workshop for example. Really nice to do some extra correction in the lower two octaves this way.
> 
> Working on a thread of advanced usage of these tools. I need to master rePhase and how to apply correction without messing other things up before doing a thread... hopefully I will learn some stuff myself from it =/


Just curious as to the price of coneq software if anyone knows.


----------



## Alextaastrup

fullergoku said:


> Just curious as to the price of coneq software if anyone knows.


Ask Raimonds Skuruls (aplaudio.com)


----------



## Alextaastrup

Muddy low end reproduction - it is nothing with APL1 to do. mp1 preset just underlines actual problems in the car/subwoofer/vibration of the car parts, etc. They are just more evident and audible if compared with the case of es1 preset.

It will be interesting to see the graphs measured with the mp1 preset (both fronts on one graph together with the target curve). Just to see - how close your setup is actually to the selected curve and what should be improved further. Nothing is 100% perfect in our world, sorry.


----------



## Elgrosso

Don't be sorry...
I just prefer flatter, sometime low boost but much lower in FR.

But I agree the before/after measurements are a necessary step.
I'm sure I have many problems in the system, it's just the beginning.
My woofers are not the sharpest, the peaky sub, some resonances, distortions etc.
So maybe mp1 will be great at the end, but now it isn't.


----------



## Alextaastrup

Ok, test with the flat target curve at first - just to see how the APL has made its job. Sometimes one has to change limits/band in the Workshop in order to work out big dips (especially in TW frequency range as some of them have tendency of early roll off). 

Do not forget to use a correct mic calibration.

Good luck.


----------



## Elgrosso

Yes I have finally a week end to work on it now.
I'll restart everything, check my drivers, the wiring, install usb etc and maybe go back to 3 way.
Then take time for clean measures as a good reference. Also with rew just for comparison.
First with flat target, to hear/see the effects, then some custom targets.
Play more with C1 too

I didn't bother with the mic cal so far, it is pretty flat, but you think I should?

And, TW meaning tweeter? Can I change the bands without losing too much on the low end?
I saw that going from 50ms to 100ms, the sub got more "attention" but the tweeters trace was less impacted, the roll off started earlier.

Thanks Alextaastrup


----------



## Hanatsu

Definietely use the cal file for mic. Tw is tweeter. 


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

OK!

found my old pillars, they din't suffer too much.
Ready to go!



Now the doors...


----------



## Alextaastrup

Elgrosso said:


> Yes I have finally a week end to work on it now.
> I'll restart everything, check my drivers, the wiring, install usb etc and maybe go back to 3 way.
> Then take time for clean measures as a good reference. Also with rew just for comparison.
> First with flat target, to hear/see the effects, then some custom targets.
> Play more with C1 too
> 
> I didn't bother with the mic cal so far, it is pretty flat, but you think I should?
> 
> And, TW meaning tweeter? Can I change the bands without losing too much on the low end?
> I saw that going from 50ms to 100ms, the sub got more "attention" but the tweeters trace was less impacted, the roll off started earlier.
> 
> Thanks Alextaastrup


Looking at your IR graphs I would definetely recommend to use not less than 100 ms windows (time window file - in Workshop). I actually ment low and hight frequency limiter settings. Deault settings of 6 dB might be too small for your setup (based on raw measurement - without APL). You might try to use 12 or even 15 dB. Then compare FR for both tweeters. I prefer if they go flat uptil 18-20 kHz - both.


----------



## Elgrosso

Rhaaaaa!!!

I was just about to upload the final filters when the ms8 went crazy!
My battery is dead…
The charger is plugged, but I guess it wasn't enough, or it is just time to change it (I kind of abused it recently)

So,
the setup is now completely different.
3way as: gb25/10 in corners, 660 gti back in doors, no rears, same sub behind my neck.



Few cal with different XO then I picked 80/300/3.6K/all 24db
I remember 300Hz to be a bit low for the gb25 in my case, but they seemed ok.
Same results than long time ago:
- soundstage higher and deeper, but narrower, especially on left
- a bit nasal and too much in my face 
- much better midbass, cleaner
- easier level match, everything lower
- no eq since it's only to get it ready for the APL
Then I did my usual check on REW, everything looked pretty good (but irrelevant later)

Then first measurements with APL:



to compare with REW (a quick avg of both ears only for this):
Left purple, right green here
They share some similarities, but clearly the xo points show up in the power repsonse. Well that's what I guess, but there is an offset.
(added mp1 to get some perspective)



Then calculated the default curves: es1, mp1, flat and the jbl > upload to APL
Everything around the cross over was boosted a lot!
The mids didn't appreaciate the treatment…

So I changed to 500hz/5000Hz/24db, maybe I could go even higher because the stage didn't suffer, on quick listening.
New APL measures:



See how the power response is almost the same?
But at least now the drivers should be able to handle the boost since it's not anymore around the XO.

Here again I came too close to the drivers, caused interferences on left.
It must be that because they're not on first measurements.
Here the two windows difference for left:


The 100ms deals better with the sub, but then boost everything a lot.
So clearly I think I have a problem with the sub.
The peak around 50Hz drives the EQ window for APL, so it boosts everything to match.
I tried your advice Alextaastrup, by modifying the EQ limit, I reduced the boost on tweeters to max 6db & max 12db on sub, but the effect was minor (?).

I have to re-read the manual and stuff, but should I:
- cut the sub for now during measurements, and deal with it later with only the ms8?
- put the gain at the very minimum before measurements and put it back after? (But it might be overboosted by the ms8)
- switch ms8 for the C-dsp?


----------



## Hanatsu

Can you post a distortion measurement from RoomEQ? I wonder why there is interference below 100Hz and stuff going on in the 1-4kHz region. It definietely affect the measurement. APL manual says it must be -15dB down from signal otherwise calculations will be incorrect...

I see in the IR that something is wrong too on the left picture (lots of noise 150ms+). Both IR got that weird combing in the 25-75ms region, that's probably the interference in the lows.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Hanatsu

I would do the following;

Not familiar with ms8 but use either apl workshop or rew to setup crossovers in the ms8. I would also apply some EQ to flatten the curve somewhat before apl corrections. Make sure that all drivers have the same rolloff slope (roughly) L-R 24dB is best imo - acoustic slope. Then check that they sum.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Can you post a distortion measurement from RoomEQ? I wonder why there is interference below 100Hz and stuff going on in the 1-4kHz region. It definietely affect the measurement. APL manual says it must be -15dB down from signal otherwise calculations will be incorrect...
> 
> I see in the IR that something is wrong too on the left picture (lots of noise 150ms+). Both IR got that weird combing in the 25-75ms region, that's probably the interference in the lows.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Sure, what driver exactly?
I don't have any REW measurements for this 500/5K XO yet.
The battery is in recon now, once ready I'll do them.
But I have 300/3.6k if it can help, and the sub didn't change:



And the left midrange, with 300Hz/3.6Khz/24db XO:


(seeing this graph I wonder if I should use 6/700Hz as XO)

And all (only 2 ears/points I didn't need accuracy on highs):



That's the graph that made me move the XO for the right mid.
It took most of the APL boost around 300Hz.
Top was ok but I moved it to 5k for security, and the mids are almost facing me.


___________________________


For the IR, here's a recap:



So no more interferences on the second around 2k 
IR wiggling around 2k is lower on second but still there
Both have some at the bottom end.

Intereferences > I guess it's the mic placement, I'll check with the next ones not going less than 2 feet from all left drivers.
The bottom wiggling > no idea 
I could proceed by elimination, like without the sub first
Or something in the car? my doors could be better, the skin must resonate it is still flimsy around the driver (compare to the enclosure)


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> I would do the following;
> 
> Not familiar with ms8 but use either apl workshop or rew to setup crossovers in the ms8. I would also apply some EQ to flatten the curve somewhat before apl corrections. Make sure that all drivers have the same rolloff slope (roughly) L-R 24dB is best imo - acoustic slope. Then check that they sum.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Ok will do, I didn't want to because it's then another step in the process, if later I want to change anything etc.

I can adjust the sub to be flatter 30-70Hz probably.
And "maybe" remove the peak around 800Hz for the mids.
The 300/3.6 sum was:



Not bad, except at 1k and 3k (the rest I need more points)

[ms8 XO can be anywhere any slopes, but can only the same for each sides]


----------



## Elgrosso

Battery seems ok so I restarted:

- XO as 80/800/5000/24db
Gives this, light green dsp off / dark green dsp on / purple&gold after EQ.
The difference in highs come from 8 points for purple (turning the head like for ms8) / 2 only for gold




Then > APL measures, I tried about 20 very specific and narrow position/number of points just to find the interferences source:
- windshield area > no
- bottom dash/steering wheel > no
- side glass area > no
- far from the left driver (like only near my head) > less to no intereferences
But it's not perfect yet, and avoiding on axis will probably emphasize the off axis in the final average.

Is it the sweep volume setting? I believe it's at conversation level but maybe not.
Or do I "paint" too fast? I think about 2 to 5 sec per vertical movement depending of the place
Maybe it's just external noise? 

Good things:
- IR below 100ms is less bumpy now

Things I noticed:
- the more points the less wiggling everywhere (obviously? )
- the less points the more sub on the graph response

I'll retry later, but now I need a beer!


----------



## Hanatsu

Lol you need a beer after that...

Pretty sure it's something on the "measurement side". Either mic/preamp/soundcard issues. While measuring in APL keep sweep level -10dB down max. How many points do you measure? I do ~250 or so in total.

Try use ASIO if you not doing that already.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Lol you need a beer after that...
> 
> Pretty sure it's something on the "measurement side". Either mic/preamp/soundcard issues. While measuring in APL keep sweep level -10dB down max. How many points do you measure? I do ~250 or so in total.
> 
> Try use ASIO if you not doing that already.


Around 250 also. For the volume, you mean at the HU?
I tried maybe 20 times again, best I got were these two:
But I did so many that I'm not so sure they had the same volume settings :/



All the others showed at the minimum the same level of interferences as before, some much more.
And this time it was the right one who gave me troubles.
But IR is better now, 50ms works, ms8 EQ did something

Tried
- another UMIK > same
- swapped L&R on RCA in APL, or on the Workshop soft > same
- lower volume level > same
- near or far of the drivers > not replicable

Not tried:
- a new battery (it gets empty really fast now it must be dead)
- much higher volume
- other laptop
- silent environment…

And I think it's the later, since the noise is random, on both channels.
Car is under a carpool, not far from the street so I can have planes, bikes, trucks, and my dog :dead_horse:
With REW it's usually ok, but it's also faster.

I'm a bit fed up so I'll just have some more beers now.
Maybe tonight once it's calm, or tomorrow at work.

Based on the 2 "best" measurements I've made I uploaded two es1 filters.
There's still too much boost, at -40db on ms8.
I need to remove the sub of the equation, maybe just with the sub remote, all down before the sweeps.


----------



## Hanatsu

There are small peaks 250-275ms indicating non-linear distortion. The IR does look much better there. I still don't get why there's so much interference in the sub range...

Here's one I've measured:



The interference isn't visible.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> There are small peaks 250-275ms indicating non-linear distortion. The IR does look much better there. I still don't get why there's so much interference in the sub range...
> 
> Here's one I've measured:
> 
> 
> 
> The interference isn't visible.


I edited the pic, it was both Left for IR, now it's fixed.
So peak 250-275ms on L and around 300ms on R.
Are they substantial?

Yeah your is much cleaner.
Could it be the sub just behind my back? It is literally the closest driver to my head. 
Also it starts very high from 0 to 40Hz, when on REW it's much more realistic.


----------



## Hanatsu

Try reducing volume on sub by ~10dB and measure again.


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah yeah yeah!!! epper:
finally got something!

I tried the sub off and the low interference was still there! (must be hardware, or outside noise).
So tried another one regular, everything on, I don't know why but no interference on top this time.
Quick load of just Es1 as I was done for the day, and test

... Few songs, humpf, yeah maybe a bit different 
Let me hear again... 
Out to the trunk to bypass, cabin check, trunk bypass off, cabin check, on, off, on, off...
Maybe female?
on, off, on, off, on, off... (f*** I really need the knob)
Ok yeah there's something here
Some tracks with more instruments maybe?

Woohooo!
It makes the bypass sound fluffy! I never had this separation!
More details, crazy separation, more depth, more width, how is that possible?? 
It's the combo of width when drivers were in doors, with heigth from drivers on dash, plus depth from L7. Alsmot feels Like L7 is ON, but there's nothing behind.
And everything is damn' stable
Had to go for a drive, it is so cool. 

All stuff over let's say 200hz is awesome (sub and bass are less good than bypassed, but it's the quick job I hope).
I can't imagine what the result will be, once I'll have clean measurements, dedicated targets, EQ and power!


Edit:


----------



## Hanatsu

Nice 


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Alextaastrup

Good job! Glad for you.


----------



## Elgrosso

First: Thanks for all you help guys! 

This morning I tried mp1,
It is definitely good, I wasn't drunk :laugh:
mp1 is better than last time, sure a bit laid back, soft, but the low end is ok.

*About the improvements, what I can add:
*- Before (ms8 only) the separation was already good, I could spot instruments in different places but only with maybe 3 inches precision.
They were more like in a cloud of this size. But I didn't know it could be better
- Now I think it's more about 1 inch precision. It's impressive.
What is the cause? Just a better match of L&R EQ?
- Details, I need to listen more again with the bypass knob.
But yeah I believe I hear some new stuff.

*Still some issues:
*Sub does not perfectly blend.
I had some strong distortion on the midranges on few tracks.
While they are crossed at 800Hz, and at average volume not especially loud (85dba).
Tweets seems ok, but maybe I'll use test tones to find where.
- I know the measures were not optimum
- So the calculations are still largely influenced by the sub
> with 50ms window, many +6db boost to match the target curve.
> with 100ms, it can go to +10db!
And I didn't find an effective way to change the point 0 for EQ.
I didn't measure AFTER yet, so I don't know what it REALLY changed.

But could it be too much boost?
*Do I need more power then?
*Now it's:
GMD1004 bridged for midbass: 90w
A900 for mids and tweet: 50w
(I could put 300w to each midbass, 100 to each mids and 45 or 90 to tweeters)

Maybe too early since I still have to:
- optimize the pillars, they still squeak sometime
- change tweeter angles
- check tweeters wiring, mids is new
- remeasure and deal with the sub
- EQ target etc etc


----------



## Hanatsu

Proper L/R EQ and time coherency (phase corrections) combined will give you focus in the stage 

I'd just put ignore in APL on curve below 160Hz until you resolve the interference. Tune the sub with RoomEQ's autoEQ function, export the filter data to c1 and use as correction in the apl workshop. Single point measurement is ok.

I think there's some unknown issue when you measure sub. My sub/mid integration is awesome with the APL


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Proper L/R EQ and time coherency (phase corrections) combined will give you focus in the stage


I finally know what it means now 




Hanatsu said:


> I'd just put ignore in APL on curve below 160Hz until you resolve the interference. Tune the sub with RoomEQ's autoEQ function, export the filter data to c1 and use as correction in the apl workshop. Single point measurement is ok.
> 
> I think there's some unknown issue when you measure sub. My sub/mid integration is awesome with the APL


OK, I've sent some questions to Raymonds but I'll do that in the mean time!


----------



## Elgrosso

Elgrosso said:


> But could it be too much boost?
> *Do I need more power then?
> *Now it's:
> GMD1004 bridged for midbass: 90w
> A900 for mids and tweet: 50w
> (I could put 300w to each midbass, 100 to each mids and 45 or 90 to tweeters)


Any comments on this? 
On the graph, not measured: I rechecked, the right mid could see +7db around 2K, both woofers could see +6/7db too.
The left mid has a boost of +3db around 1k, it's the one I heard so far.

How can I adjust the whole thing?
Should I:
- lower all gains
- increase ms8 levels before APL measurements
- lower everything with C1


----------



## Alextaastrup

I have not got a clear picture of application of the mic calibration file - this point is very critical. For example - my mic Behringer EC8000 showed up til 6 dB error at higher frequencies. Before calibration all the tests made with Workshop and APL were not satisfactory at all. Thanks to Raimonds, we found the sourse of error. And it was my turn to cry Yeah!!!

Concerning mp1 - it is actually up to you to decide what fits best for your ears. I would just share my experience. I still have some different presets - but I use only mp1, especially when driving due to the noise from engine and tars. Other presets - only for visitors - to show possibilities of APL technology. To tell the truth - not all my visitors like the sound of mp1, but I trust my brain and ears in a long run.

Problems with IR - I've got someting similar problems some time ago. It was simply bad connection between the mic and external soundcard. Plus too much output level from it. I am wondering that you had this problem only on the left channel. How many tests did you make? Have you made averaging afterwords?

Regarding your concern regarding Watts (power) - the difference between the measured signal and noise level should exceed 15-20dB, and this is enough for Workshop to create correct FIR-filter. 

Number of measured points - I used to make 120-160 per one test. This will secure a very good repeatibility. 

Apart from the Hanatsu's present install, my sub is not connected to the APL. That is why 100 ms window was just fine, covering all the necessary info.

Regarding time coherency you might use TDA software.

APL technology can be seen today at the Prolight & Sound Frankfurt Musikmesse 2016. - hall 3.1 (stand J81), Concert Sound Arena. Just for your information.


----------



## Hanatsu

I like the mp1 too but it actually sound better in my Passat than my Mercedes for some reason. Bass was too much in the Merc.

I will actually not connect my sub to APL either. I will use 2way Adv software to my MiniDSP and bypass the sub channel on apl. For more than more reason. I'll update the thread later this week.


----------



## Elgrosso

Alextaastrup said:


> I have not got a clear picture of application of the mic calibration file - this point is very critical. For example - my mic Behringer EC8000 showed up til 6 dB error at higher frequencies. Before calibration all the tests made with Workshop and APL were not satisfactory at all. Thanks to Raimonds, we found the sourse of error. And it was my turn to cry YEAh!!!


I use two USB mic, umik1 with calibration file, one from minidsp and one from crossspectrum.
They both measure very identical, here's the last one:



It is still a big slope over 10Khz, so I need to import it in Workshop.
But it didn't accept the txt file, format seems different.
I think I'll have to do like Hanatsu did for the JBL target.





> Concerning mp1 - it is actually up to you to decide what fits best for your ears. I would just share my experience. I still have some different presets - but I use only mp1, especially when driving due to the noise from engine and tars. Other presets - only for visitors - to show possibilities of APL technology. To tell the truth - not all my visitors like the sound of mp1, but I trust my brain and ears in a long run.


Yes once I'll install the knob I'll have everything to decide.
After all the dip in mp1 is not so huge, and I like the flat on very highs, compared to the jbl




> Problems with IR - I've got someting similar problems some time ago. It was simply bad connection between the mic and external soundcard. Plus too much output level from it. I am wondering that you had this problem only on the left channel. How many tests did you make? Have you made averaging afterwords?


Maybe 50 tests before I could get two clean enough (no high interferences). And no averaging, but now I'll think about it.
I don't have an external soundcard, it is plugged directly on the mac.
But I didn't check my cable, and only used one, I can test another one later.

For the volume of the sweeps, I tried low and high, like 50db up to 80/85db maybe (I didn;t measure).
The only gain I can play with is the Mac volume output setting, and the ms8 volume control.

But it was not only on the left.
After all tests I've made, they appeared very randomly.
But still 90% of the time.

Also my car battery was not full. Maybe it had an effect on the ms8/amps.

I'm looking at XLR mic right now, because I have an Apogee ONE that I could try too.





> Regarding your concern regarding Watts (power) - the difference between the measured signal and noise level should exceed 15-20dB, and this is enough for Workshop to create correct FIR-filter.


And it's clearly only over 200Hz that I get these safe levels.
But for the power I was talking about the gap between measure and the target.





> Number of measured points - I use to make 120-160 per one test. This will secure a very good repeatibility.


Ok, 
If I take my time I get 250 points.
About this points, the way we paint must have an impact on the mic calibration.
I use 90 degree file usually, but when I paint I have to change its angle many times just for practical reasons.





> Apart from the Hanatsu's present install, my sub is not connected to the APL. That is why 100 ms window was just fine, covering all the necessary info.
> Regarding time coherency you might use TDA software.


Right I didn't open this guy since last week.
If I'm not wrong, the demo version is only used to read the graph, then adjust your TA on dsp accordingly?
If it's the case, then I won't be able to use it since ms8 does not accept manual TA.

Thx!


----------



## Hanatsu

Elgrosso said:


> It is still a big slope over 10Khz, so I need to import it in Workshop.
> But it didn't accept the txt file, format seems different.
> I think I'll have to do like Hanatsu did for the JBL target.


You need to use a "tab" as spacing, not ordinary "space". APL will interpolate it when you import it, set to 48kHz.


----------



## Hanatsu

Btw, did you read the manual about the directionality of drivers and that you may need to compensate for it? That may be a huge factor in tonality.



> 6.
> Directivity of loudspeaker
> There is a problem of APL correction application on loudspeakers with particularly
> strong directivity. Those problems are notable in HF range and earlier it was advised
> to correct this by usage of parametric EQ but there is also a solution based on
> measurement.
> Loudspeaker has directivity properties in all frequencies, when the size of its emitting
> surface becomes commensurate with wave length. It is fair for all concert equipment
> and especially line arrays as well as for “home” loudspeaker with, for example 6,5”
> cone, showed directivity right away in MF and HF as well.
> And so, actions:
> 1.
> Measure PFR (Power Frequency Response, green curve in APL Workshop
> graphs, *_PR.dat file) of a loudspeaker. If loudspeaker surrounding is
> “strange” (hard to define reflecting surfaces), place it in a middle of room on
> the floor, and measure it at minimal distance commensurate to its size. For
> concert hall, measure in minimal admissible distance, but of course leaving
> loudspeaker at his working placement.
> 
> 
> 2.
> Place loudspeaker at its place (home situation) and carry out another
> subordinate measurement which is fundamentally different from the
> “classical” PFR measurement – “paint” small 15x15...20x20cm (~25 points)
> square exactly on axis of loudspeaker in a place which could match with our
> chair in front of loudspeaker or audience seats in concert hall.
> 3.
> In this Subordinate measurement we should separate (allocate) directivity
> effects from the overall PFR curve. For that you should subtract earlier
> acquired PFR from this Subordinate curve like using correction. You must set
> early measured PFR curve (*_PR.dat file) as correction for this currant,
> Subordinate measurement and recalculate it by pressing “Calculate” button
> (using *_PR.DAT PFR measurement file). Acquired curve shows just
> directivity. LF part of it is usually highly disturbed by wave interference and
> therefore you must use LF part with care. Usually it can’t be used lower than 1
> kHz as it is, but higher than 1 kHz, with 1 octave smoothing turned on. You
> can use this curve to introduce compensation of directivity by adding this
> curve to original PFR such way – 1) set “ignore curve” to 1 kHz, for example,
> and “low frequency limiter” to 0 dB (that sets curve to 0 from LF to 1kHz), set
> “smoothing” to 1 okt., press “Calculate”. Now you have edited directivity
> curve. 2) go to first (initial) PFR measurement (select it) in measurement tree,
> set check box in lowest place in “Compensations, corrections, targets”, brows
> for *_PRS.dat file of previous recalculation, press “v” button to see is your
> selection right, check the check box “Inv”, press “Calculate”. APL Workshop
> software will sum two curves – initial PFR curve and directivity curve. Now
> you have curve that represents PFR of loudspeaker with directivity
> compensated.
> Or you may evaluate that “raw” directivity curve “by eye” and use appropriate
> parametric EQ.
> Both actions can be combined in pursuit of an ideal result.


----------



## Elgrosso

Just another thing, I'm now using for my measurements:
*Mac > jack to rca > *analog in APL > ms8 > amp

But when I listen to music (it happens sometime ):
*iphone > lightning to usb > 12v DAC > *analog in APL > ms8 > amp

So I'm not really measuring the whole system.
Maybe differences are minor, but I will soon remove the DAC and use an aiport express, to go digit in to APL directly (thanks Babs )


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> You need to use a "tab" as spacing, not ordinary "space". APL will interpolate it when you import it, set to 48kHz.


Yeah! cool thx


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Btw, did you read the manual about the directionality of drivers and that you may need to compensate for it? That may be a huge factor in tonality.


Yep, but didn't pay much attention, I didn't consider my setup as very directional.
Isn't this for very narrow home speakers, like full range etc?


----------



## Hanatsu

Elgrosso said:


> Yep, but didn't pay much attention, I didn't consider my setup as very directional.


The high frequencies always are though... I had to do it in my setup.


----------



## Elgrosso

I see, ok well, another step!


----------



## Elgrosso

Humm... after re-reading the chapter, I think I'll keep this for later! 
What would be "the commensurate size" for drivers on dash?
And "put it in the middle of the room"… I could open the doors? 
I may just start with EQ, or, avoiding going to close and on axis of the drivers during the PFR sweeps (physical compensation)


----------



## Alextaastrup

Elgrosso said:


> Humm... after re-reading the chapter, I think I'll keep this for later!
> What would be "the commensurate size" for drivers on dash?
> And "put it in the middle of the room"… I could open the doors?
> I may just start with EQ, or, avoiding going to close and on axis of the drivers during the PFR sweeps (physical compensation)


In the middle of the room - was written definetely for home aplications.
You should not open the doors during the test. Just paint a small square 20 x 20 cm close to the listening position. Difference between "direct" and "total" should be used as an additional correction for FIR filters above 1kHz 

I have used this method in two setups. First - 2 ways (TW's installed in the front door triangles, directed almost back). This means a significant reflection portion for interferation. Final result of such a correction was huge. I liked that sound comming from almost everywhere, but missing the central point. Effect was so big that I had to reduce it by appr. 40% (simply in Excel) and save again as a txt-file as a correction. 

The second time (3-way, TW and mid in dash tilted with 15 degr to the driver's head) - effect is minimal. And this is despite the fact that both corrections look like each other. I have been consulted by Raimonds and he told me that it is normal as you are close to the perfect install  Joke! But this correction has different impact depending on the speakers location and angles, as I understood for now. But I will check my measurements and presets once more. it is easy to make an error...


----------



## Hanatsu

In the install where I got my 1" TWeet waveguides onaxis I got very bad power response above 7kHz. Needed to make this correction because APL brought up the highs way too much and that messed with tonal balance.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Alextaastrup said:


> In the middle of the room - was written definetely for home aplications.
> You should not open the doors during the test. Just paint a small square 20 x 20 cm close to the listening position. Difference between "direct" and "total" should be used as an additional correction for FIR filters above 1kHz


Haha sure I was kidding. ok small square at listening position




Alextaastrup said:


> I have used this method in two setups. First - 2 ways (TW's installed in the front door triangles, directed almost back). This means a significant reflection portion for interferation. Final result of such a correction was huge. I liked that sound comming from almost everywhere, but missing the central point. Effect was so big that I had to reduce it by appr. 40% (simply in Excel) and save again as a txt-file as a correction.


Interesting,
I would have bet that since the TW were really off axis, any "on axis" compensation would have low effect.
But wait… the correction measurement were made at the listening point? (and not in front of the TW)
So in fact it actually increased the APL effect! That's why you had to use only 60% of it?

(I'm still trying to wrap my brain around the fundamental concept of the APL)




Alextaastrup said:


> The second time (3-way, TW and mid in dash tilted with 15 degr to the driver's head) - effect is minimal. And this is despite the fact that both corrections look like each other. I have been consulted by Raimonds and he told me that it is normal as you are close to the perfect install Joke! But this correction has different impact depending on the speakers location and angles, as I understood for now. But I will check my measurements and presets once more. it is easy to make an error...


Ok I'll see that on time. Not there yet.

Yesterday I tried another set of measurements.
New cal with ms8, I wanted to try:
- different TA (only by changing the head angles during auto TA)
- higher gain everywhere, and lower volume on ms8
- new EQ on ms8 > new Workshop measures etc.

This time I had almost no interferences! 
But left IR is not as good.
Any way I loaded some new mp1, the sub is better now, not perfect but a better blend.
I also have less distortion, or rather less tracks with distortion.
(there is something about my gain chain)
> Only thing is, the TA is not as good, the left part of the stage is a bit compressed, I'll have to restart.
Is it the messy left IR? my new ms8 TA? hard to say.

I wonder if I should just remove the ms8 and use the Cdsp now.
I mean I'm already half into the dark side of manual tuning, so why not crossing the line completely...

[Note for ms8 users, something I noticed (in my car):
best TA/EQ results happens when I look at the midranges (or TW in 2 way) and not the mirrors during sweeps. So either doors or dash etc]

I also received a long helpful email from Raymonds that I need to digest before next steps.




Hanatsu said:


> In the install where I got my 1" TWeet waveguides onaxis I got very bad power response above 7kHz. Needed to make this correction because APL brought up the highs way too much and that messed with tonal balance.


Any pics of these waveguides? 
I should try on my LSR monitors w/ waveguides, just to check what APL does (since they're already flat).


----------



## Hanatsu

Here's my midrange / tweeters


----------



## Elgrosso

Sweet! Very smooth pods.

It wasn't too disturbing to have this in front? Not for visibility but for psychoacoustic?
Another reason why, before, I didn't favor speaker on dash, I couldn't stop thinking about them.
But now with APL they're easier to forget, the whole dash itself became the source in a way.


----------



## Babs

Hanatsu said:


> Here's my midrange / tweeters


Cool! Little apples of sonic happiness.


----------



## Hanatsu

Elgrosso said:


> Sweet! Very smooth pods.
> 
> It wasn't too disturbing to have this in front? Not for visibility but for psychoacoustic?
> Another reason why, before, I didn't favor speaker on dash, I couldn't stop thinking about them.
> But now with APL they're easier to forget, the whole dash itself became the source in a way.


Stage wise they are invisbible xD


----------



## Hanatsu

Babs said:


> Cool! Little apples of sonic happiness.


lol, that sounded funny for some reason


----------



## Alextaastrup

Mine are not so good at look at. My intention was to fit them to the cabin design as much as possible (shape, surface, colour, etc.). 

The idea was to make almost stock design with less reflections from windows and less obstacle while driving.

I actually like the Bose's conceptual approach: one should listen to loudspeakers, not just to look at them.

I still have some problems changing the size of my uploaded pictures (even using photobucket and after some reading of instructions). So sorry...


----------



## Elgrosso

Alextaastrup said:


> Mine are not so good at look at. My intention was to fit them to the cabin design as much as possible (shape, surface, colour, etc.).
> 
> The idea was to make almost stock design with less reflections from windows and less obstacle while driving.
> 
> I actually like the Bose's conceptual approach: one should listen to loudspeakers, not just to look at them.
> 
> I still have some problems changing the size of my uploaded pictures (even using photobucket and after some reading of instructions). So sorry...
> 
> View attachment 127946


Actually I like them, I like this approach too. If I could hide mine I'll do it.
For a while I kept some tweeters and mids in doors with the real playing drivers were on dash. It was funny how the brain kept some reflex (and I don't talk about my friends who didn;t know )

Btw, just tried the 7 drums track, for sure I'm sober now, right on!
It could be optimized probably, but it is already so much better than before:


----------



## LBaudio

Lookin good


----------



## SkizeR

I'd ignore the 7 drum track. Even in a proper home setup, it doesn't space out evenly across the stage

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

SkizeR said:


> I'd ignore the 7 drum track. Even in a proper home setup, it doesn't space out evenly across the stage
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


Really? (never tried at home though)
Well at least it's not as compressed on both sides, that's enjoyable!


----------



## Babs

Hanatsu's positions track is better I think. 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwilEarPfKvuVVBTbnZKZ1NlUm8


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

Cool, thx Babs!

haha it's impressive on headset.
"Far" should be in front or behind? (on headset it's behind, well, kind of...)


----------



## Elgrosso

Something else I wonder about, the target EQ level.
To reach the actual target the dsp cuts and boosts sometime about 10db.
Last week I didn't change it, yesterday I've made the exact same curves but with a general -6 and -10db to test.

Result > Much less distortion on my mids

Sure I have to compensate +6/10db at the source with ms8 volume to get the same output. But why less distortion?

I thought any boost or cut, at the beginning, in the middle, or at the end of the chain had the same result. I don't get it...


----------



## Hanatsu

If APL boosts output it may clip inputs of ms8?


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Ooh I see, 
So the 2.5V output of the APL is just an average, not the max?

(I really need to read more about the gain chain)


----------



## Hanatsu

Where does it say 2,5V in the spec? Can't find it...


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Where does it say 2,5V in the spec? Can't find it...
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Raymonds told me.
"APL1 accepts 2.5V (+10dBu) on analog inputs and max output level is same."


----------



## Elgrosso

Elgrosso said:


> Ooh I see,
> So the 2.5V output of the APL is just an average, not the max?
> 
> (I really need to read more about the gain chain)


Like this cool video: Video: Audio Signal Chain: 5-minute Gain Structure Part 1

Ok My chain is:

- iphone to istreamer, digital (with still volume adjustment)
- istreamer to APL, 2.25v. 
(But by experience I always had to lower the output here, minus 10% to avoid distortion when played with ms8 only. And that's strange because ms8 should accept 2.8v.)
- APL to ms8: cut/boost +/-10db, so what's out? 
- ms8 to amps, few cuts only on EQ, should be 1in/1out worst case no?
- amps to spk, 1 amp has fixed gain (midbass), other one is adjustable. So far it is near the 2/2.5v setting (normal position on pioneer amp)

So first, what these voltage numbers refer to, avg or peak?


----------



## thehatedguy

I am really curious as to how the APL would handle your setup but with a center channel added.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> I am really curious as to how the APL would handle your setup but with a center channel added.


I guess best would be two units (or the apl3) so the center channel has its own correction.
Must be a mess if any "sides" correction is shared with another channel.
Two units could do fronts/sub/center very well!


----------



## Hanatsu

*Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*

It would have required a separate channel I guess. Maybe measure it with workshop and make as good corrections as possible with parametric EQ in your DSP.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Since it might take probably few weeks or more to sell my other car,
and that I have hard time to find another car that I like,
I'll continue to fiddle with this one.

But no more listening for a while, and no more APL measurements.
I first removed everything because of the rain, some leaky doors that I have to fix.
In the mean time I might try to reinforce again the woofers rings.

And change of sub, 
I don't think I need that much output with the ms-basspro sq, even if it's probably good to have a lot for headroom for EQ.
I just need low, but not that loud.
Also I want my rear seats back.
So I'll try to replace it by re-using the two original enclosures, on each sides of rear seats:



















I'd say about 4/5 liters each, for 6" driver, I measured them already once but I lost the notes.
They're butchered because they've seen a lot of different drivers.
But the only "sub" I tried here were the exodus anarchy long ago, it worked ok, but didn't go very low.
I hope the TB will be a better fit, from what I've seen online they're good for small enclosure.


Tang Band W6-1139SIF 6-1/2" Paper Cone Subwoofer Speaker











There were few other drivers interesting, 6x9", 5" or 8", or two 4"?, but this one is the cheapest for a start.
The box has a complex shape to give room for the soft top to come down, so will be hard to modify.
If they're too small I could try an external mount of the drivers, could be fun.
And If sealed does not work at all I could try ported, finding some space around it to put a long external pipe.
Might be an interesting project.

I don't have a lot of experience with box calculator, usually I just use them to find the right volume and port dia/length.
But I have no idea what to do about Xmax & maximum power to use (they'll see either 150 or 300W).
What do you think? (red is random here)





New sub means new amps (the box was powered), so just trying some layouts in the back: 
With or without ms8 I'm still not sure, so with or without the micro amp for rear fill.
I was searching for a solution to use both dsp in parallel, but didn't find anything easy, didn't find any 8rca switch box.
And it's probably a bit silly, it's time to go full manual






The cool thing with ms8, it's always easy to have a good sound even while working on it, like:
removed the pillars cause you're working on them? quick cal in you're back to a great 2 way for the week.


----------



## Hanatsu

You bought a C-DSP too?


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> You bought a C-DSP too?


Bought it first day out, just never used it


----------



## Hanatsu

Elgrosso said:


> Bought it first day out, just never used it


Ah I see. Will it replace the ms8 then?

I think the remote is pretty nice. I plan to make a pure SQ preset, one pure SPL preset, one balanced and one with a peak at 50-60Hz for more kick in some rock songs.

Then the APL switch got 15 presets too... lol too much.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Ah I see. Will it replace the ms8 then?


Yep,
I first thought to use both in //
APL could switch the source (digit out to Cdsp, analog out to ms8)
But how to switch the rca out to the amps? (I don't think an Y splitter would work here, in the "other" way, 2 rca > 1 to amp)

Could have been cool to quickly get a good feeling on a new speaker placement, save a lot of time before going onto APL&C-dsp.
I'll have to modify my pillars, maybe some other midranges, it would have helped.




Hanatsu said:


> I think the remote is pretty nice. I plan to make a pure SQ preset, one pure SPL preset, one balanced and one with a peak at 50-60Hz for more kick in some rock songs.
> 
> Then the APL switch got 15 presets too... lol too much.


4x15 then 
Yes it's a good remote, and finally I'll have a knob in front!
I always missed this.

Also I have to find a good way to send the digital signal to APL.
Wireless: I bought Babs hacked airport express, so I'll try airplay again
Wire: also have a icon ido that could send coaxial


----------



## Babs

I'd say he's ready to graduate to the real-deal, do-it-yourself, tune-able DSP's, wouldn't you Hanatsu? hehe.  

Looking good there.. I like those simple Pioneer amps.. Kinda wish they had stuck with those.


----------



## Elgrosso

Babs said:


> I'd say he's ready to graduate to the real-deal, do-it-yourself, tune-able DSP's, wouldn't you Hanatsu? hehe.


Haha, the dark side 
I think I was at a point where I needed more control.
I'll need help for TA for sure (just saved all old tutorials here).
But the rest should be ok.




Babs said:


> Looking good there.. I like those simple Pioneer amps.. Kinda wish they had stuck with those.


Yes I really like them. Neat, small, clean, simple.
I originally plan to use 7 or 8 (bought them slowly when I saw good price).
But the a900 convinced me so I'll keep it for mids/tweets


----------



## Babs

Elgrosso said:


> Haha, the dark side
> I'll need help for TA for sure (just saved all old tutorials here).


Nah man.. You got this! 
Tape measure, crossover ability, mute ability, mono pink noise and two ears.
Do the EQ magic to make left = right first.


----------



## Hanatsu

Heh, neat idea to use apl as input swifter. I might get something digital wireless too. What's hacked about that unit? 


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Babs said:


> Nah man.. You got this!
> Tape measure, crossover ability, mute ability, mono pink noise and two ears.
> Do the EQ magic to make left = right first.


I really need to re-read a lot 




Hanatsu said:


> Heh, neat idea to use apl as input swifter. I might get something digital wireless too. What's hacked about that unit?


Thought of that when Raymonds said the digital signal takes over.
For the AE, it's a power change to usb 5v:
How to Add AirPlay to Your Car for High Quality, Wireless Audio


----------



## Elgrosso

Guys, any idea of what software to use for the box?
I tried winisd demo but didn't find anything related to max power/excursion.


----------



## Hanatsu

WinISD is easy to use. They got a full version, dl it from their facebook page. It shows you max spl and excursion


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Alextaastrup

I use to apply the Bassbox Pro. Also very easy and logical software with a wide and updated database for different models and manufacturers. In my case the technical support of the Peerless Company has confirmed my major calculations by using their own (more profy) soft. It resulted in exactly the same box volume (seal enclosure) fora single 10' sub.

BassBox Pro update


----------



## Alextaastrup

It might be Little bit off-topic, but seems rather interesting: advanced crossover and EQ with FIR filters:

https://dephonica.com/

•Built-in WDM driver for stream input from common audio and video players, browsers, navigation and other software
•Built-in ASIO Sink driver for stream input from audio players with ASIO support
•Low latency: about 50 msec when using IIR filters and crossover output stream into ASIO device
•Different input sample formats: 16-bit integer, 24-bit integer and 32-bit floating point
•Two input channels and up to 8 output channels
•Output to DirectSound, ASIO and Kernel Streaming audio devices
•Processing completely in 64 bit floating point precision
•No surplus resampling - filters created on-fly for every samplerate of source stream
•Built-in crossover`s frequency response analyzer with overview amplitude graph, single channel graphs (amplitude response, phase response, group delay for each channel) and response addition graph
•Filtering by FIR filters, IIR filters or by IIR filters with automatically designed phase correction FIR filter
•Can create FIR phase correction (all pass) filter for external hardware crossover
•Two FIR convolvers available: FFT convolver with Overlap-Add algorithm and linear convolver (Straight FIR) without usage of FFT
•You can use any of two convolvers with one or more IIR filters in each processing channel
•Up to 128 000 taps per channel with FFT FIR convolver
•IIR filters and frequency response envelopes available: Linkwitz-Riley, Butterworth, Chebyshev
•Parametric synthesis of amplitude and phase responses for filter types: Low Pass, High Pass, Band Pass, Band Stop, Low Shelf, High Shelf
•Band pass and Band stop filter responses can be optionally defined via lower and higher cutoff frequencies or by a definition of central frequency and bandwidth
•Amplitude and phase equalizers for arbitrary amplitude and phase response correction with data import features (from text file or from impulse response in WAV format)
•Any combination of FIR and IIR filters in each processing channel
•Full-featured pre-processing channel for input stream with its own filter set
•Automatic biasing feature for gain response in separate channels or in a group of channels
•Input and output gain adjustment in each channel
•Adjustable delay in each channel with optional sub-sample resolution.

Purchase full version of dePhonica version3 crossover

Price: 69.95€


----------



## Elgrosso

Thanks! I tried both, appears I had an old version of winisd.
Basspro speaker list is very useful (mine was in the list).
I kept using winisd for now, but I like these softwares, this is cool!

So the boxes make 5L, slightly less than the woofers would ask (6L.)
So I tried different config, sealed, ported, isobaric sealed and ported (isovent?)

I like the idea of isobaric ported, could be fun to build, and see in the rear 
It's the one that gives the most extension.
Only problem is… the length of the port: 90cm!
I probably won't find this volume around the box.
But maybe near the floor, front of the rear seats.
Does this tube need to have a constant diameter? can it be an average?

Velocity and excursion seems ok.

But for the maximum spl and power graph, I'm not sure to read them right.



Well I'll start with only 1 driver per box, sealed, and see.


----------



## Elgrosso

Rhaaa worked almost two afternoons and not finished, this wiring stuff takes time!
I tried to make it a bit better this time.
First wanted to hide all wires the maximum, but I couldn't fit everything behind the panel on the right side, so had to keep half outside.
I kept room for the 1 or 2 ms8 on left if I want it/them back.
+ room for more d800 if I want rear fill.



A900 for mids & tweeters
1xd800 bridged per woofer
1xd800 non bridged for now per sub

So had to put the two blocks behind the panel, I hope I won't have trouble with the fuses because this panel is now heavy, I had to reinforce it with wood.
Might not be easy once in the trunk, but so far I've never blown one.

I wanted something to try some technique I've seen here, but I messed up on the power ones.
At least now I know how to do it, cut one at a time, crimp one side, install, cut the other side etc for a clean look (even if totally non visible )

Also had to add a little block for both dsps since I couldn't find midi fuse in 10A (do they exist?).
Still have 1 free power source on the big one, if I need more I'll need to modify the little thing.
I got rid of my "screw" ground block, and re-used the reliable BM fuse block, just without fuses.

So now just have to wire both dsp and ready to go!



And I installed the two TB w6:




I won't be able to try isobaric since I had to add a 1 inch spacer to fit the speaker, and one another one on top now would touch the backseat.
But I thought about maybe using 2 old monitor enclosures I have, they both fit in the passenger foot area.
4x6" better than 2x6"! So they're on their way 

Last thing, I also ordered 2 *Aurum Cantus AC-180F1d*
On specs they look awesome, high QTS, high Vas, dvc, high sensitivity (that's about the only thing I can read ).
I read on few forums that AC might present very optimistic graph but, look at the response from 50 to 80hz!
I received one from ebay but it was not the right model, anyway I tried to mount it to see if it fits.
7" will need some work for sure, the door accepts it, but not the door panel.
So I was thinking about inverted mount... If kept low enough, why not?


----------



## Hanatsu

Wiring like a pro 


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> Wiring like a pro
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Sloooowly getting better. 

What do you think of this guy: Aurum cantus

I just want to try, for the heck:
- since I'm now in 3 way and don't need super high response
- and to compensate the weaker low end with smaller subs
They're probably not as good as the gti for distortions, and it might be harder on the doors.
I know my doors are still too soft, the inner skins have a weak point near the top of the drivers mount, I can push/pull this area by hand few mm easily.



And can't find a way to rigidify this, without going crazy.
(I don't want to re-use my enclosures, too much mess on the door panels).

So, what about inverted mount:
The polar pattern, even with the motor in front, should be ok up to 500hz no?
Maybe it could help with the center console cancellation?


----------



## subwoofery

Elgrosso said:


> Sloooowly getting better.
> 
> What do you think of this guy: Aurum cantus
> 
> I just want to try, for the heck:
> - since I'm now in 3 way and don't need super high response
> - and to compensate the weaker low end with smaller subs
> They're probably not as good as the gti for distortions, and it might be harder on the doors.
> I know my doors are still too soft, the inner skins have a weak point near the top of the drivers mount, I can push/pull this area by hand few mm easily.
> And can't find a way to rigidify this, without going crazy.
> (I don't want to re-use my enclosures, too much mess on the door panels).
> 
> So, what about inverted mount:
> The polar pattern, even with the motor in front, should be ok up to 500hz no?
> Maybe it could help with the center console cancellation?


The AC is a deep driver. 

Kelvin


----------



## Elgrosso

subwoofery said:


> The AC is a deep driver.
> 
> Kelvin


Yes it is, about 1/2" more than the gti.
It would fit inside with a 1" spacer, but then it's too large for the panel.
Inverted, since it's only a 4 "thin" legs frame, I think I can fit it through the panel holes. I'll try and post pictures.
(SLk with bose system used inverted midbass, maybe lower crossed that what I plan though).




How did you like them?


----------



## thehatedguy

I once heard a DLS sponsored car from Thailand that had "clam shell" iso-mounted midbasses in each door. It sounded good.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> I once heard a DLS sponsored car from Thailand that had "clam shell" iso-mounted midbasses in each door. It sounded good.


Wow, IB isobaric? that sounds cool.


----------



## thehatedguy

I don't recall if they were IB or sealed. But it was the first and only time that I've seen iso midbasses.

Kelvin might know where to find pictures- 5 series BMW with custom body kit and paint...plexi hole in the hood. A lot of what I remembered being metal work on the car too.


----------



## thehatedguy

DLS - DLS Suriya

Can't see the midbases though...and probably changed when it got over here and stayed for a while.


----------



## Hanatsu

Damn I just saw what you did with the stripes on the cables... real clever. Good one!


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> DLS - DLS Suriya
> 
> Can't see the midbases though...and probably changed when it got over here and stayed for a while.


Crazy install, so you live around?
I tried a quick search online but nothing came out




Hanatsu said:


> Damn I just saw what you did with the stripes on the cables... real clever. Good one!


Yep found here, it holds them well!


----------



## thehatedguy

I heard it once at a show (the IASCA 3x at NOPI Nationals) back around 06 or so (I think). I may have real pictures of it...not the digital kind.


----------



## Elgrosso

That would be great.
I didn't see a lot of inverted midbass online, few here talked about it, + some SLK install but that's about it.


----------



## subwoofery

thehatedguy said:


> I don't recall if they were IB or sealed. But it was the first and only time that I've seen iso midbasses.
> 
> Kelvin might know where to find pictures- 5 series BMW with custom body kit and paint...plexi hole in the hood. A lot of what I remembered being metal work on the car too.


Only pic I found of the midbass 









Found here: 
??????????IASCA2006????????????S-525i??????????(3)_CarCAV??????????????????? 

Kelvin


----------



## Elgrosso

Nice in the kick! My car getting old maybe I could think about this now... 
And here to confirm isobaric:


----------



## Elgrosso

Regular mount fits! It's really tight though, I slightly adjusted my window rail to save few mm + some foam between each layer (door/ring/ring/driver).
While waiting for the left one I will tighten it slowly till the foam doesn't move anymore.

I'll also have to be creative with the door panel, as how to seal it on top, maybe just a big foam ring. 
But good thing that I didn't realized with the other Aurum I used first, on this one the surround is inverted so it will play freely behind the panel! 

Also I'll try to fix/brace it on top, near the hole in the skin.


----------



## Elgrosso

While waiting for the left woofer from PE, I tried few things in the car.
First the amp rack finally in the trunk.
It is a mess with the speaker wiring, don't know how to fix that, maybe just a strip block?
Maybe I should cut them… but every time I cut something I regret it later.
They are very rigid, so I'm afraid to pack them too much.
Also finally installed the quick connector for the battery charger, after 2 yrs.

Still need to install the two remotes, dsp and apl.
+ another 3m usb cable, I have one now coming on the left side of the seat, perfect spot for the laptop. 
Plan is to have 3 kind of signals:
- phone, ipad or anything else to airport express by airplay, then optical to APL
- phone in dash to APL by coax (w/ icon ido in between)
- phone to istreamer to APL by analog (so I could try different dacs I have)
For all, APL to C-dsp by coax
After trying all this I'll probably keep just one.

For tuning at the beginning I'll feed the APL with an analog signal from my laptop.
Have to order a long toslink to send it directly the digital one.
I hope there's no compatibility issue with REW on mac.


----------



## Elgrosso

Then the kick idea.
My doors are not perfect, the inner skin is too flimsy, especially around the driver.
I believe it's the cause of some resonances, and sometime some rattles but very rare.
The sound is not bad at all, but I just want more, especially now that I know how it could be in enclosures. 
Of course I could heavily reinforce it, but for the same amount of work I could get an enclosure. And I want to keep my door panel stock, so why not the kick?



The footwell is deep, not super large, but it seems usable. 
I searched online to find what's behind the panel exactly: too much stuff for me to relocate, and it's not closed.






Then some placements of what I have:

660gti





Another spot that could work, not that far, not on the floor but on top of the rocker panel, near the door driver.



A box here would not be bad I guess: good width, good volume, no cutting.
I could probably find 6 liters here, but it might be disturbing when getting in the car.

560gti
I have a really nice memories of this driver, when they were high in doors around here.
It was the best dynamic I ever had I think, but it's based on memory…
I don't know if it's the size, or the driver parameters, but I miss that.
Even if now with the gb25 and the APL, everything else like soundstage, separation etc is waaaay better.



So maybe in a big ported box (for a 5") far in the corner?




It is really smaller than the 660, could almost fit on the dash 




But this one seems more reasonable 



Just for fun I tried it, pretty sure it will require too much volume.





Last the ZR800
It fits, might be hard to find the right volume, I calculated it I must have it somewhere.
Or it will need to be vented outside, not quite ready to cut here.
There are some gussets in this area, it seems structural.
Some small holes ok, but not big enough for AP probably (I need to read about this)





But of course this beast would give the best results.
Also, it would be good to build a big box here for later, I'd like to try horns one day.


----------



## Elgrosso

Also finished my little front subs.
Will try these soon, added to the side ones it makes 4 TB W6", should be enough. 
If I need to optimize delay I could add a minidsp 2x4 later.
It is really just a test, but they don't take too much space in the footwell.
Of course if I go kick I'll need something else.


----------



## Bluenote

Toys! What fun it must be!


----------



## Elgrosso

Bluenote said:


> Toys! What fun it must be!


It is! 
But I installed back the gti, waited too much I need music!
But the kick panels are outside, I'll study how to build something around


----------



## Elgrosso

First manual tuning! 
I was a bit afraid but finally it's not that hard.
Just the first step, I know I'll need much more.
But the result, if far from what I had before, for now is acceptable.
At least I can now listen.

So only the C-dsp, just levels, XO, REW auto-EQ, and finally TA.
Measurements were made at only one points, head center, 2 sweeps only.
I wanted to use Jazzi spreadsheet but I don't have the office suite for mac.

So no XO first, what a mess!



The right door does not appreciate the low end 



Classic XO that I used many times:
i know that now i can use different Xo point/slope per driver, but I'm just not sure it's the way to go first.



Hard to find a way to define levels here no?



So I just used autoEQ with a low target, and just little levels on tweeters and right woofer:



Then I did the TA by measuring distance, seems just ok for now.
Center and right side is good, left is compressed.
(I wanted to check on TDA but my demo version is expired)

Next steps, test different XO, measure 5/3-6/2 around the head, etc.
For the TA I'm not sure I can do it by ear… or it will take me a lot of time.
Then when I'll have something that looks and sounds ok I'll bring the APL in the loop.
Same for all the digit-in/dac/airplay tests etc, I'll try all these only with a clean base.

About the XO, it seems the left side is asking for different point/slope:
- for sub & woofer I have a big hole on left (always had, except with APL)
- between woofer & midrange the sum must be too high
I used BW 24db everywhere for now, will try LR, and maybe even steeper for the subs.

Good news about the little subs, they're doing a good job.



Surprisingly the sides are stronger than the front ones.
All are sealed, front in 6L, sides in 5L.
I'm not sure about how to check excursion/power handling etc in winisd.
Based on what I understand, they should accept up to 150w each.
I'll try a steeper subsonic to see how much I can boost the very low end.


----------



## Elgrosso

From the garden... I'm tuning 









(Teamviewer inside)


----------



## Babs

Consider playing with the low-pass on those two midbass drivers I recommend, so their roll-off's match. 

Looking pretty good.


----------



## Elgrosso

Babs said:


> Consider playing with the low-pass on those two midbass drivers I recommend, so their roll-off's match.
> 
> Looking pretty good.


I really try! 
Nothing I can do between 100-150Hz on the left woofer, levels, big EQ etc 
I'll check tonight with measurements from the right side to see if it's my install or the driver maybe, but it's probably a mode.
I always had this one, but with ms8 it was less present (with APL even less but I didn;t measure it independently to check for sure).

I tried to put the right woofer on similar curve, an let the subs fill the gap, but it wasn't really good or strong.
Only the rear subs since the front ones pull the stage to the right if played too high.



I tried this yesterday night (see the 95&110Hz deeps):
It's the only driver where the auto EQ didn't work, measured results were always way out, when all the others were a perfect copy of the predictions.
So I did this one manually, not sure of the result



Higher level for the auto EQ.
It is a bit higher around 80-100Hz, but still about -5db.
Didn't listen yet, might have some surprise.

-------------------------------------------------

I didn't listen yet 'cause I was measuring/tweaking from home with teamviewer 
- one laptop in the car, plugged to everything with mic near headrest.
- one laptop in home, controlling the other one by wifi

Basically a wifi dsp with the power of REW 
Super easy to measure/EQ/re-measure the change etc
It saves a lot of time and is much more comfortable and friendly. 
Really cool for basic stuff on low to mid frequencies since of course the mic is fixed at one point only.
I might miss some stuff by not hearing anything, but I can try higher levels while protecting my ears.
Perfect to manage REW auto EQ & minidsp, tried TDA but manipulating the 3d graph lags too much (Windows "on" mac1 "on" teamviewer on mac2...)






(I could even try these later anywhere with the car wifi w/ the aiport express )


----------



## Elgrosso

Call me idiot! I had a low shelf on the left input
Probably something I did months ago when I received the dsp, completely forgot and didn't check...
The left woofer looks a bit better now


----------



## Alextaastrup

Solidarity! You are not alone...


----------



## MantaOwner

Nice to see your efforts, especially on the front doors, it's a true source of inspiration. Your front door luckily has a solid metal inner 'panel' to build on, I for starters have this kind of door to work with in a Seat Ibiza (random pic from one Seat forum):











Tõnu


----------



## Elgrosso

Alextaastrup said:


> Solidarity! You are not alone...






MantaOwner said:


> Nice to see your efforts, especially on the front doors, it's a true source of inspiration. Your front door luckily has a solid metal inner 'panel' to build on, I for starters have this kind of door to work with in a Seat Ibiza (random pic from one Seat forum):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tõnu


Thanks for the good word!
As I don't get so many response I wasn't sure.
At least it helps me to keep track and organize my thoughts. 

For the doors, I think you might be better without the inner skin in fact.
I have one ok, but it's not rigid enough.
And I can hardly add more while keeping the door panel stock.

Here on your car you could re-create a complete new inner panel, super rigid based on fiberglass/metal/mdf/hdpe bits. Might even be easy to create an enclosure!

Well there is more potential, but need more work of course.


----------



## MantaOwner

Elgrosso said:


> ..
> Here on your car you could re-create a complete new inner panel, super rigid based on fiberglass/metal/mdf/hdpe bits. Might even be easy to create an enclosure! ..


I don't know how easy is it to see on that door picture but the window moving mechanism is all built into the plastic door card and those 2 rails that guide the window divide the space inside the door into 3 different areas and there is no way to make them as one. Challenge ahead.
But let's continue here with your installation .

Tõnu


----------



## Hanatsu

I see you have been busy 

For level adjusting I recommend using 1oct or 1/2oct smoothing. It's accurate if done after equalization.


----------



## Elgrosso

MantaOwner said:


> I don't know how easy is it to see on that door picture but the window moving mechanism is all built into the plastic door card and those 2 rails that guide the window divide the space inside the door into 3 different areas and there is no way to make them as one. Challenge ahead.
> But let's continue here with your installation .
> 
> Tõnu


Ho yeah I missed that.
Well there must be a way, maybe with some tubes in between chambers.
But you probably don't need 20L. anyway ?


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> I see you have been busy
> 
> For level adjusting I recommend using 1oct or 1/2oct smoothing. It's accurate if done after equalization.


So low? Ok I'll try
Last tunes are great, and I touched levels on only 3 drivers (without the filter on the input it's much simpler )
Preset 1 = 80-300-5000 with mp1 target (great fit here)
Preset 2 = 80-300-3600 with Andy's target 
And maybe +3db on both subs I don't remember, without eq on subs, they work really well.

Big impact! honestly better than before. Maybe the front sub?
The gb25 handles 300hz without problems.
Less noise on the system than with ms8
No distortion heard so far (I mean driver that cries)
Tonality not perfect, stage good.
A lot still to do, but it's really fun I enjoy it already.

This combo C-dsp/REW is a hit! So easy to use, and both on mac.
Soon I'll bring the apl in the loop.

Tonight maybe TDA to finetune TA (another thing I can do from my couch )


----------



## MantaOwner

Elgrosso said:


> Ho yeah I missed that.
> Well there must be a way, maybe with some tubes in between chambers.
> But you probably don't need 20L. anyway ?


Around 6-9L sealed enclosure is fine for a DLS IR6 mid.

Tõnu


----------



## Elgrosso

Woohoo I played with tda this morning, the idea was just to see the result more than really tweaking, but I couldn't resist...
I thought I would run out of delay on the C-dsp but finally it fits, after maybe 30min:








[/URL]

(30ms window here, excuse the messy screnshot it's teamviewer... )

Don't remember if it's left or right, but they're the same.
Pretty satisfied! 
Mixed with the new high pass of 300hz for the gb25, it is just the best sub integration I heard, period. Everything is on my dash, and super sharp bass drum!

But I'm sure it will get better.
- 1st I don't have a lot of output below 40hz 
Can't do a lot about that now (fitting some 10" behind maybe... )
- on some very specific bass notes the stage can still be steered to the right.
And my "weaker" left midbass doesn't help.
I'll try a lower or steeper LP for the front subs, should help.
- still need to finetune XO, EQ etc

Lot of fun again!


----------



## Hanatsu

That's a really good response! Even cleaner than mine in the upper midrange...


----------



## Elgrosso

Still a little something around 5k that I couldn't fix, +/- 1 step and it gets worse here.
Probably not audible but still...
Now I have to do the same on the amplitude!


----------



## Babs

Elgrosso said:


> Still a little something around 5k that I couldn't fix, +/- 1 step and it gets worse here.
> Probably not audible but still...
> Now I have to do the same on the amplitude!


That's a big reflection somewhere I bet.


----------



## Elgrosso

Maybe, but there must be something due to the xo too.


----------



## Elgrosso

2 days of tuning and I'm not done, I know I'm on the dark side of manual tuning now! Wth it's long...
Re-did everything with 8 sweeps per driver, full range when possible, then decided few xo, applied in cdsp, re-measured them.
Finally got a pc to play with jazzi's spreadsheet to test auto eq on different measured xo.
Played a lot with the target levels and the eq range, it has huge impact.

I have something ok I think
But really hard time with my woofers.
The "acoustic" XO are like offset by 100hz, have to use a target very low for the REW auto eq to get somehting clean.
I don't mind since I have power but it doesn't seem right.
And the final response measured is not as expected.

Final result was just ok to my ears. I think I messed up something with levels.
Something between pink noise and white noise, log or linear sweeps I always get confused and sometime I don't take enough notes.

But it is ok.
So at the end of the day I finally included the APL.
Maybe 20 min later, I had great sound 
Not perfect yet, but better.

Then I went back to TdA, messy! (Well still in 2ms window)
So after 1 hr I managed to get something close to the previous screenshot, but only for left.
I think I might run out of delay.
Especially due to the following guys:



URL=http://s1381.photobucket.com/user/grosso/media/IMG_8385_zpsbxnkvihe.jpg.html]







[/URL]

So, about the missing low end.
I trief these real cheap boxes I got on ebay, to fit the shallow xls.
One can go behind, and is easily removable if I want the top down.
1x10" + 2 or 4x6" was the plan.
But since I have two 10" I just tried them.

The result is not night and day compared to the 4x6"
Well certainly more output, but they don't sound better.
Not as tight, but maybe I just don't know what I'm doing 

Well the problem is that I need more eq power to optimize them low.
They handle less power than the 6" in their small boxes.
I don't need a lot of output, just want perfeclty flat.
4x6" were smoother, easier to "align", but if loud enough for me, below 40 they just played only the same "note" (call this distortion?).

So I'll continue to work on this, I think I might get a minidsp 2x4 just for that.
Four 6" optimized in eq and delay would be hard to beat in this car I think.


----------



## Justin Zazzi

Elgrosso said:


> Finally got a pc to play with jazzi's spreadsheet to test auto eq on different measured xo.
> Played a lot with the target levels and the eq range, it has huge impact.
> 
> I have something ok I think
> But really hard time with my woofers.
> The "acoustic" XO are like offset by 100hz, have to use a target very low for the REW auto eq to get somehting clean.
> I don't mind since I have power but it doesn't seem right.
> And the final response measured is not as expected.


I'm glad you found a computer so you can use the tool. I just found your post a few days ago wishing you could use it and I was about to offer to generate some house curves for you.

It sounds like tuning is not going as expected, would you like any help?


----------



## Elgrosso

Jazzi said:


> I'm glad you found a computer so you can use the tool. I just found your post a few days ago wishing you could use it and I was about to offer to generate some house curves for you.
> 
> It sounds like tuning is not going as expected, would you like any help?


That's very generous, I appreciate a lot! (this, and the spreadsheets themselves!)

Yes I picked up an old laptop at work, exported few targets for the 2 set of XOs I was used to (80-300-3600 or 5000).
But it was more to test, and now I really want excel on my own laptop.
I followed your thread last days when you talked about the mac version.
Worst case I'll install it on // desktop.

After your post I re-studied my original curves, I think I forced too much on re-using my known XO from ms8.
Well anyway it's not at the best.
I'll post pics later, but I will just re-start everything fresh.

Thx again jazzi


----------



## Elgrosso

I have a bunch, but let's not waste your time with messy ones, I'll redo everything.
But as an illustration of my thoughts, the woofers, full range:



The left one would really like a HP at 100Hz, when it will be harder for the right one (see the output at 50Hz?)


So I'll remake 8 or more sweeps per driver, while taking more time.
I'll probably make them all independently before averaging by hand.
This way I'll learn exactly which mic position has the biggest influence.


----------



## Justin Zazzi

The best way for me to help you is if you can make sweeps of each of your speakers with flat EQ settings and without crossovers engaged (except the tweeters, keep at least some crossover on those so you don't damage them) and with all levels set to +-0dB, unless you have already done level matching in which case please note the levels in the speaker sweep titles. Do all the sweeps in the same REW session and label them so I know which is which. Then send me the *.mdat file and the *.txt house curve files you want to use and I'll take a look.

As for mic positions and measurements, Hanatsu did a great job outlining his strategy here somewhere. I think it's in one of his sticky threads. If you can't find it, let me know and I'll go look too. Essentially you want multiple measurements very close to your listening position and average them together for each speaker at a time.


----------



## Hanatsu

The dips 60-100Hz are very likely modal nulls. Looks pretty common for low mounted door mids...


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> The dips 60-100Hz are very likely modal nulls. Looks pretty common for low mounted door mids...
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


I quickly measured them all, mic in right headrest to see: almost a mirrored copy (here with XO, used same color per driver)



I guess there is nothing to do here, except:
- kick
- treatment of the center console?

Or, something I was thinking about since I have now lateral subs > going 4 ways.
Higher XO between sub/midbass, like maybe 100Hz, if they can handle, and if they don't become localizable in rear.
And I could still use a 10" for the very low end, bandpassing the small 6" sub to safely push them hard.
?

Here the response of both side subs:


----------



## Hanatsu

If you have a small home audio speaker you can place it on floor in front of the mid. Measure again, if the null is gone then something is wrong with the speaker install, leakage or something. 

Moving the mic to right side seems to have fixed the dip around 100Hz, this suggest it's modal.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Hanatsu

Crossover at 100Hz is no problem if you got a clean sub. Dual subs are definietely an option.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Jazzi said:


> The best way for me to help you is if you can make sweeps of each of your speakers with flat EQ settings and without crossovers engaged (except the tweeters, keep at least some crossover on those so you don't damage them) and with all levels set to +-0dB, unless you have already done level matching in which case please note the levels in the speaker sweep titles. Do all the sweeps in the same REW session and label them so I know which is which. Then send me the *.mdat file and the *.txt house curve files you want to use and I'll take a look.
> 
> As for mic positions and measurements, Hanatsu did a great job outlining his strategy here somewhere. I think it's in one of his sticky threads. If you can't find it, let me know and I'll go look too. Essentially you want multiple measurements very close to your listening position and average them together for each speaker at a time.


Thanks for the MP, sure will do, that is typically the workflow I used:
But sometime I lose track on some files…
I use Hanatsu's method since a while now, started with ms8 even if not needed, just to check what was happening.
8 points, 5/3-6/2, but also tried different mic placement during the sweeps:
- Hanatsu style (2"&3" off the head, like his schema)
- more ms8 style (turning the head with the mic always near each ear)
- grosso style , more on the feeling, still 5/3-6/2, but based on the ear positions I used while driving (less movements than both previous).

With Hanatsu's method, I get sometime big variations, like if one of the 8 sweeps had completely messed up the average with a big peak or big dip.
With ms8 style I get less variations of course, but it's probably less representative (no compensation for the left window).
With my method, well it's too early to say, but it's the one who gave me the best result for now, but it might be something else.

But I trust more Hanatsu's experience so I usually go back to his method.
For ex, my last curves, classic 8 points, already XOed here, before level match (if I remember):



Then applied auto EQ on each target created with your file.
Measured results are far from the auto EQ:



Same at 1/2 smoothing:





Next time I'll do one sweep at a time, just to see which one has the worst influence on the average, and then decide if I need it or not...

I think few of my problems are:
- I don't really know how to place XO (ok for driver safety/beaming/staging, but not sure about the best "summing")
- I'm too impatient so I take shortcuts, usually want a "listenable" tune the same day
- I rely on the APL to fix a lot


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> If you have a small home audio speaker you can place it on floor in front of the mid. Measure again, if the null is gone then something is wrong with the speaker install, leakage or something.
> 
> Moving the mic to right side seems to have fixed the dip around 100Hz, this suggest it's modal.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


I have! 
The two enclosures I used in passenger footwell:


(the one I tried with the 660gti inside before I started to build the door enclosures /other car).

But yes it seems pure modal then, on the mirrored measurement, both dips are not exactly at the same FR though.





Hanatsu said:


> Crossover at 100Hz is no problem if you got a clean sub. Dual subs are definietely an option.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Hum 
Clean in term of distortion? power handling?
Seems promising


----------



## Justin Zazzi

If you take shortcuts and rely on the APL too, that's a lot of variables that can change and you're going to run yourself in circles.


----------



## Hanatsu

Distortion. Overtones increase the chance of localization since they will be at multiples of the fundamental. IMD, which is related to HD is also a problem. 

I'll do a in-depth thread about measurement methods I think. I made that method because of repeatability and because it was the most similar to noise in the entire 'headspace'. In the lower frequencies, let's say below 200Hz - the measurements should look very similar no matter how you do. I found that even a single point measurement was adequate to measure both sub and midbass in my system. It's not that critical since we got the APL as a measure of accuracy...


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Alextaastrup

Elgrosso said:


> Still a little something around 5k that I couldn't fix, +/- 1 step and it gets worse here.
> Probably not audible but still...
> Now I have to do the same on the amplitude!


It looks good for one channel (especially at higher frequencies).

You might try to play both channels simultaniously in TDA (mono output) and check DFR-graph. It should change due to Mutual cancelling and reflections. From this you could chose the best settings. Honestly speaking - we do not listen to music comming only from one channel (left or right)


----------



## Elgrosso

Alextaastrup said:


> It looks good for one channel (especially at higher frequencies).
> 
> You might try to play both channels simultaniously in TDA (mono output) and check DFR-graph. It should change due to Mutual cancelling and reflections. From this you could chose the best settings. Honestly speaking - we do not listen to music comming only from one channel (left or right)


This was before I used the APL, so will have to restart. But I had two times this results, so it's easily reproductible.
But I think it comes more from the install, mids and tweeters are so close:


I'll check the DFR as you said, I just got the full version, didn't really mess with anything else than the 2dmap.





Jazzi said:


> If you take shortcuts and rely on the APL too, that's a lot of variables that can change and you're going to run yourself in circles.





Hanatsu said:


> I'll do a in-depth thread about measurement methods I think. I made that method because of repeatability and because it was the most similar to noise in the entire 'headspace'. In the lower frequencies, let's say below 200Hz - the measurements should look very similar no matter how you do. I found that even a single point measurement was adequate to measure both sub and midbass in my system. It's not that critical since we got the APL as a measure of accuracy...


Yes that's the kind of shortcut I can take, only 1 sweep but for all.
It means I can measure outside of the car, much easier, confortable to play with the softwares.
So it's not only because I'm lazy, it's also time efficient:
It's easy to take 20 measurements with different xo per driver in this condition.
Ok for sub/midbass, but It's also taking the risk to not have the most realistic measure for mid/highs.


I'd be really curious on your thread Hanatsu, always want to grab the idea of APL workshop algorithm compared to REW since they both work in almost opposite ways:
- REW focuses on the listening position, with an autoEQ algorithm probably taylored for that
- APL measures the entire cabin, so taylored for power response (so what does it do exactly? Detects modes/removes extremes before EQ?)





> Distortion. Overtones increase the chance of localization since they will be at multiples of the fundamental. IMD, which is related to HD is also a problem.


I may have trouble there, since I need to push them quite a bit to get loud.
With mp1 target it's easier though.
Maybe steeper XO? Or a "second" XO much higher in FR to quiet it down completely?
A band-pass should help, like 50-100hz.


----------



## KrautNotRice

So much great info / diy work going on in this thread! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## KrautNotRice

Also great work on the clean wiring! Did you try out the TB W6 subs yet? How do you like them?


----------



## Elgrosso

KrautNotRice said:


> Also great work on the clean wiring! Did you try out the TB W6 subs yet? How do you like them?


Thank you KrautNotRice, 
Yep the w6 are nice little subs, I tried 4 them spread in the cabin and it sounded really smooth, and upfront (check previous pics/ 1 per side and 2 in front).
Without EQ it is already pretty good, but not super low.
So far I didn't play very loud since the 3 way front is not finished.
So I don't know if they'll be enough.


Being in 3 corners some TA had a nice effect.
So I should receive soon a minidsp 2x4 to optimize 4 with only 2 channels.
I have 4x6" and 2x10" XLS to use, could be any combinations, but the 6" only would be stealthier obviously.
And only two amps, 4 channels for now, not ready to add another one yet.


I'm actually learning winisd to check power/excursion etc
But I'm a bit confused: it says max power 60w, and with that power they stay well under excursion limit in the enclosures I have (5.5L sides and 6L in front).
60w gives just under 100db on the software. Now they're plugged to 125w, but then apparently they don't see it.
So I played with them yesterday, first to get the best summing with the two little sides only (no eq, just XO).
Best sum with 2ms difference:




Then I measured with more volume > super high distortion! (Around 100db)



See how they flat out on top? What is that, some kind of speaker "clipping"?
It was sweeps only so I didn't hear anything strange, but it shaked a bit.

First sweeps at -12db on REW/-50db C-dsp with 0db levels
Last sweeps at -12db on REW/-29db on the C-dsp, still 0 levels.
And, if I never check the precise db setting on the dsp, I think I can listen to that kind of volume.
I hope 4 of them would be ok.
One should be still ok around 95db, so 4 could still be ok around 101db no?
But it's maybe not enough, new territory for me.

But first, how do you measure distortion at this level? REW or the UMIK is probably not reliable there no? (I got the clipping popup message)
If this is correct, should I use only 60w since it's the theoretic maximum they can use?
(amp gives 125w @4ohms / probably 60w @8ohms)

If they can take only 60w I'll put 2 of them in serie on my prs, the front ones for exemple, this would free 1 channel for one 10"


----------



## Elgrosso

Hurray! I finally got something workable!
Had really hard time finding the right XO... To convince myself to focus on the acoustic slope.
So only xo and driver eq here, no input eq yet, no APL.
Tweaked a bit the TA to get the best summing, didn't have to change a lot, almost like tape measure for mid/tweeters, woofers had to move few ms. Subs will probaly need less too.
Didn't touch the tweeters, only levels. I can't get something clean with the auto EQ. They ring a bit now but it's ok it can wait.
For the subs the easiest was to use 1x10" and 2x6". The 6" are in stereo, I'll see if I like it or if it's disturbing.
The 6" in their small boxes accept quite a bit, but the 10" reaches easily the xmax.
Maybe I'll have to add another 10", and then remove the 6". Best would be each 10" on sides but they'll never fit



But at least I have a good base now.
I can keep this setting for everyday and enjoy.
Next, 3 subs timing optimization, input eq, TDA & APL.


----------



## airdevin

it might sound better if the curve reach 90db at is top low response.:thinking2:


----------



## Hanatsu

*Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*

Regarding post 213:

The difference between a "normal" frequency response measurement and a true power response measurement is simply the amount of points measured and the radiating space (dispersion) you measure. 

If the space would be anechoic (no reflecting surfaces) and the tranducer omnidirectional at all frequencies, then the frequency response will be equal to the sound power response. 

Software like ARTA can make sound power estimates by making multiple measurements in 0-90deg axis in both vertical and horizontal planes. It's a tedious process. 

Modal nulls and destructive interference occurs at specific frequencies depending on where the microphone is placed. A single point measurement will not represent the true response, the one that correlates with what we hear. 

A good example of this is very directional drivers like 3-4" widebanders in HF range. They tend to require a much flatter response in the upper two octaves than a tweeter. The widebander will sound rolled off like you placed a lowpass filter on it with the same FR as the tweeter. If you measure the power response you'll see why. The wideband driver will rolloff at a given frequency related to its cone size and produce a bad power response in the upper octaves. Of course, this is dependent on the environment you place the driver in but a car is a very reflective space, the reflections and direct sound is heard as one. It's important to know the power response of the midrange driver, you don't want a driver with a breakup node in the middle of the stopband of the crossover. Some drivers rolloff nicely 0-45deg but suddenly peaking in the 60-90deg axis due to some part of the cone is vibrating differently than the rest. This is good to consider when you use individual EQ and planning crossover frequencies. Since APL measures the combined FR of an entire side it might over (or under)-compensating issues in the sound power response. Always double and triple check the midranges upper response to avoid these issues. 

You can mute all drivers except one midrange driver and run apl, you'll see where it rolls off. That is basically as high you want to run the driver.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Hanatsu said:


> Regarding post 213:
> 
> The difference between a "normal" frequency response measurement and a true power response measurement is simply the amount of points measured and the radiating space (dispersion) you measure.
> 
> If the space would be anechoic (no reflecting surfaces) and the tranducer omnidirectional at all frequencies, then the frequency response will be equal to the sound power response.
> 
> Software like ARTA can make sound power estimates by making multiple measurements in 0-90deg axis in both vertical and horizontal planes. It's a tedious process.
> 
> Modal nulls and destructive interference occurs at specific frequencies depending on where the microphone is placed. A single point measurement will not represent the true response, the one that correlates with what we hear.
> 
> A good example of this is very directional drivers like 3-4" widebanders in HF range. They tend to require a much flatter response in the upper two octaves than a tweeter. The widebander will sound rolled off like you placed a lowpass filter on it with the same FR as the tweeter. If you measure the power response you'll see why. The wideband driver will rolloff at a given frequency related to its cone size and produce a bad power response in the upper octaves. Of course, this is dependent on the environment you place the driver in but a car is a very reflective space, the reflections and direct sound is heard as one. It's important to know the power response of the midrange driver, you don't want a driver with a breakup node in the middle of the stopband of the crossover. Some drivers rolloff nicely 0-45deg but suddenly peaking in the 60-90deg axis due to some part of the cone is vibrating differently than the rest. This is good to consider when you use individual EQ and planning crossover frequencies. Since APL measures the combined FR of an entire side it might over (or under)-compensating issues in the sound power response. Always double and triple check the midranges upper response to avoid these issues.
> 
> You can mute all drivers except one midrange driver and run apl, you'll see where it rolls off. That is basically as high you want to run the driver.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


How did you know I had this issue with my midranges? 
Based on my first measurements few weeks ago I started with a 5Khz XO, at that time it seemed to correlate well with the chosen target.
Results were not bad, but a little thin around the xo.

The gb25 are good up to 5/6Khz on axis, but it seems the power response decreases already at 2Khz, and too much at 5Khz. At least where they are placed here in my car (smooth and no break up).
I measured several low pass, from 3 to 6Khz, they looked almost the same at the listening position.
But I didn't check with APL, maybe I should.
I could also check with REW, on a much larger listening area for the sweeps, jut to see the difference.

So I used 3.6Khz/24db to optimize for power response, and it works better.
At the end the acoustic XO looks to be more around 2.8Khz though, but tweeters are not optimized now.





Hanatsu said:


> Modal nulls and destructive interference occurs at specific frequencies depending on where the microphone is placed. A single point measurement will not represent the true response, the one that correlates with what we hear.


So do you confirm the APL workshop can detect this nulls this way, and "decide" to not apply any correction there?
Something like removing the most extremes measurements out of the 250 taken, to focus on the let's say best 80%?
Compared to the REW autoEQ that can sometime force a boost on a null. (not always but I've had trouble with some biquads like that, had to bypass 1 or 2 out of 6, that were trying to fill a null).


----------



## Elgrosso

airdevin said:


> it might sound better if the curve reach 90db at is top low response.:thinking2:


You mean flat to 20Hz or the typical car low end boost?
Well it's personal, I got used to the mp1 target, it's much more comparable to my other audio stuff, headset and monitors.
Sure sometime I miss 3 or 5 db (not 10) on the low end that is more track dependent, but it's just for the fun and I can do that with presets later.


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Hanatsu said:


> The difference between a "normal" frequency respons
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> e measurement and a true power response measurement is simply the amount of points measured and the radiating space (dispersion) you measure.


Just a little experiment, I quickly measured with APL, there are quite some differences, more noticeable without smoothing:










Nothing surprising of course, but it illustrates.
On top are all drivers per side (left= blue / red = right / APL=black)
On the bottom are independent sweeps, blue are left ear points, righ is for right ear, but all on the same driver (based on old measurements from a post here, that had no success ).

In circle the biggest differences (not looking at tweeters).
8 sweeps in REW with Hanatsu's method, giving more weight to the measured side, their averages are always closer to blue for left, red for right (6-2/5-3).
It's pretty obvious how the APL "re-balance" the response.
In other words the red measurements reappear on left side, and the blue reappear on right side.
It's more obvious on left though.

So maybe... I should change the sweeps method, and balance them already at the beginning 50/50.


----------



## Hanatsu

When you imported the APL wave file, did you use the same IR window? APL use half-hanning and RoomEQ is tukey by default. 

Those graphs are not surprising, place a Var smoothing on the upper two graphs and see how it compares. Again, don't expect the APL results to be equal to RoomEQ. Both averaging and data acquiring is different...


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hanatsu said:


> When you imported the APL wave file, did you use the same IR window? APL use half-hanning and RoomEQ is tukey by default.


Ho so it's probably wrong? I didn't import it, just copy/paste screenshots.
What are the main differences between both windowing type?
(I goggled a bit, but it's a bit over my head...)



Hanatsu said:


> Those graphs are not surprising, place a Var smoothing on the upper two graphs and see how it compares. Again, don't expect the APL results to be equal to RoomEQ. Both averaging and data acquiring is different...


With Var it looks the same except for highs mid/tweeters.
It's not that I expected the same results, just want to get a better understanding. On what to focus on, balancing both sides for APL or in REW? They don't seem to require the same.

But maybe I'm misled by the time window difference?


----------



## airdevin

the low end boost is a real pleasure but it has to get well produced with the right subsonic. if your subwoofer produce 20 or 30 hz you'll have a real mad bass sensation .the wavelength must be respected


----------



## Elgrosso

Respect? 
Well my 10" and 6" can't really go to 20hz anyway.
For sure I miss my IBAU, can't imagine 2x15" there... Next car!


----------



## Elgrosso

Oh btw, I'm changing my xo again... Included the APL yesterday, power responses showed two big holes near the xo.
For mid/tweet it's ok it correlates with the mp1 curve. But it boosted the midranges way too much near their Fs!
Not pleasant or safe, so I'll switch to 500 or 600hz, this should give them some room while the gti can handle anything (sometime I wonder if I should go back to 2 way ).

I really start to think it's useless to optimize flat or target with REW when using APL at the end. I should work around the APL, trying to help him with the C-dsp power but that's it.
Maybe I'll just drop some super safe XO and let the APL do everything else.


----------



## Alextaastrup

Elgrosso said:


> Oh btw, I'm changing my xo again... Included the APL yesterday, power responses showed two big holes near the xo.
> For mid/tweet it's ok it correlates with the mp1 curve. But it boosted the midranges way too much near their Fs!
> Not pleasant or safe, so I'll switch to 500 or 600hz, this should give them some room while the gti can handle anything (sometime I wonder if I should go back to 2 way ).
> 
> I really start to think it's useless to optimize flat or target with REW when using APL at the end. I should work around the APL, trying to help him with the C-dsp power but that's it.
> Maybe I'll just drop some super safe XO and let the APL do everything else.


Came to the same conclusion some time ago. Why to spoil time when one has the most powerfull tool as APL. By the way - new version (5.16) of REW is available now. Great program, easy to use, but it is nothing close to the functionality of the APL approach.

Regarding XO points - do remember to go away 1,5-2 octaves from the Fs. This will protect from high distortion levels and minimize change of the impedance in the working area.

Regarding 2 or 3-way, hmmm... Good question. It is easier to install woofers in the doors when you have midrange and TW in the dash. Regarding the scene height - 3-way is a winner (probably demands more carefull installation, but it is worth trying anyway). On the other hand - do you have any audible problems, which irritate your brain? One has to find the optimization limit level, after which further Work will not give audible improvement or will cost much more than your wife expected . Enjoy music then. Actually it was my own decision to build a 3-way passive front - knowing my perfection ego - I had to stop once improving sound (not easy - I know). XO in my install done by HQ passive filters. The only thing left - connection of the front and sub. Otherwise I would use nights and nights for XO and TA...

Using mp1 target surve during optimization of the XO points might be missleading with regard to phase problems. I would recommend to start with the flat response. You could add mp1 later, after all the other problems will be solved.


----------



## Elgrosso

Alextaastrup said:


> Came to the same conclusion some time ago. Why to spoil time when one has the most powerfull tool as APL. By the way - new version (5.16) of REW is available now. Great program, easy to use, but it is nothing close to the functionality of the APL approach.
> 
> Regarding XO points - do remember to go away 1,5-2 octaves from the Fs. This will protect from high distortion levels and minimize change of the impedance in the working area.
> 
> Regarding 2 or 3-way, hmmm... Good question. It is easier to install woofers in the doors when you have midrange and TW in the dash. Regarding the scene height - 3-way is a winner (probably demands more carefull installation, but it is worth trying anyway). On the other hand - do you have any audible problems, which irritate your brain? One has to find the optimization limit level, after which further Work will not give audible improvement or will cost much more than your wife expected . Enjoy music then. Actually it was my own decision to build a 3-way passive front - knowing my perfection ego - I had to stop once improving sound (not easy - I know). XO in my install done by HQ passive filters. The only thing left - connection of the front and sub. Otherwise I would use nights and nights for XO and TA...
> 
> Using mp1 target surve during optimization of the XO points might be missleading with regard to phase problems. I would recommend to start with the flat response. You could add mp1 later, after all the other problems will be solved.


My midranges FS=170Hz, before I had [email protected]
With C-dsp only it sounded ok, safe.
But it's not so the XO itself the problem, but the fact that the midranges still played a lot of informations under this XO.
And I suspect it was not only "acoustically".
I also tried steeper slopes like 48db, but it messed up too much the delays.
Now they are at 600Hz, I'll see the impact on soundstage.

Well, I tried yesterday after my post, just 5 min and:



So much easier!
So just XO, no EQ no biquads on the dsp, all drivers levels at 0db.
TA from tape measure, it's not optimized yet, I know the woofers will have to move a bit on each sides.
And no distortion, the big boosts are nowhere the XO, I'll keep it like that few days for listening.

But this will be my starting point now!
I'll just check the acoustic XO, adjust if necessary, but won't lose any more time to optimize with REW auto EQ.


----------



## airdevin

i'm surprised of the results !
can you give all xo's?


----------



## Elgrosso

airdevin said:


> i'm surprised of the results !
> can you give all xo's?


Why? I always get this kind of results with APL, I just never had tried without DSP optimization before. Remember this was just an experiment, but there's clearly some time to save! (after all I bought it for that )

XO are 80/600/3200 or 3600 I don't remember, all @24db.
You can see they don't sum well on left graphs, but much better on right.


----------



## airdevin

my surprise is about the regularity of the curve without eq !
my surprise is also about the light response difference between r & l


----------



## Elgrosso

ok, they are power responses so they should look similar, the setup being symmetrical. I guess the small differences come from TA/driver themselves/ my positions during the "painting" that were not exactly the same for both sides.

For "after", the right is a little hotter, probably due to the better summing at XO.


----------



## Alextaastrup

L+R Front 3way, SO Audio Photo by Alexander_Souproun | Photobucket

My present difference is less than 1-2dB or something close to it. Just after 1. run by APL.

560/5000Hz 12dB/oct


----------



## Elgrosso

Alextaastrup said:


> L+R Front 3way, SO Audio Photo by Alexander_Souproun | Photobucket
> 
> My present difference is less than 1-2dB or something close to it. Just after 1. run by APL.
> 
> 560/5000Hz 12dB/oct


Very nice,
Are you full passive or just between mid/tweeters?


----------



## Elgrosso

I finally got a nice little tune after few weeks.
Time to test different sub configurations, different Xo again.

Some overlaps in XO, all BW 24db except the sub:
Subs 10Hz/6db -80Hz
Woofers 80-600Hz
Left midrange 450-4450Hz
Left tweeter 4450Hz+
Right midrange 400-4450Hz
Right tweeter 4000Hz+

To get roughly 80-480-3600 acoustically.
And finally I barely used EQ on the C-dsp.
Midranges and tweeters are safe there, so APL can boost +10db where needed.

L before









R before









TA after










Now I'm only playing with different targets with input EQ on the dsp:
Like +0/3/6 db on low end, or +2/3/4/5 db to fill partially back the 3200Hz dip from the mp1 target.
Once done I'll use it directly for APL.


----------



## airdevin

est tu sur de la sommation entre sub et woofer car la chute au point de croisement est importante


----------



## Elgrosso

Salut Airdevin, 

let's try to keep it in english, so everybody can get it



airdevin said:


> est tu sur de la sommation entre sub et woofer car la chute au point de croisement est importante


These "before APL" measurements are based here on 240 points, something like:


And honestly if I spend 10 min or 3 days on the Cdsp, the APL gives me great result everytime...
So I didn't EQ at all the woofers & tweeters (only subs and midrange a bit).
EQ on woofers gave me more trouble on phase than benefits on FR, so I just optimized TA with TDA (software) the most I could and let the APL just fix everything.

So now I will more focus on TA, balance, and the house targets.

I didn't re-measure the SPFR after APL yet, but for example I have this one based on one point:


But it can get better I'm sure.
I had some trouble with my left sub for example. Before APL it always wanted to be reversed, but then it canceled the other sub, that was well aligned.
I almost thought I wired it wrong, but no they summed well when both are on the same setting.

I'd also like stronger subs, I didn't push them too much with EQ on low end, or they distort too much around 25hz (over Xmax I guess).
The 4xW6 tang band were cleaner, sounded better, but just not enough output (maybe 8x6" could do it ).
I'm waiting for another 10'' that should handle better (gs10d2).

I'll remeasure everything turned ON and I'll see.
But it sounds pretty good, soundstage as always with the APL, is great.


----------



## Elgrosso

I'm actually trying Fuzzmeasure, to see and understand differences in measurements.
A bit harder to jump on a new software after REW, but there is one cool thing, it is not limited to 8 sweeps for dynamic averaging.
But I'm getting different results, sub for example:

Is it a window setting or something else I just missed?


----------



## Elgrosso

Some news around here,
After spending few weeks tuning and tuning I got a little bored and started to miss real diy work.
I tried a bunch of sub setups with different boxes but that's not the same.
My pillar pods were long time ago optimized for ms8, and now with the new dsp I think I could gain a little with different aiming so I plan to modify them.
In the mean time I have a pair of horns that I wanted to try for a while.
Installed the ES full body last weekend, probably the fastest install I've done in 1 or 2 hours it was ready!
The dashboard in this car looks like a very good candidate, deep, smooth bottom curvature, symetric, flat front face…

Quick dsp setup, I was really curious to hear them for the first time.
1st surprise: in very short time, the stage height is the same! top of the dash! that's impressive when you can still see the mouths 1 or 2 ft below.
2nd: I expected to have to modify gains and levels a lot to match the woofers (660gti), but no they almost react like the gb25, meaning cuts about 15/20db in some places, but levels at 0 on dsp and same gains on amp.
3rd: TA by ear was easy, but surprising, I expected to get numbers corresponding to the diaphragm distances, but it seems it's more the mouth.
4rd: center is damn solid! I have the same stage boundaries than before (just a tad lower on low notes), same separation, but center feels stronger.

It's hard to compare since it's not A/B and I rely on memory, but it's loud and clean for sure.
I'll need to do something about the low end, when pushed too much sub/midbass kind of lose it, they get dirty, when the highs just seem to get ready.
But I've spent only few hours to tune, I'm trying to get an idea on how much I can push the 660s.

I have some ZR8 or TD6H or Aurum Cantus that I plan to try, either in doors, or kick, whatever I can fit (now that the horns take some space there).
For sure it's fun, I guess my pillars will have to wait longer for their facelift because I very like the result!
And real pleasure to get a cleaner dash


----------



## LBaudio

Nice to see that you still working on your system,....how do you like the sound of horns?


----------



## Elgrosso

LBaudio said:


> Nice to see that you still working on your system,....how do you like the sound of horns?


Much cleaner louder for sure! I checked all week with a meter that I always keep around while driving. On very rough average I listen at least 5db louder.
Now the limit is the low end when before it was the highs (distortion).

The strong center is a bit disturbing, I just never had it like that.
And I think I still have some, how do you say, sybillance, and ringing on the right one.

So yeah I like them, even if now it's still less homogeneous than full cone.
I need to tune more, did almost nothing over 10k for ex, and still trying different xo with the gtis and many other things.
I'm sure 4x660s ported would be great...


----------



## Elgrosso

In the quest for better midbass to match the horns I tried this:





First I installed the td6h in doors.
They're great so far, measured better, needed less EQ, but I need a week at least to judge the sound. But they didn't fix any mode I had, no surprise.
Left side always lacked of low end, and if boosted too much it's just horrible.
Since I can't fit 8" in door without heavy work, I tried something else.

So I played with these small boxes and the gti, started as a test for the best place/aiming, in kicks or deeper in the tunnel etc.
With the horn drivers now I don't have any room to fit them deeper, or I would have to reverse them, totally possible but for later. So they ended here, best place for imaging so far, full range they seem to play from the corner of the dash. Must be dash/door reflections, plus maybe the windshield.

I expected some issues with the very small boxes, but other than harder TA it seems fine.
They clearly fill the hole, no more modes from 60 to 80hz on left.
Now it's 20-50hz for sub, 50-90 with 15db EQ boost for midbass, and 115/165+ for midranges.
Horns start at 1200hz, as 800 or more didn't change anything.
And I wanted to test the td6 higher for some time.

Comparison of gti/td6, same settings, full range, no eq 


Now I just need time to listen to judge.


----------



## thehatedguy

Curious about the whole setup...APL1, horns, & TD6Hs.

Good visceral impact and dynamics from the horns still? The MS8 neutered them.

Did you ever measure the TD6Hs? Curious bout the parameters.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> Curious about the whole setup...APL1, horns, & TD6Hs.
> 
> Good visceral impact and dynamics from the horns still? *The MS8 neutered them.


I might not be the best judge here since I never heard another horn system, but yes they certainly play effortlessly. 
Well they are definitely another step up in my car audio journey.
Feel a bit like first time I tried my 1st ms8, or 1st amp, or the 660 etc.
Everytime I discover something new, get cleaner sound, so listen louder…
The tune is far from perfect yet but very enjoyable, and more homogenous with the new midbass setup.
It gets really loud fast without noticing, if last week the woofers were the limit, today it was clearly my ears! (I need to pay attention to the spl)
And I have more headroom than before on the dsp (but this depends a lot of my tuning process).

This morning I was a bit disappointed by my last night tune, seemed a bit messy on low end, strong but undefined.
It was also kind of strange to hear for the first time some deep notes on the left side 
Stuff that I hear clearly with my headset or at home, but never so good in the car.
On the way back I lowered the sub by 6db and it felt better, so still a lot of room for improvement.
Maybe I push too much the gtis, I can see and feel a lot of excursion. Measured distortion is ok but I don't really trust these 
(extremely outside noise dependent).
I need to optimize timing, and maybe let them play higher like a 3.5 way instead of a 4 way like now.
Will try BW instead of LR, higher XO, and maybe less EQ and more gain etc


About the APL1, it seems to react very well.
Can't judge on the correction it's too early I'm still playing, but nothing strange happened.
Over 15Khz it gets harder due to the absence of tweeters, just a matter of adjusting target I guess. Since I don't hear over 16/17Khz, I don't mind for now.
But the measurements process is easier, after few months I've learned my way to use it with its flaws.
With the cones on dash I always had to pay attention to not get to close and on axis, to minimize interferences and to get the result I wanted.
No such worries here with horns.


About the lifeless effect, something I can add (for cones & horns):
I have actually two kind of tuning process, with different results, both enjoyable.
A - optimize everything on Cdsp, meaning heavy EQ with Jazzi's spreadsheet and REW, APL for final touch.
B - optimize only XO with Cdsp, minimal EQ just for shaping XO if needed, levels, APL for everything else

A > is much longer, cumbersome, but allows fine tune on the fly
Soundwise, it can be lifeless sometime / time domain is all over the places before APL1, and it cannot fix everything. 
B > is much faster but does not really allow tuning on the fly / time domain is most of the time really great after APL.

So roughly it's between perfect FR or perfect IR, but hard to get both (at my level).
And I'm more and more leaning to IR.





thehatedguy said:


> Did you ever measure the TD6Hs? *Curious bout the parameters.


Sure:



Close to what I remember seeing online, except for the FS, 46hz! In a big enclosure in kicks they should be great!
I don't have VAS or more I don't know enough the tool, I just use it for Winisd.


----------



## subwoofery

Elgrosso said:


> Sure:
> 
> 
> 
> Close to what I remember seeing online, except for the FS, 46hz! In a big enclosure in kicks they should be great!
> I don't have VAS or more I don't know enough the tool, I just use it for Winisd.


Don't think I've ever seen a Qts this low for a mid  

Kelvin


----------



## thehatedguy

Show Kelvin an ass shot of those TD6s....they have some heft back there, most un AE-like speaker that I have seen.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> Show Kelvin an ass shot of those TD6s....they have some heft back there, most un AE-like speaker that I have seen.


No pics of the back, but I have this one:


You can see the motor itself is bigger than the 660!

And more data:



I'm not sure at all I did measure correctly.
It was first to check each pair since one of the driver had a wrong sticker (M instead of H)
But compared to everything else it seems right.


----------



## subwoofery

thehatedguy said:


> Show Kelvin an ass shot of those TDs....they have some heft back there...


Edited :laugh:

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery

Elgrosso said:


> No pics of the back, but I have this one:
> 
> 
> You can see the motor itself is bigger than the 660!
> 
> And more data:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure at all I did measure correctly.
> It was first to check each pair since one of the driver had a wrong sticker (M instead of H)
> But compared to everything else it seems right.


Sure calls for ported 

Kelvin


----------



## Elgrosso

subwoofery said:


> Sure calls for ported
> 
> Kelvin


Sure they look nice on winisd, I'd like to try but I first need to fix this cancellation modal or it would be a waste.
Btw I tested some 670 that I got for cheap.
I wasn't sure, but they are reall 660. But in black, pretty nice:


----------



## Octaaf

Impressive work Elgrosso! I only read your posts for an hour so I did not read everything.
I also had a XKR Convertible and regonize your midbass problems. I also rebuild the installation many times. Never really solved it but came close by putting JBL c608GTi woofers in the door in wooden frames for kickbass. I also put 6-1/2 inch kickbass speakers in the rear subwoofer panels. Both were playing 80 to 500 Hz. These were all powered by a 4x125 watt Hifonics Olympus amp. By adjusting their levels I got a good mix between staging and punch.

For subs I made a polyesther rear seat closed enclosure with 2 mac audio aliante 10" powered by a 2x350 watt Hifonics Zeus amp. Had it covered with oatmeal colored vinyl and the grills matched the pattern of the back rest. This after blowing up several JBL 1200 GTi's and a Hifonics Atlas amp in the trunk.

For mids I put DLS 2.5" domes in the original location under the window. Because they were domes they need no enclosure. Tweets where DLS 1" on the original tweeter triangles but aimed at the opposite listener. In the end the overall result was really good but probably not up to your standards!

Good luck with your install!


----------



## Elgrosso

Octaaf said:


> Impressive work Elgrosso! I only read your posts for an hour so I did not read evererything.
> I also had an XKR Convertible and regonize your midbass problems. I also rebuild the installation many times. Never really solved it but came close by putting JBL c608GTi woofers in the door in wooden frames for kickbass. I also put 6-1/2 inch kickbass speaker in the rear subwoofer panels. Both were playing 80 to 500 Hz. These were all powered by a 4x125 watt Hifonics Olympus amp. By adjusting their levels I got a good mix between staging and punch.
> 
> For subs I made and polyesther rear seat closed enclosure with 2 mac audio aliante 10" powered by a 2x350 watt Hifonics Zeus amp. Had it covered with oatmeal colored vinyl and the grills matched the pattern of the back rest. This after blowing up several JBL 1200 GTi's and a Hifonics Atlas amp in the trunk.
> 
> For mids I put DLS 2.5" domes in the original location under the window. Because they were domes they need no enclosure. Tweets where DLS 1" on the original tweeter triangles but aimed at the opposite seat. In the end the overall result was really good but probably not up to your standards!
> 
> Good luck with your install!


Thanks Octaff,
Yeah the midbass quest will never end, but it gets better and better each time!
Do you have pics of your rear seat delete? I’ve seen a few on the jag forum, that’s a neat idea. I always planned to try it in both the coupe or the convertible... but since I change so many time my gears I just keep it rough now. Here’s what I installed this week end:





This 1.15 cu ft slim box fit perfectly between the sides panels.
Much better then the GS10 or 12" I tried before here in smaller box (0.7).
Since I’m still waiting for 12" mdf rings I started reverse mount.
No issue and it looks fun! 
With other drivers I had some mechanical noise, nothing there!
This Gb12 is great, it sounds very nice. 
The measured response is not so different then the GS10/12, it goes a bit lower but EQ work is almost the same, timing is a bit different strangely for the same place.
But the sound difference is huge, everything is much cleaner, sharp. 


And I will try again to play with midbass in the sides with these boxes later:


----------



## Octaaf

Elgrosso said:


> Do you have pics of your rear seat delete? I’ve seen a few on the jag forum, that’s a neat idea. I always planned to try it in both the coupe or the convertible...


Like this:









Here with grilles (looked much better in natural light)









PS I stil have it and want sell it for it is waste of all the work otherwise. Shipping from Europe might be a challenge though. Comes with a custom matched wind deflector.


----------



## Elgrosso

Pretty cool! I think I’ve seen the first pic online already.
Sure shipping from UE might be high, but probably US is the best market for this, did you try an add on forums?
Btw, what kind of volume were you able to find there?


----------



## Octaaf

Elgrosso said:


> Btw, what kind of volume were you able to find there?


The volume I am not sure of anymore. The Mac Audio Aliante 10 Black LTD needs 18 liter per unit. I believe it was something like 12 liter or so. As you can see the seat is a little bit higher then standard to create volume. But with a sealed enclosure it is less critical then with a vented one. Just add power The output was pretty awesome.


----------



## Elgrosso

Finally the sun let me work a bit here.
So I started to cut/prepare some boxes for my next 8" drivers in doors.
Only way to fit them was to cut a lot the panels, well no big deal, that would just be the 5th pair and they're cheap now on ebay 
I've always been inspired by these guys: BEWITH-FOCAL : ³×ÀÌ¹ö ºí·Î±×
So for once I'll try to make it cleaner.
For now it looks like that:










I won't be able to find a lot of volume but it will be solid, decoupled from the doors, and at least it would fit any 8", maybe even some 10" later with more rings.
For the volume, I could try either ported with a long tube looped outside the box (have room on the rear part of the panel).
Or aperiodic, into the doors, OEM driver holes.
But for now I start sealed.

So since I had to fiddle a lot with the panel/door skin for measuring/fitting and in the mean time I wanted some everyday sound, I re-used my super small boxes with 4xgti, well 2x660 and 2x670.



















> It's fun!
I first tried both up to 800Hz but it was a bit messy so went more into 2.5 way with one woofer on a shorter bandpass.
I won't spend too much time to tune since it's temporary, but now they're at 80-300&800Hz acoustically.
The measured curves are smoother, easier to EQ, and even on same TA they summed perfectly up to 1.2Khz.
Clearly the output is there, impact too, can be even disturbing.
Coupled with the great sub I have now the result is really strong, very tactile to chest/ears on high volume.

But these small boxes don't sound right.
There is something I don't know how to describe, the sound appears muffled, even if the volume is here.
I guess something time related, or transients maybe, it's just less clear/articulated than in doors.
But it is also fuller, some of my front dips are half fixed (by the new placement, the 4 drivers, and the boxes I guess).
So it's a balance, fuller/more impact VS less clarity/airy
Since I installed them I rediscovered all my old metal/punk tracks, bass/drums are really fun.

Might be partially a tuning issue too though.
They have now 125W from 2xD800, I could use 4 of them bridged just to see but then I'll be subless.
Maybe I'll try, just for the heck, before I install the just received HD600 & 750, ready for higher impedance of the future 8" and of my sub.

Anyway, if later with the 8" I can get best of both world, that would be the nirvana!


----------



## Elgrosso

Some updates after this long week end.
Received some Beyma 8g40 and boxes are installed.
Of course it always the last mm adjustments that are hard to manage.
Nothing final (if it can exist), I’ll play with them for a while before finishing them up.







I had to cut a hole behind to be able to mount them easily.
With AP I could have built them smaller, with less depth (maybe 1" less).
I could seal later to try, but for now I’ll play with the vents:

*http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/4092585-post14.html
*






Installed new amps, they are very nice and sturdy.
But damn' these connectors are painful.
The sub is quite happy with this more than double power.
Woofers are not bridged yet so it's about the same.




Super quick tuning yesterday end of the day, and just 30min of listening today.
I can already say that I'll have to isolate a bit more the boxes from the doors.
But everything seems fine.


----------



## Elgrosso

Took the time to clean up my left door today.
Since I have a hole now in the enclosure, firing into the original speaker spot, I re-installed the fiberglass panels to close the door skin.
Added a layer of deadener and some Ensolite on top (1st time I use that, it’s awesome!).
+ foam behind the enclosure to make sure follows the skin contours.




Then I took few measurements for the AP, to check best impedance curve I could get (following this post: http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/4107162-post17.html)
I used the same socks thing, filled with polyfill or fiberglass for insulation, different thickness, but never really tight.



Definitely a big difference between open & closed.
Closed had the smoothest curve, AP poly full being the least smooth, but the lowest in general too.
I did few measurements each time to check consistency, usually it stays 95% the same.
But I had some strange results sometime, like curve more or less smooth even if it keeps its global shape.

I think I'll go with AP Fiber 1/2 or 1/4.
What do you think?


----------



## Elgrosso

Well finally I went for full open:




It’s not as smooth but the peak is out of the band I use so I figured it should be better no?
I’ll keep it like that for a week, so far with quick tune the impact is already pretty damn’ good!


----------



## Elgrosso

After 2 days I'm not totally convinced by the full open version (simply IB).
Sound is kind of clean, with not too much coloration and seems more articulated (it could certainly be better with more tuning time) but I still have some door issues.

Resonances are a lot tammed compared to before with the speakers direclty onto the skin, but the door panel itself is still disturbing. It's not sonorous, it's now tactile.
It was already sometime the case with the gti, but much more now than before in fact, maybe with the new door treatment I push everything a bit more.
So basically I hear less problems but I can now feel them.

And my floor too didn't appreciate the sub power increase I'll have to add more layers there. 
Btw it's a convertible, and I don't know what kind of impact it has on my system. Always expected the soft top to "eat'' some of the bass, but maybe it acts like an AP? If it moves my floor it must move my top! The previous car, same model but coupe, had a different system so it's hard to compare.

So I'll try full closed next week. Just to see if I prefer better isolation over better timing. Just as a way to get to the best compromise.
With 100hz as a crossover it gets slightly better while not disturbing the stage.
Might be another solution. But I need to listen more to confirm this.

Anyway, I'm still quite happy, impact and dynamic are there, awfully there.
It is clearly my ultimate system, it's hard to decide to take time for tuning instead of just enjoying the huge impact! Being a fan of double bass I can't have enough


----------



## Elgrosso

Still on the midbass quest here... I played the beyma closed for the last weeks and it's definitly better than with the AP stuff. 
First improvment, no door resonance, I can't feel or hear anything from the panel, and that's great.
And in term of measurements it doesn't change a lot, and EQ fix the rest. But it feels better, cleaner.
Now I wonder if I should add even more volume.

I had to remove everything for different reasons, so it might be time to work a bit more on the boxes.
But playing with online tools to see the impact of bigger enclosure, I don't see a lot of difference from 3 to 8 liters. (I think I have slightly more than 3 now)
The impedance changes a bit, but nothing major.
Reflex though changes a lot, but then it needs 10L...

So I wonder if I should add another chamber, or change the whole thing again.
I can probably go to 6/7 liters easily, 10 will ask serious optimization.
Especially on the weight/rigidity ratio.
But I'm just afraid about reflex, because of the added delay.
With my small experience I never liked it.
Maybe I'm wrong?


----------



## Justin Zazzi

It's been a while since I've followed your work here so I'm not up to date with all your current stuff. But I wanted to comment on your door enclosures.

What are the T/S specs of the woofers you're using in there? Why do are you considering a vented enclosure, and what do you think you would gain from using one instead of a sealed enclosure? Is this a concern because you don't plan on using a subwoofer?


----------



## Elgrosso

Hey Jazzi, 
Well like many my midbass-goal here is to get as close as possible as my experience with headphone or at home (clean & generous bass).
The system is simple 2.1 now, horns/midbass/sub.
Horns as ES Neocomp with full body, woofers are beyma 8g40, and sub is the GB12.
It is already the best I ever had, but I want to keep improving.

For the last weeks I was working either on the enclosures or the rack and I never really fine-tune everything. So it was more about XOs, to optimize the sub/mid impact (80/100/120/140Hz), and to see how low I could ask from the horns (7/800 to 1000Hz).
Didn't even include the APL1 so far.

So woofers in enclosures, I tried:
- OPEN (big hole in the back or the enclosure, firing into the door): by ears really good results, clear and articulated, but the door resonated, and too much tactile feedback.
- AP (with different thickness of material, still going into the door): a bit less articulated, but less tactile effect and resonance form the doors. 
- CLOSED: door is dead silent, but sounds even less articulated. So far it's what I prefer. The silent door is really a plus.

But I want best of both worlds so I though maybe more volume would help.
Enclosed the driver behavior is really easy now, I barely use any EQ below 140Hz to match the XO target.
But the dips that I had before around 80Hz, were moved up to 3-500Hz (maybe the new placement, few inches more inside the cabin?)
Anyway so sub/midbass adjustment is easy, and I think I always get good phase/sum/timing.


But I was wrong on my tests yesterday, I forgot to adjust the Q! That’s why I thought about reflex (on here: Loudspeaker enclosure calculating with Thiele Small parameter)
So both closed with Q adjusted:
For a Q of 0.5 it requires 18L. (blue)
But with 10 liters it seems already really close (red):










I think I'll try bigger

T/S Beyma 8g40: Beyma Speakers - Beyma 8G40 speaker - Beyma 8G40 500 watt 8" speaker for all bass applications. Beyma 8G40 bass speaker and other Beyma 8" speakers here.


----------



## Elgrosso

I can't feel my fingers so I stopped there...

So I started on bigger enclosures, goal was 10L.
Now I have 9, with a fiber "cup" in the oem speaker hole in the door I can grab at least half a liter, maybe 1L. 
Well good enough.
(I thoug about using some T pipe inside to add even more volume, but there's not enough depth)

I wanted the minimal weight possible to preserve my doors.
So I went with plywood instead of mdf, and only 1/2" for front and back panels. Lateral are a mix of 3/4" and 1/2". It weights already less than the previous ones, for 3 times the volume.
I tried to mix technique in multiple parts to save time but it didn't.
Next time for the left one I'll cut everything at once, takes longer time on cutting, it uses more sheets but at the end it's faster and easier.

But then the question, will it be rigid/deaden enough?
It's not closed yet, but with the actual small bracing it seems rigid.
It's tall and thin so the panels don't have a lot of flex.
The question is more about potential "coloration".

For now I just checked placement/size in door, sand/check/sand/check etc
Once done I'll probably fill it with a very thin layer of resin to get it airtight while preserving the max volume.
I'd like to add 1 ot 2 "L" braces while closing the top cover, but I don't see any easy way to do that.
Then add some felt all around, polyfill and close it with glue.
And try.

In case there's still too much resonance or coloration I could still:
- add more braces externally where I can (following the door skin profile)
- add a layer of fiberglass all around. But I might have to sand again because it's really tight on door closing now. And if it should give great result on rigidity, weight will go up.
- add some deadener outside + carpet or heavy tissue.

Any other idea guys?


----------



## Justin Zazzi

I'm coming into your project kinda sideways and maybe don't understand what you're trying to do. The bookshelf speakers I built recently are ported with a 6.5" woofer and are flat to 35hz using a similar airspace to what you're working with. If you only need to reach down to 80hz or so, a 10L enclosure for a car door midbass seems like it might be a lot. The woofer you chose doesn't model very well for midbass duty either, at least using the T/S parameters I can find for it. Did you chose it because you need good response up to around 1khz to match up with your horns? If so, I could see why that particular driver might be a good choice and why you're having a tough time getting lots of bass out of it too. It's hard to find a driver that can do bass and midrange both really well, for cheap anyways.

If you're looking for ways to make a rigid but also lightweight enclosure, then baltic birch plywood is one of the better materials since it has a high rigidity-to-weight ratio compared to many other common materials including metals, fiberglass, and other woods. You're doing well to add bracing. The places that will flex the most will be large flat thin surfaces. So the bracing should be in the middle of the largest flat areas to make them into multiple smaller areas.


----------



## Elgrosso

In term of response, in the small boxes, I already had way more output that I needed.
I mean no trouble going low enough, great impact etc. They were better than everything I had, 660 and tdh.
I honestly suppose that I just want more and more, but not in term of ouput now, more in clarity, details.
The midbass on my headphone is awesome, after a bunch of test it is now exactly to my taste, and I'd like something close in the car (on other areas the car is much more fun though).
A good step was done going out of IB.
It's subjective, maybe only because I don't know any objective way to explain it.
With my basic understanding, it seems that the difference might come from the Q (box+speaker), so I search for a lower one, so more volume here.

You're right I picked this guy because of its midrange response and some reviews from here. I was waiting for the ES 8" but didn't want to wait eternally so picked one fast. But sure I could try another one, I just feel like I can get more from it now.

But yeah maybe I'm following a wrong path, I will reconsider other drivers.
I mean I still judge partially subjectively. I didn't tune the system to the best I could before deciding that for example.



Good to have your confirmation on the build thx.
I just added three "pillars" from back to front panels so far.
And some L bracket for the superior panel because it's only 1/2" and it will hold an attach point to the door.
Thinking about all this, I think I will reinforce more around the driver, it's the largest area.


----------



## Justin Zazzi

Maybe take what I'm going to write below with a grain of salt, since I know very little about your experiences and desires for what you want your car to sound like.

As I understand it, you want more detail in your midbass. One way to get more "clarity" in a system is to have one with a very good transient response, or a very nice looking impulse response where when the speaker stops receiving input, it stops moving quickly and doesn't "ring" over time as it slowly comes to a stop.

The typical IB installation in a door is not ideal because the entire door is very flexible and essentially turns into a speaker itself. As the woofer in the door moves, it makes the door panels move and they re-radiate noise into the cabin. When the speaker stops moving, the door panels take a relatively "long" time to stop moving and can contribute noise to the cabin. This is distortion in the time domain, and cannot be compensated for with something like a DSP equalizer

So when you made the switch from an IB style to a closed box style, that effect is diminished since the rear wave is no longer interacting with the door panels. The physical vibrations of the woofer will still cause the door panels to move, but a little less than before with the IB style.

This has something to do with a speaker's Q, and it doesn't. The Q of a speaker will only increase if you put it into an enclosure. So from going to an IB install to a sealed install, the QTC of the speaker/enclosure can only go up. However, the Q of the entire system _if you include the door_ might actually go down in your case, since the time required for the system to return to rest might have decreased some. This is an educated guess on my part and I have not done measurements to support such a claim, but it makes sense to me anyways.

So maybe what you are searching for is a speaker that has a low Q to begin with, and is not likely to physically shake the materials surrounding it. You can get this effect a few different ways. A speaker with a low moving mass to begin with will have less physical vibrations than a speaker with a higher moving mass. However a higher moving mass is usually required to produce lower frequencies. So that is a trade-off.

You can eliminate vibrations of surrounding materials by either making your enclosure so heavy that the speaker doesn't move it very much (like a mouse trying to move a car) or you can try to isolate the vibrations of the woofer from the surroundings by using various materials like soft rubber, foam, springs, gaskets, and all sorts of other things. A combination of the two methods works great too.

You could also mount the woofer to something so solid and rigid that the surrounding materials just don't have a chance to vibrate, like making a thick fiberglass kick panel pod. This works great since the woofer no longer interacts with the flexible materials in the doors.

If you want to keep pursuing a door installation, you're in for a real challenge and might not ever achieve the sonic bliss you are chasing.


----------



## Elgrosso

Jazzi said:


> Maybe take what I'm going to write below with a grain of salt, since I know very little about your experiences and desires for what you want your car to sound like.
> 
> As I understand it, you want more detail in your midbass. One way to get more "clarity" in a system is to have one with a very good transient response, or a very nice looking impulse response where when the speaker stops receiving input, it stops moving quickly and doesn't "ring" over time as it slowly comes to a stop.
> 
> The typical IB installation in a door is not ideal because the entire door is very flexible and essentially turns into a speaker itself. As the woofer in the door moves, it makes the door panels move and they re-radiate noise into the cabin. When the speaker stops moving, the door panels take a relatively "long" time to stop moving and can contribute noise to the cabin. This is distortion in the time domain, and cannot be compensated for with something like a DSP equalizer
> 
> So when you made the switch from an IB style to a closed box style, that effect is diminished since the rear wave is no longer interacting with the door panels. The physical vibrations of the woofer will still cause the door panels to move, but a little less than before with the IB style.


That's exactly what I concluded too, my 2 problems: transients and distortion (if it’s the right term for this kind of «*distraction*»).
The Q effect became really obvious when I started to play with cheap boxes and different volumes. I’m not sure I could read it on my measurement but by ear the difference was huge. 
Clarity, or transients were fine in door, but the door itself and the panel radiated too much, so it kind of destroyed this quality.

I spent a lot of time to fix the door, closing holes etc but it was never enough, especially when in the main time I was slowly increasing my demand in output.
It was ok with the regular 3 way cones because at that time the limit was reached first by the midrange/tweeters.
But when I installed the horns, I really had to do something to match their dynamism and the new listening levels caused by their low distortion.
I didn't try the 8" in door so I can't compare, but 6 or 7" were already too much.
I also tried to rise the XO with good results on vibrations, but no changes on clarity.





> This has something to do with a speaker's Q, and it doesn't. The Q of a speaker will only increase if you put it into an enclosure. So from going to an IB install to a sealed install, the QTC of the speaker/enclosure can only go up. However, the Q of the entire system _if you include the door_ might actually go down in your case, since the time required for the system to return to rest might have decreased some. This is an educated guess on my part and I have not done measurements to support such a claim, but it makes sense to me anyways.


Ok, I see the idea, higher Q within the box but overall lowered a bit with box+door as a system.
Well honestly I only heard the increase in Q.
The small boxes I still had last week were well isolated from the skin with foam and dampener.
I could still feel some vibration near the door step/floor but nothing too disturbing.
The door panel/armrest area were good.





> So maybe what you are searching for is a speaker that has a low Q to begin with, and is not likely to physically shake the materials surrounding it. You can get this effect a few different ways. A speaker with a low moving mass to begin with will have less physical vibrations than a speaker with a higher moving mass. However a higher moving mass is usually required to produce lower frequencies. So that is a trade-off.


The Beyma 8" Q is 0.31 or a bit more on my measurement, you don't consider this as low enough?
The TD6H were lower there though, 0.22 I think.
I could certainly re-try with the td6.





> You can eliminate vibrations of surrounding materials by either making your enclosure so heavy that the speaker doesn't move it very much (like a mouse trying to move a car) or you can try to isolate the vibrations of the woofer from the surroundings by using various materials like soft rubber, foam, springs, gaskets, and all sorts of other things. A combination of the two methods works great too.


I can try to optimize the latter, with rubber/foam between the enclosure and the door.
The small boxes had very little touch point with the door, the big one will probably have more.
I will cut the panel even more and make sure it does not touch the boxes in any point.
But for the weight, I'll try to avoid adding more for now.





> You could also mount the woofer to something so solid and rigid that the surrounding materials just don't have a chance to vibrate, like making a thick fiberglass kick panel pod. This works great since the woofer no longer interacts with the flexible materials in the doors.
> 
> If you want to keep pursuing a door installation, you're in for a real challenge and might not ever achieve the sonic bliss you are chasing.


Yes Kick… Well I really don't have enough room, the footwells are wide and deep but not really tall.
Kick will need a severe work on metal skin to make them breath outside, relocating a bunch of harness etc, nothing new but I'm not ready yet.
But after all I already did much more than I thought to this car… 

Thx Jazzi!


----------



## Justin Zazzi

I didn't mean to say the drivers you are choosing have a Qts that is too high. For an IB style a Qts around 0.5 is great. For most other applications a Qts slightly lower might be a little better since you can usually get away with using a smaller enclosure. A woofer/enclosure system tuned to a Qtc=0.7 is an accepted trade off between good transient response and reasonably small enclosure size. A Qtc=0.5 is technically best since it corresponds to a critically damped system, or one that returns to rest quickly. If you have a system with a high Qtc like 1.5, then you will have ringing and a peak in the frequency response, but a much smaller enclosure. It's all about trade-offs.


----------



## oabeieo

I really like this build. Reminds me of a lot of different things I've done. 

Those door boxes are legit ,

The g40 is a sick soundingmid huh?


----------



## Elgrosso

Jazzi said:


> I didn't mean to say the drivers you are choosing have a Qts that is too high. For an IB style a Qts around 0.5 is great. For most other applications a Qts slightly lower might be a little better since you can usually get away with using a smaller enclosure. A woofer/enclosure system tuned to a Qtc=0.7 is an accepted trade off between good transient response and reasonably small enclosure size. A Qtc=0.5 is technically best since it corresponds to a critically damped system, or one that returns to rest quickly. If you have a system with a high Qtc like 1.5, then you will have ringing and a peak in the frequency response, but a much smaller enclosure. It's all about trade-offs.


Yes my actual small box of 3/3.5 liters should give a Qtc around 0.9.
So now with 0.5/6 I'd be happy.
The qtc of 1.5/2 I tried with the gti in super small box, it was kind of fun because they really took power and they had a strong "bong" effect at one specific fr like you described.
But just fun not really appreciable.





oabeieo said:


> I really like this build. Reminds me of a lot of different things I've done.
> 
> Those door boxes are legit ,
> 
> The g40 is a sick soundingmid huh?


Thx oabeieo! Yeah I had fun, and still have, it's more a lab than a build.
I did try to play the beyma higher once, but didn't tune enough so the stage suffered too much. But I always though I should try again later, like 2khz.


----------



## Elgrosso

2 weeks without music... and it will be more, my car needs a new main seal.
So I'll use this time to get fixed few other big things (transmission rebuild, spring & shocks, diff maybe etc).
In the mean time I ride in my oldie, it's more fun, and I get the music from the straigth 6 
So I continued on the boxes, built the left one and am now close to seal them.
Had all kind of troubles with the "bowl" behind the driver to get some breath/clearance etc, but it's almost ready.
The new boxes must be around 11L., and are much much much lighter than the previous ones of 5/6L, driver included! (Thx plywood)
Yeah I got a pair of new drivers on a good deal: B&C Speakers
Half the weight than the 8g40, neo so they will breath even better with my small depth boxes, and on paper they're really promising on this volume!

So waiting to get the car back to check one last time clearance and I'll close the back.
The front I think I'll use screws at first, if I ever need to dampen them, add or remove some felt etc, then glue on final.


----------



## Elgrosso

And I didn't think a lot about the panels themselves yet, not sure how to make them look ok.
But the more I think about it, about the car, the more I want to re-build full custom panels... so I could fit some pr170 for example... 
Damn' virus it never ends!


----------



## LBaudio

lol, no way back now


----------



## Elgrosso

LBaudio said:


> lol, no way back now


Nope! And even after 3 weeks without music in the car I still feel the same, always thinking about the next thing.

Well I kind of finished the boxes today, can't do anything else without the car (finetune mount and panel)
I started them for the beyma 8g40 but ended with these mbx51 because they're lighter, smaller being beo and promising on paper.
But being octogonal it's kind of ugly.
The beyma would have requested another layer of wood with their big motor.
Thing I still could do if needed since I only screwed the top.
Also the 2118 would fit right now, if I feel the need to try.
At this point I don't really care about the box depth for door/seat clearance or esthetic, but every inch added here would be an inch lost on the soundstage width.







So I plugged them on an old battery&amp to listen a bit, full range from the phone so not the best but it gives an idea, to search for resonances/vibrations/leaks etc.
I was surprised to hear a lot of high content from these 8", even completely off axis. 

Then I started to play with the filling and impedances.
Only 4 conditions for now: freeair / empty box / half filled with polyfill / full filled felt+polyfill (packed dense).











A bit like with previous smaller boxes the measured difference in filling method is not drastic.
But empty or filled definitely: I really don't know why I have these "ported style" double peaks on the empty version, I patched all mounting holes. Maybe the fiberglass right behind the cone?
Good thing, in all cases the boxes don't vibrate too much, even empty, I can feel something with fingers on heavy bass but it's very thin (remember the signal was full range here). So plywood 1/2" is ok.
Strangely I feel more at the end of the box on the side wall than just behind the motor.
Maybe once attached on the doors they'll get a bit more rigid.
And of course full glued should help.

Based on the measured qtc I think the boxes are smaller than I thougth.
The felt version goes down to 0.53, so I tried to compare left filled & right empty (around 0.8), but with this basic amp setup it's kind of hard to be sure.
There is a difference, very little, but which is best I can't tell right now.
Filled seemed a bit more detailed but also a bit more quiet. 
But it's not blind test so maybe it's just my expectations.

Anyway, based on these I'll start with the full filled version in the car.


----------



## sinister-kustoms

Awesome work man. I can't wait to give sealed mids a go in the future!


----------



## Elgrosso

sinister-kustoms said:


> Awesome work man. I can't wait to give sealed mids a go in the future!


Thanks man! 
Today I started with the right one, same method with different material, different density etc.
Kind of boring to screw/unscrew but it's not that long to do.
I don't know why but it was just impossible to get the same result with the same filling than on left.
Only one that can get common is when both are full packed with acousta-stuff, but like really densely packed (maybe something like 500g).
Really strange, from empty, lightly filled, to felt+polyfill the right always showed some double peaks.

And I tried a bunch of things but it's like if I have some leaks somewhere but can't find them.
I've added glue or wood paste on all corners or unsure areas, but maybe I should finally add some resin everywhere inside to be sure it's sealed.
So I ended up with this:




Listened a bit more but it's kind of useless.
Except, what I said yesterday about the absence of vibrations, well if I really crank them up it's a different story .


----------



## t3sn4f2

Looks really good. The second resonance peak is likely because of the long enclosure length.

Zaph|Audio - ZRT - Revelator Tower 

"I call for heavy stuffing at the bottom of the enclosure to reduce the lengthwise pressure node at 140Hz. Not doing so would cause some audible raggedness in the midbass. The difference between enough and not enough stuffing is easily seen in an impedance curve."










Maybe packing only the bottom like Zaph suggest will give you more uniform results on both. Since the area is a lot smaller then the whole enclosure. I'd try weighing out the stuffing and packing it in up to the same point internally, that way it's easier to replicate on the other.

Also, talcum powder is good for finding leaks.


----------



## Elgrosso

t3sn4f2 said:


> Looks really good. The second resonance peak is likely because of the long enclosure length.
> 
> Zaph|Audio - ZRT - Revelator Tower
> 
> "I call for heavy stuffing at the bottom of the enclosure to reduce the lengthwise pressure node at 140Hz. Not doing so would cause some audible raggedness in the midbass. The difference between enough and not enough stuffing is easily seen in an impedance curve."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe packing only the bottom like Zaph suggest will give you more uniform results on both. Since the area is a lot smaller then the whole enclosure. I'd try weighing out the stuffing and packing it in up to the same point internally, that way it's easier to replicate on the other.
> 
> Also, talcum powder is good for finding leaks.


Wow of course! Thank you so much t3sn4f2, When I was focusing on the back of the motor or some leaks somewhere I completely forgot to run the basic numbers.
The boxes are 36" long, and driver to bottom around 30", so just about 200hz for half a backwave. That must be it!
That would also explain why I felt more physical feedback at the very bottom, when here the side wall is heavier than anywhere else.

Cool, I'll check tomorrow with only the bottom filled or some combinations.
If I can get rid of the second peak while keeping the first one around 100hz it should be great!

(and I'll try the talc, good tips too! )


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Thanks man!
> Today I started with the right one, same method with different material, different density etc.
> Kind of boring to screw/unscrew but it's not that long to do.
> I don't know why but it was just impossible to get the same result with the same filling than on left.
> Only one that can get common is when both are full packed with acousta-stuff, but like really densely packed (maybe something like 500g).
> Really strange, from empty, lightly filled, to felt+polyfill the right always showed some double peaks.
> 
> And I tried a bunch of things but it's like if I have some leaks somewhere but can't find them.
> I've added glue or wood paste on all corners or unsure areas, but maybe I should finally add some resin everywhere inside to be sure it's sealed.
> So I ended up with this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Listened a bit more but it's kind of useless.
> Except, what I said yesterday about the absence of vibrations, well if I really crank them up it's a different story .


What sub is that back there ?


----------



## Elgrosso

It's my gb12, I rebuild a box for it too, bigger!


----------



## oabeieo

Do you want to sell your g40s or trade for anything? If so are they 4 ohm model. 
I sold my 8g40s now wish I kept them.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Do you want to sell your g40s or trade for anything? If so are they 4 ohm model.
> I sold my 8g40s now wish I kept them.


Sure, yep they’re 4 ohms, but just not right now. I want to keep them until I like the B&C and boxes enough or if I need to change back.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Sure, yep they’re 4 ohms, but just not right now. I want to keep them until I like the B&C and boxes enough or if I need to change back.


Your after some 50-100hz love, the beyma is still the best sounding midbass/midrange I have ever had. I really want another set and kick my ass for sellin mine. I really miss how smooth vocals are with that driver. It's not a beast from 50-100no but it's good enough. Yes good enough and the trade off for that smoothness is worth it for me. 

I got the 6g40 and 10g40s as well and it's a good midrange but didn't capture that distinctive sound on that driver. There both good in other ways. 

Can't wait to hear what you think of this b&C looks a lot like the 8NDL51. what made you choose this one ?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Your after some 50-100hz love, the beyma is still the best sounding midbass/midrange I have ever had. I really want another set and kick my ass for sellin mine. I really miss how smooth vocals are with that driver. It's not a beast from 50-100no but it's good enough. Yes good enough and the trade off for that smoothness is worth it for me.
> 
> I got the 6g40 and 10g40s as well and it's a good midrange but didn't capture that distinctive sound on that driver. There both good in other ways.
> 
> Can't wait to hear what you think of this b&C looks a lot like the 8NDL51. what made you choose this one ?


80-100hz for sure yes, when I tried the sub higher like 120/140 I really liked the bigger impact (much stronger). But stage wise it was a little downgrade.
But now it's more a search about clarity, the FR with the beyma was great, and easy to eq for the first half. But I had troubles with either door resonances and great clarity, or no resonance if closed with less clarity.
So maybe the new system will help.

Honeslty I was first searching for some neo, just to fit in the boxes. And While I wasn't able to decide which B&C to take, I found this pair on ebay, freshly tested and for a good price.
Also they share a lot with the 8g40, looked very similar in winisd, maybe slightly stronger low end.


----------



## Elgrosso

I tried a few more measurements then, based on t3sn4f2 advice by focusing on the bottom.
1st free air as reference, then speaker in cab as: empty, the bottom (longest part of the enclosure, right of the driver here) filled with acousta-stuff, from 1/4 to 4/4 etc

Ex:
1/4



3/4



- full and full dense, meaning acousta-stuff everywhere, just loose or packed.




Results:



empty	FS 100Hz / Q = 1.1
1/4 95Hz / 0.94
1/2 94Hz / 0.66
3/4 91Hz / 0.27 (*)
4/4 171Hz / 0.64
4/4dense	172Hz / 0.5
full 166Hz / 0.5
full dense	74Hz / 0.2 (*)

* must be measurements errors no?

The 2nd peak is clearly tammed the first with the 1/4 and 1/2 stuffing.
The 1st peak is tammed only after the 3/4 or 4/4.
In the meantime the "plateau" between the peaks is constantly raised.
Then if I add more stuff again the 2nd peak goes slightly up back (4/4 dense & full).
When the 1st peak disappear in a larger bump down the frequency (full dense).

So basically the difference between stuffing the back of the motor + near the cone or not can be seen between 4/4dense VS full here > almost nothing.
And the difference between packing it or keeping it loose: full dense VS full.
The density has more impact than its placement.

I think I will continue with full and play with density, and of course listen.
the impedance is at its lowest around the potential XO (80 to 140hz).
And overall the phase curve smoothest, with 0deg from 100Hz to 160Hz.

But I must say that I'm mostly guessing here.
I didn't find a lot of good readings online about the relation impedance curve/Q of the box.
Everything is about how to manage a passive crossover, zobel etc.
I don’t know how much trust to give to the measured Qts (Qtc here) for ex.
In the V.D. cook book there are some examples like mine, but the effects are less prominent,
and he does not describe the final effect on the sound.


----------



## oabeieo

I always like this page for these topics 

Speakers: Impedance (Z)

To me , fs is not as big of deal as some make it out to be but it must still be delt with. 

The damping of the amp plays a role , the enclosure and the driver of course. 
For midbass , I just use a notch PEQ filter and match it best I can to measured resonance about 8-12db cut to smooth it out. At fs the speaker needs a fraction of power to make sound , I play speakers through fs all the time will very little Ill effects. An enclosure will help dampen any nasty artifacts depending if the cone breaks up at fs or if it's just purely mechanical fs . 

Anyway check out that read I liked that one and it made sence to me.


----------



## oabeieo

So, would you say the last boxes you had made an improvement or did it just color the sound ? Did u have to use massive cuts at 100-125? 
Would you recommend all the trouble and did u think it was worth the added LF extension?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> I always like this page for these topics
> 
> Speakers: Impedance (Z)
> 
> To me , fs is not as big of deal as some make it out to be but it must still be delt with.
> 
> The damping of the amp plays a role , the enclosure and the driver of course.
> For midbass , I just use a notch PEQ filter and match it best I can to measured resonance about 8-12db cut to smooth it out. At fs the speaker needs a fraction of power to make sound , I play speakers through fs all the time will very little Ill effects. An enclosure will help dampen any nasty artifacts depending if the cone breaks up at fs or if it's just purely mechanical fs .
> 
> Anyway check out that read I liked that one and it made sence to me.


Will do, I read this one already but maybe too fast.
Interesting the notch at max resonance, if needed I'll try that.
I suppose now I only have to try both setup in car, between high narrow or low and fat peak.

Edit: really great site! I missed all the other chapters at first, really good.




oabeieo said:


> So, would you say the last boxes you had made an improvement or did it just color the sound ? Did u have to use massive cuts at 100-125?
> Would you recommend all the trouble and did u think it was worth the added LF extension?



I still don't have the car right now, it's why I'm playing with these at home.
If I had it I would probably spend more time just listening and less time just measuring.
So I can't compare the small boxes (around 5/6 liters) to these ones (10/11 liters) yet.

So about sealed, to summarize the improvements with the previous boxes:
⁃	box allows to get out of door resonances, that was a big deal for my car. The whole door skin and panel were playing as well, talk about a planar speaker...
⁃	Box allows to get out of tactile effect on the armrest and upper panel (always good for psychoacoustic)
⁃	Box allow a much cleaner high pass, it was like a perfect 24db without any added Eq (I found some old measurements to illustrate)
⁃	Change in driver type and/or its placement (only few inches) moved the nulls to a place that I was ok with (around 4/500hz), it's still an issue but I prefer it there. This I'm still not sure why, could be driver size or something else, but it happened.

But, these 4 things were big improvements, while I still didn't have the sound I wanted.
Not so much about coloration, because after EQ they could almost all have the same FR (no big cuts at 100-125Hz, but higher).
It's more about clarity. 
IB in door I had great clarity (well great, let's say better), but much more distortion/resonances and harder EQ to target.
In box I lost on clarity, but much less disto/resonance and easier EQ.
I tried AP to find a sweet spot in between, but as soon as the 8" breathes in the door it's a mess.
That's why now I try bigger boxes.




1x gti in doors:


dual gti in boxes:


beyma in boxes:


----------



## oabeieo

Thanks for the input. Any box I've ever done had some degree of coloration or "ringing " the only downside I could see would be hearing the ringing biased torwards the closest box to whichever seat your in and that's something eq or TA or FIR can't fix. I guess you could balance it over to one side and make the ringing equal for one seat but than the magnitude response between sides wouldn't be equal. So that's my only concern. I haven't don't actual boxes in the door but done them on floor with good results but that was much more center of car than far to sides. I suppose I could switch to a one seat tune and make a Two seat tune optimized to one seat, but the un-optimized side would be pretty lame. But I would still do it if it's that much better for one seat . I can't decide maybe I'll wait till yours is done so I can see what you think 

Was that a issue on the old boxes at all or were the benefits outweigh the disadvantages?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Thanks for the input. Any box I've ever done had some degree of coloration or "ringing " the only downside I could see would be hearing the ringing biased torwards the closest box to whichever seat your in and that's something eq or TA or FIR can't fix. I guess you could balance it over to one side and make the ringing equal for one seat but than the magnitude response between sides wouldn't be equal. So that's my only concern. I haven't don't actual boxes in the door but done them on floor with good results but that was much more center of car than far to sides. I suppose I could switch to a one seat tune and make a Two seat tune optimized to one seat, but the un-optimized side would be pretty lame. But I would still do it if it's that much better for one seat . I can't decide maybe I'll wait till yours is done so I can see what you think
> 
> Was that a issue on the old boxes at all or were the benefits outweigh the disadvantages?


I thought coloration was anything that changed the fr to non flat or non on-target, but if you're talking about ringing then yes for sure the small boxes had this effect.
It was super obvious with the 1l. boxes and the gti, even if flattened out with EQ it was still there, so probably more in the time domain (probably Q>2 or more).
It was not homogeneous at all, almost like super fast transient on few hz and much slower just beside etc. And it was more present on the right side (one seater).

But no ringing with the beyma boxes, just less clarity compared to IB.
So as a final answer they were better, and I kept them for 1 or 2 months.
The loss on "articulation" was more than compensated by the lower distortion/resonances.
But I just want best of both worlds, free lunch 

If I don't get it, then I'll try kick and cut metal for IB or AP.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> I thought coloration was anything that changed the fr to non flat or non on-target, but if you're talking about ringing then yes for sure the small boxes had this effect.
> It was super obvious with the 1l. boxes and the gti, even if flattened out with EQ it was still there, so probably more in the time domain (probably Q>2 or more).
> It was not homogeneous at all, almost like super fast transient on few hz and much slower just beside etc. And it was more present on the right side (one seater).
> 
> But no ringing with the beyma boxes, just less clarity compared to IB.
> So as a final answer they were better, and I kept them for 1 or 2 months.
> The loss on "articulation" was more than compensated by the lower distortion/resonances.
> But I just want best of both worlds, free lunch
> 
> If I don't get it, then I'll try kick and cut metal for IB or AP.


Oh okay that is what I would have guessed . I love the way boxes make 50-100 possible and can cut through the sound, just after listening to any box after awhile all I can hear is the box coloring every note played. 

Colorations are anything added to the sound that the speaker it self didn't make but a artifact of the speaker playing. Like a box. Ringing is a more proper term but it can be confused with resonances. 

A box will have a fundamental resonance and when the speaker plays the same frequency as the box resonance there will be a gain but when the speaker plays frequencies that are not the same frequency as the resonance/ringing and those frequencies excite the ringing that is colorations. At least the way I understand it 
 

Maybe I'll just go for it. Man I'm scared to cut my doors up but **** it, door panels aren't that expensive

I think resonance and ringing are the same thing, resonance to describe a frequency a box is based on volume, moving mass, etc and ringing is described as a unwanted sound that is a resonance. 
I not 100% but 99% bot terms can be used at same time and mean same thing
But it can also be confused with a. If resonance from a panel vibration or a loose panel or something


----------



## Elgrosso

Ok I think I get it. Ringing and resonance must be the same in a way, since ringing must appear at the fs, fs being higher and higher the smaller the box.
I'll try to use better terms, but until now I used ringing for the "boing" sound effect, like a spring, high amplitude and small bandpass. When I used resonance for smaller amplitude but larger bandpass, so more generic coloration then.
But yeah all this terms... :/
For sure my door skins and door panels vibrated with the driver, on high or mid-high output only of course, but still it was not clean.
Door panels were disturbing mostly for tactile effect, door skin I would say for distortion.
Coloration, I think I can say I usually took care of it with the dsp, but maybe not.

But for sure I want to fix all these so:
- out of the door to fix distortion (linear?)
- Isolated of any panel that I can touch for psychotruc (non linear?)
- A lower total Q, as possibly a better starting point for the APL (so more about phase distortion?)
Yeah I think that summarize my thoughts so far.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Ok I think I get it. Ringing and resonance must be the same in a way, since ringing must appear at the fs, fs being higher and higher the smaller the box.
> I'll try to use better terms, but until now I used ringing for the "boing" sound effect, like a spring, high amplitude and small bandpass. When I used resonance for smaller amplitude but larger bandpass, so more generic coloration then.
> But yeah all this terms... :/
> For sure my door skins and door panels vibrated with the driver, on high or mid-high output only of course, but still it was not clean.
> Door panels were disturbing mostly for tactile effect, door skin I would say for distortion.
> Coloration, I think I can say I usually took care of it with the dsp, but maybe not.
> 
> But for sure I want to fix all these so:
> - out of the door to fix distortion (linear?)
> - Isolated of any panel that I can touch for psychotruc (non linear?)
> - A lower total Q, as possibly a better starting point for the APL (so more about phase distortion?)
> Yeah I think that summarize my thoughts so far.



It's Basicly all the same ****  it amazes me how loose we use these terms and only us audiophiles know how to pull it out of context. 


Yeah a low Qtc is nice. Really it asks a lot of range from a speaker but if you have the right dsp settings it can be just perfect.

My sub box is q.55 and a 1st order filter @48hz - it digs deep and gets up into 160hz range audibly bring I have no big midvasses in right now.

Man my 6.5 experiment turned out to work pretty good, them hertz hienergy drivers lick big ol ballz and are very awful. I took those out and used dyn 6.5s up front and a set morels in back doors And the 6nd430 up top and the clarity is fantastic. It's so much better not having a box muddy up the 160-500hz range but man efficiency went so far down than distortion went up because I have to push the drivers so much harder to get up to volume. I do say the dyns sound really good in a dinky small sealed box. Hardly none cone resonance and that's nice. Box still rings like a ***** but it's better than having a cone in breakup at the same frequency the box reverberates. The 2118h honestly is the worst I've used for that problem but it makes since the cone on a 2118 is not at all rigid it's flimsy and thin. . However once it hits 300hz or better it's plain ole awesomeness.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> It's Basicly all the same ****  it amazes me how loose we use these terms and only us audiophiles know how to pull it out of context.
> 
> 
> Yeah a low Qtc is nice. Really it asks a lot of range from a speaker but if you have the right dsp settings it can be just perfect.
> 
> My sub box is q.55 and a 1st order filter @48hz - it digs deep and gets up into 160hz range audibly bring I have no big midvasses in right now.
> 
> Man my 6.5 experiment turned out to work pretty good, them hertz hienergy drivers lick big ol ballz and are very awful. I took those out and used dyn 6.5s up front and a set morels in back doors And the 6nd430 up top and the clarity is fantastic. It's so much better not having a box muddy up the 160-500hz range but man efficiency went so far down than distortion went up because I have to push the drivers so much harder to get up to volume. I do say the dyns sound really good in a dinky small sealed box. Hardly none cone resonance and that's nice. Box still rings like a ***** but it's better than having a cone in breakup at the same frequency the box reverberates. The 2118h honestly is the worst I've used for that problem but it makes since the cone on a 2118 is not at all rigid it's flimsy and thin. . However once it hits 300hz or better it's plain ole awesomeness.


Yeah I definitely need to test that awesomeness of 2118 
that will be for later

Your sub is ported? 0.55 that's pretty low it must be huge!

So, ready to cut? 
How are your doors, maybe they're perfect for a box?


----------



## Elgrosso

A little more fun here, still playing with the boxes at home.
These are nearfield full range sweeps, I followed methods found online, 1cm of the dustcap, 0 degre, maybe not "academic" but it gives an idea.
At least I learned a bit more on the effect of the impedance and phase on the FR to help to decide.
Blue/red are full packed, green half packed or empty.
Apparently it's more the plateau between each peaks that cause troubles on the empty version, and the third little peak has also some effect.
Full, FR & phase are really clean.

Then I listened to both versions, but with full range it's really hard to say.
I expected more loss of output on full packed but no apparently.
I weighted all the stuffing I used and it's about 500g max per box.

So I'll redo all this once in the car.
dbs are wrong here, don't know why but since last REW update my mic keeps reseting itself.








Then I finished the sub box. I double its volume, from 1.2 to 2.4 cuft, maybe even more, still sealed. I just wanted to try bigger volume so I bought a 2nd cheap box, cutted both and glued them back + little bracing (but not enough).
With DATS I measured the Q, trying to reach the lowest, got something like 0.83 non stuffed and 0.73 once full packed with egg foam and polything. 
Nearfield FR as well, I don't have previous box measurements so can't compare.
Will see once in the car.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yeah I definitely need to test that awesomeness of 2118
> that will be for later
> 
> Your sub is ported? 0.55 that's pretty low it must be huge!
> 
> So, ready to cut?
> How are your doors, maybe they're perfect for a box?


Sealed! Low Q yeah the box is about a cube bigger than "recommend " for each sub. 
No point in having 15s unless I can get a f3 in the 30s  gotta keep it fun and do some jello dash tricks 


Lol we'll see how yours turns out first I'm scared to do all that work for nothing but a big heavy door


----------



## Elgrosso

I finally installed everything this week end, DDRC22D and boxes, and it is... AWESOME!
Dirac is so easy to use, I think it might increase the psycho-acoustic effect 
Well anyway the soundstage is great, superb clarity and I got the best midbass ever in my car.

Took me some time to get good control of the ddrc.
With the APL1 experience, I decided to start here with no EQ at all at the C-dsp, so only XO, levels and usual TA.
Took me some time to find the best levels match adapted to the target I wanted in Dirac.
Still a lot to do but it's really enjoyable!


----------



## Babs

That's way cool.. I'd wondered if/when someone was going to run a Dirac processor of some kind.


----------



## fullergoku

So you are running both the APL1 and Dirac? I would like your opinion of both of them independently and when used together please?


----------



## Elgrosso

Babs said:


> That's way cool.. I'd wondered if/when someone was going to run a Dirac processor of some kind.



Well I’m not the first, I think Jscoyne2 or someone else here did it before but yeah it's about time, I had it for few months uninstalled!
But it works really great.



fullergoku said:


> So you are running both the APL1 and Dirac? I would like your opinion of both of them independently and when used together please?


Only the DDRC, I don't think I’ll ever use both together there’s no point.
So far the results are very similar, but my system also changed a lot in between so it’s hard to compare. And I’ve been one month without music...
Maybe one day I’ll installed both to compare side/side.
But for now I just want to optimize it.


----------



## aholland1198

I upgraded my 2x4hd some time ago. It is a cool program for sure. Takes a bit to make it work in a car environment, but cool regardless. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

So like I said got the car back, new springs/shocks/bushes/tires/transmission /all hoses etc etc etc yeah a looong list…
The whole front end is new basically. I'll take care of the rear later, just to match because it's not really needed except for the diff.
It's probably too much for the car value but after all I did on the audio side…
And I just didn’t find any other car with the right mix of old school and modern stuff for me (+ my mech is almost a family member now ).
It's pretty cool because everything is smoother and more silent.
Yrs ago I would have gone in the mountains to test all that, now I just cruise at 40mph, silly me
(well it’s also because I have a real car for the fun beside...)

Few pics of the boxes:
I closed and glued them half filled with polything as it was a good baseline and allows to access the most important part with the biggest changes. Will fiddle more later if needed.
It's all temp as usual, the time to be sure all is fine before I make them look nicely integrated (lol if ever).
I messed up a bit with the fixation points, the added fiberglass around the "cup" dis-aligned the holes.
So it's not perfect and they can still very lightly touch the door sills sometime depending of the car pitch.
I'll have to sand more and fine-tune all this before covering them. But at least they don't vibrate, it's solid, and lighter than previous 8g40 boxes.

For the door panels I'm pretty happy as it went as planned, exactly following the armrests.
Absolutely no vibrations here, only if I put my hands on the box itself (and I may add some CLD there).
The octogonal drivers feel a bit out of place but no big deal.
I don't know yet what I'll use to cover them. Maybe just sub carpet, or suede.
Width is almost like the original panels and drivers are more inside the cabin but I didn't lose on confort.
Still with the horns it's tight for ladies… and I'll probably never see a carwash again!:laugh:





























And the ddrc is here for now, handy place for the presets.
Peachtree, cables & usb stuff in the armrest, handy for tuning.










I wanted to install it in the HU bay, but same here I just want to play with it before butchering this area.
And I'll have to think about a new rem in for everything, only use of the HU right now.
Could a simple on/off switch works for that? Maybe I could re-purpose an existing and unused button in the dash.

But since the ddrc22 were not made for car use, it's probably not a good idea anyway.
Leds are not bright enough for daylight, and the knob is not as precise as the C-dsp one for changing preset, it’s kind of dangerous.
Maybe I could adapt another C-dsp remote, must be the same hardware.
Also once I found the right setting all this could go hidden, maybe below the right seat.
Or if I feel like it I could just remove the box and put the stuff somewhere else, it’s 90% empty in there.


----------



## Elgrosso

I have a lot to say on Dirac, just need more time.
But basically it really works like the APL, same kind of effect on soundstage and clarity.
But everything is much simpler/faster with Dirac.
It's all in one, great UI and it feels a bit like ms8 with some added liberties.

Like I said due to the APL experience I didn't even spend time EQ the system, just used REW to define XO, levels, kept same TA than before except for the sub (oh yeah I forgot the sub, new box, like 2.5cuft, firing between the front seats).
Then went directly in Dirac to study options like:
- between chair, sofa (2 seats) and "head" method, head meaning chair but more like Hanatsu with the mic near the ears
> Chair is the best
- between several measurement points, you have 8 sweeps to take to measure the power response, so you can vary them
> best was a large square of 2 ft including part of my body me in the seat, really close to what they describe as "chair" but kind of deformed on the rear bottom. The measured curves look really close to what I had before with the APL (with different drivers). I guess the power response, affected by the cabin cannot vary that much with the same layout of drivers.
- EQ target of course. Since I didn't EQ the curves were all over the places. I've made different choices of XO and levels than usual (120/[email protected] and all at 0db)
> I used mp1 target but slightly lowered by -5db in the txt file. That's the only thing missing in Dirac: if you have a complex target, then it's hard to adjust it levels. You have to move all points by hand, the APL allows more flexibility here (and in many other places)

>> At the end, timing is awesome, chest impact is huge, left midbass back to life, stage is great as I feel like the midrange on top of the dash are still playing. The boxes helped I think (who knows since I changed everything)
The midbass are really cleaner, more natural, not perfect yet but I'd say halfway compared to what I had before and what I want.
I still have to work on everything of course I have only few hours of tuning right now.

My sub seems to be the limiting factor now, sounds a bit off sometime, and either too much or not enough (might be my tracks).
2x12" would be great so I could ask less of them but I don't have room to get a good Q. I’ll take a pic later but the actual box takes the entire space behind, rear sets deleted.

Or one 15 AE IB, my god I would dream of that... You bet I checked, and there’s nothing I can do for IB, the fuel tank is right behind the back panel and there’s not even an inch to make something breath to the trunk. Maybe some complicated tubes on the sides but what a hell.
If I condemn the soft top yeah I could do something. I know I use it only 10 times a year, but what fun it is!

I have another way maybe, got a pair of Wavecor 9" that are ok with small boxes for a good Q. I just need to build these boxes...

And maybe I should deaden every panels now, floor & rears… it never ends!
There's probably more to say, like about clipping/distortion, gains etc but the story will continue.


----------



## oabeieo

I'm really excited to see u like the Dirac .

I just got a clairion nav deck with an optical out that's variable.

I was thinking get the drc 2x2di Dirac like yours and go optical in and optical out into a pair of my HDs running FIR crossovers and some added eq abilities the drc doesn't offer in the ddrc24 won't do....

What do u think would that be a good way to do it ? 

I could tune best I can as far as TA and crossovers in the HDs than run Dirac. 

Your thoughts.

I'm amazed by your target response...man I'm jealous


----------



## oabeieo

Are you powering the drc 22 with a minidc?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> I'm really excited to see u like the Dirac .
> 
> I just got a clairion nav deck with an optical out that's variable.
> 
> I was thinking get the drc 2x2di Dirac like yours and go optical in and optical out into a pair of my HDs running FIR crossovers and some added eq abilities the drc doesn't offer in the ddrc24 won't do....
> 
> What do u think would that be a good way to do it ?
> 
> I could tune best I can as far as TA and crossovers in the HDs than run Dirac.
> 
> Your thoughts.
> 
> I'm amazed by your target response...man I'm jealous


Well that sounds like the ultimate setup! (if you can tune it )
I have 2 pair of HD too (1 ddrc24 and an HD) and I planned to try them in lieu (I like this silly expression ) of the 6x8.
Just to see if I can optimize something myself with manual FIR etc.
I’m sure the "no EQ" method is good, but it’s not OPTIMUM.

But it can also be a nightmare to tune and manage, 3 units etc.
To illustrate, I really liked Dirac not only because it performed well, but also because it is simpler in process. Like I get 90% perfect in 10 min versus 95% in 10 days (well in real maybe 60 and 65% who knows ).
For ex, I think (with no objective reasons though) that the APL can do a better job, but not in my hands. I mean it measures unlimited points for the power response, 200 is enough but you can go crazy. The after sauce is unknown, and the softwares are hard to play with, but in theory a great guy could get the optimum reaponse with the APL (and I think that's the target customer).

So just to say that it’s also easy to get lost. But for sure you're a better tuner than me, so you’re the guy to try now! 



Btw, what's optical variable??

And about the target response, what do you mean?
Since the orange target is the predicted one only.
I quickly measured before/after during tuning with other specs, and the AVG response was close to the predicted one.
But I didn't measure my last one so I can't say for sure now.



It’s also kind of eye opening. I had this experience with APL but it’s even more obvious now because everything is faster with Dirac.
Hanatsu's method is good, but power response is the way to go!


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Are you powering the drc 22 with a minidc?


Nope, since it’s only 5v I use one of my USB available. And that’s really cool!
I think it’s this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OXZ06I4/ref=s9_dcacsd_bhz_bw_c_x_2_w

I’ll see later if I need to clean up the power, but so far no problem at all.
Except that it’s ON when ACC ON, I'll deal with this later.


----------



## aholland1198

Is the piece you are using a two channel? How are you letting it perform time? Are you longing up the drivers on the left and right then letting the Dirac center everything up? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

aholland1198 said:


> Is the piece you are using a two channel? How are you letting it perform time? Are you longing up the drivers on the left and right then letting the Dirac center everything up?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes 2 channels only.
I re-used my old setting for all drivers, just adjusted a bit the new sub for better summing. I preferred to get a clean start around the XO since the stereo version of Dirac doesn’t know which driver plays which frequency.
So TA was pretty good, but not perfect.

Too bad I couldn't use TDA for that, it doesn't work anymore since I’m full digital now (or I don't know how to do with // desktop and drivers with the peachtree).


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Well that sounds like the ultimate setup! (if you can tune it )
> I have 2 pair of HD too (1 ddrc24 and an HD) and I planned to try them in lieu (I like this silly expression ) of the 6x8.
> Just to see if I can optimize something myself with manual FIR etc.
> I’m sure the "no EQ" method is good, but it’s not OPTIMUM.
> 
> But it can also be a nightmare to tune and manage, 3 units etc.
> To illustrate, I really liked Dirac not only because it performed well, but also because it is simpler in process. Like I get 90% perfect in 10 min versus 95% in 10 days (well in real maybe 60 and 65% who knows ).
> For ex, I think (with no objective reasons though) that the APL can do a better job, but not in my hands. I mean it measures unlimited points for the power response, 200 is enough but you can go crazy. The after sauce is unknown, and the softwares are hard to play with, but in theory a great guy could get the optimum reaponse with the APL (and I think that's the target customer).
> 
> So just to say that it’s also easy to get lost. But for sure you're a better tuner than me, so you’re the guy to try now!
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, what's optical variable??
> 
> And about the target response, what do you mean?
> Since the orange target is the predicted one only.
> I quickly measured before/after during tuning with other specs, and the AVG response was close to the predicted one.
> But I didn't measure my last one so I can't say for sure now.
> 
> 
> 
> It’s also kind of eye opening. I had this experience with APL but it’s even more obvious now because everything is faster with Dirac.
> Hanatsu's method is good, but power response is the way to go!



Dood I wouldn't say I'm better at tuning. You obliviously get it . 
I would say once you know how your interior acts with your drivers anyone that knows how to do the controls can do it right. 

if we could see sound it would be a whole lot easier let's just say that. 
We can stick a microphone in all kinds of places to get a glimpse visually but that's about it. The smaart v8 looks grilling amazing with real time Two channel RTA with auto time to mic offsets. 

Loop backs work pretty good with rew but that smaart really gives you a visual real time on the audio signal and it's exact behavior. It's definitely the next best thing and a must have. But it's also 800$ stars I'll have to wait. 

Once I have that I might be a better tuner until you get it or if u get it first than ya, you'll be better. 

We only have a clumsy microphone, you have Dirac so you actually have me beat at the moment. I can make a perfect filter in rephrase manually, but sometimes it doesn't sound right. That Dirac looks promising. Man that thing just makes the measurements look good. If u think it's worth it maybe no need to get smaart and just trust it, sure would be nice to see the phase responces right on top of each other tho.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> So like I said got the car back, new springs/shocks/bushes/tires/transmission /all hoses etc etc etc yeah a looong list…
> The whole front end is new basically. I'll take care of the rear later, just to match because it's not really needed except for the diff.
> It's probably too much for the car value but after all I did on the audio side…
> And I just didn’t find any other car with the right mix of old school and modern stuff for me (+ my mech is almost a family member now ).
> It's pretty cool because everything is smoother and more silent.
> Yrs ago I would have gone in the mountains to test all that, now I just cruise at 40mph, silly me
> (well it’s also because I have a real car for the fun beside...)
> 
> Few pics of the boxes:
> I closed and glued them half filled with polything as it was a good baseline and allows to access the most important part with the biggest changes. Will fiddle more later if needed.
> It's all temp as usual, the time to be sure all is fine before I make them look nicely integrated (lol if ever).
> I messed up a bit with the fixation points, the added fiberglass around the "cup" dis-aligned the holes.
> So it's not perfect and they can still very lightly touch the door sills sometime depending of the car pitch.
> I'll have to sand more and fine-tune all this before covering them. But at least they don't vibrate, it's solid, and lighter than previous 8g40 boxes.
> 
> For the door panels I'm pretty happy as it went as planned, exactly following the armrests.
> Absolutely no vibrations here, only if I put my hands on the box itself (and I may add some CLD there).
> The octogonal drivers feel a bit out of place but no big deal.
> I don't know yet what I'll use to cover them. Maybe just sub carpet, or suede.
> Width is almost like the original panels and drivers are more inside the cabin but I didn't lose on confort.
> Still with the horns it's tight for ladies… and I'll probably never see a carwash again!:laugh:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the ddrc is here for now, handy place for the presets.
> Peachtree, cables & usb stuff in the armrest, handy for tuning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wanted to install it in the HU bay, but same here I just want to play with it before butchering this area.
> And I'll have to think about a new rem in for everything, only use of the HU right now.
> Could a simple on/off switch works for that? Maybe I could re-purpose an existing and unused button in the dash.
> 
> But since the ddrc22 were not made for car use, it's probably not a good idea anyway.
> Leds are not bright enough for daylight, and the knob is not as precise as the C-dsp one for changing preset, it’s kind of dangerous.
> Maybe I could adapt another C-dsp remote, must be the same hardware.
> Also once I found the right setting all this could go hidden, maybe below the right seat.
> Or if I feel like it I could just remove the box and put the stuff somewhere else, it’s 90% empty in there.



That's dope!


----------



## oabeieo

What deck do you have currently


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Dood I wouldn't say I'm better at tuning. You obliviously get it .
> I would say once you know how your interior acts with your drivers anyone that knows how to do the controls can do it right.
> 
> if we could see sound it would be a whole lot easier let's just say that.
> We can stick a microphone in all kinds of places to get a glimpse visually but that's about it. The smaart v8 looks grilling amazing with real time Two channel RTA with auto time to mic offsets.
> 
> Loop backs work pretty good with rew but that smaart really gives you a visual real time on the audio signal and it's exact behavior. It's definitely the next best thing and a must have. But it's also 800$ stars I'll have to wait.
> 
> Once I have that I might be a better tuner until you get it or if u get it first than ya, you'll be better.
> 
> We only have a clumsy microphone, you have Dirac so you actually have me beat at the moment. I can make a perfect filter in rephrase manually, but sometimes it doesn't sound right. That Dirac looks promising. Man that thing just makes the measurements look good. If u think it's worth it maybe no need to get smaart and just trust it, sure would be nice to see the phase responces right on top of each other tho.


Thanks man,
Yeah this week-end I’ll measure before/after. But I’m pretty sure it looks really close to the prediction. With maybe variations by not using the exact same points with the mic for both.
This smaart thing look interesting for sure, but big learning curve for me!
I really appreciate the all in one solution here, and it works on mac.
But that’s right you can't check the phases, you can check the impulse response but it’s per channel not per driver.

You could try to update one of your HD to ddrc24 maybe? Or just try the desktop version too. 



oabeieo said:


> What deck do you have currently


My phone  (old pic)
iphone > camera kit > usb > peachtree x1 > coax > ddrc > coax > C-dsp


----------



## oabeieo

Oh sweet, okay that's slick , so u have the ddrc24di 

That the same one I have been looking at to go with my new setup. So your all digital into the cdsp? Why didn't u use the 2X4HDS in you would have kept 96k input? 
If it's over a volume control the ddrc does that no?


----------



## oabeieo

Oh sweet, okay that's slick , so u have the ddrc22di ? 

That the same one I have been looking at to go with my new setup. So your all digital into the cdsp? Why didn't u use the 2X4HDS in you would have kept 96k input? 
If it's over a volume control the ddrc does that no?


----------



## Elgrosso

DDRC22DI yes, all digit to the final dsp.
I had in mind to try the hds after or even the ddrc24 in front of the c-dsp to see the difference in taps number, or all kind of combinations but I just started with the easiest.
2 hds would need a coax splitter that I don't have for ex.

But I'm glad I tried like that because I get a better idea.
I prefer the cdsp knob for example, + previous comments on the leds/presets of the DI in car.
It has a volume pot yes, and I actually use it to detect clipping to adjust later the attenuation in Dirac (probably something like -8/-10db).
But I'll see.


----------



## Jscoyne2

Elgrosso said:


> Today I tried to make a copy of the door surface on the other car, to get an idea of the work later.
> On the volume/attachments/relation with door panel etc.
> Same car, same door, but with much less dynamat and stuff to deal with (and I can keep my sound system while building ).
> (It's a bit hard to be syntethic and not taking an hour to type, so please excuse if it's messy)
> 
> So first, one of the issue ont my actual door:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The driver is already really low in the door, but 1cm top is still hidden by the panel (rough cut here).
> I can add 1 or 2 cm to go lower and inside the cabin. but not sure it will be enough.
> I say that because I want to minimise the work on the external part of the door panel.
> For good looking results (by experience )
> If I can avoid to cut or add some fiber on the outside I'll be glad.
> So if you follow me, this means I will have to move lower/more inside the driver, while using fiberglass from the inside of the door panel, to the outside of the new ring of the speaker. Not sure it's clear…
> That's why I asked about aiming previously. If i can aim it differently I could save few mm.
> 
> Then, here I have a solid point to attach everything (the hole on top right, missing a strong metallic L bracket)
> The armrest is fixed here, but the armrest is attached to the door panel somewhere else behind, by below.
> So I'll have to create some kind of tunnel in the box, to get to the screws
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the next door, spare panel, cutted, to show some of the oem speaker holes I'll try to reuse to attach the box/panel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here just a layer of foam to add some space for later, for any kind of decoupler or dampener I'll want to use.
> It also smoothes out the surface, so easier to fiberglass:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then taped and fibered, just enough to give me an idea.
> I'll probably re-do a better one later
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then check on the door panel, where will I have to cut/add some fiber, especially for the last step, coupling of both panels:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of space, and I optimized the maximum:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe about 2 more liters added with the internal poachs.
> I grabbed all i could to keep room for any added thickness of the fiber.
> About this, what's more important: weight or rigidity?
> Because I could use much less fiber if I brace everywhere.
> 
> 
> And then just free try to get an idea of how I could mount the driver.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An old K2 destroyed by the couple ms8 & flat battery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have so much room behind, maybe 1cm, and the gti is larger, so I'll have to increase the "spacing" for this "triangular" part. a bit more in the cabin.
> 
> A detail of the skin:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My experience with vinyl is that it's really not that easy to get a clean finish. So I don't want to recover the entire door.
> So I'll try to destroy the actual one the least I can to re-use it.
> Should be ok here since it's the bottom. The idea is to glue both panels and recover the corners here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next step: MDF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no experience on mdf, except with rings.
> I'll grab some during the week at home depot probably.
> If I can cut it like that, fiber on the oem cover (marroon here) and filler in the gaps.
> At the end I'll try to make some kind of clipped cover on this whole front part to simulate a rear-mount of the driver.
> 
> Clearly a lot of work, I guess few week ends.
> But it seems accessible!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS:
> Also something I tried yesterday, the lost foam technic.
> I really wanted to avoid to fiberglass the panel so it seemed a good idea for an "independent" enclosure.
> I used Joann styro blocks, super easy to use, few minutes gave me this shape:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But finally I don't think it's the way to go.
> Too much steps to make it to perfectly match the door, too much lost space at the end, and no obvious solution for the mounting.
> Also I would have had to work with epoxy, and I never did that.
> The only thing I really like about this technic, is that I could have easily added some rigidity with internal braces (like crossing chopstick everywhere in the foam before I dissolve it for example, if you see what I mean).


Im planning on doing something very similiar in my car. My inner sheet metal is damn near non existent so i should have good room. Ccf on the whole inner side of the door card. Ccf on the edges of the inner door metal. Fiberglass a negative of each. Epoxy both together. See what kinda volume im looking at. 

Any tips or pros/cons with this approach?



Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jscoyne2

Pic stolen from google but if you look past the plastic sheet. You can see the giant hole. 

Mine is currently very well deadened/sealed now but I just wanted to see if I could make an actual enclosure. Feel free to pm me if you dont want to clutter your thread

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jscoyne2

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Hanatsu said:


> Don't ever go as close as 1cm of the drivers with the APL measurements, you need to keep the mic away from the direct response of the drivers. The plots in post 53 show that you got interference and the "noise" in the IR at 200ms show that your measurements are corrupt.
> 
> Mic should be pointed towards windshield, between 15-50cm, move the mic like you paint a picket fence up and down going to the next one etc, try collect 10-15points on each vertical line...
> 
> I will do a video on this soon.
> 
> Nice build btw ^^
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk.


Ever make that vid?

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk


----------



## oabeieo

Yeah a vid of a Dirac tune in car would be fun to watch 

(Hint hint nudge nudge)


----------



## Elgrosso

Jscoyne2 said:


> Im planning on doing something very similiar in my car. My inner sheet metal is damn near non existent so i should have good room. Ccf on the whole inner side of the door card. Ccf on the edges of the inner door metal. Fiberglass a negative of each. Epoxy both together. See what kinda volume im looking at.
> 
> Any tips or pros/cons with this approach?





Jscoyne2 said:


> Pic stolen from google but if you look past the plastic sheet. You can see the giant hole.
> 
> Mine is currently very well deadened/sealed now but I just wanted to see if I could make an actual enclosure. Feel free to pm me if you dont want to clutter your thread






You're lucky with all that space! Seems there's is a transverse in the door no?
Tips? well here's what I learned for my next project:

- *Wood* is way easier then fiberglass, and in order: plywood > mdf > fb
A shell enclosure of this size in 2 parts like you plan will be super heavy. Especially with large flat surfaces that would need big thickness or reinforcement. A wood enclosure with the right *bracing* is a bit more work on planning, but a lot of weight saved in total.
Same for time, burden etc, wood is much nicer to work with than FB I think. Of course it can be a combination if it makes sense on complex areas (but if you don't need big size, maybe you can copy Gary's doors?).
- See what you can *leverage* from the existing stuff: like using the door panel pocket volume, the door panel shape etc to create one wall already. But using the door panel, as a side of the enclosure, will produce vibrations that you'll probably feel in the armrest or near areas. That's why I finally *isolated* mine completely from what I can touch.
- Target the *biggest* volume possible for some flexibility later if you want to swap drivers. You'll spend a lot of time here, so why not be ready for later? And maybe think about a system that would allow bigger driver. But don't chase the last cu in, *keep it simple*.
- Carefully *plan* the way you'll fill / close / mount / re-open if needed. *Check* 100 times during the process if everything fits, glass motor/rail clearance, door panels and switch mounting, door closing & hinge effort etc
- If you can, and if your doors are symmetrical, build *both* sides in same time, helps on measurements and saves time.
- Be ready to *restart* from scratch, in fact plan for it . At least one quick draft box would teach a lot on issues you'll have to face.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Yeah a vid of a Dirac tune in car would be fun to watch
> 
> (Hint hint nudge nudge)


 I’ll think about it, but there's nothing especially obscure in the Dirac process (?)

Ho man what a fun I had this morning, Megadeath full blast to wake me up! Felt a little dizzy when I got out :laugh:


----------



## Jscoyne2

Elgrosso said:


> You're lucky with all that space! Seems there's is a transverse in the door no?
> Tips? well here's what I learned for my next project:
> 
> - *Wood* is way easier then fiberglass, and in order: plywood > mdf > fb
> A shell enclosure of this size in 2 parts like you plan will be super heavy. Especially with large flat surfaces that would need big thickness or reinforcement. A wood enclosure with the right *bracing* is a bit more work on planning, but a lot of weight saved in total.
> Same for time, burden etc, wood is much nicer to work with than FB I think. Of course it can be a combination if it makes sense on complex areas (but if you don't need big size, maybe you can copy Gary's doors?).
> - See what you can *leverage* from the existing stuff: like using the door panel pocket volume, the door panel shape etc to create one wall already. But using the door panel, as a side of the enclosure, will produce vibrations that you'll probably feel in the armrest or near areas. That's why I finally *isolated* mine completely from what I can touch.
> - Target the *biggest* volume possible for some flexibility later if you want to swap drivers. You'll spend a lot of time here, so why not be ready for later? And maybe think about a system that would allow bigger driver. But don't chase the last cu in, *keep it simple*.
> - Carefully *plan* the way you'll fill / close / mount / re-open if needed. *Check* 100 times during the process if everything fits, glass motor/rail clearance, door panels and switch mounting, door closing & hinge effort etc
> - If you can, and if your doors are symmetrical, build *both* sides in same time, helps on measurements and saves time.
> - Be ready to *restart* from scratch, in fact plan for it . At least one quick draft box would teach a lot on issues you'll have to face.


I always thought fiberglass was used because of its light weight? 

Its too cold and its gonna be too cold to fiberglass for quite awhile. Lame. I have projects to try!

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk


----------



## oabeieo

I hate fiberglass and wood sounds better . It's a good alternative for hard shapes but if it can be done with wood it always sounds better IMO no science here it just sounds better to me .


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep, I'm not a specialist on all this, just my experience with small/mid size boxes. Mdf and fb are probably close, it depends more of the shape. 
But plywood is for sure another world. Much happier with the last ones, for sound and for weight.


----------



## Elgrosso

Btw here's the sub box now:









made of 2 of these: Atrend 12SKS Slim Series Sealed Subwoofer Enclosure
Had just one before, now it's maybe 2.4/2.5 cu ft

I will measure and tune a bit more, but I'm not quite satisfied.
The box is braced a bit but is still too soft. But not much I can do externally to reinforce it now, not much space left with the car frame, the seats etc.
It's sitting on an old mastress so vibrations are filtered (it's strapped to the back).

So at the end it's only slightly better, impact and integration are great, really awesome, but it feels a bit slow sometime, or undefined on the bottom end.
Maybe I need to rise the HP, check for distortion?

It's crossed at 120hz, and being here at maybe 1ft of my head it can also be disturbing. Stage is sometime pulled back but it's a trade off.
But on big impacts it can be painfull to my right ear, too much pressure.
I wonder... if it was on the left, right behind me and not in the center, could it be better? or reversed, firing to the back panel, I have only 1" clearance there for the cone due to some chassis braces.

I may try my old ib12au here, but not sure the box is big enough for it. On winisd there's not much difference compared to the gb12.
Or maybe another sub? I searched a bit but don't know much about SQ subs.
Maybe IDQ, treo, memphis, gti?
Or 2 or 3 10", to work in this "small" volume and spread the bass a little more.


----------



## t3sn4f2

Elgrosso said:


> Btw here's the sub box now:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> made of 2 of these: Atrend 12SKS Slim Series Sealed Subwoofer Enclosure
> Had just one before, now it's maybe 2.4/2.5 cu ft
> 
> I will measure and tune a bit more, but I'm not quite satisfied.
> The box is braced a bit but is still too soft. But not much I can do externally to reinforce it now, not much space left with the car frame, the seats etc.
> It's sitting on an old mastress so vibrations are filtered (it's strapped to the back).
> 
> So at the end it's only slightly better, impact and integration are great, really awesome, but it feels a bit slow sometime, or undefined on the bottom end.
> Maybe I need to rise the HP, check for distortion?
> 
> It's crossed at 120hz, and being here at maybe 1ft of my head it can also be disturbing. Stage is sometime pulled back but it's a trade off.
> But on big impacts it can be painfull to my right ear, too much pressure.
> I wonder... if it was on the left, right behind me and not in the center, could it be better? or reversed, firing to the back panel, I have only 1" clearance there for the cone due to some chassis braces.
> 
> I may try my old ib12au here, but not sure the box is big enough for it. On winisd there's not much difference compared to the gb12.
> Or maybe another sub? I searched a bit but don't know much about SQ subs.
> Maybe IDQ, treo, memphis, gti?
> Or 2 or 3 10", to work in this "small" volume and spread the bass a little more.


I'd maybe try moving it away from you to the passenger side as well. Maybe removing enough carpet from the left side to cut out a new hole. Then sealing up the center one temporarily from the outside with a scrap piece of mdf. And if possible just to see, I would throw in a L shaped round port that fires out the drivers side into your seat back. That should lower distortion by given you the low end without introducing the upper harmonics you get if the box is sealed and you EQ the low end in.

That concept also lets you rotate the box clockwise 180 degrees and see how it sounds with the sub to your back, ported and not.

If it doesn't work you can always go back by using the initial MDF cover piece to cover the hole from the inside and then laying/securing the cutout carpeted piece onto it. And similar for the port hole.


----------



## Elgrosso

t3sn4f2 said:


> I'd maybe try moving it away from you to the passenger side as well. Maybe removing enough carpet from the left side to cut out a new hole. Then sealing up the center one temporarily from the outside with a scrap piece of mdf. And if possible just to see, I would throw in a L shaped round port that fires out the drivers side into your seat back. That should lower distortion by given you the low end without introducing the upper harmonics you get if the box is sealed and you EQ the low end in.
> 
> That concept also lets you rotate the box clockwise 180 degrees and see how it sounds with the sub to your back, ported and not.
> 
> If it doesn't work you can always go back by using the initial MDF cover piece to cover the hole from the inside and then laying/securing the cutout carpeted piece onto it. And similar for the port hole.


Great t3sn4f2, thx for the feedback.
You're right I should try that before messing with everything else. And left or right firing would be easy to test.
About ported I'm not sure, well just not comfortable, I didn't have great experience before. But I should keep this in mind.

I know the wavelengths are too long to have real effects on ITD, but I still wonder if it's related.
I mean the box is so closed to the right ear, almost the same distance than my ear to ear, and almost on the same axis.
And clearly I can sometime feel a much bigger pressure on the right ear, or can it be due to harmonics?
I got a Q of 0.58 with filling in the big box, 0.8 empty. Can it have some effect too?

That's why I wanted to try behind driver seat first, to get same distance to each ear.
But I'll try both, and in any case the "corner" load should help a bit.


Yesterday I’ve finally built the small boxes for the 8.75" (SW223BD02_03):










They’re probably not a good replacement in my case, but they could be nice woofers, they play quite high.
And I got a Q of 0.7 in small boxes without filling! On Winisd they look nice, very similar to the GB except for max output and Xmax, and 3 of these would still be smaller!

Well first the new side holecut!


----------



## t3sn4f2

Elgrosso said:


> I know the wavelengths are too long to have real effects on ITD, but I still wonder if it's related.
> I mean the box is so closed to the right ear, almost the same distance than my ear to ear, and almost on the same axis.
> And clearly I can sometime feel a much bigger pressure on the right ear, or can it be due to harmonics?
> I got a Q of 0.58 with filling in the big box, 0.8 empty. Can it have some effect too?
> 
> That's why I wanted to try behind driver seat first, to get same distance to each ear.
> But I'll try both, and in any case the "corner" load should help a bit.


Hhmmm, hard to even begin to speculate on what it could be at this point. I'm sure after you try the sub experimentation you'll see a big change that points you in the right direction.

Oh.....



Elgrosso said:


> Btw, what's optical variable??


It's a digital output that can be attenuated via the master volume control of the head unit. As opposed to a "fixed output". You don't see that hardly anywhere other than on a PC. The head unit oabeieo mentioned is the first one I know of that implemented that feature. Many other units can control the master volume from the head unit when using the digital output, Alpines mostly. But they do so by leaving the digital output untouched and sending control signals to an analog volume control on a compatible DSP. That's a better way of doing it since you don't loose resolution.


----------



## Elgrosso

t3sn4f2 said:


> Hhmmm, hard to even begin to speculate on what it could be at this point. I'm sure after you try the sub experimentation you'll see a big change that points you in the right direction.


Yes I need to try, wanted to start today but finally spent some time in the car tuning...
With another method, new xo points allowed by a bit of eq on the C-dsp, but not too agressive. So now it's "acoustic" [email protected] Instead of 120hz.
Then dirac with a smaller volume for the measurements. A lot of sweeps in total, so it's easier to duplicate like that. Something like a cube of 1ft.

Still sounds pretty good, but different. I lost on impact what I gained on stage.
It seems a bit wider on left, but not sure.
So it's a little bit less "chesty", but the midbasess working harder keep 95% of the stuff in front. Not bad, cleaner maybe, but a tad less fun.
Well I'll see during this week, my ears are done.
Maybe the sweet spot is 100hz.

Oh and I also rised the hp on the sub, dirac capted some big humps below 20hz (but it was noisy today outside).
And I still want to try the bmx higher, I'm sure they would be happy playing up to 1600hz.


----------



## Elgrosso

t3sn4f2 said:


> It's a digital output that can be attenuated via the master volume control of the head unit. As opposed to a "fixed output". You don't see that hardly anywhere other than on a PC. The head unit oabeieo mentioned is the first one I know of that implemented that feature. Many other units can control the master volume from the head unit when using the digital output, Alpines mostly. But they do so by leaving the digital output untouched and sending control signals to an analog volume control on a compatible DSP. That's a better way of doing it since you don't loose resolution.


Got it Thx!


----------



## Elgrosso

Jus FYI, here’s the last result:

BEFORE (120-800/48db no EQ):











AFTER (80-800/24db) EQ on sub & midbass around XO, none on horns:











- Even if the 8 sweeps*placements used for measurements were not exaclty the same, the horns look the same
- Sub-midbass transition is smoother (it is flat at the nose point used for TA)
- big peaks on midbass are tamed a bit, so the curves are closer to target
- with this EQ, I was able to re-adjust levels, so less boost everywhere.
- bottom sub is not as cleaned. I guess from external noise.

Something I noticed yesterday during the sweeps, while checking my previous setting of last week.
At quite high level (near mic clipping), the woofers were "flopping" around 80Hz.
Like reaching Xmax maybe? The VBRRR sound for 0.5sec, but not bottoming
But I couldn't see anything on distortion plots, and didn't really hear it with real music for one week.

Now with the new setting, no more FLBLBLBL 
EQ was definitely needed here around XO, at least to optimize the place of each boost from Dirac.

Also I compared both settings today (a bit slow since I have to adjust 2 sets on both units, Cdsp and ddrc)
> new one is cleaner for sure
> the loss of impact is very subtile, but largely compensated by cleaner sound.
> stage is the same or too close to notice any difference

EDIT: another thing, I now tune the C-dsp to flat (trying SUBTERFUSE advice) but... what a pain with the horns, it is so loud!


----------



## oabeieo

Definitely want to know what works best .... 

Are you using Dirac as a measurement method now strictly instead of rew ? 

Not that it matters , just curious, does Dirac have RTA functions?


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yeah those scenarios were more for me to build the idea. I need to think like that.
> Ok I forgot the stop band only, it would work with both, with same effects, and I tried that with good results.
> 
> Don't forget jazzi's spreadsheets for the crossover targets, really handy to see the XO curve to reach.
> Especially used with auto EQ, really powerful!
> 
> I said B2 harder, but only on driver Eq, because you tune the average in this case, and it can be real crazy. Especially with spfr method.
> But yeah I never really used input eq before (always had the apl too for this).
> Or barely to finetune L/R, and if I went out of peqs per driver. But I see that in your method it should not be used for one driver.
> 
> But bigger point I didn't realized: you use RTA. I use sweeps only.
> Rta kind of includes some effect from the room already.
> That will push the tuning into the grey zone, mix of both methods.
> 
> Grey zone that I was talking about, that each method use some bits of the other one too in a way.
> don't know why but I didn't like the results with rta. Like if too many dips and peaks were masked.



Let's move this conversation over here . I didn't want hijack


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Definitely want to know what works best ....
> 
> Are you using Dirac as a measurement method now strictly instead of rew ?
> 
> Not that it matters , just curious, does Dirac have RTA functions?


That's the,point.
I didn't know how to start so I tried 8 sweeps on rew for midbass (and sub too, with some changes!), using the same placeemtn than for dirac. Then eq lightly.
For horns I didn't do anything, I know now the levels they want compared to others. 
Horns are kind of hard to eq, at least to measure, between 8nsweeps, spfr etc it's wild.
But they sound ok to me like that, just managed by dirac.
So yeah this conversation is all about this!

So a lot fo variables:
- quality of the baseline for reference
- mic placement = size of the "cube" for dirac
- eq or not before
- method used for eq (other thread)
- target shape and levels
- gains things (but I don't care)


----------



## oabeieo

Have you just tried using plain old RTA with PN pink first on everything?

I find it a massive pain in the butt to use sweeps to try to tune, 
I always use sweeps to analyze what's going on acoustically but not actually for setting my baseline tune. Seems like the RTA is not that obsolete after all especially set to like 32 averages or even 16 averages are usually use 16 because it responds faster, once I have a pretty flat baseline then I start doing sweeps but for the most part to try and EQS system just off sweeps man that would take a long time and even with a whole bunch of averages I bet it plain old RTA would just do a better Sounding job for setting a baseline response


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah I tried, but no great results.
First I hate the sound, can't stand it more than 10 sec.
But also I don't trust it enough, ok it averages to big number pretty fast but I don't beleive it catches all informations that fast. Also it catches all stuff around, and I tune outside, not on the street but it can get noisy there.
But the main reason is that it masks the deepest dips and peaks.
Not that I absolutely wan them to fix them, but I want to decide myself.
Well I'll try again

But yeah sweeps are a pain too, it's so long... :laugh:


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yeah I tried, but no great results.
> First I hate the sound, can't stand it more than 10 sec.
> But also I don't trust it enough, ok it averages to big number pretty fast but I don't beleive it catches all informations that fast. Also it catches all stuff around, and I tune outside, not on the street but it can get noisy there.
> But the main reason is that it masks the deepest dips and peaks.
> Not that I absolutely wan them to fix them, but I want to decide myself.
> Well I'll try again
> 
> But yeah sweeps are a pain too, it's so long... :laugh:


Interesting....

Are you using plain old RTA with bins ? 
Or is it spectrograph RTA or something?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Interesting....
> 
> Are you using plain old RTA with bins ?
> Or is it spectrograph RTA or something?


Spectrum with same FFt length than the generator, don't remember the settings exactly but they looked similar enough to my sweeps. I mean they should have been ok.


I quickly tried the near-field this morning on the parking lot.
Not really well done but it gives an idea.










They are much more symetric than at the head.
I would say I recognize 50%, then the other 50% are smoother, especially over 500Hz. I’ll definitely try 1600Hz


----------



## Elgrosso

This morning I tried higher XOs, back to 120hz for sub/midbass and 1600hz for the mid/horns, but all at 12dbLR on dsp.
Based on quick near fields measurements the boxes seemed to ask for 12db electric to get to 24db acoustic, so I tried that.
But very quick nothing optimized. 

The SPFR still look roughly the same:


The sub blends better, great impact like before at 120Hz, but less annoyance from the sub itself, less localizable.
The stage is really different. More diffused, and also less depth.
At 800/24 the center was much stronger, also everything was more separated.
But there's something interesting with 1600, like softer, easier, if not more natural, more common.
I used both and don't really know wet which one I prefer.

So is it the higher xo that removed some stuff from the horns?
Or just the new slope that blends better, and maybe too much?
Both you'll say I guess…


----------



## Elgrosso

Changed again the XO today, between: [email protected] and [email protected] for horns, no pre-EQ
[email protected] - 800/[email protected] for midbass
And [email protected] for sub, no HP 

The sub is really good like that, good impact and not obnoxious.
The midbass really liked the 12db, I think I can now enjoy the boxes effect.
So it's more about staging now, between 800-1600, the difference is much more subtile than yersterday.

It's really cool to be able to try all this so fast, just 20 min this morning!


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> This morning I tried higher XOs, back to 120hz for sub/midbass and 1600hz for the mid/horns, but all at 12dbLR on dsp.
> Based on quick near fields measurements the boxes seemed to ask for 12db electric to get to 24db acoustic, so I tried that.
> But very quick nothing optimized.
> 
> The SPFR still look roughly the same:
> 
> 
> The sub blends better, great impact like before at 120Hz, but less annoyance from the sub itself, less localizable.
> The stage is really different. More diffused, and also less depth.
> At 800/24 the center was much stronger, also everything was more separated.
> But there's something interesting with 1600, like softer, easier, if not more natural, more common.
> I used both and don't really know wet which one I prefer.
> 
> So is it the higher xo that removed some stuff from the horns?
> Or just the new slope that blends better, and maybe too much?
> Both you'll say I guess…



800-1.6k on horns is tough to get right. 
Like tracks like Dave Matthews are off balanced and too much ...where 1.6k is more equal on all tracks. 

I am at 1.2k LR2 an in the middle so I can get the lovely down low horn sound that we all love but high enough that all different recordings sound correct


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> 800-1.6k on horns is tough to get right.
> Like tracks like Dave Matthews are off balanced and too much ...where 1.6k is more equal on all tracks.
> 
> I am at 1.2k LR2 an in the middle so I can get the lovely down low horn sound that we all love but high enough that all different recordings sound correct


Thanks, ok I’ll try in between and at 12db again.
The one I tried few days ago, 1.6Khz/12db was I think not really an acoustic 12db, too much overlap so a bit messy. The ones I have right now are cleaner.

Funny because yesterday I had a long drive with all the time to compare both settings (800/1600).
And I especially listened to acoustic guitar too, but John Fahey (I didn't know Dave Mathews, will check).
Well anyway, a cool drive, I really enjoy my system!


----------



## subwoofery

Elgrosso said:


> Thanks, ok I’ll try in between and at 12db again.
> The one I tried few days ago, 1.6Khz/12db was I think not really an acoustic 12db, too much overlap so a bit messy. The ones I have right now are cleaner.
> 
> Funny because yesterday I had a long drive with all the time to compare both settings (800/1600).
> And I especially listened to acoustic guitar too, but John Fahey (I didn't know Dave Mathews, will check).
> Well anyway, a cool drive, I really enjoy my system!


Defeat all EQs and Xovers
Measure your left horn by itself 
Measure your right horn by itself 
Compare where it drops on the low end 
Set crossover where it drops first (my right horn dropped earlier) 

Kelvin


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Thanks, ok I’ll try in between and at 12db again.
> The one I tried few days ago, 1.6Khz/12db was I think not really an acoustic 12db, too much overlap so a bit messy. The ones I have right now are cleaner.
> 
> Funny because yesterday I had a long drive with all the time to compare both settings (800/1600).
> And I especially listened to acoustic guitar too, but John Fahey (I didn't know Dave Mathews, will check).
> Well anyway, a cool drive, I really enjoy my system!


Dood your system is frikkin awesome.


----------



## Elgrosso

subwoofery said:


> Defeat all EQs and Xovers
> Measure your left horn by itself
> Measure your right horn by itself
> Compare where it drops on the low end
> Set crossover where it drops first (my right horn dropped earlier)
> 
> Kelvin


I restarted everything again yesterday, by measuring with oba's method, each driver nearfield. 
Sur I had differences between both horns. But almost mone between both midbasses.
Even before when measured at driver seat, the left horn always went a bit lower. I also had differences in nearfield but don't remember which one... not sure it was the left one too.
I'll post pics tomorrow.

But when you said defeat xo, on horns what's a safe minimum?
I think I measured once at 600/12db, at regular volume, and distortion was still ok. But I didn't like the shape, too much brick wall.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Dood your system is frikkin awesome.


Thx man 
Did you get your DI?


----------



## Elgrosso

So all measurements near-field:
Without knowing more I used the middle of the mouth, with this hi-tech tripod 




Boxes full range: 

Tried several XO/targets on C-dsp and ended up with:

[email protected]


[email protected]


Then EQ:


Missing the sub EQed here, lost it. I switched it to 2 ohms to try. I don't think it changed anything. 
Maybe only on high volume when it needs all power from the HD750, I'll see.
This is a test to try nearfield stuff, but it is a real pleasure to work on this kind of measurements, clean, and super predictable.
I didn't care much over 10Khz, Dirac will fix that.


Then levels at driver seat to finetune, and Dirac:





But the Dirac step was all messed up, too much external noise (planes/bikes/trucks etc). 
That's why I have strange variation on sub/midbass, when they all share the same settings.
I'll restart this part during the night or an early morning.
The sweeps must be 256 or 512K so kind of long, they catch all the stuff around.

[email protected] is definitely a sure reference, it always works and sounds good.
1600 is a bit more subtile, brings a sense of space/echo without really messing the stage (woofers reflections I guess).
Hard to say more now


EDIT: I wanted to move the sub on the side of the box, but couldn’t easily do it.
The box is 36", minus side wall it’s 33", and the hole is 11". 
So I’ll need to add material but don’t want to move my seat, and the gap between seat & box is less than 1/2"... I’ll try the wavecor first


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Thx man
> Did you get your DI?


 I just sold the 10G40s , so I got 400$ of it . 
I'm selling my minidsp 2x4 on the classifieds for 85
And I'm selling my 15s locally for 400$ 

I'm going have the Di before I do the install of the nx706 
And I'm going to get 2-10W6 JL audio subs 
I NEED to reduce weight 

I got a pro audio JBl 15 that only weighs 13lbs and I smoked it in 15 min
So yeah , the 2-10w6s will shed about 40lbs in sub and wood and get some of my trunk back


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> So all measurements near-field:
> Without knowing more I used the middle of the mouth, with this hi-tech tripod
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boxes full range:
> 
> Tried several XO/targets on C-dsp and ended up with:
> 
> [email protected]
> 
> 
> [email protected]
> 
> 
> Then EQ:
> 
> 
> Missing the sub EQed here, lost it. I switched it to 2 ohms to try. I don't think it changed anything.
> Maybe only on high volume when it needs all power from the HD750, I'll see.
> This is a test to try nearfield stuff, but it is a real pleasure to work on this kind of measurements, clean, and super predictable.
> I didn't care much over 10Khz, Dirac will fix that.
> 
> 
> Then levels at driver seat to finetune, and Dirac:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the Dirac step was all messed up, too much external noise (planes/bikes/trucks etc).
> That's why I have strange variation on sub/midbass, when they all share the same settings.
> I'll restart this part during the night or an early morning.
> The sweeps must be 256 or 512K so kind of long, they catch all the stuff around.
> 
> [email protected] is definitely a sure reference, it always works and sounds good.
> 1600 is a bit more subtile, brings a sense of space/echo without really messing the stage (woofers reflections I guess).
> Hard to say more now
> 
> 
> EDIT: I wanted to move the sub on the side of the box, but couldn’t easily do it.
> The box is 36", minus side wall it’s 33", and the hole is 11".
> So I’ll need to add material but don’t want to move my seat, and the gap between seat & box is less than 1/2"... I’ll try the wavecor first




Rofl I LOVE that mic stand!! 

Hahaha 

So ya trying the close mic thing. That's great it worked really well for me. One thing I did read when I just learned about it is you want the mic element the distance away from speaker as big as cone is so 8" speaker = mic 8" away but no more than double distance , I couldn't notice much if any but one of the guys on DIY says it will measure the passband better doing it that way because of the shape of the wave front compared to the speakers shape. So I adopted it even tho I can't really tell :/ not sure how that logic would translate to a horn mouth that's odd shaped 

On your graph there where you have almost a 14db difference at "crossover" if you didn't have Dirac or FIR it wouldn't sum right because even though your acoustical slopes sum flat the delay at the roll off is different than the delay at the pass band would make things sound weird , only because if IIR crossover delay. But you have Dirac which will correct it , but if you didn't have any way to linearize that you would want to use a standard electrical crossover and let there be acoustic overlap and eq the peak with gloabal eq. At least that's the way I understand it I'll try and dig up that link 
But you don't so as you were


----------



## oabeieo

I tried looking for that page I can't find it I'm gonna keep looking but it went on to explain the difference between measuring half space and near measurements , it was a pretty interesting page too. The one thing though if I do remember above about 1K do you want to do a different type of measurement for the life of me I can't remember what it says I got a find that page now ...


----------



## oabeieo

This isnt it but this one is sort of like it 

Speaker Measurements 101 Page 3 | Sound & Vision


And when I was talking to you the other day and talking about close measurements I definitely want to be clear that I was strictly talking about low frequencies or lower frequencies for us because you and me both use horns and both of our systems direct radiators play under 1K so the close mic method will work pretty decently , 
If we move our microphones away we're leading into much of the reflection because the car environment is almost half space as it is . Which makes it difficult for us to use 3 feet or 1 m because that's pretty much the other side of the room for us but keep in mind as you approach 1000 Hz you're gonna want to start gateing the measurements , as far as horns are concerned I have not found the best way I just put it about a foot and a half away and it seems to work OK but is far is measuring midbass or subs or midbass to horn just for crossovers the close Mik thing works pretty good ensure makes gating the measurement a lot easier in the low-frequency to get more accurate results compared to the audio signal .

anyway I just wanted to throw that information that you all keep trying to find that other article that really was good it said quite a bit of information and got me started on this whole thing


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Rofl I LOVE that mic stand!!
> 
> Hahaha
> 
> So ya trying the close mic thing. That's great it worked really well for me. One thing I did read when I just learned about it is you want the mic element the distance away from speaker as big as cone is so 8" speaker = mic 8" away but no more than double distance , I couldn't notice much if any but one of the guys on DIY says it will measure the passband better doing it that way because of the shape of the wave front compared to the speakers shape. So I adopted it even tho I can't really tell :/ not sure how that logic would translate to a horn mouth that's odd shaped
> 
> On your graph there where you have almost a 14db difference at "crossover" if you didn't have Dirac or FIR it wouldn't sum right because even though your acoustical slopes sum flat the delay at the roll off is different than the delay at the pass band would make things sound weird , only because if IIR crossover delay. But you have Dirac which will correct it , but if you didn't have any way to linearize that you would want to use a standard electrical crossover and let there be acoustic overlap and eq the peak with gloabal eq. At least that's the way I understand it I'll try and dig up that link
> But you don't so as you were


Ok yeah in doubt I tried very close to minimize any room effect. This area is pretty small so I'm sure pretty quick you get reflections (door/underdash/console/carpet/my legs etc)

Which 14db variation did you point at? Ho ok on the non-averages.
Yeah I think that's it. The very first sweep on Dirac is super important.
I tried different point yesterday, and it changes a lot. More than with ms8 for example.

Also surprisingly they summed pretty well before Dirac, at driver head point.
More than before.
I think I under-estimated the room gain on midbass.
Using a shallow slope like 6db here makes it clean in near field, but way high once at driver seat.
I'll probably change this back.







oabeieo said:


> This isnt it but this one is sort of like it
> 
> Speaker Measurements 101 Page 3 | Sound & Vision
> 
> 
> And when I was talking to you the other day and talking about close measurements I definitely want to be clear that I was strictly talking about low frequencies or lower frequencies for us because you and me both use horns and both of our systems direct radiators play under 1K so the close mic method will work pretty decently ,
> If we move our microphones away we're leading into much of the reflection because the car environment is almost half space as it is . Which makes it difficult for us to use 3 feet or 1 m because that's pretty much the other side of the room for us but keep in mind as you approach 1000 Hz you're gonna want to start gateing the measurements , as far as horns are concerned I have not found the best way I just put it about a foot and a half away and it seems to work OK but is far is measuring midbass or subs or midbass to horn just for crossovers the close Mik thing works pretty good ensure makes gating the measurement a lot easier in the low-frequency to get more accurate results compared to the audio signal .
> 
> anyway I just wanted to throw that information that you all keep trying to find that other article that really was good it said quite a bit of information and got me started on this whole thing



Ok I'll read the link thx man.
All this about over 1k makes sure sense. And that's kind of what surprised me in the other discussion.
But once I tried both in my car, honestly there is not so much variations. It’s certainly not night and day.
I mean yeah a lot of small dips/peaks disappear, especially high on horns.
But the overall shape is the same. Maybe because horns are so directive.

For sub I tried near-field too, but the room gain was near absent.
I prefered to use 2 ears method there. (good thing is I could try with the top down to see with or without room gain).

Midbasses are clearly 90% the same, just "cleaner", less accident, but same shape, except room gain too, to be considered.
But much easier to avoid room modes on eq here.

I remember when I had cones on dash and tried nearfield/driver seat, there was much more differences, so much that it was unusable.


But,
So Dirac session from the week end was bad, too much noise.
Then yesterday I re-measured everything on my work parking lot, super quiet.
I wanted to try to move the center a bit closer too me so used a different position for the 1st sweep.
Loaded the filters this morning, and the result was awful.
The center is now in the middle of my glove box 

I really don't get why, it should try to compensate, not accentuate?
Well II'll restart.


Side note:
Had no wifi on the parking lot yesterday, so I couldn't create the filters (Dirac protection).
Also it deactivated my existing filters for some reasons, so had to drive back with Dirac off and these 3 settings.
It was not that bad! A little boomy, a little hot, but not awful at all in term of timing, all midranges were ok.
The difference between 1200/1600/800 was much more obvious too.
But sub/midbass was messy as hell, strong, but messy. Center was clean at least 
So for me it means that the nearfield is totally usable, maybe not the best way but who knows


----------



## oabeieo

That makes a lot of sense. I would probably do it the same way . 

Heya? How did you like the AE6 you got from Jason? 
I have been thinking about those quite a bit. The size of them trouble me bit I don't think they'll fit , but I'll make them fit if there very very good. 

I cant make up my mind on what midrange to go with. I really wanna try something new .


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> I just sold the 10G40s , so I got 400$ of it .
> I'm selling my minidsp 2x4 on the classifieds for 85
> And I'm selling my 15s locally for 400$
> 
> I'm going have the Di before I do the install of the nx706
> And I'm going to get 2-10W6 JL audio subs
> I NEED to reduce weight
> 
> I got a pro audio JBl 15 that only weighs 13lbs and I smoked it in 15 min
> So yeah , the 2-10w6s will shed about 40lbs in sub and wood and get some of my trunk back


Which jbl 15 did you use, and how? I sometime want to try a huge one even in too small box, just to see by myself.
On winisd they don’t really look right but I’m curious, with cabin gain etc, like some peavey.




oabeieo said:


> That makes a lot of sense. I would probably do it the same way .
> 
> Heya? How did you like the AE6 you got from Jason?
> I have been thinking about those quite a bit. The size of them trouble me bit I don't think they'll fit , but I'll make them fit if there very very good.
> 
> I cant make up my mind on what midrange to go with. I really wanna try something new .


Honestly, like I answered to many by MP, I can't really say.
I kept the td6H for 2 or 3 weeks only on a ghetto ring, then I quickly went for 7-8" driver for the same amount of work needed to make them clean. Because they’re large and heavy as hell!
I felt like they had more sensitivity than the gti that they replaced. 
But everything says they want ported...

The M (midrange) might interest you! If he has a pair left.
I keep all mines for a home project for later, but if you want you can try them!
But no way you can fit these in your pillars


----------



## oabeieo

No way I'll fit them ...lol , that's the only reason I haven't tried . I am trying to stay away from heavy 


Anyway , sorry for bad info 
It was n 18" and 15lbs not a 15" 13lbs 

This 

JBL 2268HPL 351210-003X 18" Neo Woofer


Yeah smoked it bad in about 15min ....it was a complete **** show and waste of 350 bucks 
I'll never do that again... I didn't post about it out of embarrassment...
But dam that was a light ass sub ......it sounded great before GOBS of smoke came out of it 

It's at international speaker right now awaiting a recone kit from jbl...than I'll probably sell it or use it somewhere else


----------



## Elgrosso

Hahahaha

Yeah it's almost the same I wanted: Peavey 18" Low Rider Subwoofer Speaker or in 15"
More power, bigger coil

So you said it sounded great? (Even 15min )

It seems it could do ok in 2.5 cu ft. I just want to try.
Miss my IB...


----------



## oabeieo

That things A tank at 26lbs, well it's not bad but heavier than I care for , I shouldn't talk being im using 38lb 15s again. 

I need to get this sub thing figured out. I'm so tired of pulling a 200lb sub box around ...


It sounded fantastic in the fact that from 40-120hz it had THE BEST bass I've ever heard in a car, it didn't get silly low but for an 18 it sounded like I had 30 8"s back there ... it was loud loud and blended with midbass way better than anything I've ever heard. It really had that pro audio sound and freakishly low distortion....I don't know if the box was wrong or if I just simply over powered it ... it didn't bottom out I fed it 1200w and gave me no indication that it was hurtn. 

I started to smell what smelled like a can of band-aids on fire kinda I looked back and the whole back of my car was filled with smoke. I never seen so much smoke come from a speaker. And I've seen a lot of speaker blow....at work we purposely plug subs into the wall to field destroy them for warranty reasons and they never smoke like that one did...

On winisd it looked good, 5.5cu ported , tuned at 35 vent Mach 0.15 . it should have been all good ..

I definitely want that kind of sound , I had a ipal18 b&C a while back and I hammered on it and it never had a problem ... maybe it was defective, IDK 
The recone is 80$ and another 50 to have them re-cone it , maybe I'll give it a 2nd try because it was light weight and great... kinda makes me sad

But when I stared looking into recone I noticed on eBay there's a holy ****load of them for sale and most of them are re-cones ....makes me wonder if a lot of them blow ppl recone them than sell them ... I would bet if you looked that sub up on eBay at any given time most of them on there are recones


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> That things A tank at 26lbs, well it's not bad but heavier than I care for , I shouldn't talk being im using 38lb 15s again.
> 
> I need to get this sub thing figured out. I'm so tired of pulling a 200lb sub box around ...
> 
> 
> It sounded fantastic in the fact that from 40-120hz it had THE BEST bass I've ever heard in a car, it didn't get silly low but for an 18 it sounded like I had 30 8"s back there ... it was loud loud and blended with midbass way better than anything I've ever heard. It really had that pro audio sound and freakishly low distortion....I don't know if the box was wrong or if I just simply over powered it ... it didn't bottom out I fed it 1200w and gave me no indication that it was hurtn.
> 
> I started to smell what smelled like a can of band-aids on fire kinda I looked back and the whole back of my car was filled with smoke. I never seen so much smoke come from a speaker. And I've seen a lot of speaker blow....at work we purposely plug subs into the wall to field destroy them for warranty reasons and they never smoke like that one did...
> 
> On winisd it looked good, 5.5cu ported , tuned at 35 vent Mach 0.15 . it should have been all good ..
> 
> I definitely want that kind of sound , I had a ipal18 b&C a while back and I hammered on it and it never had a problem ... maybe it was defective, IDK
> The recone is 80$ and another 50 to have them re-cone it , maybe I'll give it a 2nd try because it was light weight and great... kinda makes me sad
> 
> But when I stared looking into recone I noticed on eBay there's a holy ****load of them for sale and most of them are re-cones ....makes me wonder if a lot of them blow ppl recone them than sell them ... I would bet if you looked that sub up on eBay at any given time most of them on there are recones


Ho man you're pushing me to try with these comments.
I'm willing to, but I will first go ported with what I have.
Still not happy with my sub, the bigger volume didn't do anything.
Well maybe I should focus on tuning, but at the same step in the process I prefered the 4 tb 6" for example. Except output...
and since the box is now big enough I can easily cut few holes. With th gb first, then with what I have around.
Ported is a new world for me so I'll see.

I must try to measure my car resonance fr, and room gain to get a better idea.
But the peavey looks really flat, with an early drop compared to the gb but with cabin gain it might be good. 
As I really enjoy the sub playing 80/100hz right now.
Lower is not that good.

Same or more impact, better details , that's what I need.


----------



## oabeieo

So, as you read that thread , I thinking for sure I'll get the b&c that he posted up.

Kinda funny I been eyen that same sub for some time. At 500$ bucks a pop I'll have to sell the sundowns , and just to be clear the sundown sa subs are very sq and I think there overlooked by a lot of sq folks as being so sq ...

The sa subs are great for IB built strong etc etc , but after listening to the JBL I know I want a sub that's a little bit more like a giant midbass than a sub , 

The sound is kinda hard to describe, and I think I'm completely over using steep slopes for sub as well when a 1st order slope in FIR sq is one of the best things since sliced bread. Lol 

You know how your midbass gets nasty loud (in a good way) at 100hz in a box?, 
Having the sub play up into the 125 range where your HI-efficiency midbass start to loose umph is so nice , what I did was use a linear phase 1st order crossover at 50hz and some IIR eq to smooth the slope (Basicly a wide Q peak filter centered at 100 -5db) so that 90-350hz band that the sub plays audibly isn't dominant but gives a true backbone to the blend between midbass and sub...

Keeping phase right between sub and midbass is so easy because it's so audible when it's not right...and when it is right it reinforces all notes up to as high as 2-3khz..... it's like everything is vibrating together , the sub has so much surface area that even the tiniest movements of the cone make a difference. 

To me that difference make things sound tight.... having upper Oactave bass info come from sub and the sub box having that low pitched ring to fill the harmonics of those upper bass notes is fantastic IMO and I like it. It makes kickdrums blend into the HF and everything else to have a very real experience as if the band is actually in the car with you playing live...

Having high order slopes on midbass and having to worry about having 10s in big boxes to do the job is sometimes just hard to do...

But it's not the only way to get there , like in your car you have a pretty good size sealed boxes so higher order slopes may work pretty decently especially that you have been the base upfront , I bet you could get away with not even having those big enclosures and have a very similar sound and just let the sub play up to those 125's or whatever , but the key is not letting the sub play at that height at full power it's a matter of blending using shallow slopes between Midbas and sub and getting the phase right between the two , and the cool thing at least in my case is with the 2 x 4 HD's and rephase I can dial-in whatever phase curve I want arbitrarily , so it happens very very easily . I bet DIRAC would do the job just fine to with a standard Butterworth's first-order applied in IIR. 

I can get both the sundowns to play to 150, that's not the problem, I can just tell at 75-90 Hz most of the amp power is going to them with huge cuts at 50-60hz on eq....
And it leaves 55-65hz having a pretty noticeable distortion that is sluggish and garbled..

So 
Anyway , I posted the sundowns on a local site , as soon as they sell I'm get the b&c 
Pretty excited....


----------



## Elgrosso

Haha I always enjoy your posts, you put the right words on a lot of my thoughts.
The giant midbass instead of a sub, I think that's exactly it. Sure this blend makes everything even more dynamic and full, a nice complement to the horns.
The last 2 weeks I had this kind of tuning, even if I'm not 100% sure of why with my measurements, but I really liked it.
You're right now after few weeks of discovering the shallow slope thing, I think I could have gone with smaller.
Well the good thing is that they don't need much EQ on the first octaves, and I can still try to go lower later if needed.
Fullrange nearfields on midbasses were more like a 12db slope, and with cabin gain they look like a 6db or even less.
They played low with just enough volume and not much distortion, I'm sure it helped the blend and anchored everything in front.
And the sealed sub was easy to dial. By hand I could get a nice transition around XO but Dirac made it perfect on a larger band.

Although everything could sometime feel a bit "too" dry. 
And I felt like I was still missing something on first octave. The sealed sub showed up well on measurements around there, but it was missing clarity.
And too close to my ear can be painful sometime.

So this week end I tried few things:
- first measured cabin gain, sealed box, top down/door opens vs everything close. It's a bit strange, it seems to build up after 65Hz but depending of the mic placement I can also have a dip around 75Hz so it's hard to define. I'll restart it 
- same box firing backward, 2-3 inches of the back firewall > not bad at all, it acted like a low pass and worked well… until I pushed up a bit more and then the whole car went shaking like crazy! The box was well isolated so it's the output, the cone firing 70% onto the metal sheet. I tried foam/fiberglass/pillow etc on top of the grill to tame, nothing worked.
- 2 smaller boxes with 8", in different position "on" rear seats, opposed/front/up/back/mix of firing directions etc > no real gain, measured a bit flatter 20-60Hz, but less output and not much gain on quality.

So I modified the box to try ported. Played a lot with winisd, and with 600W while keeping excursion and air velocity down it asked for 6" port!
I started with what I found at homedepot = 4", about 80cm of pvc pipe with an angle inside. 
Not much room there so the port is firing up, right side of the box.
I kept few inches outside so I could easily add the 4" cap, and too long inside to tune later.



But I must have messed up too much the simulation, maybe I under-evaluated the volume of the pipe taken in the box and over-evaluated the internal volume of the box to start with. Because it's tuned too low.
At least no rattles and that’s cool because I did it real quick.

Not much change compared to the sealed, it goes a bit lower louder but nothing dramatic. Too early to say if it's cleaner.
I'll play between 40-80cm inside, for a tune between 20-30Hz according to winisd. Flares and finish would be for later if I like it.



But, I wasn't able to tune as smoothly as before with the sealed. Around 100Hz I have a dip that I think wasn't there. Can it be the side port?
I didn't spend much time but so far I can't get my shallow slope back. :/

I only tried ported for a cleaner low end, not so much for more output I had enough I could get flat easily.
Maybe cabin gain is great in this case, but also maybe the soft top messes a bit the response?
That’s why I think one day I’ll try the peavey 15", in this small box it looks really good on winisd, smoother, and with the gain it should be closed to flat.


----------



## oabeieo

Have you calculated the EBP? 
The GB subs are mid Q no? 

For some reason I thought you had a trunk, I see better now it's like a vw bug but smaller 

Anytime I've used subs that close to me I try to go bandpass , 
Or shall I say give a bandpass box a try... 
having subs that close you are very much in the range of motor noise, and I don't mean that v12 you have under the hood , I mean the subwoofer motornoise. Even the most quietest IB subs have a pretty large amount of noise ,it's non linear and it definitely adds quite a bit to the sound when your that close ..


A bandpass box will mask wall of that noise, but than you have the inherent downsides of a bandpass , but it doesn't always have to be worce , IMO the submotor noise would be worse than some group delay that for us is fixable

And I think some of the distortions that you measure from sub get a lot louder the closer you are to the sub, At least the ratios between frequency response and distortion response gets closer.. FME


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Have you calculated the EBP?
> The GB subs are mid Q no?


No I didn’t, but just did 
The Audiofrog T/S give an EBP of 32.5/0.52= 62.5
with mine measured I get: EBP of 26.92/0.66 = 40
I guess mine wants sealed




oabeieo said:


> For some reason I thought you had a trunk, I see better now it's like a vw bug but smaller
> 
> Anytime I've used subs that close to me I try to go bandpass ,
> Or shall I say give a bandpass box a try...
> having subs that close you are very much in the range of motor noise, and I don't mean that v12 you have under the hood , I mean the subwoofer motornoise. Even the most quietest IB subs have a pretty large amount of noise ,it's non linear and it definitely adds quite a bit to the sound when your that close ..
> 
> 
> A bandpass box will mask wall of that noise, but than you have the inherent downsides of a bandpass , but it doesn't always have to be worce , IMO the submotor noise would be worse than some group delay that for us is fixable
> 
> And I think some of the distortions that you measure from sub get a lot louder the closer you are to the sub, At least the ratios between frequency response and distortion response gets closer.. FME


Yep not in the trunk. Before in the coupe I had it IB.
Now the soft top once down goes in a big volume behind the seat, and over the fuel tank.
No easy way to use this area without blocking the top. + the tank doesn't help to vent anything in the trunk.
web pic:
p73113935-4.jpg
So I removed my rear seats (barely enough to sit 2 kids) and use what I have just behind, now the box is just sitting there (attached).
(but if I wanted to optimize, I could find more volume here, on both sides behind the panels, below to use the curves, and near the back wall. Maybe 2 more cu ft, with a lot of work)


I never noticed this motor noise, and I had it reverse mount for few weeks, literally at 2 ft of my head.
There's a vent on the motor, I could feel the air sometime, but not hear it.
But is it a specific noise or just added distortion? 

I thought about trying a bandpass because I'm curious, the cheap one from JBL for example.
But can it play over a large band while keeping its main advantage?
Maybe I could build a bandpass "around" my back firewall, using it to separate both chambers…


----------



## oabeieo

If you don't notice it than your not playing the sub anywhere near it max, which is good ...and ide imagine that's a fairly quiet sub to begin with...
That's no cheap sub either, like example a cheaper sub , the old w1s with gold cones...them were noisy a$$ subs ..

Point being , you said it was painful being so close to your ear...maybe I'm not thinking about the right thing  

Are you talking about spl pain or noise pain from fatigue?


----------



## Elgrosso

It’s not the same pain as when my HF are too loud.
It’s much more physical, like I can feel the wave on the right eardrum on big impact, and less on left.
It’s very short, and I don't think it causes long term fatigue, and I didn't notice any loss.
Well of course usually it’s when loud, so everything will cause fatigue if too long.
I’ve never been to any SPL demo but it’s nothing like these crazy videos online with hair floating 
So yeah it’s probably spl, but the fact that it’s not the same on both ears is a burden


----------



## oabeieo

Oh okay I see now .... yeah that would be cumbersome 

So hey , how do you have your 22d powered again?
You have the USB cord plugged into a USB to cig lighter adapter? And not using the 5v in? 

How many amps does it need to be? I can wire up a relay and make it turn on with remote pretty easily , how do u think is the best way to power it? 

Thanks


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Oh okay I see now .... yeah that would be cumbersome
> 
> So hey , how do you have your 22d powered again?
> You have the USB cord plugged into a USB to cig lighter adapter? And not using the 5v in?
> 
> How many amps does it need to be? I can wire up a relay and make it turn on with remote pretty easily , how do u think is the best way to power it?
> 
> Thanks


It’s still a temp install right now but I had a free USB from this in on an AUX outlet in my dash, then USB to barrel cable and all good.
It wants only 600mA so really I didn't bother with remote etc and so far it’s clean.
Once I’m happy with settings (if ever) I’ll do a clean remote thing just for peace of mind.


----------



## captainobvious

I'm doing a pair of the GB12's in about 3 cubic feet (could be smaller and still be just fine). They play very low and very cleanly. I was pretty surprised. Not the most sensitive subwoofer, but very good extension.


----------



## Elgrosso

captainobvious said:


> I'm doing a pair of the GB12's in about 3 cubic feet (could be smaller and still be just fine). They play very low and very cleanly. I was pretty surprised. Not the most sensitive subwoofer, but very good extension.


Hum 2 GBs... I just modeled it and it looks nice, in my 2ish cu ft box they could play without HP and with a better response everywhere. Way less excursion at max power, maybe I should try!
And I could go stereo sub!


----------



## oabeieo

One of my buddies here on the form as a GB12 on a hd1200/1 ,
Sealed Q.66 
that thing gets seriously down for a 12 in a tiny sealed box
We had a nice meet and greet Diyma Rocky Mountain region style , 
Pretty dang good subs . If you get one I'll be pretty jealous


----------



## Elgrosso

Well mine doesn't go that low, measured sweeps down to 20hz yes, but with real music not that impressive. Even in the bigger box I had, with an hd750.
I'm in France now so didn't play much with my new ported box.
Once back I'll play with the port length.
Anyway I think I also have many issues to tackle:
- placement (center rear, firing front)
- not enough deadening and some panels vibrations in the rear
- maybe a need for little more bracing, or a complete new super solid box.

(but I still look at bigger asses... w15gti? )


----------



## oabeieo

I'm really glad I saw you have that processor...
Man it's the best thing I've added. So thanks!

So when you take measurements do you have problems with it saying sub is clipping and are u forced to take really quiet measurements or have sub low when measuring? 

I took a really quiet measurements and made a curve that follows the shape of the sub responce so that it wouldn't adjust the amplitude but just do a phase correction, 

That seemed to work pretty good , but not having the sub up loud during measurements makes it hard to correct the sub phase with the extra 15db gain I usually like. So I took measurements with sub off and tilted the responce down at 50hz towards 20hz and optimize that way. Than added back the sub and measurement in REw than added sub back until it started pushing phase up than used phase eq to push phase back up so it's flat w rest of system.

Sub is so impactful now and thesesundowns I've been trying to sell actually sound good now. They can play barely to 80 at full power and rolloff . It's weird how this thing can fix the suckout at 80 by using sub and midbass phase and change it to reinforce 80. 

80 is loud now and clear. I was really worried it would just boot into the null and just cause distortion but it sounds fine and plays loud without clipping.

Do you have problems getting measurement volume to ride at around 0db line all the way through the magnitude? I am loosing about -2 fb of signal and have to boost the input on minis by 2db to get all the signal back. I found the ddrc software has a level adjustment in it however I have mine a 0dbfs and just force Dirac to notboost. Wondering if you have similar experience 

Anyway


----------



## Elgrosso

Back home!
I removed all drivers before leaving to keep the car driveable for my fellows, but I hope to have time to put everything back this week end and play with the sub.
I miss big sound!




oabeieo said:


> I'm really glad I saw you have that processor...
> Man it's the best thing I've added. So thanks!
> 
> So when you take measurements do you have problems with it saying sub is clipping and are u forced to take really quiet measurements or have sub low when measuring?
> 
> I took a really quiet measurements and made a curve that follows the shape of the sub responce so that it wouldn't adjust the amplitude but just do a phase correction,
> 
> That seemed to work pretty good , but not having the sub up loud during measurements makes it hard to correct the sub phase with the extra 15db gain I usually like. So I took measurements with sub off and tilted the responce down at 50hz towards 20hz and optimize that way. Than added back the sub and measurement in REw than added sub back until it started pushing phase up than used phase eq to push phase back up so it's flat w rest of system.
> 
> Sub is so impactful now and thesesundowns I've been trying to sell actually sound good now. They can play barely to 80 at full power and rolloff . It's weird how this thing can fix the suckout at 80 by using sub and midbass phase and change it to reinforce 80.
> 
> 80 is loud now and clear. I was really worried it would just boot into the null and just cause distortion but it sounds fine and plays loud without clipping.
> 
> Do you have problems getting measurement volume to ride at around 0db line all the way through the magnitude? I am loosing about -2 fb of signal and have to boost the input on minis by 2db to get all the signal back. I found the ddrc software has a level adjustment in it however I have mine a 0dbfs and just force Dirac to notboost. Wondering if you have similar experience
> 
> Anyway


First times I used -10db on ddrc for safety, then quickly moved to -5db or more.
Tried many times at 0db and it was mostly ok, except very bad tracks.
Also I use a low target compared to measurements, so it mostly cuts.
I still have to play more with the gain chain To optimize.
Maybe there's a better way, but I didn't really mind I have enough power.

But no issue with the sub. Although I'm pretty sure my target is flatter than your. I must have 10db slope from 20 to 20k. And I optimized levels for this.
I don't know how much range dirac can manage.

No mic clipping as well. I don't remember the numbers but the sweep levels I used were just loud enough to be slightly agressive if too long.
But I want to try higher levels, just to check if it has any "loudness curve" impact.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Back home!
> I removed all drivers before leaving to keep the car driveable for my fellows, but I hope to have time to put everything back this week end and play with the sub.
> I miss big sound!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First times I used -10db on ddrc for safety, then quickly moved to -5db or more.
> Tried many times at 0db and it was mostly ok, except very bad tracks.
> Also I use a low target compared to measurements, so it mostly cuts.
> I still have to play more with the gain chain To optimize.
> Maybe there's a better way, but I didn't really mind I have enough power.
> 
> But no issue with the sub. Although I'm pretty sure my target is flatter than your. I must have 10db slope from 20 to 20k. And I optimized levels for this.
> I don't know how much range dirac can manage.
> 
> No mic clipping as well. I don't remember the numbers but the sweep levels I used were just loud enough to be slightly agressive if too long.
> But I want to try higher levels, just to check if it has any "loudness curve" impact.


 welcome back 


So when I do my own measurements for tuning (not analyzing) I make them as loud as I can stand. About 100-105db . It *always*makes a better sounding tune . On Dirac it says I'm clipping and it isn't *that*loud. (80db)

When I turn off sub I can run it up. Maybe I'll ask Dirac 

I finally got a really good tune now tho. It works remarkably well 
I had to set a good tune first


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> welcome back
> 
> 
> So when I do my own measurements for tuning (not analyzing) I make them as loud as I can stand. About 100-105db . It *always*makes a better sounding tune . On Dirac it says I'm clipping and it isn't *that*loud. (80db)
> 
> When I turn off sub I can run it up. Maybe I'll ask Dirac
> 
> I finally got a really good tune now tho. It works remarkably well
> I had to set a good tune first


100db! Ok I'll try higher then


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> 100db! Ok I'll try higher then


Yeah but that's just RTA with plain old eq not Dirac ...


Dirac won't let me go past 90-95


----------



## oabeieo

So in chair mode 

Do you find yourself having to move the mic for the first measurement a wee bit to the right (towards the center of car) by about 3-4" from true center so the left isn't too loud ? 

It seems to make the center more left because the level is a good 2db louder. 


I have my first sweep about parallel with my right ear and it's perfect...
I'm 99% sure all the added energy the horns push to other side of car messes that up a tiny bit. Just wondering if you have same issue. 

And before you said your measurements were a 2' square, so in chair mode do you put mic inpassanger area at all?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> So in chair mode
> 
> Do you find yourself having to move the mic for the first measurement a wee bit to the right (towards the center of car) by about 3-4" from true center so the left isn't too loud ?
> 
> It seems to make the center more left because the level is a good 2db louder.
> 
> 
> I have my first sweep about parallel with my right ear and it's perfect...
> I'm 99% sure all the added energy the horns push to other side of car messes that up a tiny bit. Just wondering if you have same issue.
> 
> And before you said your measurements were a 2' square, so in chair mode do you put mic inpassanger area at all?


Ho man I tried to find some old posts about that, because yeah I did try and I thought I typed why, I wanted to be sure I remember why exactly. Well I think it was more about my left boundary, I wanted to extend a bit. The center itself has always been easy to define and awesomely precise.
So yes I tried the mic 1/2/3" on the right, from right eye to ear.
And I didn't like it. In all cases the center moved way too much without improving total width or distribution.

But consider I have a specific dashboard, almost like a truck one, strong reflective (varnished wood) and vertical surface on all width (even if I believe the smooth curve under shape helps a lot to get quick good results).

For example with my old cones in pillars, I had a deeper and a tad wider stage, but with a much weaker center.
With horns I lost some of this, but gained so much everywhere else than it's a no brainer. 

But, there's always room for improvments right?
I was studying some install pics lately, I think I’ll try again to push the horn more to the left. By reversing them I should gain 1", by cutting I could get more...
Was also considering some other cars that could fit some 10/12" in kicks. Maybe next one.
(For ex my oldy would be great for that. Could fit 12" in front wings, with high horns way into the engine bay... but no way, I wouldn't be able to hear them anyway )

And for the 2ft square cube, nope I don't go in the right area volume. I'll try to draw the points on some pics.
I have my visual references now to replicate easily.


----------



## oabeieo

What DSP do u use w your setup or dac. Sorry I forgot and don't remember what page. 

I definitely want to see that new 15 too! What kind of box are you planning


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> What DSP do u use w your setup or dac. Sorry I forgot and don't remember what page.
> 
> I definitely want to see that new 15 too! What kind of box are you planning


It’s the C-dsp 6x8

For the 15" I’m still studying...
Will probably just start with my actual box, sealed (2.5cuft)
And see what I can do with the dsp.

But I plan to try different things, a bit more radical.
I’ll make a post to illustrate


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> And before you said your measurements were a 2' square, so in chair mode do you put mic inpassanger area at all?


Here's a pic to illustrate (didn't find quickly a full interior drawing):









Bottom points are at elbow level, top point are a bit higher than ears, maybe top head.
Then rears are at the maximum I can but still in front of the seat, and front must be about a loose arm distance.
So roughly a cube/trapeze deformed at the bottom rear.
That's what worked better for me, in chair mode.


----------



## Elgrosso

So while I was out in EU I had a bunch of ideas to test another sub setup in my car.
But all based just on what I remembered of the bodyshell and what I could find online.
Ex (not mine here):

























You can see the space for the fuel tank right behind the rear panel (ooo / ^^^)
And the compartment to fit the soft top, when down, right above the rear parcel shelf.(angled).

I thought I could cut in some way these metal panels for an IB setup.
Either the top one to fit a deported manifold in the trunk, like in my old coupe. Or the rear one to fit the sub reversed firing into the trunk/tank.
The trunk is huge, so IB for sure would be great.

But once home and a real check there’s really no room around the tank, not an inch...

So I’m thinking.
1 - Maybe I could remove the top shelf completely (doesn’t look structiral at all) just to free the way, and put the sub in a big box in the trunk. But even with this I’m not sure there will be enough breathing room to get good results up to 120Hz or more. I guess I’ll get around 1 or 2" around the tank for the air to go in the cabin (I tried the ported box in the trunk as it is now, it was horrible. More sound outside the car than in the cabin).
2 - or move the tank, just few inches backward so I could free some air to fit the sub reverse IB, vertically. This would be great. (Maybe I could also just modify the tank, reduce its volume with a mallet )
3 - or replace the tank completely, with some racing stuff that could go in the trunk. Maybe this is crazy I don’t know about regulations/safety/total price.
4 - or I could port the front 8", the boxes are big enough. And use the sub only for the low end, without any consideration for its placement etc. On winisd the bmx8" look pretty good. But they are still only 8, and not 12" or 15" that I just received (what a beauty the sbp15).
5 - But I will first put the 15" in my actual box to see. But I doubt it will have enough volume, might just be under-used.
If none of these solutions appears viable I can build a bigger box by using all the space I have in place of the rear seat. IF I optimize a lot I could probably get at least 4 cuft. But with a lot of work.

I really enjoyed the actual sub (GB12) in the middle of the car. There are some issues since it is really close to my right ear. And it’s not the best for the response (dip near 80Hz if I remember) but really cool for impact, letting it play high with a 12db slope, sort of big midbass.
I don't think I’ll get the same results with the sub back in the trunk. Sure I’ll get more low end but I’ll lose on highs/integration.

I also have ideas for the front, to go 3 way again. With 8" in kicks, and 6" in doors, but this would be for later...


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Here's a pic to illustrate (didn't find quickly a full interior drawing):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bottom points are at elbow level, top point are a bit higher than ears, maybe top head.
> Then rears are at the maximum I can but still in front of the seat, and front must be about a loose arm distance.
> So roughly a cube/trapeze deformed at the bottom rear.
> That's what worked better for me, in chair mode.



With bottom mounted horns that would be a good measurement box. 
I tryed that and I have top mounted horns so I did about same size box except I went from above head to chest level and got it good. 

Dirac says it's just a recommendation, But the big box seems to work the best.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> So while I was out in EU I had a bunch of ideas to test another sub setup in my car.
> But all based just on what I remembered of the bodyshell and what I could find online.
> Ex (not mine here):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can see the space for the fuel tank right behind the rear panel (ooo / ^^^)
> And the compartment to fit the soft top, when down, right above the rear parcel shelf.(angled).
> 
> I thought I could cut in some way these metal panels for an IB setup.
> Either the top one to fit a deported manifold in the trunk, like in my old coupe. Or the rear one to fit the sub reversed firing into the trunk/tank.
> The trunk is huge, so IB for sure would be great.
> 
> But once home and a real check there’s really no room around the tank, not an inch...
> 
> So I’m thinking.
> 1 - Maybe I could remove the top shelf completely (doesn’t look structiral at all) just to free the way, and put the sub in a big box in the trunk. But even with this I’m not sure there will be enough breathing room to get good results up to 120Hz or more. I guess I’ll get around 1 or 2" around the tank for the air to go in the cabin (I tried the ported box in the trunk as it is now, it was horrible. More sound outside the car than in the cabin).
> 2 - or move the tank, just few inches backward so I could free some air to fit the sub reverse IB, vertically. This would be great. (Maybe I could also just modify the tank, reduce its volume with a mallet )
> 3 - or replace the tank completely, with some racing stuff that could go in the trunk. Maybe this is crazy I don’t know about regulations/safety/total price.
> 4 - or I could port the front 8", the boxes are big enough. And use the sub only for the low end, without any consideration for its placement etc. On winisd the bmx8" look pretty good. But they are still only 8, and not 12" or 15" that I just received (what a beauty the sbp15).
> 5 - But I will first put the 15" in my actual box to see. But I doubt it will have enough volume, might just be under-used.
> If none of these solutions appears viable I can build a bigger box by using all the space I have in place of the rear seat. IF I optimize a lot I could probably get at least 4 cuft. But with a lot of work.
> 
> I really enjoyed the actual sub (GB12) in the middle of the car. There are some issues since it is really close to my right ear. And it’s not the best for the response (dip near 80Hz if I remember) but really cool for impact, letting it play high with a 12db slope, sort of big midbass.
> I don't think I’ll get the same results with the sub back in the trunk. Sure I’ll get more low end but I’ll lose on highs/integration.
> 
> I also have ideas for the front, to go 3 way again. With 8" in kicks, and 6" in doors, but this would be for later...


How much low end do u want? What to party a bit? Relocate gas tank with a race tank and do a 15" in a 6th order ported through (group delay monster) or 
Do 4-8" IB in that back wall (tiny amount of clean bass ) you could do a 6th order and vent the high side to the outside and get a decent 20-40hz output without as much GD , you could at that point use TA to dial back phase enough so Dirac can get it perfect. Or you could do 4-8s in a sealed box (I like IB better) but IB would be hurting for deep bass output. A 15" would be a lot of added weight. 

Hard to say ....what u like the most


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> With bottom mounted horns that would be a good measurement box.
> I tryed that and I have top mounted horns so I did about same size box except I went from above head to chest level and got it good.
> 
> Dirac says it's just a recommendation, But the big box seems to work the best.


Ho yeah I forgot yours are on top, interesting.
I didn't try thousands of combo but it was easy to spot the differences.
Just around the head, "hanatsu" style for ex, didn't give great results.
The larger the better, until you reach some messy reflections I guess.

With the APL though, something close to the sofa mode worked better.
But it was more than 200 points...


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> How much low end do u want? What to party a bit? Relocate gas tank with a race tank and do a 15" in a 6th order ported through (group delay monster) or
> Do 4-8" IB in that back wall (tiny amount of clean bass ) you could do a 6th order and vent the high side to the outside and get a decent 20-40hz output without as much GD , you could at that point use TA to dial back phase enough so Dirac can get it perfect. Or you could do 4-8s in a sealed box (I like IB better) but IB would be hurting for deep bass output. A 15" would be a lot of added weight.
> 
> Hard to say ....what u like the most


Hard to say, because honestly I don't know well how much low end the stuff I listen to has. Some electro can go real low but I'd say most go around 40hz, maybe 30-35hz.
For ex some High passes near 20/30hz are hard to discern.
I'll play a bit more with that, but the very first octave is not my priority.
I'd prefer super high impact up north.

You're right I'm kind of concerned about GD, but if kept low dsp+ Dirac should manage.
I thought about Bandpass, some kind of box in the trunk, that could fire in the rear vents (enlarged for the occasion) maybe. but on winisd they don't look very nice. Or ask for a huge volume to go high enough.

4x8" yeah maybe, and it would spread well. Had good result with 4x6, not so godd with 2x8 only.
Wanted to put 1x10 in each sides, stereo, + a bigger digging lower in the trunk. But the soft top mechanism takes all the room in the sides areas. Not much to gain.

Also thought about some bp box on rear bench, with the front part of the box going under the seats in two tunnels, firing up front. But I don't have much height there. And I couldn't find good infos on the minimum cross section area/long tube etc on exotic bp boxes.

Sure the 15 sealed would weight a dead donkey. I just refitted my actual box 20 min ago, and that was a real pain.

So... the race tank yeah. Would be magic to go IB again, with a 15".
Best/lighter/simpler but more expensive/risky.
I'll ask my mech what he knows about that kind of mod.


----------



## Elgrosso

Ho and btw I carpeted my boxes, much cleaner like that. Not perfect nor stealth, but it's the best I ever did 
Makes quite a difference on daily drives.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Hard to say, because honestly I don't know well how much low end the stuff I listen to has. Some electro can go real low but I'd say most go around 40hz, maybe 30-35hz.
> For ex some High passes near 20/30hz are hard to discern.
> I'll play a bit more with that, but the very first octave is not my priority.
> I'd prefer super high impact up north.
> 
> You're right I'm kind of concerned about GD, but if kept low dsp+ Dirac should manage.
> I thought about Bandpass, some kind of box in the trunk, that could fire in the rear vents (enlarged for the occasion) maybe. but on winisd they don't look very nice. Or ask for a huge volume to go high enough.
> 
> 4x8" yeah maybe, and it would spread well. Had good result with 4x6, not so godd with 2x8 only.
> Wanted to put 1x10 in each sides, stereo, + a bigger digging lower in the trunk. But the soft top mechanism takes all the room in the sides areas. Not much to gain.
> 
> Also thought about some bp box on rear bench, with the front part of the box going under the seats in two tunnels, firing up front. But I don't have much height there. And I couldn't find good infos on the minimum cross section area/long tube etc on exotic bp boxes.
> 
> Sure the 15 sealed would weight a dead donkey. I just refitted my actual box 20 min ago, and that was a real pain.
> 
> So... the race tank yeah. Would be magic to go IB again, with a 15".
> Best/lighter/simpler but more expensive/risky.
> I'll ask my mech what he knows about that kind of mod.


Stereo sub bass from rear. Won't matter and won't even tell it's stereo unfortunately.


Or you could do a 10" in a sealed box in passenger footwell along with the 12" you have 
That would sound good too


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Ho and btw I carpeted my boxes, much cleaner like that. Not perfect nor stealth, but it's the best I ever did
> Makes quite a difference on daily drives.



Very nice indeed


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Stereo sub bass from rear. Won't matter and won't even tell it's stereo unfortunately.
> 
> 
> Or you could do a 10" in a sealed box in passenger footwell along with the 12" you have
> That would sound good too


Ok
Before the horns I tried 2x6" there with 2x6" behind, and it was fun, clean, but not loud enough.
Even a shallow 10" (XLS MAC), but now with the horns no way I can fit a box, even on the small side.




oabeieo said:


> Very nice indeed


Thx! Not super clean door cut you can see, and I messed up the left one carpet.
But I know I can improve now, with not much time.


----------



## oabeieo

could you fit an 8" sub in floor board under horn
Have it fire straight forward. 
Do like a JL audio 8w3 would be real nice sealed 
And run it as a sub. It would sound pretty good I'm probably going to do it too
Front sub is so nice it really really makes things sound full 

I love the way my 2 15s sound but I think I get get just as much output that I use with 2-10s.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> could you fit an 8" sub in floor board under horn
> Have it fire straight forward.
> Do like a JL audio 8w3 would be real nice sealed
> And run it as a sub. It would sound pretty good I'm probably going to do it too
> Front sub is so nice it really really makes things sound full
> 
> I love the way my 2 15s sound but I think I get get just as much output that I use with 2-10s.


A false floor maybe yes, I could even rise a bit the right seat I don't care.
But it's kind of tight already, I have to constantly remind any passenger to be careful 

Funny because I was just looking today at JL microsubs and spec.
Seemed pretty small, I could try 3 or 4 of them. Front, behind me, and one on the top shelf, "horn" loaded (and easy to remove for the top down).
But based on their size they must be tuned pretty high!

I'm going crazy trying everything in winisd... I need to butcher my box to try the spb tomorrow.
Because so far nothing beats it in theory, even box too small etc it has more headroom everywhere it just looks better (don't care anymore about the Q). Maybe only the w15gti on extension allowed by its excursion but not on sensitivity.
So I need to try it like that, and decide if bigger sub in the center is ok before anything else.

Well I'm re-reading a bunch of posts in the hlcd part, to see what other tricks I could try.


----------



## oabeieo

Man I agree , if you can't get critically damped you can still eq. 
I've tried linkwitz transforms and it works. But just ok, imho the way eq is applied in LT may show good in paper but in car I think some cuts in the 45-65hz range is a better way to accomplish the same type of eq but nothing is boosted. Just sounds better and less distortion. 
I guess it's the same thing really but different way of getting a boost at rolloff


----------



## Jscoyne2

Everytime i check in on this thread. It gets crazier and crazier.


----------



## Elgrosso

Jscoyne2 said:


> Everytime i check in on this thread. It gets crazier and crazier.


Haha, well I calmed myself down about the fuel tank idea etc, this is a bit too much for me 




oabeieo said:


> Man I agree , if you can't get critically damped you can still eq.
> I've tried linkwitz transforms and it works. But just ok, imho the way eq is applied in LT may show good in paper but in car I think some cuts in the 45-65hz range is a better way to accomplish the same type of eq but nothing is boosted. Just sounds better and less distortion.
> I guess it's the same thing really but different way of getting a boost at rolloff



Yeah it's too much effort and I didn't hear the difference, or it could even get worst with a too low Q.
And I started to understand that with EQ it’s useless anyway, it can change so much.

So yesterday before anything I started by re-measuring the cabin gain, or sort of because I didn't measure it outside.
Since it's a convertible it's easy to get an idea, between top down everything wide open vs closed.
So still the gb12, both mic at the nose, low volume:










On top the gain normalized.
See how it cuts around 50-60hz? That's cool because it's close to where I'll get a bump with the sbp in a small box.
Below 50Hz I'm pretty sure it's only cabin gain, but between 50-100hz it's must be a mix of gain + cancellation due to the subwoofer position (firing right in between front seats).
Then 150hz total cancellation between front and rear windshields etc.
It makes the EQ tricky around the crossover point if I want to go high, but 120hz is still ok.


Then I installed the new little guy, SBP15-4. removed the port and covered both holes, the 12" one with a large panel, box got more rigid that's good.
And just made the new hole the other side, lateral this time so I could place the woofer just behind me or passenger side.
Some more bracing inside, fully filled with acousta-stuff, and back in the car. This thing is getting heavier an heavier…
Nothing fancy to look at here, it fires now half in the passenger seat, that I moved a bit to let him breath. 










I had to go for a long drive so I didn't re-tune yesterday, just quickly -3db at it… But damn' that was a cool drive! 
Maybe there’s a part of psycho-thing here because I’m so happy to get one, but it is really awesome!
Even if it was still a bit too much I din't mind because it was clear and so fun. 
This thing sounds so unstressed it's impressive, it does everything the gb did, but just much better.
It seemed to go a bit lower even in this small box, but maybe it's the new placement. Also seemed to better integrate with the front, same here maybe the new placement, that disturbs less my right ear.
I know it’s too early, but I think I also got more clarity, new notes effect.
And impact is of course much much stroOonger, with some previously fixed rattles back from the dead 

It can only get better, I know now it was the good choice.
So only problem is... I might listen even louder!


----------



## oabeieo

That's fantastic it works better. Yep no replacement for good ole sd. Even in a crammed box more surface area will always have more potential output. May not be the best usable output but output in general. 


How much ft.³ do you have to play with? I'm starting to think honestly a sundown sa series sub might be just what you want. It's high qts makes it hit very hard and transient in a sealed box. It's got a über quiet motor and a holy ****ton of xmax and a shorting ring. 
It plays to 75hz and after that a little bit of power compression starts. In my box it has 12db drop from 65-75 but I am a full cubic foot over recommended and modeled in 2.5 ft.³ it plays better up high. 

But for what you need to get some low spl to happen this sub makes a lot of sence 
The sa-15 is a low bass monster and in a sealed box there is almost no resonance at all and plays flat to 10hz. 

In my car it works nice but I have that ginormous null at 80 and it can't play through it. 
If you don't have a problem at 80hz this sub could be pretty sweet in your car. 

It has a unusually tight suspension to the point you can give it all of its rated power with no enclosure and it would be 100% fine. It's mass driven to the extreme and needs zero compliance to move serious amounts of air. I honestly believe it could be a hidden treasure in the IB world but none the IB fanatics will go for a sub that's known for winning SPL comps.

In a ported box it has a lagging response just as you would expect from a high qts sub in a ported box but somehow it's Other parameters let it work very loudly in a ported box. 
IIRC EBP was 60 something. (Too lazy to go get it or calc it) .....just an idea. But you would have the xmax to do any kind of transform you want cleanly...


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> That's fantastic it works better. Yep no replacement for good ole sd. Even in a crammed box more surface area will always have more potential output. May not be the best usable output but output in general.
> 
> 
> How much ft.³ do you have to play with? I'm starting to think honestly a sundown sa series sub might be just what you want. It's high qts makes it hit very hard and transient in a sealed box. It's got a über quiet motor and a holy ****ton of xmax and a shorting ring.
> It plays to 75hz and after that a little bit of power compression starts. In my box it has 12db drop from 65-75 but I am a full cubic foot over recommended and modeled in 2.5 ft.³ it plays better up high.
> 
> But for what you need to get some low spl to happen this sub makes a lot of sence
> The sa-15 is a low bass monster and in a sealed box there is almost no resonance at all and plays flat to 10hz.
> 
> In my car it works nice but I have that ginormous null at 80 and it can't play through it.
> If you don't have a problem at 80hz this sub could be pretty sweet in your car.
> 
> It has a unusually tight suspension to the point you can give it all of its rated power with no enclosure and it would be 100% fine. It's mass driven to the extreme and needs zero compliance to move serious amounts of air. I honestly believe it could be a hidden treasure in the IB world but none the IB fanatics will go for a sub that's known for winning SPL comps.
> 
> In a ported box it has a lagging response just as you would expect from a high qts sub in a ported box but somehow it's Other parameters let it work very loudly in a ported box.
> IIRC EBP was 60 something. (Too lazy to go get it or calc it) .....just an idea. But you would have the xmax to do any kind of transform you want cleanly...


Interesting! 
My box is around 70liters/2.5 cu ft, a bit less with the driver. So not small but it would get better if bigger of course. 
I played a lot with winisd before, tried a bunch of less common subs (well for me) like FI, SSA, Treo, etc and some PA brands. But everytime the sbp15 came first.
It does not have the biggest Xmax but its sensitivity I guess always helped.
Excursion starts to be an issue only around 600W, w/o filters, and that’s a lot of db here for me.
Of course all this is theory on winisd, but it helps to at least compare.
And it’s only part of the picture. But other than trying all existing subs, how can we get an idea of the final result?

Once in the car it goes low and loud enough, and now cleaner since less stressed. With cabin gain I don’t see myself needing more, I already cut a lot around 40Hz, or maybe only to lower even more distortion for crazy sessions.
But for now it’s not anymore my limit I think. I’d say that clarity is good for now, I will focus on integration, see what I can do to limit the effect of having it so close.
Also time for more deadening.
And maybe studying my cabin gain, I wonder how the soft top acts on everything. It could act like a big PR, that maybe eats some FR, could be the reason why I have less gain around 60Hz?
And I just have to tune better, will try again back to 80/100Hz to see.

So I just played the SA in winisd in the same box, and same result here, it has more low end on the transfer, but needs gobs of power to give the same spl.
Excursion limit sure is crazy high, but it does not impact the spl as much.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Interesting!
> My box is around 70liters/2.5 cu ft, a bit less with the driver. So not small but it would get better if bigger of course.
> I played a lot with winisd before, tried a bunch of less common subs (well for me) like FI, SSA, Treo, etc and some PA brands. But everytime the sbp15 came first.
> It does not have the biggest Xmax but its sensitivity I guess always helped.
> Excursion starts to be an issue only around 600W, w/o filters, and that’s a lot of db here for me.
> Of course all this is theory on winisd, but it helps to at least compare.
> And it’s only part of the picture. But other than trying all existing subs, how can we get an idea of the final result?
> 
> Once in the car it goes low and loud enough, and now cleaner since less stressed. With cabin gain I don’t see myself needing more, I already cut a lot around 40Hz, or maybe only to lower even more distortion for crazy sessions.
> But for now it’s not anymore my limit I think. I’d say that clarity is good for now, I will focus on integration, see what I can do to limit the effect of having it so close.
> Also time for more deadening.
> And maybe studying my cabin gain, I wonder how the soft top acts on everything. It could act like a big PR, that maybe eats some FR, could be the reason why I have less gain around 60Hz?
> And I just have to tune better, will try again back to 80/100Hz to see.
> 
> So I just played the SA in winisd in the same box, and same result here, it has more low end on the transfer, but needs gobs of power to give the same spl.
> Excursion limit sure is crazy high, but it does not impact the spl as much.



So than what are you trying to do getting subs in trunk? 
If you have enough output why the move? 

Are you trying for a different sound? More 60? If you want 60 do a ported box tuned around 45 with a HE driver in a decent sized box. You'll loose low end and will need a subsonic but get power handling at 60 and decent compliance. 

I was think you were lacking really low lows with soft too I figured all the fun bass was escaping. The sundown with gobs of power would move a lot of air . But yeah above 35 your right the sub you have would be more efficient and work better. :/ hummmm not sure than. 

Are you trying to get more space to put stuff


----------



## Elgrosso

Well to summarize, before there were different specific issues I wanted to fix:
- lack of clarity around 80hz (compared to headset for ex)
- lack of deep low end (first octave)
- Sub in the center caused some right ear "fatigue" (There was really a strong difference between both ears)
- Sub localization (rattles/box resonance)

The new 15" helped with the low end, but in the same time it increased the rattles/resonances.
Here I just have to modify the box, with more bracing, and add some deadening in some places (rear firewall/floor).

It helped also on low end clarity, I guess because of its lower distortion.
The 12" had enough output, but not as clean.

Its new placement, moved to the right, also helped with ear fatigue.

So now I have to work on the sub/midbass xo.
My midbass' are I think too weak around 80hz. I'm not sure and I don't know how to measure or confirm this. The output is here, and the distortion plots are well below 5% there. But I still feel like they don't like to be pushed too low.
Crossed a bit higher they sound better, and I then also get the biggest impact from the sub.
But there's a limit or it becomes too much localizable.

For one week I had the sub on right, tuned with xo at 80hz/24db, same target.
Everything sounded cleaner, everything in front with sub almost not localizable (except for resonances/rattles).
But it was less fun, not the big big impact on drums I had at 120hz.

Yesterday I placed the sub to fire right behind driver seat.
Quickly tuned but will finish today. The seat seems to act as an high pass, would probably help for localization. Also it will be at the same distance for both ears, should help too.
The seat has a hard shell in the back, so I hope it won't be felt too much in my back (1" clearance).
Goal is to move up the xo to find the sweet spot impact/localization.

So I'll know more tonight.
If this doesn't work, I can:
- port the midbass. In theory this should lower excursion near 70/80hz so help a bit. Delay should not be an issue it's only few ms more on winisd.
- or doubling the midbass, 4x8" in 2.5 way, for a very clean output. This would need only minor modifications of my boxes.
- or going for 2x10"... but they won't fit in doors, will need a big job in kicks, I'm not sure I can do it.


----------



## oabeieo

4 8s ! Geesh almighty 

Ha okay I see what your after now. That seems like a logical approach. 
Porting the midbass IMO won't give you much more. I don't think 70hz is where your picking up a lot of excursion it's probably 30-50hz . Even tho you may be crossed high there's still a decent amount of power getting down low. If you apply a 96db crossover at 70hz watch you'll have almost no excursion.... at least that's how it goes for me. 
A 96db crossover would sound pretty bad too being -12db down in the 40s still produces some movement in the speaker but more importantly it's low frequency motion tho not very audible definitely helps the harmonics of upper and lower bass blend and I imagine you have some decent low frequency pumping so them boxes have some thump to them.

Adding a port will get you a small bump at 70 but if it's a cabin cancellation it will be bad because than you have to use steep filters to save the speaker. I would tune the port at 45 and you'll get a more flat response and get good power handling. Figure a port is a 24db device in most cases , so 24db at 45hz the port will still have some some output at 50-60hz and a lot more power handling of its sub oactave for the crossover.....that's why I would just do sealed and try a overlapping one oactave filter. Basicly a 6db filter than a second 18db filter applied one oactave past.....in fir of course if your using IIR than I would just stay sealed or tune lower than where you need the bump by about 1/2 oactave. 


I have a question for you tho. When you do measurements with Dirac do you get any snap crackle pops? During my measurements i am getting some pretty hanus pops and crackles.
Your using digital coax or toslink?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> 4 8s ! Geesh almighty
> 
> Ha okay I see what your after now. That seems like a logical approach.
> Porting the midbass IMO won't give you much more. I don't think 70hz is where your picking up a lot of excursion it's probably 30-50hz . Even tho you may be crossed high there's still a decent amount of power getting down low. If you apply a 96db crossover at 70hz watch you'll have almost no excursion.... at least that's how it goes for me.
> A 96db crossover would sound pretty bad too being -12db down in the 40s still produces some movement in the speaker but more importantly it's low frequency motion tho not very audible definitely helps the harmonics of upper and lower bass blend and I imagine you have some decent low frequency pumping so them boxes have some thump to them.
> 
> Adding a port will get you a small bump at 70 but if it's a cabin cancellation it will be bad because than you have to use steep filters to save the speaker. I would tune the port at 45 and you'll get a more flat response and get good power handling. Figure a port is a 24db device in most cases , so 24db at 45hz the port will still have some some output at 50-60hz and a lot more power handling of its sub oactave for the crossover.....that's why I would just do sealed and try a overlapping one oactave filter. Basicly a 6db filter than a second 18db filter applied one oactave past.....in fir of course if your using IIR than I would just stay sealed or tune lower than where you need the bump by about 1/2 oactave.
> 
> 
> I have a question for you tho. When you do measurements with Dirac do you get any snap crackle pops? During my measurements i am getting some pretty hanus pops and crackles.
> Your using digital coax or toslink?


Ok, that's kind of why I didn't try porting them before, the gain seemed limited (and totally unsure in real) but glad you confirm.
Especially since I won't cross lower than 80Hz.
The actual acoustic target is [email protected]@24db and I use [email protected]@24 to get there with very limited EQ.
You're right they can push pretty low full range, but I don't think they're still playing that much once filtered.
I tried to add a -12db lowshelf at a lower octave out of the bandpass to see if it changes anything > nope.
(I have only IIIR on the Cdsp)

But anyway, I go a good tune today.
Lowered my gains on the horns, tuned flat for once, then Dirac for the target. It's easier, but also painful for the ears all those highs.
At the end the sub behind me is much more discrete sonically… but I get free massage 
I'll see for one week, but it's ok I'll rework on the box one day. And will give it more room.
Impact is good, everything is in front now, but there’s room for improvement.

For the 4x8" I checked, and the added left one would fire right into my leg… :/
I guess once you try big cones it's hard to come back. 
The only future evolution would be 10 or 12" in front now…


About clipping I got my first today in Dirac too! I didn't hear it at first since I was tuning with earplugs (to try higher volume)
It was a big boost on the right horn, one biquad left even if deleted.
For some reasons the C-dsp sometime keeps some stuff in memory.
It's not visually here, but is definitely acting.
In this case I have to clear/import a new one/clear again to be sure.

Ho and it's coax all the way.


----------



## Izay123

Elgrosso said:


> Well to summarize, before there were different specific issues I wanted to fix:
> 
> - lack of clarity around 80hz (compared to headset for ex)
> 
> - lack of deep low end (first octave)
> 
> - Sub in the center caused some right ear "fatigue" (There was really a strong difference between both ears)
> 
> - Sub localization (rattles/box resonance)
> 
> 
> 
> The new 15" helped with the low end, but in the same time it increased the rattles/resonances.
> 
> Here I just have to modify the box, with more bracing, and add some deadening in some places (rear firewall/floor).
> 
> 
> 
> It helped also on low end clarity, I guess because of its lower distortion.
> 
> The 12" had enough output, but not as clean.
> 
> 
> 
> Its new placement, moved to the right, also helped with ear fatigue.
> 
> 
> 
> So now I have to work on the sub/midbass xo.
> 
> My midbass' are I think too weak around 80hz. I'm not sure and I don't know how to measure or confirm this. The output is here, and the distortion plots are well below 5% there. But I still feel like they don't like to be pushed too low.
> 
> Crossed a bit higher they sound better, and I then also get the biggest impact from the sub.
> 
> But there's a limit or it becomes too much localizable.
> 
> 
> 
> For one week I had the sub on right, tuned with xo at 80hz/24db, same target.
> 
> Everything sounded cleaner, everything in front with sub almost not localizable (except for resonances/rattles).
> 
> But it was less fun, not the big big impact on drums I had at 120hz.
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I placed the sub to fire right behind driver seat.
> 
> Quickly tuned but will finish today. The seat seems to act as an high pass, would probably help for localization. Also it will be at the same distance for both ears, should help too.
> 
> The seat has a hard shell in the back, so I hope it won't be felt too much in my back (1" clearance).
> 
> Goal is to move up the xo to find the sweet spot impact/localization.
> 
> 
> 
> So I'll know more tonight.
> 
> If this doesn't work, I can:
> 
> - port the midbass. In theory this should lower excursion near 70/80hz so help a bit. Delay should not be an issue it's only few ms more on winisd.
> 
> - or doubling the midbass, 4x8" in 2.5 way, for a very clean output. This would need only minor modifications of my boxes.
> 
> - or going for 2x10"... but they won't fit in doors, will need a big job in kicks, I'm not sure I can do it.




I like where you're headed--If you port--I'd Design it with the ability to easily adjust the port length & Id get TWO SETS of ports so you can do experiments with the first, Dial it in with port 2, & use port 3&4 to install. I'd start super long with port 1--I'd set the low end of the fb up to 1/4 octave below free air FS-- then try that out before trimming length bit by bit, listening/measuring & documenting at standard intervals, through the whole range.


By the second time you do it, you should have it narrowed to 3 options. & then after you decide, You still have the last set of ports to cut to your tested length & install!!!

The lower you port, the more the group delay moves down in frequency (& up in amplitude a bit). So if you port to 80 HZ--Sure you'll get Output, but it'll be slow in comparison to the 80HZ bass you'll hear with a 60HZ tune--& it also allows you to use either a shallower xover (maybe 12db VS 18 or 24). Or a lower crossover point. Remember each order you rise in crossovers, you impact both phase as well as raise group delay significantly.

IMO some Folks split hairs pouring over WinIsd worrying about a couple ms group delay difference--but then turn around & slap a 24+db (4th order) or higher crossover on it--Or worse yet--A pair of 4th order crossovers--& many are totally oblivious

I'm on a mission to eliminate the use of subsonic crossovers in my subwoofer builds--I wonder if I'll be able to hear the difference...


----------



## Izay123

Izay123 said:


> I like where you're headed--If you port--I'd Design it with the ability to easily adjust the port length & Id get TWO SETS of ports so you can do experiments with the first, Dial it in with port 2, & use port 3&4 to install. I'd start super long with port 1--I'd set the low end of the fb up to 1/4 octave below free air FS-- then try that out before trimming length bit by bit, listening/measuring & documenting at standard intervals, through the whole range.
> 
> 
> By the second time you do it, you should have it narrowed to 3 options. & then after you decide, You still have the last set of ports to cut to your tested length & install!!!
> 
> The lower you port, the more the group delay moves down in frequency (& up in amplitude a bit). So if you port to 80 HZ--Sure you'll get Output, but it'll be slow in comparison to the 80HZ bass you'll hear with a 60HZ tune--& it also allows you to use either a shallower xover (maybe 12db VS 18 or 24). Or a lower crossover point. Remember each order you rise in crossovers, you impact both phase as well as raise group delay significantly.
> 
> IMO some Folks split hairs pouring over WinIsd worrying about a couple ms group delay difference--but then turn around & slap a 24+db (4th order) or higher crossover on it--Or worse yet--A pair of 4th order crossovers--& many are totally oblivious
> 
> I'm on a mission to eliminate the use of subsonic crossovers in my subwoofer builds--I wonder if I'll be able to hear the difference...




Another thing--I didn't double check parameters of your front MIDBASS drivers--So what's the FS of them again? A port is an easy & cheap way to test an alignment out--But Id steer clear of high slopes--IMO most Pro rigs don't use super high orders as a matter of course because,IMO, they sound ****ty. I don't even like the sound of most 24db crossovers--almost too steep for me. If you want to kill excursion low, just use a PEQ: problem solved


----------



## oabeieo

Lazy123 

Elgroso and I don't have to worry about group delay we use fir so it's a non issue 

Answer this why would a manufacturer of a midwoofer that's designed to play 100hz to 2khz recommend using a port tuned at 45hz with a FS in the 70s? 

Your ideas are good however I don't think anyone is splitting hairs over group delay, it's a serious problem if you don't have a way to correct for it , and if you do have a way to correct for it the less time smear means less dsp power to fix it. 

You like shallow slopes because it sounds better , why? Because the time smear is stretched over a lot more area so it's not as audible. Steep slopes sound fine if there made to be linear phase. So by saying you don't like steep slopes is splitting hairs over group delay 

For non fir users the LR24 actually summes the best in the time domain so not sure why you wouldn't use it otoh a bw6 has the least time smear all together but still has it and is somewhat noticeable and you run into some serious driver interaction issues 
All your advice is great to a non fir user. And I think that's why hardly anyone comments in elgroso and I build pages to try to give advice. It's a whole different ball game.


----------



## Izay123

Big ******* Obeico--
Elgroso and I don't have to worry about group delay we use fir so it's a non issue
Sounds cool. I remember the Pro guys using that. How does it work?
Answer this why would a manufacturer of a midwoofer that's designed to play 100hz to 2khz recommend using a port tuned at 45hz with a FS in the 70s?
Did I say to port there? No. I SUGGESTED a simple method of trying out tuning that might also reduce excursion at the same time...
Your ideas are good however I don't think anyone is splitting hairs over group delay said:


> my faves are 6db & 18db slopes--But Everything depends upon the vehicle & speaker setup--Gotta try different things. I'd much rather introduce a reduction in GDelay by adding a PEQ if I need good adjustment--WAAAAY more adjustable than Crossover--So I can then put steeper crossover lower, & manage transition with PEQ.
> 
> So--I said don't worry about LINEAR GROUP DELAY within a couple ms--But your LR24 isnt linear. When I use a LR24, it makes the sound "more artificial" to me & not as effortless, IMO.


----------



## Izay123

*Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*

Sorry for the Misunderstandings, OP


----------



## oabeieo

How is that scarcastic? Man you get all fired up any time someone talks to you. 
You remind me of me about 5years ago but gosh dam. Just because I was talking to you doesn't make what you said wrong. I was explaining that tuning at FS probably isn't The best idea and making a point that would help you. Trying to be friendly of course but whatever , I can't stop you from going crazy with yourself . 


And I'm not an ******* I'm a "fir snob" .  

I think I'll avoid talking to you from here on out or until you can intellectualize without taking others comments as a personal attack.

When you say thinks like "other folks" and than bring up something that "other folks" just talked about in a previous post and than trample on it and try to one up everyone you'll loose respect. Fast . Believe me I learned the hard way and am just trying to help you. 

But it's all good I can avoid you if you don't want to talk. Just avoid the threads I post in and there shouldn't be any issues.

Nonlinear group delay? That's a new term to me. Either phase is flat or not group delay is non linear in a matter strictly of the time domain so it's a double negative. So please enlighten us. :snacks:


----------



## oabeieo

But enewayz 

So...your getting clipping also. Earplugs. How high up do you have the level in Dirac ? 

Yes a louder sweep will get a better tune but you shouldn't need earplugs . 

On mine mic gain at 0 and gain at -35db is pretty loud and gains on my amps are all the way down and nothing boosted in the minis. It's loud but shouldn't be ear piercing.

When it's doing sweeps the window at the bottom that shows the sweep should have the magnitude filling as much of the box as possible, once it hits the ceiling it gets red lines in it saying clipping.

All I was saying is it makes a better tune if the box isn't have a itty bitty magnitude that takes up a inci binci little part of the window .

I was definitely getting amp clipping because the magnitude was still very small and it would go red instantly and I could hear a lot of 3khz distortion in right horn . 

Pos warned me about inverse filters being hard on drivers. I think I get what he meant now.
It's like the signal level needs to be as close to 0dbfs as possible so you don't loose gain on output from having to turn everything down in the target settings and filter making. So a very good gain structure needs to be implemented that has all the drivers as close to perfect as possible. Like doing a sweep with a horn gain that is too low will cause it to have to use boost and some of that boost in the inverse can be damaging to drivers.

I'll try to find the post he made talking about it over on diy


----------



## oabeieo

I've also noticed a couple of the sweeps in certain mic positions have a stronger signal. 
Like right forward high and left rear low I know seem to go into clipping and I can't ever get past those two measurements if I'm up too high. 

It does something with the power response. I'm yet to find out what bit I'm diggin for answers


----------



## Izay123

*Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



oabeieo said:


> How is that scarcastic?
> 
> At the top of your earlier post, you addressed me as "Lazy123"
> --not Izay123, as my screen name is on here...
> 
> (I guess my attempt at a funny comeback to your adaptation of my screen name flopped) Sorry. I wasn't really fired up about that--I Was just attempting to respond in kind..
> 
> Man you get all fired up any time someone talks to you.
> 
> You remind me of me about 5years ago but gosh dam. Just because I was talking to you doesn't make what you said wrong. I was explaining that tuning at FS probably isn't The best idea and making a point that would help you. Trying to be friendly of course but whatever , I can't stop you from going crazy with yourself .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm not an ******* I'm a "fir snob" .
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'll avoid talking to you from here on out or until you can intellectualize without taking others comments as a personal attack.
> 
> I'm usually good at intellectual convos without taking offense, & we can do that in the future: I am undoubtedly more on edge talking to you because our a big part of our exchanges have resulted in misunderstanding.
> 
> 
> 
> When you say thinks like "other folks" and than bring up something that "other folks" just talked about in a previous post and than trample on it and try to one up everyone you'll loose respect. Fast . Believe me I learned the hard way and am just trying to help you.
> 
> 
> 
> But it's all good I can avoid you if you don't want to talk. Just avoid the threads I post in and there shouldn't be any issues.
> 
> I'm not upset; & as long as I don't have to try to determine sarcasm or joking from seriousness, I think we could get along just fine. Honestly
> 
> 
> 
> Nonlinear group delay? That's a new term to me. Either phase is flat or not group delay is non linear in a matter strictly of the time domain so it's a double negative. So please enlighten us. :snacks:


Non linear GD was the only term I could think of to describe a Peak in the Gd with the GD absolute value varying with frequency. To me, that's non linear GD... 

I don't understand how a peak in group delay where the ms delayed varies with frequency could be nullified by simple time alignment--IMO When the Group delay of a speaker output has no more than 3-4 milliseconds difference between any two points in the Subwoofer's passband, IMO it tunes easier & sounds better.

IMO m Ported subs often have 20-30ms GD spiking at ported freq. It seems non linear to me--But I don't care if we call it different things, as long as we each put in effort to be friendly, like you have been, & im aiming for now...

I guess we miscommunicated a couple times there.. that's all I meant by non linear GD & also how a crossover looks like it has a bigger impact on the delay the closer it is to where the speaker plays.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hot in here! Isn't it how friendship start? 
Well, thx for the comments,

Izay123, I kind of drop the port idea for now.
First because with some more measurements I realized that the midbass' seem pretty clean. Even if I need to do some more at very high volume to confirm.
Also because I really want to stay over 80Hz, probably 100/110Hz to get full impact from the sub (in my configuration), so port would not help here.
But about the delay added Oab’ is right I don't really care, unless it becomes crazy as I don't know Dirac limits here.

About the slopes, I can enjoy shallower when I try on midbass/sub (talking acoustic slope here).
Even if I think i's more about the fullness of the sound coming then from 3 corners, fixing some dips etc.
But I do prefer now the cleaner sound without too much overlap, so 24db, and the sub is much easier to forget.
A Dirac 8 channels might make me re-consider this though.




Oabeieo,
Yeah earplugs but for REW. Since I tuned flat it was really too hot, especially for 1hr.
Tried higher in Dirac too, my usual is -30db / mic gain at 0, but here I tried -25db and mic slightly over.
I really didn't hear any difference (no need for earplug here).
One of the issue is that if I tune during daytime I have too many outside noise.
And this is definitely seeable on the amplitude window below, gets all messy instead of sharp.

But ok I'll try to maximize this amplitude, makes sense.
The clipping I got came from a zombi-biquad , a +10db bug from the Cdsp.
Although it only appeared when I measured top/right/front on right driver, so really close to it, I guess Dirac have some margins.
The Umik accepts way more than 100db I beleive right?

The gain structure yeah I need to study this more (I keep syaing that ).
For now gains are low but not at mini, and target low too so I rely on that.
Only the sub/midbass' are getting quite some boost (like 10db) near the XO.

Anyway I'm not happy with yesterday's tune, after some more time, impact is meh.
Now that I think of it, I lowered the midbass gain too in the same time, and I don't think I should have… 
On horns it was necessary, I still had some little noise.


----------



## Elgrosso

OMG
Forget about my last comment
I just had one of my best drive! I don't know what I did this morning but I think I messed up my settings (betwene dsp and ddrc)
And honestly I’m not totally sure I found the right one back, the one I tuned yesterday.
But what I had was awesome!
Enjoyed Brubeck "take five" Legacy 4 times, loud and clear, the drum on left, min 3 to 4... never heard my left midbass like that, the one I always thought was the weakest... almost crush my teeth! 
What an experience! Damn’ this horny story is so good!


----------



## oabeieo

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Izay123 said:


> Non linear GD was the only term I could think of to describe a Peak in the Gd with the GD absolute value varying with frequency. To me, that's non linear GD...
> 
> I don't understand how a peak in group delay where the ms delayed varies with frequency could be nullified by simple time alignment--IMO When the Group delay of a speaker output has no more than 3-4 milliseconds difference between any two points in the Subwoofer's passband, IMO it tunes easier & sounds better.
> 
> IMO m Ported subs often have 20-30ms GD spiking at ported freq. It seems non linear to me--But I don't care if we call it different things, as long as we each put in effort to be friendly, like you have been, & im aiming for now...
> 
> I guess we miscommunicated a couple times there.. that's all I meant by non linear GD & also how a crossover looks like it has a bigger impact on the delay the closer it is to where the speaker plays.


AAh no worries. 
Well and actually I got what you meant the first time I was b a bit snotty and I would much rather be friends than go down the duschery road. So sorry also  

So Basicly your right GD peaks like ones from a port or from a bad crossover alignment or and applied Eq will cause some sort of GD or time smear .

An FIR filter actually moves all the phase of everything else so that everything is time coherent. And can be shaped exactly to whatever anomalies in time you want. So it's a bit more than just delay. So let's say your port has a 25ms peak, you would need enough taps that have a IR length that would be equal to 25ms so roughly 4800 taps (96k) or an FFt equal to around 13,000 +\- (guess there but close) and it would be able to achieve 25ms and Basicly add 25ms delay to everything else except the peak. Software like rephase or accorite or Dirac live do this and than you need a convolution engine (minidsp ddrc or HDs or minisharc) 
This is a great explanation of FIR , the more common type of filter is an IIR 

If you like 1st order filters you would love love FIR filters . 

https://www.minidsp.com/applications/dsp-basics/fir-vs-iir-filtering


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> OMG
> Forget about my last comment
> I just had one of my best drive! I don't know what I did this morning but I think I messed up my settings (betwene dsp and ddrc)
> And honestly I’m not totally sure I found the right one back, the one I tuned yesterday.
> But what I had was awesome!
> Enjoyed Brubeck "take five" Legacy 4 times, loud and clear, the drum on left, min 3 to 4... never heard my left midbass like that, the one I always thought was the weakest... almost crush my teeth!
> What an experience! Damn’ this horny story is so good!


Oh man that's crazy I had tuner fatigue bad last night too ! I thought my drive to work was going to say is the stereo was going to be probably sounding Crappy got in and it was very nice no clipping at all ..... sometimes sitting in the car listening to noise can make me go bonkers


----------



## Elgrosso

Agree yep, 
But now I'm still going nuts... I can't sync to check which tune it was.
I'm too dumb, for some reasons I must have played with the soft after, out of sync.
And now if I sync again I'll overwrite evrything,no way to get it back from the dsp to the laptop... Rhaaaa!


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Agree yep,
> But now I'm still going nuts... I can't sync to check which tune it was.
> I'm too dumb, for some reasons I must have played with the soft after, out of sync.
> And now if I sync again I'll overwrite evrything,no way to get it back from the dsp to the laptop... Rhaaaa!


Oh I HaTE it when that happens ugh!! 
Or I save something as horn and over rite it as mid . 

So I'm positive Dirac filters clip the signal now if the magnitude isn't within about 6db. A pretty good pre tune is a absolute necessity. I think I've solved my clipping issues now for good. I was thinking as long as I'm setting a target under its 0db line it won't use boost well that's 0dbfs not 0db. It's normalized and even says it on the screen so if I draw my target anywhere above any of the "all before" it in fact does add boost. It brings everything up to 0dbfs which is the absolute max in the digital world. Can't boost past 0dbfs or massive clipping starts. So the only way to get a really really good tune would be to have as flat as possible magnitude responce so that no part of the "all before" is too low. 
So that's a test signal and I don't know it's crest I'm assuming it's about 3 to 6db as is most signal generators. But I don't know so I'm going to have to hook up a scope and test. If music has a transient louder than the test signal guess what, yep the closer you get to 0dbfs the more **** will clip. So any erratic changes in magnitude could cause a boost if set wrong and if set right won't leave enough gain to get enough useable output meaning system will loose a lot of signal to cutting. Inverse filters are a *****. So tomorrow I'm going to spend some quality time with good old fashioned RTA and get **** flat than tune. I've just haven't (still) because Dirac does such a good job at it. But it really is important now. Use eq cuts on output and save precious digital headroom 

I got a much better tune but tomorrow I'm going to make the end all (for this week ) tune.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Izay123 said:


> I don't understand how a peak in group delay where the ms delayed varies with frequency could be nullified by simple time alignment--


That's the thing, what he(and a few others around here) is using isn't "simple" time alignment. Think of it an more like an EQ, but for time, and with thousands of adjustment points.

You should do some reading in the DIRAC and APL threads, fascinating stuff.


----------



## oabeieo

Or the 2x4HD minidsp. And also download rephase it's freeware that you can play with and see for yourself how to make such corrections and use it. 

You could also download the trial version of Dirac but you have to have audio go through a laptop during trial but it's at least able to get an idea how powerful these things are.

Fun stuff ....complicated and deep into the rabbit hole but fun indeed


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Oh I HaTE it when that happens ugh!!
> Or I save something as horn and over rite it as mid .
> 
> So I'm positive Dirac filters clip the signal now if the magnitude isn't within about 6db. A pretty good pre tune is a absolute necessity. I think I've solved my clipping issues now for good. I was thinking as long as I'm setting a target under its 0db line it won't use boost well that's 0dbfs not 0db. It's normalized and even says it on the screen so if I draw my target anywhere above any of the "all before" it in fact does add boost. It brings everything up to 0dbfs which is the absolute max in the digital world. Can't boost past 0dbfs or massive clipping starts. So the only way to get a really really good tune would be to have as flat as possible magnitude responce so that no part of the "all before" is too low.
> So that's a test signal and I don't know it's crest I'm assuming it's about 3 to 6db as is most signal generators. But I don't know so I'm going to have to hook up a scope and test. If music has a transient louder than the test signal guess what, yep the closer you get to 0dbfs the more **** will clip. So any erratic changes in magnitude could cause a boost if set wrong and if set right won't leave enough gain to get enough useable output meaning system will loose a lot of signal to cutting. Inverse filters are a *****. So tomorrow I'm going to spend some quality time with good old fashioned RTA and get **** flat than tune. I've just haven't (still) because Dirac does such a good job at it. But it really is important now. Use eq cuts on output and save precious digital headroom
> 
> I got a much better tune but tomorrow I'm going to make the end all (for this week ) tune.


Ok this is a bit over my head, even if it should be the base...
I sometime had some clippings depending of the tune, but I only noticed it on highs. But it can also be my tracks, in fact more often.
Or when I noticed some heavy boosts in Dirac (on mids) I usually lowered the ddrc knob (or default preset) to -3 or 6db. Seemed to do the trick.
Is this a good fix?
But I try to stay safe, either in the Cdsp (input -Xdb, X being the max PEQ I used), and then low target in Dirac. 
Of course the final output is much lower, but I never missed juice for now.
But I could imagine that it’s not optimum.

I should try to keep the laptop synced during a drive, to see what output level I usually listen to.
Btw I have a dbC meter that I check sometime when loud, to not go to crazy
But I use it more as relative levels as I’m not sure it’s accurate.


Then I managed to get back my good tune, or at least find out which one it was.
By disconnecting each speaker and playing sweeps, got the XO and levels of the tune.
But the strange thing is, it should not be the one that correspond to the Dirac preset (preset 1 on C-dsp for preset 1 in Dirac, 2 to 2 etc).
I mean, it should not be the best combo but still it’s the one I like 

I’ll make another Dirac pass once it’s quiet outside...


----------



## LumbermanSVO

Elgrosso;4480433I’ll make another Dirac pass once it’s quiet outside...[/QUOTE said:


> Going topless, that's one of my biggest struggles!


----------



## Elgrosso

LumbermanSVO said:


> Going topless, that's one of my biggest struggles!


And you should do it while driving to get best results


----------



## Jscoyne2

When i was playing with Dirac, i found that i never had a clipped signal when doing the chair measurements unless my sub channel was high. It seems to me that it just cant handle a decent spl substage whatsoever. 

Im interested in this flat Freq response your talking about. Do you mean eq to a flat response(even 9-12db+ substage?) and then let Dirac do its work? 

Whenever you guys figure this out. Id love if someone through together a Hanatsu style tutorial. Reading through this and APL threads get extremely overwhelming.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

Elgrosso said:


> And you should do it while driving to get best results


If you thought texting and driving was bad!


----------



## oabeieo

Okay I'll try explain better sorry   


So you know I'm make filters tab after you get measurements the blue screen 
So you make let's say a measurement and the sub and midbass is above the "0db" line. 
And the horns are somewhere above it and some spots below it (because the horns have pretty drastic curves) well , let's say the target by default sets sub about 3db above that line and 16k around -2db part. 

So if you just optimize where the default target is it's going to put boosts and cuts to make that target....so the measurement in the "all before" when compared to the reference in "0db" could be high above that line and have parts below it. Well depending on how loud the measurements were taken will show where the "all before" is placed on the graph. So In reference to the 0db line the measurement is just normalized and doesn't reflect any "0db" centering on the graph. They just put the measurement on the screen so you can see it , after all there is no scroll down or scroll up so they have to just stick it in the window with where you want your target. 

So when making a target , the center of the measurement will depend on how much boost and cut Dirac can accomplish. So if the measurement has more than about 6db dip in it from its center. To find center you would have to take the tallest peak/null and get the range and divide it by 2 to get the center of where Dirac will make its correction. 

Remember Diracs behaviors , Diracs IIrs are not like PEQs on a dsp, dirac uses one single filter to do the whole correction, it would be similar to a single biquad that programs banks of biquads, but it's not limited to banks of biquads. It's a IIR inverse filter literally a mirror image of the averaged frequency response. So it will use boost and cut. Always! You can't make the target line in the blue screen under all the measurements and think it will only use cuts that's not how inverse filters work. 

So after you take measurements the "all before " doesn't mean anything compared to what your viewing. So Dirac 1st makes its inverse frequency response filter. Than it uses the reference point and makes a inverse phase filter but before it does that it takes into account what the 1st inverse filters effect on minimum phase so that it doesn't over correct phase. 

It determines minimum phase by the reflections in the IR. By avoiding those and feeding back the projected reflection sound with an inverse filter it should effectively change the speakers behavior to make the reflections part of the acoustical stream. So it does some funky ****.... and up there I said "should" because that part wasn't fully explained in the video I saw with the maker of Dirac in it...

So when dealing with inverse filters you gotta know your digital headroom. So 1 you get a stronger signal out of Dirac if the magnitude is already pretty flat. If it's not flat like elgroso said you have to turn down the volume out of Dirac. Well that sucks because than the amp gain has to go up or boost on outs in dsp. Which is why I think the newer minidsps have +12db boost on outputs now. So, if your measurement are more than a 6db swing you may crash into 0dbfs and that's the absolute max in digital. So I figure the test sweep has at least 6db crest noise so a 6db swing (+/-6db or 12db boost and cut together) should be safe I think Dirac come in default with -10db lowered out. 

So yes my measurements show a huge cut at 3k (which I did on purpose) and it's about 12db deep on Dirac measurements so it will boost that 12db in its filter and I've been playing Dirac a 0db thinking as long as my target is under 0db it will only cut which is false 



And yeah I hear distortion in the high mids too. And that's where I have lots peq on horns. So I gotta rethink things a bit and dial up a really good flat tune 1st. Or have very good level setting I should say and maybe 3 pre. Eq cuts only on big peaks to flatten things first.


----------



## Elgrosso

Jscoyne2 said:


> When i was playing with Dirac, i found that i never had a clipped signal when doing the chair measurements unless my sub channel was high. It seems to me that it just cant handle a decent spl substage whatsoever.
> 
> Im interested in this flat Freq response your talking about. Do you mean eq to a flat response(even 9-12db+ substage?) and then let Dirac do its work?
> 
> Whenever you guys figure this out. Id love if someone through together a Hanatsu style tutorial. Reading through this and APL threads get extremely overwhelming.


What kind of amplitude did you have in total for these measurements?
I know my target is not crazy but I’ve seen 25db and it worked fine.
Only time I had Dirac mic clipping was this WE with a wrong high Q peq on horn.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Okay I'll try explain better sorry
> 
> 
> So you know I'm make filters tab after you get measurements the blue screen
> So you make let's say a measurement and the sub and midbass is above the "0db" line.
> And the horns are somewhere above it and some spots below it (because the horns have pretty drastic curves) well , let's say the target by default sets sub about 3db above that line and 16k around -2db part.
> 
> So if you just optimize where the default target is it's going to put boosts and cuts to make that target....so the measurement in the "all before" when compared to the reference in "0db" could be high above that line and have parts below it. Well depending on how loud the measurements were taken will show where the "all before" is placed on the graph. So In reference to the 0db line the measurement is just normalized and doesn't reflect any "0db" centering on the graph. They just put the measurement on the screen so you can see it , after all there is no scroll down or scroll up so they have to just stick it in the window with where you want your target.
> 
> So when making a target , the center of the measurement will depend on how much boost and cut Dirac can accomplish. So if the measurement has more than about 6db dip in it from its center. To find center you would have to take the tallest peak/null and get the range and divide it by 2 to get the center of where Dirac will make its correction.
> 
> Remember Diracs behaviors , Diracs IIrs are not like PEQs on a dsp, dirac uses one single filter to do the whole correction, it would be similar to a single biquad that programs banks of biquads, but it's not limited to banks of biquads. It's a IIR inverse filter literally a mirror image of the averaged frequency response. So it will use boost and cut. Always! You can't make the target line in the blue screen under all the measurements and think it will only use cuts that's not how inverse filters work.
> 
> So after you take measurements the "all before " doesn't mean anything compared to what your viewing. So Dirac 1st makes its inverse frequency response filter. Than it uses the reference point and makes a inverse phase filter but before it does that it takes into account what the 1st inverse filters effect on minimum phase so that it doesn't over correct phase.
> 
> It determines minimum phase by the reflections in the IR. By avoiding those and feeding back the projected reflection sound with an inverse filter it should effectively change the speakers behavior to make the reflections part of the acoustical stream. So it does some funky ****.... and up there I said "should" because that part wasn't fully explained in the video I saw with the maker of Dirac in it...
> 
> So when dealing with inverse filters you gotta know your digital headroom. So 1 you get a stronger signal out of Dirac if the magnitude is already pretty flat. If it's not flat like elgroso said you have to turn down the volume out of Dirac. Well that sucks because than the amp gain has to go up or boost on outs in dsp. Which is why I think the newer minidsps have +12db boost on outputs now. So, if your measurement are more than a 6db swing you may crash into 0dbfs and that's the absolute max in digital. So I figure the test sweep has at least 6db crest noise so a 6db swing (+/-6db or 12db boost and cut together) should be safe I think Dirac come in default with -10db lowered out.
> 
> So yes my measurements show a huge cut at 3k (which I did on purpose) and it's about 12db deep on Dirac measurements so it will boost that 12db in its filter and I've been playing Dirac a 0db thinking as long as my target is under 0db it will only cut which is false
> 
> 
> 
> And yeah I hear distortion in the high mids too. And that's where I have lots peq on horns. So I gotta rethink things a bit and dial up a really good flat tune 1st. Or have very good level setting I should say and maybe 3 pre. Eq cuts only on big peaks to flatten things first.




I think I get what you're saying.
So you mean that whatever shape and wherever we put the target, with the orange dots, dirac will kind of normalize it and boost/cut as if you had drawn the same target, but placed right in the middle of the total amplitude?
Then the final output level, the knob or the drop down menu in ddrc plugin, will adjust the final max level (0dbfs)
A bit like with APL and "target level".
Makes sense.

But,
I think I saw few times dirac having troubles to match perfectly some higher targets.
I mean, if I draw it lower, or mostly lower than the "all before", I usually get a perfect prediction match.
(Sometime with some squiggles down low, LF & taps limitations I guess. But by playing with the total fr selection window, the handles, deleting some points or smoothing here and there I can get back some taps to fine-tune)
But if I draw the same target, and placed higher, I can clearly see it struggling.
I would then get few holes in few spots, like it's getting out of juice to match the target.
I'll put some screenshots to illustrate.


----------



## Elgrosso

Here, see how lower the better? Of course it eats some juice.
It’s not my target just the default one moved up and down.







It’s today’s tune, 100-1700Hz.
No PEQS on mids, because around the XO they looked pretty nice by themselves, so I wanted to let Dirac fix the bandpass.
Then just few PEQS on sub and horns to get a smooth slope.
But it’s a miss, note how the mids play higher than expected, at least than what I saw in REW.
Also note the left midbass, weak around 100-150Hz.
I get that when I use a large «*cube*» of measurements.

Here’s mine:


----------



## Jscoyne2

Elgrosso said:


> What kind of amplitude did you have in total for these measurements?
> I know my target is not crazy but I’ve seen 25db and it worked fine.
> Only time I had Dirac mic clipping was this WE with a wrong high Q peq on horn.



*This was my original post and try with it awhile back*

Ok so i did some more testing. Keep in mind that the FR shown in the below pics are using different mic positions, meaning that for REW i use Hanatsus and for DIRAC i use the positions on the DIRAC software. 

This is my base tune using using the Hanatsu method and The C-dsp for everything. This is without Dirac. VVVVV









Here is my Dirac measurement with time alignment done beforehand. The same T/A settings as in the first pic but different mic positions. VVVVV









As you can see. i get drastically different FR at certain points. 

Now here is my Dirac measurement with all T/A settings on my dsp set to 0. VVVV










I used the same curve on both and then uploaded it to the Dirac software part 2 which just lets you control gain, T/a, and up to 4presets . So i uploaded with and without T/a as preset 1 and preset 2. 

In order to listen with an A/B method. I had my settings(that gave me the curve on the first picture) on my C-dsp saved to preset one and the same exact settings on preset 2 but without any T/A applied, then i had t go into the DIRAC program and swap accordingly as well. So Preset 1 on c-dsp with preset 1 on Dirac, preset 2 on c-dsp with preset 2 on Dirac. . Sounds more complicated than it is. Initially both preset 1(with ta) and preset 2(without Ta) were too far left but with a little fiddling in the Dirac program i had perfect center stage within 2ms of change and 2db of change. 

This means that this thing does time alignment for you. Dope. There was definitely a different sound to a song even with the same exact curve when comparing A/B to the curve done with and without Initial time alignment. I enjoyed no inital T/A more and i attribute that to less boosting done to fill in weird gaps. 

As for negatives. i heard a lot of distortion and there is a clipping meter on the Dirac software that was going off plenty. Im not sure the reason behind this. The computer was playing music to the headunit through an Aux cord so im hoping it was either the cheap computer feeding distortion into the system because of just a simple built sound card or something along those lines. I dont know what the Dirac clipping indicator actually indicates. At what point is what clipping in the software.... Idk. 

Also in order to really get a curve, you have to cut which to me is taking away even more headroom and making my loudest possible volume that much lower. Im curious if it would be better to tune most of your system to a flat curve without any PEQ or GEQ involved at all. What i mean is, level match, do your best as crossover matching. Dont do any time alignment, dont do any PEQ or GEQ and let DIRAC do all of the FR shaping after that. 

anyway, this thing is dope. im definitely getting a DDRC-24 in the future.


----------



## Elgrosso

Jscoyne2 said:


> As you can see. i get drastically different FR at certain points...


Yeah I remember your post, with or without T/A.
But so in the laptop version you have T/A per channel?
Not on mine, it's only 2ch.
Anyway, I think to compare both FR you should use the same sweep points.
But they don't look that different right now. Seems just accentuated in Dirac. Probably the SPFR that accentuate the lower output around XO.

For the mic clipping yeah 43db is a lot 
It’s also strange that it doesn't distribute your measurement equally around 0db. Up limit is 10db and goes to -30db here.
(well I just looked at mine and it’s the same)

For the clipping output, do you have a master volume control in this soft version? In the plugin there's a -3/-6/-10db option.

About pre-tuning flat VS target, I’m more for target.
Just because you can keep control of output/final gain to not lose too much headroom. And I use always the same kind of target so I know my system like that now. Can also listen to it without Dirac when I want to change something else. 

But I agree on the noPEQ pre-tuning. But only if the XOs are clean enough, using some PEQS here to optimize the slope will really help.
In the bandpass Dirac is better than me.


----------



## oabeieo

Yeah, the lower the better indeed. That would leave more digital headroom 
There's a theoretical 96db of headroom in digital audio. I think we use about 20db and the music we listen to rides so close to 0db it's like 5db and a good cd is like 12db headroom or something I can't remember exactly what it is but I read it somewhere reputable...

So if our music is so close to full blast that doesn't mean we have a lot of room above the 0db line in our target , unless there was cuts made in the filter than what we see would be elusive... 

So yeah your getting it I think. If you look at your screen it shows the measurements as normalized , when we make the measurements we can put out output at whatever I set my test sweeps to -35db and 0db would be 0dbfs , obviously that would probably blow all the speakers in the car if we did that. However......that's the test sweep. As soon as I make my filters I been jacking up the outpolut to 0db. And on my deck toslink out I turn it up all the way when I listen. So there for leaving whatever digital headroom in the music as means of dynamic headroom and it's safe because it's media and wasn't recorded with clipping. However if my filter has boost in it than I eat up whatever left over headroom I have. So what we do it lower out filter target below the 0db line and all seems ok right, yes. And it is, however we need to first look at the "all before" and take the biggest peak and biggest null and count it out in db on the graph divide it by two and that should be how low we set the output gain to.....which means to truly get no clipping the "all before" really needs to be within just a few db of flat otherwise we have to gain it down so far that we have hardly any output. We would have to gain our amps up a lot or boost the output in dsp to compensate.

What I'm saying is the measurement is normalized, if you made that measurement at -35db. Why is it show way above the 0db line on the blue screen graph? Because it's fake and it's showing up the curve and has nothing to do with target....the target is the sum of the measurement and inverse filter than averaged over all 27 measurements or whatever. The inverse would make a perfectly flat line electricity but it's an average so that's why we see it as a flat flat but squiggly yellow line....

So a good pre tune to be made as flat as possible and use up as much bits in the output peq. Would be the way to go first. That way the input is as strong as possible and will lead to a lot higher noise floor and a lot more gain....

It's okay how Dirac dose it for idiot proofing but gosh dam I would so much prefer making a filter and tweaking it on my own...

My problem is I keep changing **** and need to stop and actually set my gains and get it all right. So I was going to do that today, I forgot about Valentine's Day so **** the wife wanted to do something and my B&C 10s came today so crap. I'll have to do it tomorrow or next day


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yeah I remember your post, with or without T/A.
> But so in the laptop version you have T/A per channel?
> Not on mine, it's only 2ch.
> Anyway, I think to compare both FR you should use the same sweep points.
> But they don't look that different right now. Seems just accentuated in Dirac. Probably the SPFR that accentuate the lower output around XO.
> 
> For the mic clipping yeah 43db is a lot
> It’s also strange that it doesn't distribute your measurement equally around 0db. Up limit is 10db and goes to -30db here.
> (well I just looked at mine and it’s the same)
> 
> For the clipping output, do you have a master volume control in this soft version? In the plugin there's a -3/-6/-10db option.
> 
> About pre-tuning flat VS target, I’m more for target.
> Just because you can keep control of output/final gain to not lose too much headroom. And I use always the same kind of target so I know my system like that now. Can also listen to it without Dirac when I want to change something else.
> 
> But I agree on the noPEQ pre-tuning. But only if the XOs are clean enough, using some PEQS here to optimize the slope will really help.
> In the bandpass Dirac is better than me.



Yep I felt that way before I notice the clipping issue...

So maybe your doing something different or have REALLY quiet amps and can gain them up to the 500mV setting. I can't I get noise if I gain my amps up. But I use class AB which is so much more sensitive to gain noise than a D. So maybe you got me beat on this... 

If I could just gain my amps up with no noise I would just do that.... I can get to about half way or 2v setting and it starts to show hiss  the three Class D I have have zero noise. It's a shame maybe I'll get Another 600/4 and pull the focals for good.


----------



## oabeieo

When I say use peq first I am strictly talking about a peq that affects both left and right together. A averaged of the entire system on with all speakers playing no eq no Dirac but yes let Dirac do the L/R filters on it's own. It would be too much if not. 

And find the big two or three peaks and cut them down. That's is just try to make Dirac correction not use up so much dynamic range. 

I'm convinced this will work. So I will try tomorrow. If I have time . 
And let you know..... you don't hear any clipping in the horns on yours after you make a target filter?


----------



## oabeieo

And I don't think this would be a issue for non horn users . I hear zero clipping in my mids 
Just horns ....and subsequently that's the only driver that has up to 18db differences in peaks and nulls .... 


I will get answers sorry but it's buggin me ...

I'm write a letter to Drac himself .


----------



## Elgrosso

> Yeah, the lower the better indeed. That would leave more digital headroom
> There's a theoretical 96db of headroom in digital audio. I think we use about 20db and the music we listen to rides so close to 0db it's like 5db and a good cd is like 12db headroom or something I can't remember exactly what it is but I read it somewhere reputable...
> 
> So if our music is so close to full blast that doesn't mean we have a lot of room above the 0db line in our target , unless there was cuts made in the filter than what we see would be elusive...
> 
> So yeah your getting it I think. If you look at your screen it shows the measurements as normalized , when we make the measurements we can put out output at whatever I set my test sweeps to -35db and 0db would be 0dbfs , obviously that would probably blow all the speakers in the Car if we did that. However......that's the test sweep. As soon as I make my filters I been jacking up the outpolut to 0db. And on my deck toslink out I turn it up all the way when I listen. So there for leaving whatever digital headroom in the music as means of dynamic headroom and it's safe because it's media and wasn't recorded with clipping. However if my filter has boost in it than I eat up whatever left over headroom I have. So what we do it lower out filter target below the 0db line and all seems ok right, yes. And it is, however we need to first look at the "all before" and take the biggest peak and biggest null and count it out in db on the graph divide it by two and that should be how low we set the output gain to.....which means to truly get no clipping the "all before" really needs to be within just a few db of flat otherwise we have to gain it down so far that we have hardly any output. We would have to gain our amps up a lot or boost the output in dsp to compensate.
> 
> What I'm saying is the measurement is normalized, if you made that measurement at -35db. Why is it show way above the 0db line on the blue screen graph? Because it's fake and it's showing up the curve and has nothing to do with target....the target is the sum of the measurement and inverse filter than averaged over all 27 measurements or whatever. The inverse would make a perfectly flat line electricity but it's an average so that's why we see it as a flat flat but squiggly yellow line....
> 
> So a good pre tune to be made as flat as possible and use up as much bits in the output peq. Would be the way to go first. That way the input is as strong as possible and will lead to a lot higher noise floor and a lot more gain....
> 
> It's okay how Dirac dose it for idiot proofing but gosh dam I would so much prefer making a filter and tweaking it on my own...
> 
> My problem is I keep changing **** and need to stop and actually set my gains and get it all right. So I was going to do that today, I forgot about Valentine's Day so **** the wife wanted to do something and my B&C 10s came today so crap. I'll have to do it tomorrow or next day


Hum… ok
It really sound like one of our old discussion, what I understand is that we have 3 options:
A - tune to flat first
B - tune to target first
C - tune to target but non optimized (only around XO, not bandpass)

A - means higher gains on horns, or lower gains on sub/mids, or big dsp output discrepancies
> loss of power and potential clipping (well depending of the target shape)

B - means good levels, good gain chain, less or no clipping
but potentially more errors created by the multiple PEQS per driver for Dirac to fix

C -well a mix of both, but due to the high amplitude variation on horns, could drive to clipping

Makes sense?





> Yep I felt that way before I notice the clipping issue...
> 
> So maybe your doing something different or have REALLY quiet amps and can gain them up to the 500mV setting. I can't I get noise if I gain my amps up. But I use class AB which is so much more sensitive to gain noise than a D. So maybe you got me beat on this...
> 
> If I could just gain my amps up with no noise I would just do that.... I can get to about half way or 2v setting and it starts to show hiss the three Class D I have have zero noise. It's a shame maybe I'll get Another 600/4 and pull the focals for good.


I have the same thing with my horns amp. It's a prs-a900, AB too, and it's the one driving the final global gain in a way.
I can't reach 500mV, have to lower it till I have acceptable noise, but if I set it to no noise, then I miss too much final power. No idea of the final Voltage selection.
(btw 500mV means average and 2V max?)



The HDs are great, absolutely no noise, I could try the horns on them to check.
And if good I could get another HD, all stacked in the rear wing they would fit, stealth! 
It’s really cool that, bridged, they push the same power for 4 or 8 ohms.
I wonder which one I should use if I want to try 16 ohms drivers (1x1200 per mibass? )






> When I say use peq first I am strictly talking about a peq that affects both left and right together. A averaged of the entire system on with all speakers playing no eq no Dirac but yes let Dirac do the L/R filters on it's own. It would be too much if not.
> And find the big two or three peaks and cut them down. That's is just try to make Dirac correction not use up so much dynamic range.


Ok I see, so you use PEQS, pre-Dirac, for target correction and then a minimal PEQ for driver correction (on horns usually).
I do the same, + sometime the sub. Because the sub can drive the total amplitude of the "all before" up. As I cut it 10/15db around 40Hz.





> And let you know..... you don't hear any clipping in the horns on yours after you make a target filter?


It's not that clear in fact. Most of the time if I have clipping it's track dependent.
I mean maybe I'm already at 0dbfs but don't notice. Not loud enough to reach it except with very bad recordings?
Or it's just the bad recording that is already clipped (still have some very old mp3).

But yes when I had clipping, lowering volume either on the phone (source) or the ddrc fixed it. Not at the final dsp (6x8).
Lowering the target for a new filter works of course.




> And I don't think this would be a issue for non horn users . I hear zero clipping in my mids
> Just horns ....and subsequently that's the only driver that has up to 18db differences in peaks and nulls ....


Ok so for both of us. Could it be that clipping on mids is harder to notice?
About the big difference between peaks & nulls, that would push for the good pre-Dirac EQ too.


----------



## oabeieo

I'll answer that post ^ next 

But first ide like to say I got an answer...

So apparently Dirac is only capable of 10db correction. Period . If there is more than 10db it won't go past it and push all of the correction to -10db and stop. So whatever is left would be uncorrected and would be additional signal that would have to be attenuated even farther than the -10db so literally eating up all the dynamic headroom.... so that solves it. 

Our measurements need to be within 10db of flat and all should be okay.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Hum… ok
> It really sound like one of our old discussion, what I understand is that we have 3 options:
> A - tune to flat first
> B - tune to target first
> C - tune to target but non optimized (only around XO, not bandpass)
> 
> A - means higher gains on horns, or lower gains on sub/mids, or big dsp output discrepancies
> > loss of power and potential clipping (well depending of the target shape)
> 
> B - means good levels, good gain chain, less or no clipping
> but potentially more errors created by the multiple PEQS per driver for Dirac to fix
> 
> C -well a mix of both, but due to the high amplitude variation on horns, could drive to clipping
> 
> Makes sense?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have the same thing with my horns amp. It's a prs-a900, AB too, and it's the one driving the final global gain in a way.
> I can't reach 500mV, have to lower it till I have acceptable noise, but if I set it to no noise, then I miss too much final power. No idea of the final Voltage selection.
> (btw 500mV means average and 2V max?)
> 
> 
> 
> The HDs are great, absolutely no noise, I could try the horns on them to check.
> And if good I could get another HD, all stacked in the rear wing they would fit, stealth!
> It’s really cool that, bridged, they push the same power for 4 or 8 ohms.
> I wonder which one I should use if I want to try 16 ohms drivers (1x1200 per mibass? )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok I see, so you use PEQS, pre-Dirac, for target correction and then a minimal PEQ for driver correction (on horns usually).
> I do the same, + sometime the sub. Because the sub can drive the total amplitude of the "all before" up. As I cut it 10/15db around 40Hz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not that clear in fact. Most of the time if I have clipping it's track dependent.
> I mean maybe I'm already at 0dbfs but don't notice. Not loud enough to reach it except with very bad recordings?
> Or it's just the bad recording that is already clipped (still have some very old mp3).
> 
> But yes when I had clipping, lowering volume either on the phone (source) or the ddrc fixed it. Not at the final dsp (6x8).
> Lowering the target for a new filter works of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok so for both of us. Could it be that clipping on mids is harder to notice?
> About the big difference between peaks & nulls, that would push for the good pre-Dirac EQ too.


Yep you got it buddy. We on same page now.

I truly think it's a issue only us (or horn users) will experience. Direct radiators frequency response is much more manageable . So it forces us to have some sort of pre-equalization before we run the Durack SoftwRe . 

Man I'm not kidding I was getting some pretty bad clipping and I had everything all the way down it wasn't making any sense but now it makes perfect sense we were both doing it the right way the first time and I was thinking too hard into it all it is is there's no more than 10 DB correction and we're good . 

If we had direct radiators or we would have to do is sit or gains so that the frequency response is flat between drivers because direct the radiators don't have such a large variances 

This makes sence why joeysycon2 (sp?) is not experiencing these problems although he is running the trial version but it shouldn't matter should still work the same and less the computer sound card is Jank , but overall that's what it comes down to. 

So 10 DB is our number, as long as our gains and pre eq has a magnitude with no more than 10 DB variance and We set out output level in Dirac to -10db it really won't matter where we put the target in Dirac. Which would also make sense that if you had let say one or two or three DB variance total you would be able to boost the target above 0db about 6,7,8 db. Or whatever the variance is.

I was confusing the over zero DB Line as 0dbfs. Albeit that 0dbfs is still part of it but we would have to set the target like 15db above the 0db line before we worry too much about that. So 

Overall. If your measurement has more than 5db variance it's a good idea to have the target no more than about 3-5db above the 0db line and if it has more than 10 the target line HAS to be below the 0db line. Doesn't matter where could be 1db below 0db just needs to be below 0db. And than we set the output to -10db and wallah clip free music alas


----------



## oabeieo

This also makes sence why any bending of the target makes a undesired sound and could make left or right stand out more. Because there's a separate correction for left and right . If one channel has 13db variance in one frequency band while the other channel doesn't have over 10 DB variance in that frequency band but may have a variance that's greater than 10 DB in another frequency band could cause any bending of the target so not sound right or have one side sound louder in one frequency.....

But being that it is an average I would still do all my pre-equalization on both channels at the same time however I would look up left and right channel separately with an RTA and just look at the behavior of the frequency response and make a decision based on what you see in the RTA weather will be good to do a Pre tune on separate left and right channels but I will personally think it would be better to let dirac that single correction. Otherwise he cues are probably counteracting each other and that just seems to be not the good way to go . 

So yes I would pre-tune a 100average or more Pink PN large fft RTA average to both left and right together. And just focus on the big peaks and knock them down with wide Q. = .7-to 1.7... and get less than 10db variance. 

For that matter what I would do is set for my PEqs flat use some output eq to tame stop band interference, but I wouldn't go too crazy with it , ya know knock down the 5k interference hump frommidbasses that are crossed at 800-1k . And some minor stop band spikes but I wouldn't focus too much on it just get the big stuff that will be audible , especially if you using Iir crossovers , there's no pre-ringing to worry about from stop-band interference on a crossover, Dirac will sum the interacting drivers and correct whatever combined wave that happens to hit the measurement microphone for phase and FR


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah nice find man. I should have seen it, I thought the squiggles were related to taps limit but in fact it's super obvious on the third pic I posted, everything that passes the +10db limit follows the exact same curve than "all before".
Cool so we were a bit overthinking all this and the first approach was the right one.
So just stay within 10db of the measurements, less if possible, check max predicted boost and adjust either target level or output attenuation.
Much simpler 

Ok next step, focus on pre-EQ with good old fashioned tools!


----------



## oabeieo

So....just made another discovery...

If you set the output level in DDRC2x2 plug in to -whatever db 10-8-6-3 it is specific to that configuration. It is not gloabal to all 4 presets. 
I think it's the input gain and the output gain is the volume control. Not 100% but why on earth would they do that unless there's a reason....for clipping. So what I did was go in with ddrc2x2 and connect with config 1 and set to -10db than "x" out switch to program 2 and reconnect and set it to -10db and three and four.... 

I am not sure if the input and output gain are relevant, meaning if there is a "input" or "output" side but I definitely can hear a difference. So rather than just turning the vol knob down to get headroom I had to set it up to -10in the other plug in not the Dirac live software. 

Seems the Dirac live software is directly connected to the volume knob volume.


----------



## Elgrosso

Spent some more time tuning here. But it’s now close to my limit, improvements are getting more subtile.
The goal was to fix few things based on previous measurements, to get a better pre tune ready for Dirac.
Here REW sweeps laid on top of Dirac (9 sweeps per side / same mic positions for both):



My to do list for pre-Dirac:
1 - left midbass weakness, find out if which mic placement triggers it, and if it’s fixable
2 - right mids dips, optimize PEQs to fill it a bit
3 - tame this peak, present in Dirac but not as much in REW (might be external noise at that time)
4 - tame more the horns, and get better L/R alignment
+ get a smaller total amplitude for Dirac, to optimize gain chain/headroom

Side note: see how the horns are higher in REW than in Dirac? (same level in dsp). It’s 1/6 smoothing in REW, probably close in Dirac. But can it be something else? Maybe Dirac uses a psychoacoustic 1/6 smoothing, that brings up the highs a little.

After some readings on diverse forums I wanted to try different "cubes" for mic placement.
Smaller, and even ms8 style (near the ears moving the head)

Here ms8 style mic placement (20-20k):





Half my typical cube (20-20k):




First, see how the "all before" look the same whatever mic placement I used? (I added the impulse because they look different)
So there are variations on the high portion of the mids but nothing major. 
And horns look the same!
I didn't do the usual big cube size yet (1ft) but will try later.
This one should change more.

Results:
1 - not fixable. But it’s definitely correlated to the right side of measurement cube. Probably some cancellation with the right window. I can optimize with heavy PEQS but it gets strange sounding. So I preferred to let Dirac go.
I think I would just have to move the mids to fix this. It's not "hearable" by itself, it's just that the right midbass sounds better.
2 - same, not fixable. Maybe the console? But here I don't miss it, don't even notice it.
3 - done, it’s the right mid just after the #3 dip. hard to fix the dip without increasing this peak. So I moved the XO a bit higher to be able to tame with PEQ without messing to much the bandpass while still getting a clean slope.
4 - done, with a higher and shallower slope on horns, all PEQS work better

100Hz-1700Hz acoustic LR24db, all channels at 0db, sub at -2db in dsp.
Target is just under the avg in Dirac, so it will only cut except Left midbass, and I still have a lot of headroom.
I just kept -3db in ddrc for safety at first but I could get rid of it.
I also change a bit my TA and gained a bit on left of the stage.
The sub is getting better and better, hard to spot it except very very loud with massages in my back.
It sounds very deep and precise. Bass attacks are awesome, strong and sharp.
then I need more time to compare both.
But something easy to say, the ms8 style (close mic placements) doesn't sound as airy as the second one. Like if the horns are getting more signal.

If I have time I’ll take post Dirac measurements with REW.
To see what it did on #1 & #2.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> So....just made another discovery...
> 
> If you set the output level in DDRC2x2 plug in to -whatever db 10-8-6-3 it is specific to that configuration. It is not gloabal to all 4 presets.
> I think it's the input gain and the output gain is the volume control. Not 100% but why on earth would they do that unless there's a reason....for clipping. So what I did was go in with ddrc2x2 and connect with config 1 and set to -10db than "x" out switch to program 2 and reconnect and set it to -10db and three and four....
> 
> I am not sure if the input and output gain are relevant, meaning if there is a "input" or "output" side but I definitely can hear a difference. So rather than just turning the vol knob down to get headroom I had to set it up to -10in the other plug in not the Dirac live software.
> 
> Seems the Dirac live software is directly connected to the volume knob volume.


I thought about this too this week end.
I think the knob is just an output control.
While the attenuation (-10/-6/3db) in the DDRC plugin, just the default position when it turns ON. I don;t think this one is not filter dependent, I didn't check but never noticed a change.

But don't know exactly what does the volume output in the Dirac soft itself.
The slider on top of each filter, the filter dependent one.
So you think it could be an input gain?


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> I thought about this too this week end.
> I think the knob is just an output control.
> While the attenuation (-10/-6/3db) in the DDRC plugin, just the default position when it turns ON. I don;t think this one is not filter dependent, I didn't check but never noticed a change.
> 
> But don't know exactly what does the volume output in the Dirac soft itself.
> The slider on top of each filter, the filter dependent one.
> So you think it could be an input gain?


Well the attenuation in the 2x2 plugin is the input. And you would have to attinuate volume pre filter so that the filter would have enough headroom to function. The volume knob and the slider in DL are the same. The output level. 

In digital as long as it doesn't go past 0dbfs (full scale) your good. If we have 10db differences in our measurements where it will have to boost 10db we need to set that in the input attenuation. It absolutely is pre set specific I've tryed it and it's true. The thing is I don't know how close this box rides to 0dbfs 

So in the analog world the equivalent would be 0dbv (volts) so I think it depends on the input digital signal coming in and how much available signal is left. But I'm certain the clipping is simply tips of the waveforms trying to go past 0dbfs. So on my source I usually listen to my stereo all the way up on toslink. Giving it the maximum amount of dynamic range. However with 24bit dynamic range isn't really a issue compared to 16bit. But it makes me feel better knowing that it has a good strong signal (147db potential). So we could lower our output on toslink however I don't know how a variable toslink is encoded and if it can boost from that or not. Like if it thinks a lowered volume from the deck is a max signal and goes off it....so I need learn how exactly that works.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Well the attenuation in the 2x2 plugin is the input. And you would have to attinuate volume pre filter so that the filter would have enough headroom to function. The volume knob and the slider in DL are the same. The output level.
> 
> In digital as long as it doesn't go past 0dbfs (full scale) your good. If we have 10db differences in our measurements where it will have to boost 10db we need to set that in the input attenuation. It absolutely is pre set specific I've tryed it and it's true. The thing is I don't know how close this box rides to 0dbfs
> 
> So in the analog world the equivalent would be 0dbv (volts) so I think it depends on the input digital signal coming in and how much available signal is left. But I'm certain the clipping is simply tips of the waveforms trying to go past 0dbfs. So on my source I usually listen to my stereo all the way up on toslink. Giving it the maximum amount of dynamic range. However with 24bit dynamic range isn't really a issue compared to 16bit. But it makes me feel better knowing that it has a good strong signal (147db potential). So we could lower our output on toslink however I don't know how a variable toslink is encoded and if it can boost from that or not. Like if it thinks a lowered volume from the deck is a max signal and goes off it....so I need learn how exactly that works.



Ok so, well I'm visual so is this schema right?



At the end since it's all digital, we could either use IN attenuation or OUT knob to stay below 0 dbfs.
But it's just safer to adjust with IN attenuation, so no mistake is possible with the knob.

Question: if digital clipping is not volume dependent.
But is it hearable at low volume?
Can speakers get damaged at low volume?


----------



## Elgrosso

Elgrosso said:


> ...
> Results:
> 1 - not fixable. But it’s definitely correlated to the right side of measurement cube. Probably some cancellation with the right window. I can optimize with heavy PEQS but it gets strange sounding. So I preferred to let Dirac go.
> I think I would just have to move the mids to fix this. It's not "hearable" by itself, it's just that the right midbass sounds better.
> ...
> 
> If I have time I’ll take post Dirac measurements with REW.
> To see what it did on #1 & #2.



About this, I took some quick measurements, couldn’t wait...

Blue my left midbass EQed a bit, only the second half, but pre-Dirac.
Red: post-Dirac



And phases:



With my 6 PEQs I couldn't get something as clean myself.
I really need to make more post-Dirac measurements to see what it did.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Ok so, well I'm visual so is this schema right?
> 
> 
> 
> At the end since it's all digital, we could either use IN attenuation or OUT knob to stay below 0 dbfs.
> But it's just safer to adjust with IN attenuation, so no mistake is possible with the knob.
> 
> Question: if digital clipping is not volume dependent.
> But is it hearable at low volume?
> Can speakers get damaged at low volume?



By god your a visual genius. Yes sir exactly right! 
In fact that is perfectly how it's done...


----------



## oabeieo

All except your not taking into consideration the filter itself. 
The line you have drawn represents at 24bit in 24bit out 0dbfs scale....but not too fast 
The input and output have a level of isolation because of the filters and the filters hardware....it's not just one optical cable that goes directly through the device. There's a in and out respectively: 

So turning down the output won't help in a signal that was clipped during processing. 
The input needs to be turned down to acomidate the hardware that reads the 147db of flexibility to a signal, 24bit is 147db. The 0dbfs roof and the data structure of the stream is all mathematically into the dsp chip. If it's -10db down at its input it will read 10db lower than the 0db ceiling and know there's 10db more volume to make a filter that matches what you see. If you turn down the output , that just tuns down the output of the corrected filter. Which would still have that clipping that was copied from the clipping at processing, because it doesn't know better. We told it to try to make a signal 10db louder but wasn't 10db between the peak and the 0dbfs ceiling. So it just does what we told it to do. And if the high dynamic peaks get clipped it will be beards throughout the entire range. And I experienced this. Too much in fact because I wanted more output and told it to.


----------



## oabeieo

It's like there's no actual Celiieng at all.. it's just the end of the bits depth. 
Mathematically whatever but depth the encoding is will determine 0dbfs. 

For 16bit that's 96db for 24bit it's 147db..... now know that most of our music rides within 12db of that ceiling ....yeah the one that doesn't exist but is more like an end so we describe it as a ceiling. 

So....if a dsp is being fed a data stream that is hovering around 12db or even some music is 5db from its ceiling it depends on what format the music was recorded. 16/44 24/96? 

Our dsps will upsample to 24bit and add a bunch of zeros. Even tho the spacing between volumes is a lot closer with 24bit and upsampled recording will still keep its mathematical equivalent to its original by rounding...and it works just fine. 

But by rounding it still pushes the signal to the top where it was with 16bit. It's just spread out more with lots of nothing in the spaces in between. 

So anyway our dsp is being fed data, and it runs through a filter and the filter tells it what to do, and than it's repackaged as a new stream all together with a whole different set of ups and downs as before..as soon as it leaves the filter it probably runs into another filter that has a volume coefficient and is connected to the output. 

Unless the output volume IS the one in the same as the input volume, the input volume would be the filter itself and have control over the coefficients that control volume. If that were the case , why even have a in and out volume. 

I mean unless minidsp wanted us to idiot proof the front volume knob, but I'm not sure anyone buying minidsps are idiots and can probably hear clipping...

Idk tho.....the first idea is the only way that explains clipping at low vol which I was 100% hearing.....


Idk still tho......because, my deck is also a volume control.....wouldn't turning down the decks volume lower it away from 0dbfs.....after all a digital volume is just a massing cutting of LSBs right. ?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> All except your not taking into consideration the filter itself.
> The line you have drawn represents at 24bit in 24bit out 0dbfs scale....but not too fast
> The input and output have a level of isolation because of the filters and the filters hardware....it's not just one optical cable that goes directly through the device. There's a in and out respectively:
> 
> So turning down the output won't help in a signal that was clipped during processing.
> The input needs to be turned down to acomidate the hardware that reads the 147db of flexibility to a signal, 24bit is 147db. The 0dbfs roof and the data structure of the stream is all mathematically into the dsp chip. If it's -10db down at its input it will read 10db lower than the 0db ceiling and know there's 10db more volume to make a filter that matches what you see. If you turn down the output , that just tuns down the output of the corrected filter. Which would still have that clipping that was copied from the clipping at processing, because it doesn't know better. We told it to try to make a signal 10db louder but wasn't 10db between the peak and the 0dbfs ceiling. So it just does what we told it to do. And if the high dynamic peaks get clipped it will be beards throughout the entire range. And I experienced this. Too much in fact because I wanted more output and told it to.


Yeah the top 0dbfs line is just as max reference. 
Ok so we know the knob or slider won’t help us, they just control the out, that can be already clipped.
Then the tools we have are attenuation level & target placement.
+ pre tune to stay within +10/-10db for th max boost allowed with our max attenuation allowed.

Ok I just saw your other response, I was about to add:
But then, if needed, can we theoretically adjust also before the DDRC?
(and how to determine the max amount of db to lower between 24 to 16bits without losing too much?/ You kind of answered)
And like you, on my phone sending digital out, I still have control over the volume.
I was surprised, and it's one of my easiest tool to reduce temporarily signal when I hear clipping. (-5% is usually enough)

Also I’d add, the minidsp digital stuff, wasn’t built to be used with our crazy constrains in a car, especially with horns & PA drivers 
Would be cool to find out somewhere on the web some details on the car/OEM version of Dirac...


----------



## oabeieo

Yes lowering the target will do a cut as well....it's just the boost in the filter we are concerned about. It can add cuts all day long and be fine... 

Bigger the null you see guess what..... 

So ......

I'm going ask around and see if all the volumes are done in the filter or if there is in fact two volumes .....that would really help us to making better judgments on how we draw our target and set our levels within the DL box


----------



## Izay123

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



LumbermanSVO said:


> That's the thing, what he(and a few others around here) is using isn't "simple" time alignment. Think of it an more like an EQ, but for time, and with thousands of adjustment points.
> 
> 
> 
> You should do some reading in the DIRAC and APL threads, fascinating stuff.



HELL YEAH!!! I WANT THAT!!! 

HOW DO I BUY IT, FROM WHOM, & HOW MUCH $$???


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Izay123 said:


> HELL YEAH!!! I WANT THAT!!!
> 
> HOW DO I BUY IT, FROM WHOM, & HOW MUCH $$???


Haha, well, from minidsp, manual stuff:
https://www.minidsp.com/products/opendrc-series
or Dirac stuff:
https://www.minidsp.com/products/dirac-series

From APL Audio:
Acoustic Power Lab :: Home
Han’s review here: http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...l1-advanced-dsp-eq-phase-correction-unit.html


----------



## oabeieo

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Izay123 said:


> HELL YEAH!!! I WANT THAT!!!
> 
> HOW DO I BUY IT, FROM WHOM, & HOW MUCH $$???


   

Do your research and do it well.....

The apl is good but has fixed point architecture....
However it has some very cool software 

(Fixed vs. floating ...in short better stop band rejection for the floating and fixed has less noise. However floating point is MACd so it's noiseless also so eeh floating if I were to pick ) 
Dirac has floating point architecture. More user friendly 
And can get a good solid usable tune in minutes
Opendrc boxes are where it's at IMO if you want to do the corrections manually 
That's the same as the Dirac box except it's do it yourself and have to use third party tools....(which are great IMO ) 
The minidsp 2x4HDs are the perfect DAC and DsP all in one and has its own FIr bank built in so you could use those for all your corrections and it's a good dsp on top of it's all that runs at 96k....one of the few that do.
So it's a opendrc And a dsp all in one ..but you need two of them minimum for a 4 way  not too shabby 
I use 3 2x4HDs and use 2 of them as a 2x2. It's works well 
And have a Dirac box before them...
That way I have enough fir processing to do my own filters and corrections and have a Dirac box to finish off and it's the icing on the cake 

I would say don't get trapped into a "beginners" mentality and try to justify buying a box that doesn't do what YOU want. Buy what peaks your interest after some serious study time on what it all does and how to Basicly use each

You won't regret it

Btw , glad to see u back


----------



## Izay123

*Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



oabeieo said:


> Do your research and do it well.....
> 
> 
> 
> The apl is good but has fixed point architecture....
> 
> However it has some very cool software
> 
> 
> 
> (Fixed vs. floating ...in short better stop band rejection for the floating and fixed has less noise. However floating point is MACd so it's noiseless also so eeh floating if I were to pick )
> 
> Dirac has floating point architecture. More user friendly
> 
> And can get a good solid usable tune in minutes
> 
> Opendrc boxes are where it's at IMO if you want to do the corrections manually
> 
> That's the same as the Dirac box except it's do it yourself and have to use third party tools....(which are great IMO )
> 
> The minidsp 2x4HDs are the perfect DAC and DsP all in one and has its own FIr bank built in so you could use those for all your corrections and it's a good dsp on top of it's all that runs at 96k....one of the few that do.
> 
> So it's a opendrc And a dsp all in one ..but you need two of them minimum for a 4 way  not too shabby
> 
> I use 3 2x4HDs and use 2 of them as a 2x2. It's works well
> 
> And have a Dirac box before them...
> 
> That way I have enough fir processing to do my own filters and corrections and have a Dirac box to finish off and it's the icing on the cake
> 
> 
> 
> I would say don't get trapped into a "beginners" mentality and try to justify buying a box that doesn't do what YOU want. Buy what peaks your interest after some serious study time on what it all does and how to Basicly use each
> 
> 
> 
> You won't regret it
> 
> 
> 
> Btw , glad to see u back



(Edited after a bit more googling)


Hmmm... Is miniDSP the only brand offering a box that does this? Or are there other boxes/ways to do it? I'm currently running Zapco DSP-Z8 IV & am lined up & waiting for first shipment of Z16HDRs for competition use.

What's the most expedient way to ADD that functionality to a setup with Zapco DSP already? If I have to, I may try out a miniDSP DiracLive unit ( but only use it on Aux input as the sample rate seems lower than Zapco's native rate--& I wouldn't want to limit frequency response). here's screenshot of normal Zap DSP IV--with some initial experimental points & slopes. Can you post screenshot of your controls for Dirac & any other brand? I feel like Pro Audio HAS to use this software....













Judging by the training video & specs, I suppose JL's FIX box must be using a similar software with an auto-tuning capability enabled...


----------



## LumbermanSVO

These FIR processors go before your "normal" processor, so it should be as simple as adding one. The hard part is wrapping your head around how it works and wha it's doing.


----------



## oabeieo

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Izay123 said:


> (Edited after a bit more googling)
> 
> 
> Hmmm... Is miniDSP the only brand offering a box that does this? Or are there other boxes/ways to do it? I'm currently running Zapco DSP-Z8 IV & am lined up & waiting for first shipment of Z16HDRs for competition use.
> 
> What's the most expedient way to ADD that functionality to a setup with Zapco DSP already? If I have to, I may try out a miniDSP DiracLive unit ( but only use it on Aux input as the sample rate seems lower than Zapco's native rate--& I wouldn't want to limit frequency response). here's screenshot of normal Zap DSP IV--with some initial experimental points & slopes. Can you post screenshot of your controls for Dirac & any other brand? I feel like Pro Audio HAS to use this software....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judging by the training video & specs, I suppose JL's FIX box must be using a similar software with an auto-tuning capability enabled...


With an existing dsp...

Dirac live
Opendrc
Or APL1

Imho Dirac live is the hotness. I've used opendrc and Dirac and read a TON on APL1....can't get around the fixed point architecture.....not as powerful but effective as heck

The only thing I don't like about the Durack is that it will not force you to learn all about impulse responses and FIR in general because it does everything for you for the sake of learning you might want to try the APL one or the open DRC


----------



## oabeieo

Yes I will post screenshots of my equipment tonight if I can make a video for you soon as I get home from work tonight ....


----------



## Elgrosso

Izay123 said:


> (Edited after a bit more googling)
> 
> 
> Hmmm... Is miniDSP the only brand offering a box that does this? Or are there other boxes/ways to do it? I'm currently running Zapco DSP-Z8 IV & am lined up & waiting for first shipment of Z16HDRs for competition use.
> 
> What's the most expedient way to ADD that functionality to a setup with Zapco DSP already? If I have to, I may try out a miniDSP DiracLive unit ( but only use it on Aux input as the sample rate seems lower than Zapco's native rate--& I wouldn't want to limit frequency response). here's screenshot of normal Zap DSP IV--with some initial experimental points & slopes. Can you post screenshot of your controls for Dirac & any other brand? I feel like Pro Audio HAS to use this software....
> 
> 
> Judging by the training video & specs, I suppose JL's FIX box must be using a similar software with an auto-tuning capability enabled...


There is a large range of products using FIR, from jbl ms-2/ms-8, minidsp suite, apl, and many in PA but I can only remember a few right now: coneq, marani, powersoft
But since you have multi channels you might want to try the ddrc-88, open or dirac version.

You can find a bunch of screenshots here in this thread as I used apl and Dirac, in Oab’ thread about Opendrc and Dirac, with LumbermanSVO about APL, and few more.
Dirac has very limited controls and gives easily and quickly great results.
APL has way more controls, everything is customizable there, will give great results as well.

Also there’s or there was a lot discussions about FIR here. I remember one between Andy and Raimonds but there was many more.


----------



## oabeieo

I have a video uploading it should be live in about an hour


----------



## oabeieo

The 8ch version of Dirac is geared towards surround , and each channel has limited taps...

You would get a better overall correction with a 2ch version if using a dsp.

The 8ch version has crossovers and peq built in and is meant to act as a dsp and Dirac together for the most part and uses a different algo...

I would get an apl , Dirac or opendrc 2x2 and just do FR PH all in one go if it's a 2ch setup.
If you use a center and have rears the 8ch would be the way to go.

The algo in the 8ch uses the rears not just as a sound source but as a reinforcement for imaging and bass. Like a active bass trap. Impo I think the 8ch version would be difficult to implement in a car. It does have a custom mode where you can assign outputs and make it 2ch however a opendrc/Dirac would be able to make better use of its abilitys and taps with a existing dsp...more bang for buck . 

Ya know minidsp is pimpin Dirac live DDRC22 boxes as "the best in room correction " and is featured on just about all of there pages..... for a reason....
Anyway ......I

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...9756b637/1452585157921/on_room_correction.pdf


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...9756b637/1452585157921/on_room_correction.pdf


Very cool paper! A bit over my head at the beginning but pages 8/9/10 are very interesting!
Some common points with the other one you posted it seems (too hard for me the other one).
Thx!


----------



## oabeieo

Good gosh I waited two hours for my vid to upload 
And at the very very end it said it was too long and my account wasn't activated...

So I activated my account and tried again two more hours and same thing!

So I'm have to re do it tonight and make a series of 10min videos


----------



## oabeieo

How did u do that?

Link a post like that?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Good gosh I waited two hours for my vid to upload
> And at the very very end it said it was too long and my account wasn't activated...
> 
> So I activated my account and tried again two more hours and same thing!
> 
> So I'm have to re do it tonight and make a series of 10min videos


Arghhh




oabeieo said:


> How did u do that?
> 
> Link a post like that?


the «*other*» one? I just copied the link of the post (clic on the #xxx of the post on the right) then pasted with the «*earth/link*» icon (top of the text box). But I think there’s a direct tool for this in the forum, how to quote a post.

Btw, do you have more stuff from Dirac research? Didn’t find much myself, other than some forum talking.
But this hone here is really cool, enlightens a bit its behavior.
As I found on some forums it seems that the 1st measurements is really important, other than for TA of course, it also drives everything else, with the target. Than all other 8 sweeps are more here to draw the big picture so the algo can decide which dips/peaks to tame and how (iir of fir or both), while optimizing the time coherence for the stereo effect.
Well sounds obvious like that but since the APL I’m still wondering how they really work, I mean in logic and details.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Arghhh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the «*other*» one? I just copied the link of the post (clic on the #xxx of the post on the right) then pasted with the «*earth/link*» icon (top of the text box). But I think there’s a direct tool for this in the forum, how to quote a post.
> 
> Btw, do you have more stuff from Dirac research? Didn’t find much myself, other than some forum talking.
> But this hone here is really cool, enlightens a bit its behavior.
> As I found on some forums it seems that the 1st measurements is really important, other than for TA of course, it also drives everything else, with the target. Than all other 8 sweeps are more here to draw the big picture so the algo can decide which dips/peaks to tame and how (iir of fir or both), while optimizing the time coherence for the stereo effect.
> Well sounds obvious like that but since the APL I’m still wondering how they really work, I mean in logic and details.




How do you think I know how that **** works   dude I've been digging and digging and digging and digging for a while now to find out exactly what this thing does ..... pretty sure I got the most of it now but yeah definitely will share what I can find I didn't save much of it is bookmarks but I will try and pull up some of the stuff from memory I just pulled up to work so will have to be tonight 
Yeah I've got a lot of little treasures I can share I have to dig them back up ,
That one is pretty good yeah it's a good read for sure but it definitely gets down into the nitty-gritty of it . 

You should check out YouTube and look up Matthies Johansson Dirac 
Is the inventor of it and there's some really really good videos out there 
But yeah I'll find some more white papers too


----------



## Elgrosso

Will do! Will check these videos for the week end, here’s just a good one too:
Dirac Room Correction Interview With Mathias Johansson | Audioholics


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Will do! Will check these videos for the week end, here’s just a good one too:
> Dirac Room Correction Interview With Mathias Johansson | Audioholics



Ha seen it already


----------



## LumbermanSVO

Elgrosso said:


> You can find a bunch of screenshots here in this thread as I used apl and Dirac, in Oab’ thread about Opendrc and Dirac, with LumbermanSVO about APL, and few more.


Also, I'm willing to help anyone with the tuning process of the APL, but you must be patient with my time. I am a touring video guy and some weeks have nothing but time on my hands, and other weeks wish I could find the time to brush my teeth. Either way, feel free to ask my any question you may have.



Elgrosso said:


> Also there’s or there was a lot discussions about FIR here. I remember one between Andy and Raimonds but there was many more.


I don't remember this discussion, do you happen to have a link? I had a MS2 that I picked up for $40 on Amazon and used it in rental cars when I travel, but it died after less than six months of use.


----------



## oabeieo

Here's a test video I made 
I'm tuning a 1994 Supra at work...
Has two kicker IQ amps and hertz 3 way front 
And hertz 7" midbass in rear 
It's finally taking shape and I'll have more time to do my stuff it's almost done 
This is the hertz with no eq and no sub ....pretty dam smooth responce for zero eq 

And I'll make that video for iazy now that I know I can't go over 10min 
I made this one as a test run and it worked 

It turned out pretty nice 

https://youtu.be/-vYYsGnG2jY










photo hosting sites


----------



## oabeieo

Sorry to hijack with stupid cars and stupid amplifiers anyway I will try and get that video done tonight I finally got that thing done so I can have my evenings back


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Ha seen it already


Didn't find much more, maybe 4 or 5:
https://twit.tv/shows/home-theater-geeks/episodes/269?autostart=false
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvDMxk9j4Mw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmmkiZtDy0o

Just watched the first one, kind of video version of the pdf you linked, not bad





LumbermanSVO said:


> I don't remember this discussion, do you happen to have a link? I had a MS2 that I picked up for $40 on Amazon and used it in rental cars when I travel, but it died after less than six months of use.


HEre I think (didn;t re-read): http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ve-fir-filtering-must-have-toslink-input.html






oabeieo said:


> Sorry to hijack with stupid cars and stupid amplifiers anyway I will try and get that video done tonight I finally got that thing done so I can have my evenings back


Haha no worry man, good to see your face in the vid’ 
So midbass in the trunk facing rear?
But it looks sure nice


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Didn't find much more, maybe 4 or 5:
> https://twit.tv/shows/home-theater-geeks/episodes/269?autostart=false
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvDMxk9j4Mw
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmmkiZtDy0o
> 
> Just watched the first one, kind of video version of the pdf you linked, not bad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HEre I think (didn;t re-read): http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ve-fir-filtering-must-have-toslink-input.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haha no worry man, good to see your face in the vid’
> So midbass in the trunk facing rear?
> But it looks sure nice



Those are subs 10w1 JL .... 

For crappy equipment it sounded pretty dam good



*Edit://ilovethevideosnerdiness.lol*

*The avcam guy is funny *


----------



## oabeieo

Okay here's a Dirac vid ....

Pretty dam easy to do 

https://youtu.be/flW9w4MiGoY

I'll do rephase one and minidsp tomo


----------



## oabeieo

Finally a 2x4HD video and some very short showing of rephase 


Sorry for delay 

https://youtu.be/v_aJUgMHIpk


----------



## oabeieo

Grosso , 

Have you tried a tune with only phase corrections 
By moving curtains ?


----------



## Elgrosso

We're missing posts here right? :/



oabeieo said:


> Grosso ,
> 
> Have you tried a tune with only phase corrections
> By moving curtains ?


I played with the curtains yes, especially when I tried a target for one driver only (wanted to see what it can do on midbass only with a ddrc24).
But what do you mean exactly?

This week end I removed all my stuff in the trunk, planning to re-do a new amp rack, probably stacked in one side. Few days without sound...
Oh but before that, I tried to use 4 horns channels from the cdsp (doubled channels), into the 4 inputs of the bridged horns amp to increase voltage and then reduce noise with a lower gain.
Worked beautifully 
But anyway I ordered another hd, this one is too big.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> We're missing posts here right? :/
> 
> 
> 
> I played with the curtains yes, especially when I tried a target for one driver only (wanted to see what it can do on midbass only with a ddrc24).
> But what do you mean exactly?
> 
> This week end I removed all my stuff in the trunk, planning to re-do a new amp rack, probably stacked in one side. Few days without sound...
> Oh but before that, I tried to use 4 horns channels from the cdsp (doubled channels), into the 4 inputs of the bridged horns amp to increase voltage and then reduce noise with a lower gain.
> Worked beautifully
> But anyway I ordered another hd, this one is too big.



Oh you did? (Btw I just saw your post on other thread about it ) 
So maybe I need to try , obviously not y cords but a whole different output would double the input. However , if the outputs aren't perfectly matched there could be anomalies......but I seriously doubt it would even be detected 


Okay I'll try it


----------



## oabeieo

I did a pretty cool different tune tonight

I put a pretty hard slope from +10db on sub to -10db at 20k

Before I took measurements I made all channel levels equal and eq equal
After measurements and Dirac tune I went back into dsps and turned down the frequencies on the left that were too loud and screwing up the phantom image because of too loud and reflections. I took down 800&1.2k on left horn and a tad bit of 200 out of left 10" and 1db level out of left midrange.....

For a one seat tune I am actually enjoying it quite a bit. A 20 db difference from start to end sounds pretty stinkin good with all dssh speakers...


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah all buggy here! I saw your posts with videos during the week end but they disappeared! Same for you answers yesterday.


----------



## oabeieo

I can't see pages on other threads as well ...


----------



## oabeieo

Can't see last page again....


Anyway ....found a great way to use Dirac 

So I have been studying how Dirac reacts to the speakers and distortion.

I've noticed one thing and have realized that it needs to be used like a old skool eq .
So basically I got a very clear tune that gets loud and with no breakup. It's a lot better.

So although I have got it to where Dirac won't clip anymore that needs to be done but also 
Learn how it's boost are going to affect other speakers that are playing....well for me it's mostly 80hz.... I have 3 sets of speakers playing audibly at 80.

The dash 6.5s the 10s and the 15s I've pull all resources together to reinforce 80hz because arrays work. Even better arrays with phase correction works even better. Although phase correction and phase management. I use the 10s at full power , the 6.5s are mid rolloff and sub rolling off at 80. 

What I've done is look at the measurements and determine where Dirac will boost the most (80hz) so I did a pre tune with the 10s with a 5db boost Q.5 @80hz peak filter on dsp and 6.5s flat no add on eq.....

Being Dirac will boost 80 the 6.5s are mid rolloff so they can handle a 5db boost at 80 no sweat .

The 10s would sorta **** the bed when I would crank it at 80 so I pre boosted it 5db and left sub turned down 1/2 way on bass knob at pre tune. Than ran Dirac made a nice 15db slope from 20-20 and than after making it he Dirac filter went back into dsp and lowered the 10s down from +5db to +1db than went into the 6.5s and added 4db at 80hz and it sounds great. The 6.5s are 6db down at 8hz so now there 1db down because of boost in eq. 

Doing it this way let's me pre tune so Dirac won't make all the speakers try to play one note stronger but was able to manipulate it so I can balance it so the speakers aren't using every bit of digital boost there is in the Dirac which affects the entire spectrum. 

Let it get a measurement with **** maxed out so it won't boost so much than pull it back and shape it between drivers so there's no loss in FR or a 1db loss in exchange for less distortion.,,, but than......oh yeah it gets better......now after everything is done crank the bass knob to max and fully restore any loss in 80hz and some and create a very nice bass slope that's about 15db gain from 20-150hz smooth slope no harsh edges....

The ole bass knob trick is golden with Dirac ...and this little tuning manipulation works fantastic! 

Going in Dirac and drawing the target with a dip at 80 and back up sucks and it doesn't sound right.


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah it works now! and your vid’ posts are back.
But strangely I can't see your Dirac video, says «*blocked in my country*» 
Did CA already seceded?

Interesting your trick, with 3 drivers playing around 80hz I can definitely imagine a benefit.
Already with 2, so around my crossover point, I try to optimize.
A nice slope on both sides should be enough but it’s not always easy, especially with door drivers/center console etc.

That's why I tested adding one ddrc24 only for midbass, just as an easy way to get a perfect slope.
Worked nice on midbass > perfect and smooth slope on both sides (maybe somer small ringings, didn't listen long to verify).
But the added delay was not manageable with the C-dsp, I couldn’t make them reach the sub cleanly (I’d need more delay).
Maybe the final Dirac (DDRC22) could have fixed it, I didn't try.
How do you do with your manual FIRs, I guess sometime you have crazy added delay too?

Should get my other HDs tonight, I hope I can mount everything back during the week end to play more.


----------



## oabeieo

Oh dood a ddrc24 on midbass would be sweet. 

Do you run Dirac on top of it or separate. But heck yes I bet that's pretty decent .


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Oh dood a ddrc24 on midbass would be sweet.
> 
> Do you run Dirac on top of it or separate. But heck yes I bet that's pretty decent .


Yeah double dose, that was the idea 
But I stopped there when I saw the added delay.
To reach the sub I'd need something like 50ms I think. Do you have this kind of issue with your hds/manual fir and crazy delays?
Maybe the second dirac could fix it but that would defeat the purpose of getting close to perfect first.
Due to the amount I prefer trying to fix it manually.
But I'm convinced dirac could be used for XO too, or per driver, so the ddrc88 is maybe a good path, all in one.

Will try more next week now, got the other amps but not the car so can't work on the rack.
One more week without sound, but it's ok, like a good reset.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yeah double dose, that was the idea
> But I stopped there when I saw the added delay.
> To reach the sub I'd need something like 50ms I think. Do you have this kind of issue with your hds/manual fir and crazy delays?
> Maybe the second dirac could fix it but that would defeat the purpose of getting close to perfect first.
> Due to the amount I prefer trying to fix it manually.
> But I'm convinced dirac could be used for XO too, or per driver, so the ddrc88 is maybe a good path, all in one.
> 
> Will try more next week now, got the other amps but not the car so can't work on the rack.
> One more week without sound, but it's ok, like a good reset.



Well each channel on the hds has its own unique filter delay for the fir I have created on each channel. 

My sub is 42ms delayed and midbass is 29ms delay
Midrange is 7.29ms delay and horns are 1.79ms delayed. 

So I have to take the longest one and subtract all the other ones from that using digital delay so that all speakers come out 42ms later. 


I probably have the most complicated dsp setup to ever be installed in a car but it's easy peazy once I get it all done. 

Than Dirac has its own delay which IIRC is roughly 15ms ....

When I hit pause or play I can tell there's some delay on everything as it's not instant as it was before all this. 

What's weird is with almost 60ms delay when I watch video in car it doesn't seem out of synch at all. Well at least not by much it's barley noticeable.


----------



## Izay123

oabeieo said:


> Well each channel on the hds has its own unique filter delay for the fir I have created on each channel.
> 
> 
> 
> My sub is 42ms delayed and midbass is 29ms delay
> 
> Midrange is 7.29ms delay and horns are 1.79ms delayed.
> 
> 
> 
> So I have to take the longest one and subtract all the other ones from that using digital delay so that all speakers come out 42ms later.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I probably have the most complicated dsp setup to ever be installed in a car but it's easy peazy once I get it all done.
> 
> 
> 
> Than Dirac has its own delay which IIRC is roughly 15ms ....
> 
> 
> 
> When I hit pause or play I can tell there's some delay on everything as it's not instant as it was before all this.
> 
> 
> 
> What's weird is with almost 60ms delay when I watch video in car it doesn't seem out of synch at all. Well at least not by much it's barley noticeable.




Dang--42ms sure seems like a lot on the sub IMO!!! Are you ported super Low or just using high order Filters & subsonic?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Well each channel on the hds has its own unique filter delay for the fir I have created on each channel.
> 
> My sub is 42ms delayed and midbass is 29ms delay
> Midrange is 7.29ms delay and horns are 1.79ms delayed.
> 
> So I have to take the longest one and subtract all the other ones from that using digital delay so that all speakers come out 42ms later.
> 
> 
> I probably have the most complicated dsp setup to ever be installed in a car but it's easy peazy once I get it all done.
> 
> Than Dirac has its own delay which IIRC is roughly 15ms ....
> 
> When I hit pause or play I can tell there's some delay on everything as it's not instant as it was before all this.
> 
> What's weird is with almost 60ms delay when I watch video in car it doesn't seem out of synch at all. Well at least not by much it's barley noticeable.


Good to know thanks, so I was not crazy with 50ms.
On my base system, TA on the C-dsp pre-Dirac, all drivers are set within 2ms.
C-dsp has 15ms limit so I could't do anything.

But I have the same feeling when playing/pausing from the phone, just a little lag. Probably the Dirac delay.
that ’s strange because on a video I start to notice it only if more than 2/300 ms!


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Good to know thanks, so I was not crazy with 50ms.
> On my base system, TA on the C-dsp pre-Dirac, all drivers are set within 2ms.
> C-dsp has 15ms limit so I could't do anything.
> 
> But I have the same feeling when playing/pausing from the phone, just a little lag. Probably the Dirac delay.
> that ’s strange because on a video I start to notice it only if more than 2/300 ms!


 Exactly for playback I don't see what the big deal is ,
They should just make million tap boxes and call it a day


----------



## oabeieo

Anything new fun or exciting? 

Did u try a new sub?


----------



## Elgrosso

Hey Oab’ 
No not much really, no sound since 2/3 weeks now.
Same sub I’ll keep the AE15 for long I think, and I sold my gb to SPAZ here.
Got the new amps but I've been too busy to finish anything, and every time I start I realize I miss something.
Was working a bit on the rack, I wanted to put them all stacked in the rear wing, left side.
I did a bracket, re-wired few things and everything fitted and it looked nice there but it was really tight.
And I realized I would miss the comfort and full accessibility of the floor rack.
For not much gain on usable volume for a big sub box to try again here.

So tonight I restarted with this:


New simple floor, like before but deeper so I can stack them while getting my full trunk back (if it was a coupe I could build a nice and big box here).
And I was just playing with layout for better access and room for any future device.
Preparing wiring optimization to add some minidsp hd or anything else (got a cool jag fuse box to use as distrib block).
Goal is to have flexibility and easy access to amp for tuning/wiring changes, especially during night time tuning as it’s almost always the case.
And at the end all stealth once closed.

If I’m not too lazy I’ll rewire all my speakers properly hidden.
And I might put the ddrc22 here as well, to clean up the cabin, since by experience I don't play that much with its presets.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Hey Oab’
> No not much really, no sound since 2/3 weeks now.
> Same sub I’ll keep the AE15 for long I think, and I sold my gb to SPAZ here.
> Got the new amps but I've been too busy to finish anything, and every time I start I realize I miss something.
> Was working a bit on the rack, I wanted to put them all stacked in the rear wing, left side.
> I did a bracket, re-wired few things and everything fitted and it looked nice there but it was really tight.
> And I realized I would miss the comfort and full accessibility of the floor rack.
> For not much gain on usable volume for a big sub box to try again here.
> 
> So tonight I restarted with this:
> 
> 
> New simple floor, like before but deeper so I can stack them while getting my full trunk back (if it was a coupe I could build a nice and big box here).
> And I was just playing with layout for better access and room for any future device.
> Preparing wiring optimization to add some minidsp hd or anything else (got a cool jag fuse box to use as distrib block).
> Goal is to have flexibility and easy access to amp for tuning/wiring changes, especially during night time tuning as it’s almost always the case.
> And at the end all stealth once closed.
> 
> If I’m not too lazy I’ll rewire all my speakers properly hidden.
> And I might put the ddrc22 here as well, to clean up the cabin, since by experience I don't play that much with its presets.


Didn't you hear about the release of the JL audio HD v.2 amps ?


----------



## oabeieo

Izay123 said:


> Dang--42ms sure seems like a lot on the sub IMO!!! Are you ported super Low or just using high order Filters & subsonic?




Not ported , but once you add up all the delay throughout the system the box and the crossover it can get up there . It depends how low the crossover is 
For me I am using a 50hz FIR crossover consisting of 2 LR2 crossovers cascaded 
To achieve a LR4 at 50hz I just simply don't have enough taps to do a 50hz in one filter 

Each Second order filter has Aproxx 21.4ms inherited delay x that by 2 and I get my 43ms delay. And than I let Dirac handle the GD , Dirac has a algo that can figure out the mics inverse responce for getting a calibration below 100hz 


Any measurement mic phase data is mostly inaccurate below 100hz
Dirac uses its impulse calculation to inverse the responce and make a cal data for those frequencies. 

So that's why I let Dirac do the GD offset (it works!) plain and simple


----------



## oabeieo

Here an interesting read on the topic 


State of the art of measurement microphones phase response calibration - Page 7 - diyAudio


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Didn't you hear about the release of the JL audio HD v.2 amps ?


Nope nothing, what do you know?


----------



## oabeieo

Dude, 
I tryed something totally different with good results ....

I haven't refined it totally yet but seems to sound better

So....I used about 15db of cut from the 0 line in Dirac and set everything below the responce. Than set my input to 0 attenuation , got a nice strong signal and it sounds decent. 
Maybe a fluke at this point but I am liking it. It smeared the image pretty bad tho so I need to take some new measurements I think the first measurements got f-ed up but this might not be bad if I can get it smoother in my pre tune .

I'll try again tonight


----------



## oabeieo

oabeieo said:


> Dude,
> I tryed something totally different with good results ....
> 
> I haven't refined it totally yet but seems to sound better
> 
> So....I used about 15db of cut from the 0 line in Dirac and set everything below the responce. Than set my input to 0 attenuation , got a nice strong signal and it sounds decent.
> Maybe a fluke at this point but I am liking it. It smeared the image pretty bad tho so I need to take some new measurements I think the first measurements got f-ed up but this might not be bad if I can get it smoother in my pre tune .
> 
> I'll try again tonight



Disregard. It sucked . Went back to our method.


----------



## Elgrosso

Haha, not sure I got what you did, but if it was about normalizing everything so all curves never go over the target, then yes it sucked with me too. Removed all the life of it.


----------



## Elgrosso

Worked a bit more on the trunk, finally got everything I needed.
Colored rcas, always wanted that.
And had to find something with rem in to install the ddrc22 in the trunk, so I used the minidch. I was really not sure of how to plug it the specs are not clear at all for an electro noob. But it worked and nothing burned.
+ some more usb power in case I want more minis.
It's cool everything is accessible now.
Next, clean up speaker wires and the center console


----------



## Jscoyne2

Elgrosso said:


> 2 weeks without music... and it will be more, my car needs a new main seal.
> So I'll use this time to get fixed few other big things (transmission rebuild, spring & shocks, diff maybe etc).
> In the mean time I ride in my oldie, it's more fun, and I get the music from the straigth 6
> So I continued on the boxes, built the left one and am now close to seal them.
> Had all kind of troubles with the "bowl" behind the driver to get some breath/clearance etc, but it's almost ready.
> The new boxes must be around 11L., and are much much much lighter than the previous ones of 5/6L, driver included! (Thx plywood)
> Yeah I got a pair of new drivers on a good deal: B&C Speakers
> Half the weight than the 8g40, neo so they will breath even better with my small depth boxes, and on paper they're really promising on this volume!
> 
> So waiting to get the car back to check one last time clearance and I'll close the back.
> The front I think I'll use screws at first, if I ever need to dampen them, add or remove some felt etc, then glue on final.


friggin beautiful


----------



## Elgrosso

Thx! It's still not exactly what I had in mind, got some surprises all along, but I'm pretty happy with the sound!


----------



## Jscoyne2

oabeieo said:


> Yep you got it buddy. We on same page now.
> 
> I truly think it's a issue only us (or horn users) will experience. Direct radiators frequency response is much more manageable . So it forces us to have some sort of pre-equalization before we run the Durack SoftwRe .
> 
> Man I'm not kidding I was getting some pretty bad clipping and I had everything all the way down it wasn't making any sense but now it makes perfect sense we were both doing it the right way the first time and I was thinking too hard into it all it is is there's no more than 10 DB correction and we're good .
> 
> If we had direct radiators or we would have to do is sit or gains so that the frequency response is flat between drivers because direct the radiators don't have such a large variances
> 
> This makes sence why* joeysycon2* (sp?) is not experiencing these problems although he is running the trial version but it shouldn't matter should still work the same and less the computer sound card is Jank , but overall that's what it comes down to.
> 
> So 10 DB is our number, as long as our gains and pre eq has a magnitude with no more than 10 DB variance and We set out output level in Dirac to -10db it really won't matter where we put the target in Dirac. Which would also make sense that if you had let say one or two or three DB variance total you would be able to boost the target above 0db about 6,7,8 db. Or whatever the variance is.
> 
> I was confusing the over zero DB Line as 0dbfs. Albeit that 0dbfs is still part of it but we would have to set the target like 15db above the 0db line before we worry too much about that. So
> 
> Overall. If your measurement has more than 5db variance it's a good idea to have the target no more than about 3-5db above the 0db line and if it has more than 10 the target line HAS to be below the 0db line. Doesn't matter where could be 1db below 0db just needs to be below 0db. And than we set the output to -10db and wallah clip free music alas


were you drunk lol


----------



## Jscoyne2

So after reading this friggin white paper of a thread i think i have a decent grasp on what you guys are doing with Dirac. 

My set up is 80prs, cdsp- amps. It would be 80prs, DDRC, c-dsp, amps.
3 way+sub front stage. 

Set T/a as close as you can. 

Set input to -10db
Do the 8 Dirac points measurements in REW. Adjust everything so its within 10db of (eachother or your target curve?) with Peqs on c-dsp. Target curve right? 

Then do the 8 point dirac on the actual dirac program. Find the highest and lowest peak and do something, im not 100% sure what. Like if it has a 8 db peak at its highest and a 5 db peak at its lowest. Get 13/2=6.5 so you'd set the base target curve to be where exactly..?

go back and repeat till curve is whats subjectively good.


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep, basically do the best tune you can with cdsp:
So xo, levels, peqs, ta etc, input attenuation and/or driver channel level to match the final boosts (if there's any) you use on output. I use my final target with jazzi's files here, but you can tune flat if you want to test several targets with dirac later.
Then add dirac in the loop,
And depending of what you see in dirac (before/after etc) attenuate its input to avoid going over 0dfbs. 

Dirac will show you the spfr so it can vary from what you get in rew (except if you check the sums in 8/9 sweeps too, well even there it won't be exactly the same).
But expect to modify a bit your cdsp tune based on what you see in dirac.
It's not needed to chase the perfect tune with cdsp first, but the more you do here the less variability you'll get in dirac.

Later you could focus on the stopbands per driver on cdsp, around xos.
Using all your peqs to fine tune perfect slopes and less on the bandpass.
The idea is:
Dirac has all the eq power needed anywhere, but it's only 2ch, so for best results it needs to measure/apply its filter on a system that almost look like a 2 channels only (So driver overlap to the minimum, clean summing, no artefact from one driver in its stopband that will disturb the adjacent driver bandpass etc).
This is easier said than done 
But with a 3 way you'll have a lof of flexibility.

Also it needs power and low distortion drivers to use it fully (10 or 15db max boost? I don't remember)
But the cool thing is, almost everything in the bandpasses will get fixed 
Enjoy!


----------



## Jscoyne2

Elgrosso said:


> Yep, basically do the best tune you can with cdsp:
> So xo, levels, peqs, ta etc, input attenuation and/or driver channel level to match the final boosts (if there's any) you use on output. I use my final target with jazzi's files here, but you can tune flat if you want to test several targets with dirac later.
> Then add dirac in the loop,
> *And depending of what you see in dirac (before/after etc) attenuate its input to avoid going over 0dfbs. * Are you referring to like if i need a (x amount of boost 10db max) then i need to attenuate input for (-x)db?
> 
> 
> Dirac will show you the *spfr*(sound power frequency response? so like basically the sound in a larger area than just say hanatsus method, just clarifying.) so it can vary from what you get in rew (except if you check the sums in 8/9 sweeps too, well even there it won't be exactly the same).*(basically what im doing is what you did when you were checking certain problem spots. i can link the exact post if you'd like.)*
> But expect to modify a bit your cdsp tune based on what you see in dirac.
> It's not needed to chase the perfect tune with cdsp first, but the more you do here the less variability you'll get in dirac.* When you say modify, do you mean like if my Rew response says flat from 1-2khz but my Dirac response shows a big peak, i should flatten it out there?
> *
> Later you could focus on the stopbands per driver on cdsp, around xos.
> Using all your peqs to fine tune perfect slopes and less on the bandpass.
> The idea is:
> Dirac has all the eq power needed anywhere, but it's only 2ch, so for best results it needs to measure/apply its filter on a system that almost look like a 2 channels only (So driver overlap to the minimum, clean summing, no artefact from one driver in its stopband that will disturb the adjacent driver bandpass etc).
> This is easier said than done
> But with a 3 way you'll have a lof of flexibility.
> 
> Should i be aiming for certain order slopes? I know you guys were discussing earlier about group delay in relation to certain slopes or something like that.
> 
> Also it needs power and low distortion drivers to use it fully (10 or 15db max boost? I don't remember)
> 
> *I have 150rms on tap for midbass and midrange. 140rms on tap for tweets. I think ill be good :3. Only problem is 2 volt out from c-dsp :////// Sad day for high noise floor. (or is it low, i never understand that crap)*
> 
> But the cool thing is, almost everything in the bandpasses will get fixed
> Enjoy!


 ^^^^

Due to the nature of how it fixes everything in the time domain. Would there actually be any real benefit to say having the processing power to run Dirac for every drivers bandpass. If you had your midbass and midranges and tweets and sub(s) all on different Dirac boxes each correcting its driver perfectly.


----------



## Elgrosso

Jscoyne2 said:


> ^^^^
> 
> Due to the nature of how it fixes everything in the time domain. Would there actually be any real benefit to say having the processing power to run Dirac for every drivers bandpass. If you had your midbass and midranges and tweets and sub(s) all on different Dirac boxes each correcting its driver perfectly.


That's what I'm exploring, well was exploring last month.
With 1 ddrc24 behind the Cdsp for mids and another one for horns.
I'll continue on this once everything's re-installed, but I doubt it can work easily.
First you still need a final device to make the whole integration, and I'm not sure it has enough delay to compensate for everything.
And this means 9 sweeps/target adjustment for mids, 9 for horns, and 9 for final (incl sub).
That kind of defeat the purpose, the simplicity of great tune quickly.
But it's fun to test, I'll see.

The best would be a specific ddrc with 8 channels, but with Dirac 3 way option tailored for that.
This does not exist for now.





> Are you referring to like if i need a (x amount of boost 10db max) then i need to attenuate input for (-x)db?


Yep
The gap between «*all before*» and your target in Dirac.




> sound power frequency response? so like basically the sound in a larger area than just say hanatsus method, just clarifying


Yes, it's only 9 points but larger area than Hanatsu's. Apl use 200+ pts so is more representative, but 9 pts carefully chosen can give pretty similar curves.
After it's try and listen, to your taste.



> basically what im doing is what you did when you were checking certain problem spots. i can link the exact post if you'd like.


Using the same pts for REW and Dirac seems the logical way yes.
I can't for sure say it's necessary but it helps to maintain consistency, reducing parameters.




> When you say modify, do you mean like if my Rew response says flat from 1-2khz but my Dirac response shows a big peak, i should flatten it out there?


For example, but it probably won't be the case.
Dirac measurements will mostly accentuate the peaks and dips you have solved or not in REW.
I was thinking more about the choice of XO points, as it reveals driver behavior/beaming better.




> Should i be aiming for certain order slopes? I know you guys were discussing earlier about group delay in relation to certain slopes or something like that.


The only important slope is the acoustic one. And here 24db is probably a good start.
Because it helps to "separate" the driver for Dirac algo.
But try everything to get an idea




> I have 150rms on tap for midbass and midrange. 140rms on tap for tweets. I think ill be good :3. Only problem is 2 volt out from c-dsp :////// Sad day for high noise floor. (or is it low, i never understand that crap)


This depends more of the driver/target etc.
The 2v thing has only be a light problem to me on the horns.
Using 4 outputs to the horn amp allowed to reduce the gain, then the noise.


----------



## oabeieo

^
Elgroso is right. 
And this is why I chose to keep my HDs , HDs . Instead of turning them into Dirac machines.

The ability to make crossovers in fir from the HDs with rephase is fantastic in every way 
And than one set of Dirac measurements post pre tune and crossover implementation. 
Dirac does a better job as a gloabal correction in that software version. And having the crossovers pre linear makes the 22d shine and gives it the freedom to make a truly astonishing sub intergration. 

Idk whatever you do I'll be very excited to get your feedback tho.


----------



## Jscoyne2

oabeieo said:


> ^
> Elgroso is right.
> And this is why I chose to keep my HDs , HDs . Instead of turning them into Dirac machines.
> 
> The ability to make crossovers in fir from the HDs with rephase is fantastic in every way
> And than one set of Dirac measurements post pre tune and crossover implementation.
> Dirac does a better job as a gloabal correction in that software version. And having the crossovers pre linear makes the 22d shine and gives it the freedom to make a truly astonishing sub intergration.
> 
> Idk whatever you do I'll be very excited to get your feedback tho.


That'd all be great if i understand half of what you just said 

you guys are both leagues above me


----------



## Elgrosso

Well Oab' can do manual fir, I can't.
The thing you asked about:



Jscoyne2 said:


> ^^^^
> 
> Due to the nature of how it fixes everything in the time domain. Would there actually be any real benefit to say having the processing power to run Dirac for every drivers bandpass. If you had your midbass and midranges and tweets and sub(s) all on different Dirac boxes each correcting its driver perfectly.


Is possible but with some hds like he does it.
It's probably optimum, but also you need to know what you do 


Oh by the way, no more noise for me!
I used the hd600 for the horns, bridged so double inputs > absolutely no noise 
Didn't tune yet as I misss the sub and all gains are not set, just 9 o'clock right now, but I doubt I will need to push them more, maybe even less, so perfect


----------



## LumbermanSVO

oabeieo said:


> So 10 DB is our number, as long as our gains and pre eq has a magnitude with no more than 10 DB variance...


10db? Silly plebeians...


----------



## Elgrosso

yeah APL has much more, but that’s already 10 times the power!


----------



## Elgrosso

Since I recently spent some money in the transmission/shocks etc I decided to fix everything else on this car to make it 100% clean. Plus a little work on aesthetics with some new rims ready for powder coating, new front grill and many little bits etc.
But for now more important stuff: I have some leaks in the soft top hydraulic system since years, and I finally found a good supplier so it's time to fix that.
So in the mean time I’ll seriously deaden the entire car (never did anything else than the doors in this one), so got some mlv and cld etc.
Plus I wanted to start to study the rear bench area to build a box that could use all the space.

So first the hoses etc, it’s a silly brit’ system with hoses all around and to the top of the windshield etc. Still waiting for the parts but I started to scrap everything to make it fast, a good clean up will be welcome:









Once I removed all carpets and foam in the footwells I was surprised by the room there! Especially the height and depth.
The OEM foamed carpet is sometime more than 2 or 3" thick! I knew it since I did it in the old coupe but just forgot about it.
Good news I can definitly place a 8" or a 10" there, maybe even more (but then I would need to serioulsy think about venting it).
So high Q box if I don't cut of course.
Well anyway I think I’ll go for it!
And I have some pairs of pr170 or 2118 waiting to go in the doors since a while, it’s about time!
Also I discovered some big grommets in good places so I'll rewire again.

For the horns yesterday before scrapping, I tried different placements for the full body but nothing came better than originally. I’m waiting for the minis so I'll see. But for sure I won't be able to fit them deep "in" the dash, too much stuff here. But maybe, now that I have a better view, I’ll be able to push them further under the dash while keeping safe clearance for the pedals.

Well, I can see few busy weekends!


----------



## Elgrosso

Messing around, since the car is empty it's pretty cool to have a new view.

I’ll ask my mechanic if he knows how are built all panels around, if I can use the sill or what’s behind the foot panel etc. The kick area I don't think I can, there are some stuff behind (hoses and pump, maybe the de-pollution system).
There are a lot of holes in all metal panels but I have no idea what's behind, what communicate with what etc. I just know there’s a big tube in the sill for structural reinforcement on convertibles. Don't want to touch this guy!

So maybe I could do something like that, false floor with a tunnel on the side to the driver. Like Erinh but going further in the back since I don’t have real rear seats. There the floor can go higher, no limit else than clearance for the back of the seat itself.
With rough estimate I think I can get 1.5 cu ft here, If I remove needed bracing/dampening/some areas for wires or surprises I should be able to get 1 cu ft.
More if I play with the "back" volume behind seats.
Also there are some cavities that I may be able to leverage (under rear bench).



Here I tried with an xls 10, but a 12 would fit in diameter. 
Only depth could be an issue, so now I’m looking at 12"* drivers... 
The BC 12BG100 would be a winner, it’s a beast! 
Could I go subless? Maybe I’m dreaming...


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Since I recently spent some money in the transmission/shocks etc I decided to fix everything else on this car to make it 100% clean. Plus a little work on aesthetics with some new rims ready for powder coating, new front grill and many little bits etc.
> But for now more important stuff: I have some leaks in the soft top hydraulic system since years, and I finally found a good supplier so it's time to fix that.
> So in the mean time I’ll seriously deaden the entire car (never did anything else than the doors in this one), so got some mlv and cld etc.
> Plus I wanted to start to study the rear bench area to build a box that could use all the space.
> 
> So first the hoses etc, it’s a silly brit’ system with hoses all around and to the top of the windshield etc. Still waiting for the parts but I started to scrap everything to make it fast, a good clean up will be welcome:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once I removed all carpets and foam in the footwells I was surprised by the room there! Especially the height and depth.
> The OEM foamed carpet is sometime more than 2 or 3" thick! I knew it since I did it in the old coupe but just forgot about it.
> Good news I can definitly place a 8" or a 10" there, maybe even more (but then I would need to serioulsy think about venting it).
> So high Q box if I don't cut of course.
> Well anyway I think I’ll go for it!
> And I have some pairs of pr170 or 2118 waiting to go in the doors since a while, it’s about time!
> Also I discovered some big grommets in good places so I'll rewire again.
> 
> For the horns yesterday before scrapping, I tried different placements for the full body but nothing came better than originally. I’m waiting for the minis so I'll see. But for sure I won't be able to fit them deep "in" the dash, too much stuff here. But maybe, now that I have a better view, I’ll be able to push them further under the dash while keeping safe clearance for the pedals.
> 
> Well, I can see few busy weekends!



If you could get an 8" or 10" woofer in the foot wells cut into the floor pan behind pedals you would be a stud!


----------



## oabeieo

LumbermanSVO said:


> 10db? Silly plebeians...


Apl is hardly 10x as powerful as a Dirac machine.  

10db is plenty of boost on any system. Dirac will cut as much as you want. 

I mean , you wouldn't want to cut too much on those ApL units tho, migh run into stop band ripples in the fir caused by that fixed point ya have. (Ohhhh burn )



And go ahead and tell me all you need is a gloabal linearization. (If that's your thing)  he he he he j.k.


Did u get the bronco tuned? I was just jokin ^ 
I actually want to try the apl unit but there's no demo software except with jriver and that tells me there would be a lot more taps than with a hardware box. Kinda not even close to what it should be like so .....thats kinda like cheating .


----------



## LumbermanSVO

oabeieo said:


> Apl is hardly 10x as powerful as a Dirac machine.
> 
> 10db is plenty of boost on any system. Dirac will cut as much as you want.
> 
> I mean , you wouldn't want to cut too much on those ApL units tho, migh run into stop band ripples in the fir caused by that fixed point ya have. (Ohhhh burn )
> 
> 
> 
> And go ahead and tell me all you need is a gloabal linearization. (If that's your thing)  he he he he j.k.
> 
> 
> Did u get the bronco tuned? I was just jokin ^
> I actually want to try the apl unit but there's no demo software except with jriver and that tells me there would be a lot more taps than with a hardware box. Kinda not even close to what it should be like so .....thats kinda like cheating .


I haven't touched the Bronco in awhile, took a break to do the Miata. I just have two more things to do to the Miata before I get back to the Bronco. Even then, it'll be awhile before I make any real progress on the Bronco. On Tuesday I fly to Hawaii for 15 days, then I'm home for two weeks. After that the tour REALLY cranks up and I'll be gone for about 12 weeks.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> If you could get an 8" or 10" woofer in the foot wells cut into the floor pan behind pedals you would be a stud!


Yeah I'll check that first, what's behind this panel. I can see another one behind, maybe with some luck... I could fit 10" and the horn motor there!


----------



## oabeieo

LumbermanSVO said:


> I haven't touched the Bronco in awhile, took a break to do the Miata. I just have two more things to do to the Miata before I get back to the Bronco. Even then, it'll be awhile before I make any real progress on the Bronco. On Tuesday I fly to Hawaii for 15 days, then I'm home for two weeks. After that the tour REALLY cranks up and I'll be gone for about 12 weeks.


AAh man. 


Well. Can't wait to see more.

But honestly the apl is pretty dope. 
I really want to see more people dial in there rides with corrections and gear what they say.

If any system that is as good as it can be shouldn't need much correction. 
Apl has plenty of power to do a really nice correction. I want to see someone besides hanatsu that has done it all the way. Well there's a few others that are doing it too, can't wait to see what Scott does with his. That should be pretty sick for sure


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yeah I'll check that first, what's behind this panel. I can see another one behind, maybe with some luck... I could fit 10" and the horn motor there!



Seriously. That would be so sweet. If it were me I would use a woofer that can play down into the high 40s. Not at full power but with some reinforcement. 
You know which ones are good. 

Honestly that AE woofer looks like a bad ass. The midbass one. 
I think I would definitely do that in a 10" if you have a budget for it


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Seriously. That would be so sweet. If it were me I would use a woofer that can play down into the high 40s. Not at full power but with some reinforcement.
> You know which ones are good.
> 
> Honestly that AE woofer looks like a bad ass. The midbass one.
> I think I would definitely do that in a 10" if you have a budget for it



Yeah the TD10 there should do well with cabin gain!
It can almost do the same thing than the 12BG100, while still half the power and half its excursion limit! If it can take more power it will crush the bg, but it’s a big big motor, won't fit I think.
The TD8 might be an option too, but do they really exist?
Also quite sure it's the same motor size/depth.
I’ll check the other TD10 models because he has the M, H, X and I think S with all different T/S.
(cost not so much an issue, well if I make this big change let's use a good driver).

Or dual 8, the mbx will stack well vertical in the corner with no cuts, and that’s already quite a gain at 80hz, but won’t dig that low unless ported.

Rhaaa so much possibilities! 
Maybe I need a quick and dirty box to try the 8 there and get a better idea.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

oabeieo said:


> AAh man.
> 
> 
> Well. Can't wait to see more.
> 
> But honestly the apl is pretty dope.
> I really want to see more people dial in there rides with corrections and gear what they say.
> 
> If any system that is as good as it can be shouldn't need much correction.
> Apl has plenty of power to do a really nice correction. I want to see someone besides hanatsu that has done it all the way. Well there's a few others that are doing it too, can't wait to see what Scott does with his. That should be pretty sick for sure


Well, it is doing the whole system in the Miata, but that system is just smaller than the average setup.


----------



## truckguy

Elgrosso said:


> Yeah the TD10 there should do well with cabin gain!
> It can almost do the same thing than the 12BG100, while still half the power and half its excursion limit! If it can take more power it will crush the bg, but it’s a big big motor, won't fit I think.
> The TD8 might be an option too, but do they really exist?
> Also quite sure it's the same motor size/depth.
> I’ll check the other TD10 models because he has the M, H, X and I think S with all different T/S.
> (cost not so much an issue, well if I make this big change let's use a good driver).
> 
> Or dual 8, the mbx will stack well vertical in the corner with no cuts, and that’s already quite a gain at 80hz, but won’t dig that low unless ported.
> 
> Rhaaa so much possibilities!
> Maybe I need a quick and dirty box to try the 8 there and get a better idea.


I contacted AE about the TD10 just about a week ago. They are 6" deep! For playing 70-400hz they recommended the S or M. The S would play a bit lower but the M was more efficient. These were smaller sealed enclosures but the gave some ported info too.

From AE
If are playing from 70-400hz, any of the TD10's could work well. It depends mostly on the enclosure type. If you are using a sealed box, the TD10S is going to give you the lowest F3 point. If you have about .65cubic foot, you get an F3 right under 70hz. The TD10M is going to be a more efficient option. However, it will begin to roll off sooner also in a sealed box. If you go with a vented box the same size, tuned to 57hz, the F3 is the about the same. The TD10M will give you more overall efficiency and output. Here is how both compare with 400W input. The TD10S in yellow and TD10M in green.

I can't get the image to show but the M plays a little higher and is 3-4db more efficient it seems in the sealed enclosure he listed above. 117db for S and 120ish for the M.


----------



## Elgrosso

truckguy said:


> I contacted AE about the TD10 just about a week ago. They are 6" deep! For playing 70-400hz they recommended the S or M. The S would play a bit lower but the M was more efficient. These were smaller sealed enclosures but the gave some ported info too.
> 
> From AE
> If are playing from 70-400hz, any of the TD10's could work well. It depends mostly on the enclosure type. If you are using a sealed box, the TD10S is going to give you the lowest F3 point. If you have about .65cubic foot, you get an F3 right under 70hz. The TD10M is going to be a more efficient option. However, it will begin to roll off sooner also in a sealed box. If you go with a vented box the same size, tuned to 57hz, the F3 is the about the same. The TD10M will give you more overall efficiency and output. Here is how both compare with 400W input. The TD10S in yellow and TD10M in green.
> 
> I can't get the image to show but the M plays a little higher and is 3-4db more efficient it seems in the sealed enclosure he listed above. 117db for S and 120ish for the M.


Great info truckguy thank you!
I'll ask AE too, I thought I had the T/S of all these but can't find them. I have only what looks to be the M. The S seems the winner in my case, small enclosure and 117db! And 4 ohms, so all power available.
Ported probably not, it would be too complex for me in this area.
If you can share the pic by email/mp maybe?

Yeah 6" deep :/
5 or 6" on a neo might be ok, but with the big ass ferrite it's probably impossible without cutting the metal, maybe the brake pedal a little etc. but damn' that would be cool.
I ordered one 10NW in the PE clearance, I'll see. It will give a better idea than my cardboard models.

Also I visited a jag junkyard today for some other parts. Found few crashed body shells, helpful to see how it's built.
Venting in the kicks look perfect for my need, long and deep, but... on the left side there's is the EEV thing, with rigid tubing etc. something not easy to relocate, at least I can't. On the right it's just the windshield liquid so that would be ok. (if only I had an RhD, I wouldn't mind dissymetric placement, kick driver side and footwell passenger side).

The foot panel, harder to see here, but it is highly reinforced, not sure I want to cut there. And then even, the motor would be right behind the v8, how do guys manage the heat with drivers that close?
I'll check more details with my mech tomorrow.
Maybe I'll convince him to butcher it... 

Also something funny, I drive now with one seat only and metal everywhere.
But I'm surprised it's still pretty quiet! 
And most of the noise comes from behind, the wheel arches. 
Not the hell I expected.


----------



## oabeieo

LumbermanSVO said:


> Well, it is doing the whole system in the Miata, but that system is just smaller than the average setup.



O how can't wait. It will be sweet. 

I can't remember you doing horns in the Miata also?


----------



## Elgrosso

Finally got the test drivers! 
So quickly placed them to check clearance, and also used some old and cheap boxes to get an idea of the FR.
The 10NW64 would fit for sure, it is super light and compact:





The 12BG100 is super heavy in comparison.
Of course bigger diameter, but it;s more the motor that limits.
It may fit… but I'm really not sure, once you add the needed thickness of the box walls and ring, it might not fit back easily.





Unless I cut of course.
But the only spot I found that I would be ok to cut, a flimsy area just above the connectors here, is too high to really gain me any room.
But it would be good for venting.



The box for the 10" was way too small, so I don't have any idea of how low it can go.
But over 100Hz it has a similar response than my door 8mbx, even placed 1 ft deeper.
It is louder with less power for the test.
In the right box and even deeper in the footwell, it should allow a lower XO and more spl than the 8", but probably not a radical change at the end.

For the 12BG I had a bigger box that I could only place on the floor, not optimum placement:



But volume was probably close to the optimum, I think it's 0.6/7 cu ft.
The response is pretty good between 50-200Hz. Here in blue, with again less power than the 8:



But no way to use it as a 2 way up to 800Hz.
Good thing is, when pushed more, at 116db distortion was still pretty good. (but the naked floor didn't enjoy it )

Everything is full range here, nose point measurement only just for comparison.
Note that the 8 need to be crossed around 80Hz minimum to sound right, 100Hz is better. 


I should receive a cheap small micro camera soon, to see what’s behind all panels in details.
I can also study a modification of the brake pedal if really needed, cut or bending.


----------



## Elgrosso

If someone is interested I got the T/S for the TD10 serie:

TD10M, X, H, and S parameters - AE Speakers

and dimensions, same as the AV10 here: 

http://aespeakers.com/pdfs/AV10_dimensional.pdf

I checked many other 10 but none comes close.
The TD10X would be the best in my case, works in really small enclosure with still pretty good ratio sensitivity and extension
And I'm sure it will blend very well up high.
Unfortunately it's a big ass…
Here for comparison, the 12BG takes less space in a corner.
Larger diameter but slightly smaller motor.
The 10NW of course is totally free here.



All this expecting I can give it more volume around of course, up high below the dash or floor.

I don't know which one to start with.
The 10NW would be easier, and still be an improvement.
When the TD10 or the 12BG would be a big step up, at the risk of not being able to build a box solid enough.


----------



## oabeieo

12bg100 as a midbass would be the ****! FS-39hz 
And 96db 

Oh if only I could fit a set of those....better yet if only they made that sub in a 10"


----------



## oabeieo

The 10nw right there would be pretty dope tho. 
And have the 8s playing down. That should slam. 
I would do it. You could easily take a mic and move the TA on with 10s or 8s which ever give better reinforcement at 70hz in that mic position/s. Than run Dirac so it sees the responce in the same manner as the TA and the sum would be set in phase that would gloabaly change both sets. It has mad potential. Arrays work better than single locations. For reinforcement issues. ...........

So are the kicks going to be that huge size close to pedals? What about an 8 tucked in firewall behind pedals. Is there a steering rack or brake booster in the way?


----------



## oabeieo

That's what I've been playing with lately. 

I've got the 6.5s playing all the way down with modest power with a half order filter. 
And the 10s ply to 40 with a BW6, I've used the mic with noise and moved the TA on 10s until they started to reinforce 70hz. Basically by changing the acoustical behavior of the wave by use of another wave timed to give power to that frequency at the diffrance of the drivers path lengths and some. Knowing it will sum and the mic will only see the sum whatever change it makes will make it on both together. That would lead to the speakers acoustical behavior to be the same, just the electrical signal will be changed. 

So going with that approach has done some pretty frikkin bad ass effects in my car. 
When music that has a lot of 70-90hz info the whole car buzzes pretty hard. Seems it vibrates the **** out of the car body. 

Which leads me to think that the 70hz null in cars might be associated with mass absorption of acoustical energy. (I want to dig deeper on this and discover for myself why the null really happens vs. what I've been told.) but I need specimens and a scientific way to measure it. .......ehhhhhgh ....maybe I'll just try and find someone that has done it.


----------



## nadams5755

Thought about modifying the door boxes for the 10" and do a 6" for midrange in the kicks instead?


----------



## Jscoyne2

nadams5755 said:


> Thought about modifying the door boxes for the 10" and do a 6" for midrange in the kicks instead?


I dont think there is enough cuft for a 10

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## nadams5755

Jscoyne2 said:


> I dont think there is enough cuft for a 10


Or leave the 8s. I mention it because these 10s will leave a pretty big gap in the midrange area, as he mentioned. Putting midbasses in the doors makes more sense than midrange due to stage depth, getting midrange more on axis, etc


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> The 10nw right there would be pretty dope tho.
> And have the 8s playing down. That should slam.
> I would do it. You could easily take a mic and move the TA on with 10s or 8s which ever give better reinforcement at 70hz in that mic position/s. Than run Dirac so it sees the responce in the same manner as the TA and the sum would be set in phase that would gloabaly change both sets. It has mad potential. Arrays work better than single locations. For reinforcement issues. ...........
> 
> So are the kicks going to be that huge size close to pedals? What about an 8 tucked in firewall behind pedals. Is there a steering rack or brake booster in the way?


I see what you mean, I tried this already, but not with this setup. It sure worked well to fill everything, but didn't sound as clean.
I try to minimize the number of drivers on the same band, that’s why I want to keep the possibility to get only a 2 way at one time. 





oabeieo said:


> ...
> So going with that approach has done some pretty frikkin bad ass effects in my car.
> When music that has a lot of 70-90hz info the whole car buzzes pretty hard. Seems it vibrates the **** out of the car body.
> 
> Which leads me to think that the 70hz null in cars might be associated with mass absorption of acoustical energy. (I want to dig deeper on this and discover for myself why the null really happens vs. what I've been told.) but I need specimens and a scientific way to measure it. .......ehhhhhgh ....maybe I'll just try and find someone that has done it.



That would be cool! I'd like to find out too.
My test boxes are just too big to be moved enough to study the impact on dips.






nadams5755 said:


> Or leave the 8s. I mention it because these 10s will leave a pretty big gap in the midrange area, as he mentioned. Putting midbasses in the doors makes more sense than midrange due to stage depth, getting midrange more on axis, etc


I really can't fit the 10s in doors without changing the whole panel. 
Right now the boxes fit pretty well with the panel shape, almost like stock.
A 10 would need to be fitted much backward because of the dash/door joint area,
would need a new armrest, probably an even bigger/thicker box so more into the cabin etc.

And there's no real room to fit a midrange in kicks (not the footwell)
The actual boxes take all the space here once the door is closed.
But these door boxes are ready to accept any kind of midrange right now.
Box might even be too big, but it's easy to reduce.

So all this is not a real problem because that was not my goal.
I mean here I try to reach multiple goals, some of them being contradictory but it's ok:

1 - be able to test 3 way, to play with several midranges I have, in door boxes (and keep good width you're right)
> So I need to move the midbass, let's make it bigger in the same time

2 - be able to still test 2 way with this new midbass in footwell
Sure worst width than now, but better depth, trade-off to be tested.
Also maybe the simplicity of the setup will counter balance that.
> So I need one that can also play up to 7/800Hz with the fullbody horns or more with he minis (10NW or others are ok, not the 12bg)
> so they can't go in the firewall, it will reduce too much the width.

3 - change or relocate the sub
Maybe the added midbass with cabin gain will allow sub-less, or loss of the first octave only, to be tested.
> So I need bigger midbass

Many combinations here and I'm still studying everything, I will take my time.
Could be 4x8, 2x10, 2x12 etc
I'm checking other drivers as well, like the new 10MBX that looks very good, crazy efficiency!


----------



## oabeieo

I want to try the mbx as well. 
Iirc its aluminum wire tho no? 

(I still prefer copper)


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep alu, but honeslty I have no idea what it does on the sound. Would need to swap copper/alu in same driver.
It has higher power handling and sensitivity, might be better for 2 way, but it depends of the high pass.


----------



## Elgrosso

Not much news here I finished the sound deadening of the rear and part of the front but didn't spend much time on the kick thing.
I got my micro camera kit, but it’s kind of useless.
Well it helped me to check what was in some big cavities (below the rear bench) so I decided to put some expanding foam there.
But it’s not good enough to really see the firewall area, can't see much without good light, or the volume is too small and the cam can get a clean point.
But anyway I think I can cut there if needed, there’s another panel behind.
It won't help much due to the general layout but maybe I could gain one necessary inch.

In the meantime, still in the chase for the right driver, just ordered 1 Beyma 10MW/Nd-4 and 1 B&C 12CL76 to test.
In case I stay with 10" the Beyma looks very good, better than the B&C10NW or MBX with same dimensions.
And the 12CL76, if not the best 12" possible, has close dimensions to the 10s with its small motor and will fit there, with of course better response than a 10, in theory.

The td10 is definitely out of the run, I’ll still try the 12bg100 but I have big doubts.


----------



## captainobvious

Maybe you should look into the Scanspeak Discovery 10" or the Scan 25w/8565-00.

In either case, you would probably want to vent them into the frame rails or exterior so they can perform optimally. A 10" driver in those kicks with an uber small enclosure is probably going to not perform the way you want it to. For 8" size the 8BG51 models well and the SB Acoustics SB23 aluminum driver can do well in a very small sealed enclosure.
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...coustics-sb23nacs45-8-8-aluminum-cone-woofer/

For a 10" with easy mounting dimensions either of those Scans would be good...your challenge is really the airspace and qts once installed.


----------



## Elgrosso

captainobvious said:


> Maybe you should look into the Scanspeak Discovery 10" or the Scan 25w/8565-00.
> 
> In either case, you would probably want to vent them into the frame rails or exterior so they can perform optimally. A 10" driver in those kicks with an uber small enclosure is probably going to not perform the way you want it to. For 8" size the 8BG51 models well and the SB Acoustics SB23 aluminum driver can do well in a very small sealed enclosure.
> https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...coustics-sb23nacs45-8-8-aluminum-cone-woofer/
> 
> For a 10" with easy mounting dimensions either of those Scans would be good...your challenge is really the airspace and qts once installed.



Thanks captain'
Venting in the frame rails is not really an option I want to try. On this convertible everything relies on this part in a way.
I could use or increase a bit the existing small holes here and there, but that won't be enough anyway. 
I just don't feel comfortable doing this, maybe I'm wrong.

About the SB and Scan, I just modeled them both to check because I stopped looking at "regular" driver since I have the horns.
They just don't come close to the other PA. Sensitivity, power handling and VAS is usually just out for my needs.
For example the SB, if thin and shallow, really wants a big box to go deep, and if I give it this big box than power handling goes out the window.
In a small box of course the final Q goes to the roof.
At the end any other PA 10 gives me 6 to 10db more everywhere else with still a good Q.

Also, I don't really need to vent outside. Well it all depends of the XO I want to use.
But for pure midbass, based on all PA modelings, what I could gain in low extension with the bigger volume, I'd lose it with the increased excursion and power limit.
There's a sweet spot with the low QTS of these PA guys in sealed.
This is all theory and modeling, but it proved right in real life with my actual 8MBX or the 8G40 before. 
I could even have built my actual door boxes a bit smaller.
I hope it will be the same with 10+ drivers.

Then if I really want to cross lower I would have to go ported, with much more volume to get it real full. 
This is still an option, but then I would want to go full retarded with a 12" and a floor box etc.
Well you just helped me to realize that I have two choices: 10" midbass only in sealed, or 12" ported and subless.

The BG51 yes is good, but just a tad behind my MBX or the NW. 
The Beyma 10NW/Nd looks like a winner, it is significantly louder everywhere.
If the T/S once measured stay close!


----------



## oabeieo

You don't think Steve has a pretty good reason for his thinking. 

Seems like box size vs. Sd has something to said about ringing no?


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yep alu, but honeslty I have no idea what it does on the sound. Would need to swap copper/alu in same driver.
> It has higher power handling and sensitivity, might be better for 2 way, but it depends of the high pass.


Alum sounds just fine. 
It's just how Copper sounds after 10min of rippin on it hard. 
Copper seems to have better detail at high levels for long periods. 
It's more conducive, so will have less resistance when hot. 

(I guess I could have just said power compression)

At mid volumes I couldn't tell you what kind of coil any speaker has. 
At levels I listen to , it's pretty easy to tell once I learn the driver and how it performs and after making sweet sweet love to it . BLAWU!


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> You don't think Steve has a pretty good reason for his thinking.
> 
> Seems like box size vs. Sd has something to said about ringing no?


Why? Did I sound sniffy? 
Yeah maybe after re-reading... well sorry that was involontary! (And maybe it's worst )


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Alum sounds just fine.
> It's just how Copper sounds after 10min of rippin on it hard.
> Copper seems to have better detail at high levels for long periods.
> It's more conducive, so will have less resistance when hot.
> 
> (I guess I could have just said power compression)
> 
> At mid volumes I couldn't tell you what kind of coil any speaker has.
> At levels I listen to , it's pretty easy to tell once I learn the driver and how it performs and after making sweet sweet love to it . BLAWU!


Oh yeah now I remember, you explained me that already once but I forgot.





Elgrosso said:


> Why? Did I sound sniffy?
> Yeah maybe after re-reading... well sorry that was involontary! (And maybe it's worst )


To add a bit on what I know and what I don’t (or what I think I know ).
Of course I have a lot more to learn, but also need to move on and keep learning.

Enclosure volume:
I target something like 0.3 cu ft, based on few measurements in kicks I think it's reachable, if I don't mess up the enclosure.
Maybe more if I can extend it higher under the dash or beside the footwell.
This volume is acceptable on all modeling I've done for the 10 sealed, not the best for sure, but ok to cross around 70/80Hz with headroom.
Bigger would be better of course, but the gain is not super obvious visually in the software. Maybe this gain is more subjective, and is hearable IDK (following point).

Qtc/ringing:
After my tests on the door boxes, different AP and box volume, etc, I finally didn't hear many advantages over the smaller volume.
It looked better on FR/impedance measurements while didn't sound much cleaner, with or without EQ/Dirac. And too big was even worst, but it was only a 8.
It might have been something totally unrelated like box shape, box resonances etc IDK.
But sure I’m now limited, it sounds better crossed at 100/120Hz than at 80Hz.
I'm ok with the trade off on low extension, 80Hz is ok for moderate volume but louder it sounds strange, less sharp (don't know if it's ringing related). 

SPL needed:
Here I'm in the blur, I don't know a lot but sure I enjoy the louder/cleaner levels of the horns and actual 8.
Usually listen to moderate levels like maybe around 100db, but sometime I want to go over but for a short time (I don't keep my eyes on the meter but I've seen numbers like 110/115 C-weighted if I remember).
And I have no clear idea how this number really represents each driver effort, when they all play together I mean. So I just target the best I can fit.
Also, Dirac needs headroom with sometime big boosts down low, sounded good to oversize the system a bit.
(BTW I never took the time to measure the system post Dirac)

All this combined I don't imagine a regular driver keeping up, but maybe I’m wrong. 
So yeah please tell me if I missed something or what I miss-interpreted!


----------



## oabeieo

You have got to start trying Dirac with a massive cut and don't let it boost more than 3db.

Dood .....it sounds better. 

I don't think I'll ever tune that way again.
After some playing with it, it works just like a graphic (of sort) 

I fully admit I was doing it wrong. (And trying to learn how to master it) 
Much much less distortion especially on horns and midbass.


----------



## captainobvious

Elgrosso said:


> Why? Did I sound sniffy?
> Yeah maybe after re-reading... well sorry that was involontary! (And maybe it's worst )



I didn't read it as sniffy fwiw. 

I see what you are saying. 

There are always trade-offs. You can do a pro-audio driver but they could have drawbacks too, like less excursion, higher FS and higher distortion at the lower end of the FR spectrum that you want them to be able to play at.
Sensitivity to me is not a huge concern because we're not lacking in power to drive the speakers. Also, if you have a target SPL you want to be able to reach, you'll probably find that most of the non-pro audio speakers mentioned will get you there no problem. Power compression for most quality drivers is not going to be a big issue with reaching that SPL goal.

I liked the idea of the pro audio midbasses and had modeled and considered them a couple years ago when I was looking hard at using the 10NW64. 
The problem is that you can't have the best of all worlds. You won't get excellent sensitivity, low FS and be able to use a tiny airspace with almost anything out there. My thinking was why did I want to then do a proaudio woofer that could get very loud, but would be playing well into and below it's FS where the distortion is highest? The tradeoff of louder/sensitivity for quality and extension didn't seem to make sense to me when I could simply add more power to the less sensitive driver. 


You may want to experiment and check something...
Try measuring your driver's parameters with a woofer tester so you can get an accurate QTS and then put the driver in the enclosure and measure it again. Then what happens if the bottom/back of the enclosure is opened up to vent into whatever holes are existing in the kick area? How is qts affected? You may need less venting area then you think, but it's worth at least experimenting to see.


----------



## Elgrosso

captainobvious said:


> I didn't read it as sniffy fwiw.
> 
> I see what you are saying.
> 
> There are always trade-offs. You can do a pro-audio driver but they could have drawbacks too, like less excursion, higher FS and higher distortion at the lower end of the FR spectrum that you want them to be able to play at.
> Sensitivity to me is not a huge concern because we're not lacking in power to drive the speakers. Also, if you have a target SPL you want to be able to reach, you'll probably find that most of the non-pro audio speakers mentioned will get you there no problem. Power compression for most quality drivers is not going to be a big issue with reaching that SPL goal.
> 
> I liked the idea of the pro audio midbasses and had modeled and considered them a couple years ago when I was looking hard at using the 10NW64.
> The problem is that you can't have the best of all worlds. You won't get excellent sensitivity, low FS and be able to use a tiny airspace with almost anything out there. My thinking was why did I want to then do a proaudio woofer that could get very loud, but would be playing well into and below it's FS where the distortion is highest? The tradeoff of louder/sensitivity for quality and extension didn't seem to make sense to me when I could simply add more power to the less sensitive driver.
> 
> 
> You may want to experiment and check something...
> Try measuring your driver's parameters with a woofer tester so you can get an accurate QTS and then put the driver in the enclosure and measure it again. Then what happens if the bottom/back of the enclosure is opened up to vent into whatever holes are existing in the kick area? How is qts affected? You may need less venting area then you think, but it's worth at least experimenting to see.



Ok nice captainobvious thank you, I re-considered few things…

*#1 SPL levels
#2 PA or home drivers
#3 vented, ported or sealed
#4 floor considerations*

All the following stuff is probably basic for you guys, but it helps me to summarize, typing it helps to clear up and memorize things.


*1, So first I think I really need to define the SPL level needed.
*
What I know:
I mostly cut, and a lot, but can also boost very little here and there on C-dsp.
And Dirac adds on this his own boosts in the 80Hz area.
How much I don't remember exactly but probably between 3-6db based on Dirac graphs before/after predicted.
It is acceptable for moderate volume, but not so clean if much louder.

In my box with only one of the filter I commonly use, real driver T/S simulated in winisd, the 8mbx gives 117db at AES power in midrange.
But since it's sealed, it's down to 111db at 100Hz, and 108db at 80Hz.
It's not a surprise it was the goal, high sensitivity to compensate the low end loss.
So I cut a lot over 150Hz (around 10db in some places) and boost a little below.
But here it's already over excursion limits. And this doesn't count for the EQ from Cdsp/Dirac.
So at the end it's probably much over.

Not knowing how much final EQ is really used, I simulated a 6db boost at 80Hz, Q=1:
At 20% power it's 111db/300Hz, 109db/100HZ, 107db/80hz, and right on excursion limit at 80Hz
Same without any filter, 107db at 80Hz is the limit.
So it seems to say that I need a driver that can deliver either more than 107db at 80Hz,
or just 107db while still being within its excursion limits.
Good start!

So in real world:
Since I can't measure real excursion I can still try to verify the theory with REW.
With few sweeps full range & high passed at multiple levels I could study where it starts to fail.
And this will include cabin gain, that in my car starts around 75hz.
When max level is reached, when power compression starts to impact, when distortion becomes an issue etc
I kind of do that when I tune but never really tried to reach the limits, I'm mostly tune for a moderate target level.
Checking distortion will be harder without real music.
I mean my REW plots are not super relevant I always had inconsistent results,
like if it was too sensible too external noise, or internal resonances maybe (often the louder has less distortion).
And all this will be "raw" compared to final listening context.
Cdsp+ Dirac with their EQ will potentially change a lot the result.
But at least I'll have the limit to compare to.

Does it make sense?


*2, PA or home drivers:
*
After all this I think I'll have a better idea of what I need.
Then I could simulate a bunch of drivers again, PA or hifi and see what I could use.
That was kind of the idea behind using a PA10". Something that can accept all EQ and power, while still under excursion limit.
But the good thing with a home driver, I won't have to boost it as much on low end, as soon as it gets the needed enclosure volume.



*3, Then ported/vented outside/sealed
*
Too early to answer that.
Other than listing the inconvenient of ported midbass that I see (steep LP, potential port noise, complexity)
Advantage being always lower excursion, even with smaller box size.
And something else, the FR response difference is less and less obvious when the driver starts to get to its power limits.
Did you notice this on measurements from V.Dickason/Voicecoil mag for ex?
Low level ported and sealed are really different, but max level they always look very close!

Venting out, I tried some experience with the door boxes.
At the beginning they had a hole right behind the driver, firing into the door, with fiberglass etc
I used the dayton thing to measure impedance/Qts etc while changing filling of the box/thickness and layers of the vents etc.
I could get a much cleaner impedance curve for sure.
Final Q changed a lot also, and I was trying to reach a lower one.
But once in the car, once EQed etc, they didn't sound much different.
And I didn't care much about the Q anymore.
In fact I always preferred the sealed version, that's why I have sealed my actual boxes.
But they're only 8" with a good volume for them.
Maybe the story will be different with a 10"

Another question on venting/AP, is it considered closer to IB or to ported?
Because on my measurements, it always looked more like a bad "ported".
But maybe it was the box shape (long and thin)


*4, Floor considerations
*
One think I could consider, is venting in the floor. I don't mind cutting here it's easy to refill and not structural.
But I must say I wonder how does it sound from outside.
Is it disturbing for other people?

After some more readings on kick/footwell sub/midbass, it appears the floor can be a big problem, resonance/peaks etc.
And my floor is definitely not one of the best, long and flimsy.
So what's best here? decoupling or rigidifying?
I could add a false floor in wood, or even brace it with some metal panel, glued on.
Or just create a box that is "floating" on it. Has it been done?


----------



## Elgrosso

I did measure some drivers today, the B&C 12bg100 & 10NW64, Beyma 10MWnd and my sub the sbp15.
First real free air T/S (except VAS) to update my simulations in winisd. 
At the end it didn't differ a lot, not obvious in the simulations, in fact it's a little better for the Beyma.
But maybe I should better try the VAS measure to get the real whole picture.

Then tried them in 20 liter and measured near field, outside, with REW & the dayton tool to get an idea on final Qtc and FR, the sbp stayed in its box (around 60L.)
It was interesting to see the Qtc, I should have tried to remove some volume with some wood blocks but I didn't really bother, it was more to get a first idea.
Both midbass Qtc are too low, around 0.37/4, they should be ok in 10L.
But even in 20L they look very similar to my actual 8mbx boxes in doors, for 10/12L., same slope (not here).
Then I played them at higher levels, it was direct from laptop to a small amp so the volume level is not super precise with this dumb new "touch bar" on mac .
Here the beyma at different levels, dark green is good, gold starts to get nasty in the distortion plot.
Of course it’s nearfield so I should remove maybe 3/6db once in car at my head, but even with EQ cut it should be plenty enough.



For the subs the 12BG gave me a Q of 0.85 in 20L. unstuffed.
I tried because I had nice results in winisd, wanted to see if I could play later with Linkwitz Transform in a super small box since it can handle 1000W+ and has a solid motor. 
Here in blue is the max acceptable, still outside here, no cabin gain.
I measured it in car, it gets to flat, but there’s just not enough headroom to be comfortable.
Now I know I would need a stronger sub to try LT and make any real difference.
I’m seriously looking at the B&C 15SW… reverse mount on a tiny box, this guy gave me crazy good results in simulation! 
Would be cool to get the same FR than an IB15 in only let’s say a 30L. box 
I say same FR because the rest would probably change, it may sound differently but I want to try.
If it's only a decay difference maybe it's ok in car? And I don't have much choice in this car.
The only other solution would be 4 or 6 LS10-44, in tiny boxes too, spread the bass around... But one thing at a time, let’s focus on the midbass since I have a good sub.



The sbp15 in 60L gave me 0.86, and I was surprised here because in winisd it's over 1.1.
Maybe the volume is actually bigger than I thought.
Also it's heavily stuffed, maybe too much I got some squiggling on the impedance curve, something to improve.
But I must say the box is not so clean inside after all butcher steps it went through.
But clearly for now I'll keep the sbp. It's a big damn box on my rear bench, but it works well and clean.
Especially the cone right behind me, I can almost feel it «*wrapps*» me.
Overkill a bit maybe, with measurement I can push it too much but with real music I never felt it failing, not once.
And with cabin gain I cut it a lot, zero boost.



IT's strange because with only 300W available, full range, it should not go over excursion in this box.
But here the last good curve it the purple one, under 2% distortion. Higher it gets over 10&25%.
I didn't try intermediate levels.

Well, I'm not sure I learned a lot that I didn't know.
Unless that I need at least the same sub response, will just try to get it in a smaller box.
And the midbass 10" should be plenty good in 10L. Their distortion is good at 2% up to 115db.
Bigger is not needed, it could even be smaller and still ok. Only ported would make a valuable difference, but too big too complex for me for now.

Next, I'll start to work on a baffle or a dummy box to test in car.
I'll pick the beyma, but only for its 4ohms (not really needed), and for a slightly smaller volume for a corner. But both seems all good, I could even try one of each per side


----------



## oabeieo

Lmao. 
I know I sound sniffy at times 

Maybe I can pre apologize for my duschery ahead of time

It's hard to convey hard sarcasm with dickish statements 
But at least I try  ;p


----------



## Hanatsu

Good to see that you're still going, don't worry too much about Qtc, just EQ the response to whatever you want. My midbass enclosures are at 2.2 and they are performing great


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Lmao.
> I know I sound sniffy at times
> 
> Maybe I can pre apologize for my duschery ahead of time
> 
> It's hard to convey hard sarcasm with dickish statements
> But at least I try  ;p


What, what you wanna say? 
No need for pre apologiz with me man 
Heh, most of the time I just miss the sarcasm or irony because of my english 





Hanatsu said:


> Good to see that you're still going, don't worry too much about Qtc, just EQ the response to whatever you want. My midbass enclosures are at 2.2 and they are performing great


Han'! Yes I came to this conclusion too by trying. As soon as the driver accepts it.
But if 2.2 seems like a stretch!


----------



## Hanatsu

*Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*

Naaah, I had a peak of 12dB or so around Fsc (155Hz). Pulled it down 15dB and they are playing well down to 50Hz. The drawback is that you need really sturdy boxes and they get powerhungry as crap. The mids are eating more power than my 15" dvc sub >.<


Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Hanatsu said:


> Naaah, I had a peak of 12dB or so around Fsc (155Hz). Pulled it down 15dB and they are playing well down to 50Hz. The drawback is that you need really sturdy boxes and they get powerhungry as crap. The mids are eating more power than my 15" dvc sub >.<
> 
> 
> Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk


Where do you cross them?
But I have no problems with my midbass and their boxes.
Well I'd like to cross a bit lower but it's not related to the box (Q<1), but more the driver itself. I just don't think it can play strongly and cleanly there.
So it's more about the sub, and for this one it's hard to compensate for a high Q without putting thousands of watts on a beefy driver.
Car being a convertible I can't use much volume, so I try what I can to get low distortion and still high output in a different way.
The bc 15sw simulated well with Linkwitz transform in a tiny sealed box.
Just not sure the driver can accept it, in real.

So I ordered some ls10-44 to test...


----------



## thehatedguy

So the sbp15 didn't have much output at 20?


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> So the sbp15 didn't have much output at 20?


No no it does with cabin gain, and I just cut the 50hz bump.
It's just the size and placement that are a bit... ghetto.
Can't put my back seat to the max where I like or it can touch the surround sometime. Not much, like an inch, but it bothers me.
I just want to try something else a bit cleaner looking. Especially since I deadened the area now, I lost few cm.
Had great sounding results with 4x6", good spreaded sound but not much output.
Maybe 3 or 4 LS10 would be ok, simulated they say so.


----------



## Hanatsu

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Elgrosso said:


> Where do you cross them?
> But I have no problems with my midbass and their boxes.
> Well I'd like to cross a bit lower but it's not related to the box (Q<1), but more the driver itself. I just don't think it can play strongly and cleanly there.
> So it's more about the sub, and for this one it's hard to compensate for a high Q without putting thousands of watts on a beefy driver.
> Car being a convertible I can't use much volume, so I try what I can to get low distortion and still high output in a different way.
> The bc 15sw simulated well with Linkwitz transform in a tiny sealed box.
> Just not sure the driver can accept it, in real.
> 
> So I ordered some ls10-44 to test...


No highpass at all, the enclosure takes care of that. The acoustic crossover happens around 70Hz with 24dB slopes both ways. Lowpass is at 230Hz / 24dB LR.

Not all drivers like super smallish enclosures though. It helps if the speaker got low Qts and low VAS relative to size.


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Hanatsu said:


> No highpass at all, the enclosure takes care of that. The acoustic crossover happens around 70Hz with 24dB slopes both ways. Lowpass is at 230Hz / 24dB LR.
> 
> Not all drivers like super smallish enclosures though. It helps if the speaker got low Qts and low VAS relative to size.


Ok, mine still need a 50hz/12db LP for an clean acoustic 80 or 100hz.

For the drivers, it's just that I read on some other forums that the surround could get destroyed in too small boxes on power peaks.
I'm surprised because a low QTS woofer should be more solid and accept more stress there.
But yeah maybe near the fs, even for a sub it's just too much.


----------



## Hanatsu

Not all drivers like small enclosures but I have fed my Seas L16 tons of power, exceeding Xmax even and absolutely no sign of damage after one year now. These are stiff alu cone, high quality drivers though but for the surround to be destroyed... I dunno, I believe it when I see it


----------



## oabeieo

Hi hanatsu! 

Long time buddy! 


So, I agree with hanatsu also, I use virtually no HPF either, 
On the 10s no HPF and the 6.5s A 3db slope from 200 and some mild eq at resonance. 

But let em play all the way down. 

One you add the electronic HPF you also introduce time smear at crossover, 
With no HPF the enclosure does it for you and below f3 it's mostly just noiseless excursion, so use mild eq to control it. Doing it that way has no "added" phase issues. Or shall I say lessened by a big degree with use of IIRs for EQ reasons. 
At least it not a 90db stop band at 80hz which is such a fragile phase region 

Even tho I could easily make a fir for a linear phase HPF and get better power to the driver from excursion the issue is ringing in the filter at that point.

IIRs are noisy (especially in midbass) and firs can pre ring pretty easily, a small amount of pre ring in the excursion band where there's no reinforcement is okay on midbass but why when you can easily have no worries with no HPF. 

Better phase, plenty loud , no pre-post ringing , cleaner impulse in general. 

Key is control excursion with eq. Find the band that moves the driver too much and makes it spitty when loud. 

Try it both ways measurements and look at the shape of the IR with both. You'll see the difference


----------



## oabeieo

This one sounds pretty good.....

(Look at that IR delay. 45ms before the peak. That's some fir for ya ;p

It actually sounds pretty dope right now 








screencast


----------



## Elgrosso

Found some time to start on the kicks.
After long search online I got a better idea on my footwells.
Depending of years models it’s built differently.



mine is full closed in two parts


There's a cavity just before the firewall, probably more for comfort and to hold some electronics for the gas pedal on both LHD and RHD.
Lightly braced but the welding is pretty basic, just to hold them.
So I decided to cut, not much volume maybe 1 or 2 liters gained, but it will help to push further the driver, about 1".
It helps to aim them a bit more while keeping the same brake pedal clearance.
First the right side, easier and I can learn for the other side.

First with a nibbler and some aviation shears.
It's mostly 1mm but could be more in some places, with the nibbler it's ok but it's really not easy to use it in this area. 
Shears are easier but couldn't always cut.




So after too many finger cuts I went to get this guy:



In 5 min I did more than in the previous 2 hours! 
Really cool, a bit too big but the blade can be placed in 4 directions it’s super handy.

I didn't remove the whole thing because I just couldn't reach the edges cleanly and left some bracing behind.
But I got what I needed.

I didn't relocate the side connectors, they’re kind of recessed and I won't gain anything if I don't cut behind them.
Then layed out some CLD where needed, ensolite + some 1/2" heavy foam at the bottom and the side, in contact with flat panels, if it can help to isolate the final box for later resonances.
Then prepared to tape for fiberglass, for next weekend I hope.



With this 12" triangle/pyramid shape I should get around 1/4 cu ft.
Not much, but I may be able to gain more on top of the box, the dash is kind of empty behind.
But I’m not sure I could get the same amount on the left side.
And I need to keep some space for the horn driver!


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> This one sounds pretty good.....
> 
> (Look at that IR delay. 45ms before the peak. That's some fir for ya ;p
> 
> It actually sounds pretty dope right now


Nice! pretty smooth.
What’s up with the 18k bump, you like it or just don't care?


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Nice! pretty smooth.
> What’s up with the 18k bump, you like it or just don't care?




Uugh forgot to pull past target point to 20k 
By default it has little lines that anchor it. 
I'm way below it's anchor point and it stopped at like 14k

But it's already deleted I got issues


----------



## oabeieo

Holy **** !


Dood this is going to be dope as ****


Elgrosso said:


> Found some time to start on the kicks.
> After long search online I got a better idea on my footwells.
> Depending of years models it’s built differently.
> 
> 
> 
> mine is full closed in two parts
> 
> 
> There's a cavity just before the firewall, probably more for comfort and to hold some electronics for the gas pedal on both LHD and RHD.
> Lightly braced but the welding is pretty basic, just to hold them.
> So I decided to cut, not much volume maybe 1 or 2 liters gained, but it will help to push further the driver, about 1".
> It helps to aim them a bit more while keeping the same brake pedal clearance.
> First the right side, easier and I can learn for the other side.
> 
> First with a nibbler and some aviation shears.
> It's mostly 1mm but could be more in some places, with the nibbler it's ok but it's really not easy to use it in this area.
> Shears are easier but couldn't always cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So after too many finger cuts I went to get this guy:
> 
> 
> 
> In 5 min I did more than in the previous 2 hours!
> Really cool, a bit too big but the blade can be placed in 4 directions it’s super handy.
> 
> I didn't remove the whole thing because I just couldn't reach the edges cleanly and left some bracing behind.
> But I got what I needed.
> 
> I didn't relocate the side connectors, they’re kind of recessed and I won't gain anything if I don't cut behind them.
> Then layed out some CLD where needed, ensolite + some 1/2" heavy foam at the bottom and the side, in contact with flat panels, if it can help to isolate the final box for later resonances.
> Then prepared to tape for fiberglass, for next weekend I hope.
> 
> 
> 
> With this 12" triangle/pyramid shape I should get around 1/4 cu ft.
> Not much, but I may be able to gain more on top of the box, the dash is kind of empty behind.
> But I’m not sure I could get the same amount on the left side.
> And I need to keep some space for the horn driver!


----------



## thehatedguy

I just cut the floor of my IS300...can't do anything large like yours...but my 2119s are nearly flush in the floor now though. Which I need all of the room because of the TAD drivers are so huge.


----------



## oabeieo

thehatedguy said:


> I just cut the floor of my IS300...can't do anything large like yours...but my 2119s are nearly flush in the floor now though. Which I need all of the room because of the TAD drivers are so huge.


Can we please see some pics. 
This sounds sweet.


----------



## thehatedguy

None right now...I can do the minis with 8s like that have be 98% stealth to the eye, or big bodies and the TADs.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> I just cut the floor of my IS300...can't do anything large like yours...but my 2119s are nearly flush in the floor now though. Which I need all of the room because of the TAD drivers are so huge.


Nice,
Did you build a vented box outside? (Or inside maybe)
I was curious about the amount of sound going out, if it can disturb or not people around.
And where did you place them? 

After this test I might consider cutting somewhere, but I start slow, it might just work like that.


----------



## thehatedguy

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...321.1073741828.100000492690189&type=3&theater

Maybe someone can copy and post that if you can't get on Facebook.

Sorry about the highjack...


oabeieo said:


> Can we please see some pics.
> This sounds sweet.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...321.1073741828.100000492690189&type=3&theater
> 
> Maybe someone can copy and post that if you can't get on Facebook.
> 
> Sorry about the highjack...


No FB for me but I can see it, sweet, so you have an oblique floor right there? that’s handy for aiming.

About the back wave/external sound, how loud is it outside?


----------



## oabeieo

I'm not 100% certain but I don't think grosso cares about an occasional hi-jack. 
Especially some 2119s in a kick. 


------------------------------------


Did you decide ?


----------



## oabeieo

Three days off the board.

Must be fabricating something sweet


----------



## Elgrosso

Haha yeah exactly.
Well I had many false starts with the weather or cause of missing materials.
But finally I managed to cut both sides and lay out the first FG.
If I have time today I'll aim the drivers, fix the rings and begin on closing them.

About aiming, left foot clearance is good for almost any lateral or vertical angle with the Beyma 10MWnd.
As midbass I don't care I just want the motor to be as far as possible per side. 
But I still want to optimize as much possible between aiming and clearance because I have something in mind for later with either smaller or deeper drivers…
So I have to go slowly if I want to gain some volume on the upper part and still be able to remove/put them back! 




I also played with some subs in 4x LS10-44 in prefab 15 liters boxes.
The goal was to put 2 boxes on the rear parcel shelf and two on the rear bench in different positions, up/down/side etc.
And see if it could smooth out the response by spreading it, without EQ, just for fun (had good results with the 4x6" before, 2 in front and 1 per side).
But here it seems the drivers are not far enough from each other, in any combination the added «*natural*» smoothing is anecdotic.
Overall same output than the sbp15 but distortion is higher, it goes to 10% pretty quick.

I also tried some XLS10" reverse mounted in 2 of the same boxes, on the rear bench.
They are definitely cleaner, and quite loud for these small boxes that don't take much space.
IDK I'll keep it like that for now and decide once I have the front ready, since it will change my XO.

Ex here one of the combination with 2 XLS below and 2 LS on top.
With the soft top up it's easy to put the two LS boxes on the shelf and gain the space back for everyday:


----------



## oabeieo

Omg! 
Another set of ginormous kicks!!!

Captainobvious has started a trend. 
I need to get my but in gear and start fabbing!

Those look sweet
I can't wait to see them done....



So 2-10s? For bass.....

I like that idea


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep 2x10MWnd, funky looking drivers











Should be plenty enough, measured them just with towels yesterday, they're more symmetric than the doors 8".
Different amp/gains here, but certainly louder as well.
I hope to get the 60-100Hz back once in box like for the 8.

800 is reachable, or just 3/400Hz (1pt full range):


----------



## oabeieo

Wow! 

Gosh dang I'm a tad bit jealous now. 
Those look sweet. Responce is very decent, very 

Can't wait to see what they do, 
They have triple roll or half roll


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep not too bad. Here they were on 2 free channels of the hd600 while the 8 on their 750.
I didn't play much but they probably had less than half the power.

And triple roll yep.

Got some time to work, but not much.
Rings glued



trimmed, fleeced and glassed:





And here with just one layer of tissue on top.



I'll work the internal walls with mats, putty on joints/corners, and increase baffle thickness from outside with tissue.
Nothing fancy, I don't care much and I wouldn't know how to do it.
And they will be really deep in the footwell.
If I can get something solid enough tomorrow and listen to them the whole week that would be nice.
Even unperfected just to get an idea, before I finalize anything.
Because I could still gain volume on each corners, or go ported.


----------



## thehatedguy

1/4" Milled fiber and cabosil mixed with your resin on the insides of the kicks will get them thick and heavy fast.


----------



## Elgrosso

Perfect, I ordered some cabosil/qcells and talc this time but wasn't 100% sure how/where to use each, thx!
Oh btw it's the first time I used cloth, and with the new resin it's a real pleasure.
Of course the shape was just gently curved here so it was not hard but it really soaked/covered super easily.
So I might add one or two layers on the whole thing outside, I have some little clearance since I molded it on with 1/2" foam for isolation from metal.


----------



## thehatedguy

Mix the resin and MEKP, add your milled fibers (I put them in until there isn't a lot of liquid resin showing)...it will be sort of thick at this point, then I add cabosil until I get the mixture as thick as I want it- you can make it as thick as peanut butter if you want. If it's that thick, brushes are good for moving it around, or you can use a plastic body filler speader too.

The talc will work similar and give it mass...but I like cabosil better.

Can always add sand to the mix too for extra mass...but don't expect to sand it much after that as it will be as hard as concrete.


----------



## oabeieo

Holy mackerel, sand. 

That would make one hell of a strong box. 
I never thought of that. Heavy I'm sure but dang if someone needed to build up a corner .......



—————…………

:thinking2:


So the 10s will you vent them to the outside as a tuning option.
Build it in to the design and make a cap. 

So when you want to try a speaker with a little low EBP or something you have an option


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> Mix the resin and MEKP, add your milled fibers (I put them in until there isn't a lot of liquid resin showing)...it will be sort of thick at this point, then I add cabosil until I get the mixture as thick as I want it- you can make it as thick as peanut butter if you want. If it's that thick, brushes are good for moving it around, or you can use a plastic body filler speader too.
> 
> The talc will work similar and give it mass...but I like cabosil better.
> 
> Can always add sand to the mix too for extra mass...but don't expect to sand it much after that as it will be as hard as concrete.


Damn' days are too short, all batteries empty and it might rain soon...
Weather has not been my friend recently, kind of cold for CA everytime I want to work.
I lost time on curing and had to adapt my guestimate dosing.

Well I did 80% of what I wanted. Few layers of mat inside, mat and cloth outside, and different sort of putty inside.
Still need to trim one box and flush the rings to put the drivers for first tests.
Box are actually kind of solid for only 5 ot 6 layers (you see it's still translucent).
Front is flat but all the rear sides are somewhat curved.
I wouldn't step on it but I think I can try like that.
But they're light, I'd say they weight less than 2 kgs right now.
Sure I could add more layers but volume is disappearing fast!
I'll see, I can add more outside, but at the expense of isolation/fit.
Now they still fit easily.

View attachment 174738


I tried the aerosil like you said, works nice. It's smoother, but not sure it's what I need though.
External I won't do much it's pretty smooth and will be covered with carpet.
I focused on internals like bracing corners etc when I couldn't use mats, where it's just to tight. Had to go with the fingers.
Sand is a great idea, I'll see for next step.
But I'll need more resin.

I kind of messed up my plans, thought I could wrap more around the external edges but it's too accute.
So had to fill from inside, and then lose volume.
but well, I know it's just a step, I know I'll probably build 2/3 more.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Holy mackerel, sand.
> 
> That would make one hell of a strong box.
> I never thought of that. Heavy I'm sure but dang if someone needed to build up a corner .......
> 
> 
> 
> —————…………
> 
> :thinking2:
> 
> 
> So the 10s will you vent them to the outside as a tuning option.
> Build it in to the design and make a cap.
> 
> So when you want to try a speaker with a little low EBP or something you have an option


Not these ones, just sealed. I didn't cut to the exterior, only to get a bit more volume and fit the rings where I needed.
I'll see first how it works like that.
But yeah I can see the day when I'll cut more


----------



## oabeieo

I frikkin can't wait to see it done. 

This is sick . 

I bet it sounds dope as f$&@

Are u still going to use the 8s as more up front bass


----------



## poormansporsche

oabeieo said:


> I frikkin can't wait to see it done.
> 
> This is sick .
> 
> I bet it sounds dope as f$&@
> 
> Are u still going to use the 8s as more up front bass


+1

cheers

poorman


----------



## Elgrosso

Thanks guys, yes I have big hope!
If boxes are really too small, even with an LT, I might try ported.
It seems I have enough room on top for a tube, even a bit longer, with a 180 return to fire down.
In theory it doesn't change that much the response in the bandpass I want, but a lot on excursion.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Thanks guys, yes I have big hope!
> If boxes are really too small, even with an LT, I might try ported.
> It seems I have enough room on top for a tube, even a bit longer, with a 180 return to fire down.
> In theory it doesn't change that much the response in the bandpass I want, but a lot on excursion.


Driver with lowish vas, low EBP, and high qts should play decently low (sealed), add a compressor so it doesn't **** the bed when cranked up, (kinda like a loud feature) and be transient as hell. 

And the kicks....idk I would find a use for it somewhere, I wouldn't abandon it just yet. The kicks might fight you at some frequencies as well, and the doors might be all you need to fix....


Either way, it will be dam good.


----------



## Elgrosso

Ok boxes done, ready to go for the first tests!










I added few 2/3 layers of mat inside where needed, and 2/3 layers of cloth outside.
+ a lot of putty in corners, from different density just to be sure it's sealed, and cleaned for my fingers… 
Then wrapped the front in carpet.

Good news they still fit 
I could have increased the thickness a bit I have room.
If I restart I’ll know how to build them for a slightly bigger volume.

Bad news…. I punched one cone :/
On the left one, I had to install the box without the driver (I knew it) so it could go around the brake pedal first (pedal that I think I could cut...).
Then driver install, got 1mm clearance exactly at the dust cap.
But of course I underestimated the f***g hell to mount this guy in this space!
6 screws were ok, but the 7 & 8th ones gave me a lot of trouble, and of course Murphy was around… 
Well it's a tiny hole, probably won't change anything to the sound.
But I'll soon fix it with light glue just to be sure it doesn't get worst.




Had to install the minis, the full body won't fit anymore.
Here I messed up again, I really thought I could but I forgot about the wires that I pushed around for the kicks.
Not such a big deal but I wanted to try 2 way only.

Re-routed everything to the amps and added some wires, so first step will be:
- front minis on hd600 (over 1500Hz for now)
- midranges in doors on hd600 (300-1500 to start)
- midbass on hd750 each (50-300)
- subs on hd1200, but they are not re-installed yet, I think I'll wait, it's already a lot of changes to digest right now.

Tomorrow will be the first tuning session, but I quickly listened a bit of course (no levels all gains at mini, no TA, nothing, all at 0).
1st feeling, the 10s are waaaaayyy too loud, had to lower by 15db to get something reasonable 
Being 4 ohms they really don't need the 750hd, and the mids being 8 ohms are now too low in comparison.
I might get a new hd600 for the 10s, or keep the 750 if I wanna test some Linkewitz Transform.

It seems they play very low, but not clean down low. A bit like the 8s, full range they can go low, but it's just not nice.
Impact is here, but without TA it's hard to judge.
I didn't feel anything bad on resonances or vibrations on the floor, and this is without the floor carpets that I need to cut now.
But sure they will need a lot of EQ, it's not very clean.

The minis seem less strong than the full size, I will have to re-adjust myself here, also they have half the power than before.
Oh but I forgot, I changed the drivers too here, for some faital 148r, that I got for a faire price and always wanted to test.

So after few adjustments it was listenable, played a bit with different XO and finished on what is listed upper.
The bmx8 are really good drivers, low to 100 or up to 2k they give a very nice feeling.

Tomorrow starts the long journey of tuning!


----------



## oabeieo

A750/1 on each 10 :surprised:

Jimminychristmas - that's going to be a lot of unused power but a lot of headroom as well.

I would keep the 750s for coolness factor, but dam!


----------



## oabeieo

Sorta curious what a sweep looks like on those 10s with no eq and no crossover


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> A750/1 on each 10 :surprised:
> 
> Jimminychristmas - that's going to be a lot of unused power but a lot of headroom as well.
> 
> I would keep the 750s for coolness factor, but dam!


:laugh:
They were for the 8 ohms before but yeah that’s a lot.
At least the lack of power is out of the equation 
The bmx might need more than 25V later, if so maybe I’ll change for 2 hd600 bridged, for both 8 and 10.
If not I'll keep it like that.
Also the new cdsp 8x12 with its new voltage out might change my needs.

Here's my handy power sheet:





So this morning I removed them to fix the left cone. I know if I don't do it right now I may never fix it.
The hole is very small, and I was able to bring the little paper lip from behind, one drop of glue and go.
(I figured wood glue to be good for paper cone?)
Will change the mms, and maybe even the distortion shape of the cone but I'm pretty sure it will be completely unnoticeable.






In the mean time I ran some sweeps to check on the acousta stuff filling with the Dayton tool.
Fully filled (125g) the FS is around 130Hz, Qts of 0.5, smooth impedance.
Empty, FS is around 150Hz, Qts of 0.65, still smooth impedance.
These numbers suggest I have 0.25 cuft/7 liters, about what I thought.
More about 6 L. once the driver's in.
I would need 10L. at least to make a significative difference.

I'll go empty at first, so re-installed them, but much more carefully this time.
Protected the driver, and taped my little tool.
See the space to work with here, and the worst placement for the top screw.







Than ran one sweep for the right side to compare filled/empty (20-5K / no XO / no EQ / nose point / dsp at -30db / gain at mini):



Really just the same.
I added the "towel" measurements to compare 
The towel used another amp so levels are not matched, I moved it up a bit to make it more clear.
But we can see the box effect on the low end.
And probably the effect of the horn in front, I don't think I could use the 10 very high they are partially masked now.
It starts to be a little crowded in here


----------



## oabeieo

Holy crap, okay you will have a ton of midbass , 
Looking that responce man honestly I would go for a BW6 at 40hz on those 10s or better yet no HPF , but with the 750 loaded up maybe you'll have to be around 50 and a steep slope so you don't pop them bitches right out of the gap 

And it now looks bigger than before , that pic on seat shows it's got some good size for sure.

my 10s look a awful lot like that and they have 1.1cu ea 
So I know your talking liters but that's Chinese to me 

Or something silly like that​Okay so I'm definitely jealous now


----------



## Jscoyne2

Im astonished you have that kind output from 10s sealed. Like holy crap.

Random Q, what size speaker wire are you running to those 10s? With the 750(?) on tap. id run large wires for peace of mind.


----------



## Elgrosso

Some notes after this first day of tuning:
Awesome, I'm glad I went this way, it works!
I'll try to not speak too much as every time I change something it feels really great like the ultimate tuning etc
And then few days/weeks after I start to hear the bad side.
Plus I didn't have my system for a while now, so it';s hard to compare but I like these fresh re-starts.

So basic TA, XO, first pass on EQ, gains.
Needs more EQ, It's far from final tuning but I have something I can listen to for this week.
And Dirac is not in the loop yet, I'll bring it later once it's clean enough, for the "Coup de grâce" 




I finally went with 60/250/1800 acoustic, it kind of naturally called for it.
With symmetric filters for now, being 50-300 / 250-2200 / 1800+, all @24db.
1800Hz is a bit high for the 8", but I like how they sound.
With the next 6" or 5" it should get easier.

I feared to lose on stage width but no it didn't change anything so far, same boundaries.
The minis are at the same place than the full body, so I'll probably lose just a little bit of depth.
And the 8 now play higher, bigger sense of space.
Nothing special about the supposedly "stronger" crossfire of the minis that everybody describes.
I noticed a little more high ends than before, could be the minis, the drivers, or just my brain!
The console is not re-installed yet, in fact I'm not sure I will, I might work on something with just a light cover.
I'd like to move the seat to the center too, just 1 or 2 inches if I can (don't know how yet).

The 10s, well they hammer, it would be totally acceptable to go subless, even HP at 50Hz.
TA brought back the big impact, impact that once the sub's here will be awesome I'm sure.
FR is good now, phases not perfect.
If I can get the same than when the sbp15 was playing high right behind my face I'd be proud and happy, seems reachable!

During tuning I was surprised by some high distortion around 200Hz.
But once EQed it disappeared, before/after:




Maybe box size effects, boxes wall?
And there is still something strange down low, I think it's the floor.
Without HP it's not clean enough yet. If I cut them a bit higher like 60/70hz it gets better. I will study this a bit more.
Maybe I need even more CLD again (I have 2 or 3 layers now), or something heavier, plus foam, a lot.
Are lead sheets safe to use in the cabin?

But it might be something else because my naked feet didn't catch a lot of vibrations, just a little.
Box knocking on the wall, or entire dash vibrations?
They are not especially attached right now, they just lock themselves into the firewall cut I made.
They won't move around but maybe they vibrate. Glad I kept some clearance to add more foam.

Well, still a lot of work!


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Holy crap, okay you will have a ton of midbass ,
> Looking that responce man honestly I would go for a BW6 at 40hz on those 10s or better yet no HPF , but with the 750 loaded up maybe you'll have to be around 50 and a steep slope so you don't pop them bitches right out of the gap
> 
> And it now looks bigger than before , that pic on seat shows it's got some good size for sure.
> 
> my 10s look a awful lot like that and they have 1.1cu ea
> So I know your talking liters but that's Chinese to me
> 
> Or something silly like that​Okay so I'm definitely jealous now



Yeah the black carpet made them look bigger, but once installed they’re not disturbing (well to me ).
And even better, the left corner can be used as footrest!
I tried no HP, but I have other issues you’ll see.
Boxes are 0.25 American cubic foot I think .

Maybe your 10s response came from the fact that they’re behind? But in any case, if not ported these guys can’t really shine down low.
You’re right I need to not forget to at least keep a minimal HP, in case I reach full power. On simulator, in such a small box they only need bw6 at 10Hz at 500W, so probably never...






Jscoyne2 said:


> Im astonished you have that kind output from 10s sealed. Like holy crap.
> 
> Random Q, what size speaker wire are you running to those 10s? With the 750(?) on tap. id run large wires for peace of mind.


My bad, after check the gain on the 750 was not a minimum.
Maybe 3 or 6 db more than at zero then.
About the wires, good point, I think I have 14 or 16 awg from knuconceptz but not sure.
I’ll check, but I’ll change my sub ones now that you reminded me thx.
If I feel like it I’ll put 12 everywhere to be done once and for all.


----------



## oabeieo

Wow that's crazy you say that.
That almost exactly where my tens are crossed when I do run my sub. 
IIR bw6 at 15hz 

What's very weird about the 10s is I play them all the way through FS and it sounds totally fine in every way. No breakup at all or crazy spitty sounds.

Your totally making me want to do a full blown re do of everything.

sometimes I wish I wasn't so dam hung up on two seat. 
The ambiance is so easy with two seat but that mean impact can be difficult.



Oh you will definitely get quite the crossfire from minis, it's too early in the game for you to see that and you even recognized that, which is true. 

But some mini installs work great and the right side isn't overpowering at all, 
In big wide trucks there perfect. My right horn is usually 10db louder than the left , and I sit on the left. 

I don't know if you have done any left right eq but you'll see 2.5k-12k are usually way way louder if there's a lot of PLD (over 8") but if your dash and listening angle are kinda far from you it may not do that at all. 


**** Dave I'm super jealous, I'm thinking all night and going to do something different.


So 1.8k cross on horns. I love it! I bet it's great, 
What cd you using now? Es driver?


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Wow that's crazy you say that.
> That almost exactly where my tens are crossed when I do run my sub.
> IIR bw6 at 15hz
> 
> What's very weird about the 10s is I play them all the way through FS and it sounds totally fine in every way. No breakup at all or crazy spitty sounds.


Yeah most of the pro 10s I simulated looked the same, just these beymas were a little on top, and 4 ohms and available.
And sure their FS is 60 or 70Hz, but 30 to 150 once in the box, and no issue.
What size are your boxes?





oabeieo said:


> Your totally making me want to do a full blown re do of everything.
> 
> sometimes I wish I wasn't so dam hung up on two seat.
> The ambiance is so easy with two seat but that mean impact can be difficult.


I think I never tuned for 2 seats! Or maybe when I had the ms8 it was easy enough.
One day I’ll tune for the passenger seat, just to see if she can hear the difference I hope not or I would have to continue )





oabeieo said:


> Oh you will definitely get quite the crossfire from minis, it's too early in the game for you to see that and you even recognized that, which is true.
> 
> But some mini installs work great and the right side isn't overpowering at all,
> In big wide trucks there perfect. My right horn is usually 10db louder than the left , and I sit on the left.
> 
> I don't know if you have done any left right eq but you'll see 2.5k-12k are usually way way louder if there's a lot of PLD (over 8") but if your dash and listening angle are kinda far from you it may not do that at all.


Ok then I’ll try to be attentive here. The tune is halfway so it’s hard to judge.
I have a hard time to figure out the pattern control of these horns (even the full body for that matter).
I keep reading about it but it's not super clear, I think I need something visual, like a 3d.
Hard time to imagine/visualize it since it's frequency dependent.
I know you started to study building your own, I hope you didn't put the idea on hold, I'm super curious too.

The PLD is about 12" on the horns, but is it that important for 1 seat TA?
I can imagine that it is, for the off axis and late reflections coherence.
I might try again to push them further, I didn't last week end, just wanted something to play.




oabeieo said:


> **** Dave I'm super jealous, I'm thinking all night and going to do something different.
> 
> So 1.8k cross on horns. I love it! I bet it's great,
> What cd you using now? Es driver?


Haha so what's the new plan?
You already butchered your dash you can rebuild your floor too! 

CDs are the Faital HF108r. I really didn;' have any good reason to get them expect the price and for personal learning.
Later I'll swap back the ES.


Tonight I re-installed two of the subs, fine-tuned a bit my TA and levels.
Wanted to change EQ but I'm too tired and started to mess things up.
So I just listened for a while and enjoyed.

Subless or Sub, it's impressive how they add little and a lot in the same time.
I mean they mostly play the first octave, and not super loud since they're only 2x10, but it really adds some texture, a sense of realism.

Also the 10s are a real pleasure to tune now, seems it's all minimum phase, super easy to EQ and integrate with the subs!
Higher with the mids it will be a little harder, I think they have a natural high pass, maybe the combo dash/horn and small volume with my legs.
They became super sensitive to any xover applied.

Horns, if not good enough yet, seems smooth. I don't think I'll have to EQ a lot once I'll have the right XO (playing between low & steep or high & shallow).
But the right level might be hard, I started to adjust by ear more than by measurement.
I don't know if it's the minis, but it's harder than before.

I always wanted to measure the polar response of the horns, if I have time maybe I'll try.
Also I have in mind to test a new process for the pre-Dirac tuning, not well defined yet, but the polar would help.


----------



## Jscoyne2

The best two seat tunr ive heard was with a center channel and pro logic2. It really did sound quite good. Worth it in both seats 

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## oabeieo

Look at the radiation angle of the horn.
That will give you an idea of how the pattern will emit.

Than think about the shape of the horn mouth. 
Being it's shaped long on one side and short on the other makes the sound want to go out in all directions except the x axis. So basically the sound goes up streight and down.

That combined with the angle of the horn will dictate its pattern in a more visual way.
So, a **** ton of energy is thrown sideways, that makes the opposite side louder (and have a different frequency responce) but think about the driver side horn as well, it's shooting sideways also, and your right ear picks up a lot of that energy. So your right ear pics up a LOT of sound from the passenger and driver horn. That plays off ITD/IID so it forces a center from both sides. As long as the PLD is low on midbass it should image good on both sides as is no TA. 

Not sure if that makes sence but it does to me


----------



## Elgrosso

First, you said you had 10db more on right than left,
is it at one point of measurement? or avg?

On mines they measure really similar, for 1 or 8 pts.
But by ears I think that right is louder, or more «*broaded*» if it says something.
Maybe I should use different placements for the mic, more «*masked*» by my head for the left side. Because the left ear can’t catch what the mic catches.


And then, long post here hold on 



oabeieo said:


> Look at the radiation angle of the horn.
> That will give you an idea of how the pattern will emit.
> 
> Than think about the shape of the horn mouth.
> Being it's shaped long on one side and short on the other makes the sound want to go out in all directions except the x axis. So basically the sound goes up streight and down.
> 
> That combined with the angle of the horn will dictate its pattern in a more visual way.
> So, a **** ton of energy is thrown sideways, that makes the opposite side louder (and have a different frequency responce) but think about the driver side horn as well, it's shooting sideways also, and your right ear picks up a lot of that energy. So your right ear pics up a LOT of sound from the passenger and driver horn. That plays off ITD/IID so it forces a center from both sides. As long as the PLD is low on midbass it should image good on both sides as is no TA.
> 
> Not sure if that makes sence but it does to me



Yeah I get the basic picture, but I'd like to see it more in details, like a shape with energy levels.
Thinking about something like:

http://www.audioxpress.com/article/Understanding-Horn-Directivity-Control.html

So high directivity on the horizontal plane and less on the vertical plane.
And more directivity on the long side than on the short side.
So I guess almost a triangular shape.

And what would be the effect of towing/rotating the minis?
If they’re designed to crossfire at the center console, it might quickly get worst.
Either by moving the cross point closer to our head, or by indirectly messing with their off axis response (to the windows, disturbing the dash joint?)

Hard to see something similar online since most of the horns measured are home ones, square or round, but not triangular.
The most originals I found are the Iwatas or the jmlc like:










I didn't find any asymmetric horns as example.



So, short side / long side, can we assume that it will just give a mix of the polar response of a short horn and a long wall?

I draw this to explain (not focusing on the FR or lenght here, just the general idea):










Trying to mix short and long mouth, at the bottom in red.
Can we assume it's the kind of horizontal response we have?


Based on the way we mount our horn, its central axis being aligned with the center of the car,
this would mean that there's not much energy toward the central/front part of the dash/console horizontally.
And a little more spreaded to the doors/windows, even of it's probably at a much lower level.
Just conjectures here, but it's the kind of thing I want to know.


There's a great post from Steve_B on http://forum.speakerplans.com/constant-directivity_topic49603_page1.html



> _A horn is simply a 3D object that constrains the expansion of sound waves.
> To realise how they work it is useful to think of sound waves as a series of bubbles. Low frequencies with long wavelengths are big bubbles and high frequencies with short wavelengths are small bubbles.
> If a bubble travels down a horn (or waveguide), as long as the cross sectional area is smaller than the bubble then the bubble is constrained, or controlled, by the horn. With a traditional exponential horn the angle between the horn walls is constantly increasing the further from the throat you get. Once the cross section of the horn is larger than the bubble, the bubble loses contact with the walls and it no longer sees the horn. Larger bubbles have to travel further down the horn before they stop seeing the horn and therefore the wall angle is wider. As the bubbles get smaller (higher frequencies) they see a horn with a narrowing angle between the walls. This causes a narrowing of the dispersion pattern with increasing frequency.
> A constant directivity horn has straight walls. The angle between them therefore remains constant and the dispersion pattern remains constant over the usable bandwidth.
> The bandwidth is set at the lower end by the mouth dimensions. Where the wavelength of the sound is larger than the mouth dimensions the horn has little control over directivity. The upper frequency limit is set by the dimension of the compression driver exit. Once the wavelength is smaller than the throat diameter the sound doesn’t see the horn and it is only influenced by the compression driver.
> By modifying the acoustic radiation resistance the diaphragm sees, the horn can influence the power output and efficiency of the drive unit. However, all drive units, cone and compression, have an upper response frequency above which the power output falls at 6dB per octave. The on axis sensitivity is usually maintained above this frequency because increasing directivity concentrates the power into an increasingly smaller area. By maintaining a constant directivity, the on axis response more accurately follows the power response. This is the reason corrective eq is used to flatten the response. The horn doesn’t actually change the power response as such but as stated in other posts, the power is spread out more. A good CD horn can require in excess of 12dB boost above 10KHz.*_



Also, looking at the full bodies, they seem built like two horns combined (not the minis).
First section being near symmetrical, with flat and almost symmetric walls, so constant directivity.
Second section being asymmetrical, with variable cross section shape (the "thicker" part in the middle) so variable directivity per wavelength and angle.

Still wrapping my head around what it does per FR/wavelength exactly 
Maybe I should post all my questions on the HCLD forum to catch Eric!


Edit: fixed links


----------



## oabeieo

Yeah you get it! 

Sorry I have never been good at describe and I hate the time it takes to do screenshot, although I wish so much I had the time for it . I think I would be much more understood sometimes

So, the minis don't play as high , so they don't need as much expansion,
Eric explained it once and I get most of what he said, Patrick Bateman has sim from hornresp on here in places as well, I don't know if he added the flare and such.

But you got the long and short of it for sure.....
And yes I want to learn more about that as well. I read a book a whole le back about horns and directivity, pattern control, modulation & propagation. A ton of math that I don't care too much to dive into, but I wish I still had that book. Well it was more like a folder than a book but still. 

But yeah the full size have a flare to accommodate the lower frequencies. The corners closest to console having the largest opening. If you think about that, it should move the wave front to come out more evenly forward and still maintain the flare rate for the lowest frequency... that's why you want to mount them firing streight forward not toe in. 
The mini still has a flare it's just more at the lip. In my own experience I like the mini crosssed at 1.6-2k , 2k/12db or 1.6k/24db .....I just like the way it sounds better. Why?, 
I think it's because of less needs for proper termination The wave is developed inside the horn and as it exits the last few inches of the mouth and the flare do the termination for me., if the horn isn't terminated it will snap and pop and sound harsh from hi pressure to low pressure without time to slow down. Putting foam around the mouth helps that as well. 

Even tho the horn when mated to a dash can load even lower than the horn can, I like the way it sounds not going below what the horn can load on it's own. A good midrange will be able go that high and have a much better blending area where none of the waves are freaking out at there origins. 

So yeah they'll measure there overall responce together good. The sum should create a center even tho one side is stronger. But stronger to only one ear. 
It's not the entire passband that is louder, it's more like 8-16khz is a lot louder, but again, depending on mounting angle and TA it could be made to not be any louder at all. You'll notice the addded energy , even tho both have a perfect L/R frequency responce (thx Dirac) the opposite side will still sound a bit louder with minis more than full size. Full size are so much easier to get right. The mini with a slightly more forward angle like the full size would be a bomb setup with streight entry. At least it make sence that it would, probably not by much tho. 

And yes single mic location. 

I'll try and remember that tile, I'll have to do some searching to see if I can find what it was. Pretty good read,

Your article was good, I enjoyed it. They talked mostly about LF directivity loss. 
I want to try and find an article more about pattern forming and horn shapes. 

I think I've read something similar but that too also reinforces my idea of a taller horn that would be better on axis. It's time to fully learn hornresp


----------



## oabeieo

Have you ever noticed when you eq down the horn the crossover gets extended by means of the sound power. And have you even had them crossed (minis especially) kinda low and just way way way too much 1kz oactave is trying to come out of the horn. That's what I don't like, it's a power imbalance if I were to guess, and it makes music sound like it coming from FM radio or something. Even tho it sounds good, after a while of listening it kinda sounds crappy , like you can really tell it's streaming from a phone or like it's a crappy fm channel or like a am stereo. I don't know what it is with car horns and trying to get them to play low, sure with some trance music the low can sound really dynamic and be cool for a day but overall all songs all artists and all sources sound good....I can get a much much better more real sounding tune crossed higher, and that will play all kinds of music and not have the horn sound too loud. 

Right now I'm crossed at 2khz/12db q.707 and the mid 1.6khz/48db-LR (6db down at1.6khz). It's been a favorite combo fora long long time. Multiple installs multiple locations, all around great sounding with minis attached. 

So your 1.8k acoustical I bet sounds dope. It's right where that horns wants to get loud and not freak out

My minis/mids also have a 3db low/hi shelf at 800hz Q.05 only because acoustically with the horn eq down its acoustical cross is more like 1.4k, 
Being my horn has that extra low end it makes my fir not accurate so it has chance of some minor ringings? So I added a 1st order iir filter in the fir and it moved the phase back to 0. Works excellent! 

I love that the amount of energy is not being emitted from my underdash more than I like good mouth termination, but that's just me, for you you have a low dash to help you out, I have a sheet of glass :shame:


----------



## Elgrosso

Still buggy here, I saw your response once but not anymore!

Well, just to say I found some asymmetrics, from an old thread from PB:
EVEREST

And thought this article pretty good:
http://www.excelsior-audio.com/Publications/QTWaveguide/QTWaveguide_WhitePaper.pdf


Edit: now I can see your posts! Strange

Good feedback thanks.
Yeah I never played them too low, even the FB.
But more for staging reasons, I preferred a center not too strong and the good sense of space from the door speakers.
With the minis it's too soon to say anything I just started.
What I can say is that the right side is definitely tricky to adjust, I’m not done.
But the left one is also a bit better than the FB.
Might be my dash configuration, but the extreme left boundary plays a little higher.

Here’s a shot of different Xo I tested yesterday. Very low volume, from off to something like 6000/6db. Distortion is sure higher for the lowest but reasonable at low volume, it still plays very low!



Wonder how the dash/flare joint can be optimized even more.
The thing is that the actual flare angle is much steeper near the mouth than my dash curve, so it creates a step for nothing.
I can understand its value since it's built for any cars and to go on both side so up or down.
But maybe I can sand/cut it to smooth the hole thing, upper flare/dash.

Other thing I wonder (well among many), it’s always advised to push the minis even further than the FB.
But once so deep they probably cross fire into the transmission tunnel or center console, much in front.
So, once these reflections dealed with if possible, do they still have a strong center?

And then what can we do about the bottom flare. I know PB tried the homster of using foam stuff.
But, can we shorten/cut it?
No real advantages it’s already pretty small, but just for theory.
I assume that the sound going down below the knee plane is not so important.


----------



## oabeieo

Pushing the horns far back really makes a deep drop soundstage. 
It also takes the edge of HF away and makes it easier to get the sound to "appear" higher than it actually is

The crossfire will still work, it will just run into stuff , you'll have to experiment.
But a lot of ppl like it better way back, I like it way back also . Even if there's a console in the way .


I wasn't big on the reticulate foam, open horn works fine, however it has some advantages sure , try n see if u like .

Yeah can have a strong center , that depends mostly onyour midbass mid setup and how it's aligned to the horn.

I like a strong center , so strong ppl think there's a center channel . I fukn dig that **** 
But a slightly diffuse center sure can make the stage go way way back past the boundaries of the car......if done right you can have both wide and strong center


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Pushing the horns far back really makes a deep drop soundstage.
> It also takes the edge of HF away and makes it easier to get the sound to "appear" higher than it actually is
> 
> The crossfire will still work, it will just run into stuff , you'll have to experiment.
> But a lot of ppl like it better way back, I like it way back also . Even if there's a console in the way .
> 
> 
> I wasn't big on the reticulate foam, open horn works fine, however it has some advantages sure , try n see if u like .
> 
> Yeah can have a strong center , that depends mostly onyour midbass mid setup and how it's aligned to the horn.
> 
> I like a strong center , so strong ppl think there's a center channel . I fukn dig that ****
> But a slightly diffuse center sure can make the stage go way way back past the boundaries of the car......if done right you can have both wide and strong center


Yep with the FB I used to toggle different settings between mids and horns for either strong center/highly diffuse or a mix (like around 800/1200 or 1800Hz).
Now I’ll have less choices, but it’s ok I like it slightly diffuse.

Ok I’ll see if I move them further or play with the foam/roundover/angles etc next week end.
But for now:

8x12 dropped in! 



Cool now I need to load it.
5min…
Done!
Let's listen with my actual settings...
Wow it’s louder! I'll clearly need to re-do my gains.
That's good, fully compatible, I kept the same remote/cables etc.
Went quickly over the manual, seems the rem in has some fancy feature now, you can adjust the delay.
I’ll restart from scratch next week end.


----------



## Elgrosso

Cool (from the big horn install thread):



Eric Stevens said:


> They are supposed to be parallel or level with no upward tilt, a little is OK and more will still work but it gets harder to achieve a center image from both seats like that.
> 
> When tilted or aimed upward the amount of crossfire is reduced. What we want is more volume from farthest horn to compensate for earlier arrival of the nearest horn to create strong center image.



Oh and by the way... these 10s definitely rule!
The full drum set is on my dash!


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Cool (from the big horn install thread):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and by the way... these 10s definitely rule!
> The full drum set is on my dash!



Eric would know,
I'll elaborate a bit on that quote if I may. 

Tilted up a tad can help but surly will change the radiation pattern.
Firing streight forward keeps everything off axis which would hypothetically reduce PLD not because of PLD getting smaller it stays the same but you add the distance inside the horn more to each side in a sence because of its off axis pattern...which is much more evenly dispersed across the distance of the horn at lower frequencies. 

What weird , and I've done it countless times and it usually sounds about perfect every time ,is ..... mount horns firing streight forward no angle up or down or toe in out and use tape measurement from the right side exit of left horn to my nose and than the left side exit of right horn to my nose and whatever that PLD is I use that as my delay for 1seat tuning and it usually is about perfect....

Both horns have the same exact distance inside the horn so we know that, the horn cross sectional area moves the wave front to come out streight, so the "acoustical " PLD is the spot where the sound would be its loudest (which is the ends) 

I have zero amount of scientific data to support that but tons of trial and error and it usually is dead on balls or dam close to perfect doing it that way


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Eric would know,
> I'll elaborate a bit on that quote if I may.
> 
> Tilted up a tad can help but surly will change the radiation pattern.
> Firing streight forward keeps everything off axis which would hypothetically reduce PLD not because of PLD getting smaller it stays the same but you add the distance inside the horn more to each side in a sence because of its off axis pattern...which is much more evenly dispersed across the distance of the horn at lower frequencies.
> 
> What weird , and I've done it countless times and it usually sounds about perfect every time ,is ..... mount horns firing streight forward no angle up or down or toe in out and use tape measurement from the right side exit of left horn to my nose and than the left side exit of right horn to my nose and whatever that PLD is I use that as my delay for 1seat tuning and it usually is about perfect....
> 
> Both horns have the same exact distance inside the horn so we know that, the horn cross sectional area moves the wave front to come out streight, so the "acoustical " PLD is the spot where the sound would be its loudest (which is the ends)
> 
> I have zero amount of scientific data to support that but tons of trial and error and it usually is dead on balls or dam close to perfect doing it that way


With the minis right?
In fact I never really knew which points to pick with the FB before, motor, mouth, half in between, a little on the side etc. I remember reading many things about the center of the flare, but of all the ones I tried, the middle of the mouth was always the best, constantly. Mouth center to my nose, but head tilted back, so almost center of the head during listening. Even after fine tuning I usually went back to this.
So I did the same with the minis last sunday, 1st test = success.


----------



## Elgrosso

Interesting patent about asymmetric horns:
https://www.google.com/patents/EP0320270A2?cl=en










So horizontal polar response, but no vertical one.
That's the one I'd like to see.


----------



## nadams5755

you tried flipping the midbass role to the doors and midrange to the kicks? they'd have the advantage of being more on axis. being further forward should help with stage depth. with the doors boxed up, you should get good midbass as well.

i had a really good center image and stage width with the mini horns, even with a large center console. that was the pretty-easy part of the image. getting a good image around legs blocking midranges in the doors was the challenge. if i shifted my legs around, the image would shift quite a bit.


----------



## Elgrosso

nadams5755 said:


> you tried flipping the midbass role to the doors and midrange to the kicks? they'd have the advantage of being more on axis. being further forward should help with stage depth. with the doors boxed up, you should get good midbass as well.
> 
> I had a really good center image and stage width with the mini horns, even with a large center console. that was the pretty-easy part of the image. getting a good image around legs blocking midranges in the doors was the challenge. if i shifted my legs around, the image would shift quite a bit.


I never tried midranges in kick, but I'd be curious.
Midbass in the door boxes were good, but due to the driver specs I couldn't dig very low and loud, so had to cross high to the sub. Worked very well for a while, but I finally wanted to get rid of the sub localization cues I could get sometime.
Couldn't fit bigger in doors, so it had to be bigger midbass in kick.

I have in mind to try some coax in kicks once, 10 or probably more 8 only due to the added depth of the CD. Single point, less driver etc should be good.
But stage width might suffer, there's at least 5" difference between doors and the kicks (actual boxes optimized for the bigger driver, not for a smaller midrange).
And I favor width over depth. Best depth I ever had was with the cones on the dash, since I went horn I lost a bit on this, but gained so much everywhere else, good trade off.

Doors give a good image so far, enjoyable. And I'd say stable, never noticed big changes with my legs. But since they need a higher crossover point with these horns, probably I'll get better results with a 5 or 6 instead of 8. A good power reponse is a bit hard that high for the 8.
So far the minis seem ok, manageable. I only tuned few hours where they are right now. 

Where are your horns, deep under the dash?
And where do you cross them?

But I still have to test few things before I really optimize the tuning:
- adding a dedicated amp for the midranges
- pushing horns further if possible, test different angles and smooth out the dash/mouth area.
- trying other drivers in doors (other 8 or 6)
- and finish the subs.


----------



## nadams5755

i agree, width from the doors is hard to beat.

i had mine mounted at the edge of the dash with the magnet next to the metal. i didn't cut into the kick to push them further though.



























i had the horns crossed at like 3200hz, their response fell off pretty quickly after that. i didn't try other drivers though (just selenium d2500-tis)


----------



## Elgrosso

I see, pretty similar layout.
Was reading your build thread, your kicks look amazing!
So really no way to put back the horns?


----------



## Elgrosso

Rhaaa after check, I can't push the minis forward.
If I had thought about this before I would have made the boxes a little shorter.
It's only the tip, the upper corner that takes the place the motor could go, and not by much with connectors out. 



Sure I could cut the box etc but no, the system is great like that.
Because even without perfect placement and unperfect tune, on my drive back it managed to give me the longest shivers ever.
Damn' it is cool, on a super classic "money for nothing", I was out of my mind for 30sec after the drum intro, laugh so loud after this moment. Played it a second time on my parking, same!
This hobby IS rewarding, that's what I was after!


----------



## nadams5755

Elgrosso said:


> I see, pretty similar layout.
> Was reading your build thread, your kicks look amazing!
> So really no way to put back the horns?


i think if i put horns back in, it'll be in another car. mids+tweets on the dash does a really remarkable job with the height that i could never get with door-mounted mids. even if i cross the kick midbasses higher, they pull the stage down.


----------



## Elgrosso

Sure dash mount is easier on the stage, but it also was a bit too much in my face. For now I still prefer the horn effect over few inches of width/depth/height.
But it's so subjective, how much cues come from the ears, and how much from the eyes or from what we expect etc

Funny thing, yesterday I was playing with my left window, and a specific track (Van Halen if I remember, so with many high mids I guess). It was like if the horn was attached to the glass, the extreme left part of the stage always followed it, in almost a linear way it was impressive. Glass up > stage at 1/3 pillar, glass half down > stage at the dash level, glass down > still dash level but more diffused, with all intermediary levels.
Clearly the minis are different than the FB here, it wasn't so obvious before.


----------



## nadams5755

i found the full size horns do have a wider stage and the minis have a mire defined center image. they both have a pretty diffuse sound which i can only describe as a 'wall of sound'


----------



## oabeieo

If you think about it , you can shift the stage farther back but by cutting the highs a tiny bit. 
Actual physical placement has very little to do with how far back a sound may appear , 
So you can tune the horns to sound farther back and higher up than they actually are. Because there's so little reflection compared, 

When the speaker is physically farther back you don't have to do those tricks to get the farther back sound and can have a more flattened response and still have good depth to boot. 

I prefer horns on the dash edge to make the stage sound farther back with a cut on the highs , it's not in 1/8th space and very little reflections 

I love horns pushed farther back because it makes it much easier to get the sound above the dash line. It's crazy how much your brain picks apart cues when you can physically see the loudspeaker. But besides not seeing the horn , the 2.5khz oactave is way less noticeable "at your knees" and is more just there


----------



## Elgrosso

I see what you mean my friend, I have noticed something like that recently, but in reverse, I perceived this change when I was slightly changing the global slope with more low end, it pushed everything a bit further. But with the limit of muddiness to not cross.
I'll try to cut on horns only then thx!

I'd love not being able to see any drivers that's right. It's really hard to forget them, especially when you are the guy who putted them here!
The horns I don't really see them it's ok, can't say I forget about them since I'm in tuning phase, but it's mostly the midranges that are obnoxious.
It's really hard to separate visual & audio cues, and I'm not even talking about all the theorical stuff that is bubbling in the brain.
A bit of concentration or closed eyes helps, but not for driving though 

It must be really cool when you get a pro install, if you have no idea what they did, drivers placement or tuning etc. first time listening must be quite impressive.
I did the trick on the first time horn install, just to save time I kept the gb25/10 on dash... and my friends got all caught, focusing on them while they were not plugged!
I must say, even me I got tricked sometime.
I'm sure that if the tune is good, and you concentrate, you can hear the stage just where you want it to be (within some limits).

Once I install the 6" midranges I should be able to cross a bit higher.
I'm eager to test these Audax! And the td6 again. But this means a bit of work on the door boxes.


----------



## oabeieo

Dave have ya tried doing just a two way upfront? 
I would be very much willing to bet you would like it quite a bit with just 10s n horns
The amount of issues that a 3way front brings when you have a optimal location for mid and midbass in the same spot .

I bet once you put the 10 and used the minis to 1.4k it would be some sweet **** and probably worth a try at the least. 

I'm 100% sure you could get a wikked two seat tune with a two way front. 
I've got to say, and I truly mean it, a two way front horn car with equal path lengths on midbass is the best **** I've heard .....ever. You have the ability now very easily and I would bet it's pretty dam nice like that. 

Use Dirac sofa and set it up for a two seat as just a trial run. 
I know you like your doors added in and I know you have the TA and combfilter areas figured out and you can go back, I just think you would drastically improve ambiance and realism with a two way and them kicks you made


----------



## oabeieo

And yeah, but more than just turn down horns. Gain down horns. 
Using the gain will more smoothly reduce the level but morely reducing the power.

The gain is so weird and behavior is different than chopping some digital headroom offer a dsp level. 
It's crazy how a horn system really needs the gains so perfectly matched to the mid or eq just won't work right, especially at crossover. Very picky drivers for getting gained correctly.

The only way I've been able to find that spot easily is to flatten the horn first than flatten the mid and than run pink and use a RTA and align the responces with amp gain not dsp gain. I did that than took off all my peq and ran Dirac to re eq and was ohhh la la.

You can start by setting the horns about 6db too loud and than doing a single eq if separate eq is not available. And that gets close.

Maybe I'm a bit over kill on it but I love to ride the edge of "laid back" and ear pain. Want it to not be fatiguing ever but be loud enough to make my hair stand on ends with hard core HLCD energy :devil:


----------



## Elgrosso

So when I received the 8x12 I quickly changed my gains last week at night time and I don't know what I did but it was a mess, at levels but painfull to my ears when loud.
Yesterday I re-started once the little horn amp was installed.
Haha sure I should not tune in the dark, the gains were completely out as I had one amp on high levels!
So now it's better, sub & midbass at minimum, midranges and horns with just a little gain. Midranges are now much happier on the hd600 bridged.
I kept some room on the horns because of severe eq, but I'll re-adjust after, if I have time to tune today.



Crowded in here, that's what happens when you don't plan right 
Good thing, the horns noise is lower with the 8x12. Similar to what I had when I tried 4 outs summed to the amp for them.


For the 2 way option, it's good that you reminded it to me.
It was part of the original plan, but I kind of dropped it for few reasons. 
First when I saw that I couldn't fit the full body.
Then with the boxes finished I realized the drivers were Much more "inside".
And when I saw the response of the 10.
But I re-checked the 10s full range reponse, and if they don't go very high, well maybe it could be manageable, because they're so powerfull.
Sure it must be cool, especially since they're so closed. 
And maybe the horns can accept lower like 1.3khz or even less.
So I'll try yes!

For the two seats tune hum...... but yeah it's easy to test too. Few measurements in the center and let dirac play. Curious here but I can try too.


----------



## oabeieo

Yeah I would definitely give it a shot. That 10 should play fine to 1k, 
The 10g40s were definitely laid back and weren't very strong above 300hz but could still manage 1k with the right eq.

Idk I just think it's too cool a setup and configuration to not at least try and get a good tune that way. I'm sure it won't have that direct sound like a dirt mid but I bet it would still get nasty loud and overall sq be legit ...



Hi level switch! Ha! 

Hey do you have an extra hd6004 ? 
Or a really big two ch amp you'll let go of? 

An extra 600/4 would be perfect.....trades?? Maybe


----------



## Elgrosso

Man I tried all afternoon, I don't know why but I couldn't make it work.
We’re talking about 40db swing on the 10s, between 150 and 1000Hz here.
I couldn't find the right EQ, and even with Dirac, it didn't sound right.
Kind of hollow. Not ugly as hell but just not fun.
They can measure usable up to 1K, but once more off axis it goes down real fast. I think there’s just a big hole in the power response like that.

Due to the driver, and even more to the placement.
‘cause they are partially masked, by the horns, by the dash and by my legs.
I can see half of them only best case. Totally ok for 300Hz, but higher it gets tricky. I’ll see tomorrow I’m tired I started to make mistakes.


Nope no spare JL, I’m still waiting a bit but I might get 3 other 600s.
One for the 4 subs so I could TA them better
One for the 4 ohms midbass to replace the 750s.
And one for the horns but just to make things clean.
+ existing one for 8 ohms midranges.
So if I do that I'll have two 750s and a 1200 ready to go.

If you want I still have another PRS d800, 125w x2/300wx1, sweet little piece.
and a big PRS A900 (but this one I might keep it, could share it though)
+ maybe a micro pioneer, gmd something


----------



## Elgrosso

Tuning was hard today, I had two left hands it seems.
Tried everything I could for a 2 way again, 1800/1500/1300/1000 even 800hz but no nothing worked well. Got a lot of peqs with the 8x12 but they didn't seem to work!
The 10s have hard time over 600hz, and if the minis seemed to accept 1khz, at louder volume it was baaaad. And at low volume, thin and boring... 

So went back to 3 way! Still 50/250/1800hz 24db acoustic.
Everything was much easier, used very little PEQS but carefully picked my XO, mostly second order. 3000hz on the horns with only 1 or 2 peqs for example.
Then Dirac in the loop, re-adjusted the levels few times to get a good power response.
Strange how it doesn't really measure the same on dirac than on REW, even using the same 8pts. Smoothing for sure, windowing maybe?
So I un-tilted everything a bit:



I listened to this one only 20min but it was really good.
Great stage, large and airy, powerfull and tight bass, nice voice clarity.
As usual I'll keep it few days to judge more.

On the graph you can visually spot the horns around 3/4k, strange because I tammed them quite a bit before.
The low end is a little too low but it was a way to keep everything in the right range for Dirac. Sub and midbass can accept any boost safely here, but I might adjust a tad more later.
Also the 300hz spot, see how both midbass drop quickly? Quicker than on rew.
Or maybe it's an effect of the averaging, on the nose point for TA they summed well.
And last I have more than enough power now, new amps and the new 8x12 probably too. With very low or minimum gain. I can confortably try to find the right spot for the digital output.


----------



## oabeieo

Well poop! 
If only it worked. 

Well it looks like a good curve , very similar to what I'm using, 
I wonder if you can save the target and email it to me , just the target 
I would like to try if it's possible ( I think it is )


----------



## Elgrosso

Sure! I have a dozen but usually use only 2 or 3, the same MP1 but with different levels.
Attached, this one is mp1C:
View attachment Dirac targets.zip

Lemme know


For the 2 way I’ll try again though, I don't see why it can't work.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Sure! I have a dozen but usually use only 2 or 3, the same MP1 but with different levels.
> Attached, this one is mp1C:
> View attachment 177585
> 
> Lemme know
> 
> 
> For the 2 way I’ll try again though, I don't see why it can't work.


I'll try it , I usually don't like that much boost but I can easily lower my levels for that . 


I never use that many points, just three maybe four , enough to make it so left and right stayed anchored to each other. 


I did a lot lot lot of analysis last night made some pretty big discoveries on fir and mixed phase filters in general.


On thing I have noticed is Dirac will set levels and delay automatically, 
However it wants the sweet spot between the speakers , it can change it but when it does it tryes (and successfully does) make the sweet spot between the speakers. 

The live algo is not meant for a car however as you know it can be very successful in a car it just needs a little guidance and manipulation.

I did a one seat tune with sofa , than added delay and dropped levels to the left ....it sounded quite good and the IR was much better 

So , than I adjusted levels on separate drivers for chair so that from my reference point all drivers averaged have as much as the same levels , than ran dL than turned down just the left and the IR was even better. 

I have been working on making a single fir for each driver with mixed phase filters so they match the acoustical slope as the fir , I've got it now where the tail of the IR is mostly flat, I don't think it's going to get much better. 

Sitting on the left the left driver has more energy 

Minimum phase responce is much smoother , no weird energy dips or peaks it looks exactly the inverse of FR. I am 99.99% sure minimum phase is the energy response. The more I look at minimum phase the more it is directly tied to the energy output of the system , not so much any driver it self. 

A reflection can add amplitude but it can not add more energy. Only the sound power can add energy and it only has one source, if a reflection could add energy we would be able to make a acoustical solar panel and power the world from noise. 

So minimum phase is the basis for a true correction and it seems the closer the reflections are the more dsp can fix them. It just can't fix transfer function. 
So minimum phase truly is at the core of a good correction, you have to know the systems minimum phase to be able to make a filter of mixed phase work with the measurements. 

On an eq when you cut it cuts energy and when you boost it adds energy, 
When you move phase it can weaken the amplitude measured , however the energy remains and must go somewhere, weather it get eaten up by a delayed copy or an acoustical barrier , as long as some of the energy is in your path it will still yield its forces accordingly. 


So long story short , I've made some mixed phase filters , I've made a HPF and a LPF in an fir with a linear phase and a minimum phase attribute and adjusted the slopes of each until the IR has less ringings , it works much much better...

What's crazy Is an IIR has a delay , it's a extremely small delay and at low frequency it's measurably small however it is in there , 

As an experiment anyone can try load up rephase and make a minimum phase eq cut , n rephase you can see the phase stretch in the log time , than use adjacent min phase eq and try to smooth out the phase error from the one eq cut you made (at the frequency of your choice) you can successfully smooth the phase by adding energy to the heels and head of the cut you made , so the center of an IIR has a whole bunch of energy and it can be smoothed .....

So it is with an fir except backwards, an fir will have pre ring or ring , ring sounds like reflections and pre ring sounds like echos of a tone before it actually takes place. With an fir you can use any type of minimum phase you want to smooth it, as long as the acoustical responce in minimum phase and frequency responce match what your filter looks like it won't have a bit of ringing and will sound really really good! 

What blows my mind is how horribly bad a IIR (minimum phase) causes ringings. Especially when they are not correlated together (separate eq on drivers ). Even in the stop band. So to truly get rid of IIR rings and fir needs to be made for stop band attenuation along with an IIR to calm the stray energy but in a way that is not destructive on the impulse.

The major problem seems to be high order filters , the length of the fir is just too long and it rings back for a long long time , ive seen 30-50ms of just filter ring , and that's not a big fir either, less than 9000 samples. I need to do more experiments but I don't think a 48db filter is very plausible in an fir without the entire band being smeared so bad it no longer has the same time signature and would have big parts of it spread out. 

It seems the processing time needs to be short and a low tap implemented for a higher order filter to even work......

Not 100% but it's looking that way from these sims  

In short don't go higher than 4th order . 2nd order seems to behave the best


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah I don't think we got the best of it yet, or at least the best process.
I hope they'll deliver the car version one day, just to see if there's difference in the way the algorithm manages its filters.
The home version must not be designed to manage the huge variations of volume/FR we have between the 9 points.
I mean distance driver/mic can vary a lot in our car, this distance can nearly double between mic in front and mic in back of the head.
In home it's probably only around 10% variation.
But it’s already damn' pretty good!

Yesterday I played with the on/off toggle, the difference was so huge!
I don't remember having this kind of difference before (probably though)
And on a pre-tune that I was kind of happy with at first.


----------



## Elgrosso

Carpet's back, and Audax are in doors ready to go! Refilled the kicks with acoustastuff too, for a tad lower Q and FS.
I wanted to try something else to dampen even more the floor, like maybe lead sheets, but I'll see first with just the carpet.
It's 2/3" thick and I addedd some more foam in some places so maybe it will be enough.
Kind of strange to get the original floor height again, I feel like the seats have been lowered a lot!

A bit of a pain to cut the carpet at the right spot to get something clean: install carpet/check, remove/cut, re-install/check, remove/cut etc etc for about 10 times per side.

Result is not too ugly so it's not lost time (but not as good as on the pic).
The original kick covers cannot go back so I'll have to find something for the finish. For now I just re-used the small cut parts.
And I’m waiting for some 10" grills, maybe I’ll totally hide them.
The thing is, on the left side it’s really tight, the brake pedal goes inside the cone volume.
I checked multiple times if it could touch and it’s ok (no I won’t think about it if I need an urgent stop )
But a grill would have to be concave, or maybe just partially open.



Tomorrow I’ll add the center console and finish the horns, all smooth around.
For the Audax, to put them in the door boxes would need some work since they're are for 8" drivers. 
So I'll try just in doors first, since they'll play over 250/300Hz I hope I won't have too much resonances.
And then I can put back the original un-cut door panels for a cleaner look. 
If it works fine, I could cover the horns with some fabric and get a semi-stealth install 

In the mean time I smoothed out a bit the horns' surfaces, at the throat and where I could find some irregularities (dremel with soft polish wheel and water sandpaper).
Not sure I'll hear any difference but it shouldn't hurt.
The throat is clearly much smoother now, just one surface from the beginning to the flare. It’s not self-evident that it would work better, but I’ll see.
And there was a protruding spot right at the bend on both, I guess molding stuff. The cleaning here for sure will help.

About the minis, I don't know if it’s them, or the new drivers (faital HF108R), but I have more highs than with the full body. It’s cool, especially on the left part of the stage.
Also these faital are shallower than the neo comp, so I gained 1" in total width, awesome 


And when I was cleaning them, I couldn't resist to play with the hose… here’s a vid'



Funny right? Gives an idea of what it does to the sound waves


----------



## oabeieo

How do u like the fatal on the mini? 

What's FR look like no eq on that horn at 3' away?


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah I have a bunch, but I don't really keep notes on them so I'm not sure which was what 
I usually just adjust on the fly, but these are fresh so I remember:

5 pts for left horn, left side, from near the window/left ear/nose/right ear/center console, all head level, Var, 1800Hz/24db



L/R at head level center of the car, 1/12, right horn at -3db (brown), 1800Hz/24db




And I only had these drivers on the minis so can't compare.
So other than the better highs they sound the same so far.
But clearly now I can see that the right horn is a little harder to manage for a one seat tune, so now for pre-tune I use more and more center points instead of aroudn the head and it seems to work fine, by ear.


----------



## Elgrosso

BTW Andy did you try the mp1? How d’you like it?

________________________


And a little more pics:

Just had to enlarge a bit my old door rings, super easy to fit regular size drivers compared to everything else!
And the Audax has a flat surround, so I could cover it tightly with the original cover that include a sort of foam ring around.



Covers back



You see that big lip on the rack cover? One day I’ll cut it smooth...

Handy stuff all in the armrest:
1 usb from phone to peachtree, and 3 on a hub, 8x12, ddrc22 and one more for later, + mic



So I can:


15" is back too



The Audax are less sensitive than the 8, the 8 were on -6db while the 6 need 0db. So far they sound good no issue.
I got a very goo tune from low end up to midrange, but the horns are still not right.

But drums are awesome! Hot for teacher or trust / Megadeth... damn’ it is good, like perfectly timed, clean and separated while super impactful!
I put back the 15 because there was something I didn't like with the 4x10.
I think too much distortion, on sims they had more output for slightly lower excursion so I thought it might be better.
But no, the sbp 15 is super good, lower distortion, sharper, I’d say cleaner overall, and I start to believe because it’s the only one to play!

Oh and the carpets made a big difference.
Still some vibrations on super heavy kicks, but much less than before!
And distortion plots, 10' playing full range without EQ, didn’t show the huge bump anymore at 150Hz.


----------



## oabeieo

Yeah I finally got it to work.

Yeah I like it! It's a bit laid back but not too laid back 
It listenable for long trips , very nice 



I ended up movin the Dip to 2.5k on mine and I like it better 
I haven't had much time lately but tonight I'm going to try a similar one


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Yeah I finally got it to work.
> 
> Yeah I like it! It's a bit laid back but not too laid back
> It listenable for long trips , very nice
> 
> 
> 
> I ended up movin the Dip to 2.5k on mine and I like it better
> I haven't had much time lately but tonight I'm going to try a similar one


Cool you're alive!  
I'm sure you're plenty busy with kids and the new house, but I was about to check if everything's ok.

Yeah a little laid back that's the right word.
In fact I just started to modify it this week.
My tune is now pretty good, like really really good I enjoy it. It's well balanced between precision and diffusion right how I like. So good, stable and coherent that I felt the need to lower a bit the bass and start to fill the 3.2khz dip. Gently only for now,I'm so used to the original mp1.
I'll post some dirac stuff later.
But it feels strange, I don't have anything else to do now!


----------



## Elgrosso

So here's some Dirac stuff, a comparison of my previous tune, mostly 24db everywhere and limited use of PEQs around XO points and stop bands, with the 3 usual mic positions: head (few inches around each ears), cube (1.5ft side) and sofa (4 pts over each front seats)
TA for one seat always, nose point.







See how cube and sofa are almost identical?
But they do sound really different, sofa is more diffused, not bad though but just a bit less sharp.
Head clearly has the biggest dips and bumps on midrange, and discrepancies on horns.
It’s also the worst when listening, just too «*synthetic*», artificial.
And you can spot the high Q boxes of the 10s.
Cube is really a good method in my case. 
Stable, easier to reproduce with REW, and gives so far the best sonic results.


So I decided to optimize a bit my levels around it, and try without any PEQS, zero.
I usually have good to very good result like that.
But to keep the overall measurements in the Dirac range (+/-10db) to adjust a reasonable target, without losing too much power or dynamic I had to change my XO (not the acoustic ones).
So mostly 2nd orders with a tighter bandpass per driver. Even on the horns I didn't have to use any PEQS to get something clean.
TA was still based on the nose point. Summed well with REW, but not flat of course since no EQ.

I then fine-tuned the target during few days this week.
I think the great integration bass/midrange allowed me to lower a bit the whole bass range, without losing depth and impact, I gained a bit on clarity.
The horns were playing a bit higher than before, it's really obvious, but there is no fatigue they seems more symmetric, so I also started to fill the 3Khz dip slowly, again for more clarity.
Here orange versus green:





I always measure my system by counting the number of real LOLs I have when I drive.
This one for now scores the best, every drive I get one of these chills :laugh:

Really this long journey around the APL and now Dirac made me re-consider many things. I just don’t think I could get the same result with only EQ.
With now 10 PEQS per driver I can get to target by hand, perfect or less, depending of the mic positions used.
And it's enjoyable when I listened, but there’s always something a little off somewhere, and less stability for sure.
It is nowhere as nice as the global result Dirac gives me.
I didn't check before/after with REW on this one yet. I wouldn't be surprised if the post-Dirac measurement still have dips and bumps.
But I just don't think it's important, what it does in the time domain is so much more realistic and preferable.
Man if they include some XO features one day, it would be an absolute killer!


----------



## oabeieo

So I'm back to using minimal peqs 
Very minimal in stop band , but I stress only because I am using FIR crossovers upstream of Dirac 

If I was using IIRs I wouldn't use any peqs in stop band unless the stop band has a peak within the first oactave of stop band , and a peak that is tall enough to be heard that is .


The gloabal Dirac eq works amazing by itself . 
In REW my target from Dirac usually has a slight wide Q (.05) hump in the 1-2k oactave that's about 1db tall. 

So Dirac is almost exactly what it says it will be, it just leaves the midrange about a db louder , so I compensate by pulling the target in Dirac down 1db more than it says and it flattens out nicely vs. doing it with IIRs downstream.

Sofa does make horns sound more uniform in the car but it can be diffuse a bit , 
So some added TAs after Dirac can help. 

Also with sofa I start using no TA what so ever .
Let it do all TA , than add small amounts of TA to separate drivers and I can get a very decent two seat tune rather quickly 

Also sofa with no TA than post Dirac add TA to driver side and turn it into a one seat by TA works pretty good as well , but not as good as cube (chair) 


I'm going try something different today.....
I'm going to do some high Q IIRs on the combfilter peaks and dips than run Dirac 
See what happens


----------



## oabeieo

i tryed working into the combfilters with some high q(q=8 or higher) cuts and boosts between 600-1khz with some excellent results, +-3db 

It looks like you have a pretty dang solid setup now. 
I have a really good tune going now. I have been just enjoying it , 
I finally have it so it doesn't hurt my ears loud but sounds loud and clean 
But it's actually not that that loud. 

we have been so slammed at work I haven't any time to do my stuff , drives me nuts 
I so bad want to start redoing some things 

I'm diggin the 6g40nd. I like that it's sensitivity allows me to push into combfilters a tiny bit without running into breakup , and responds to eq well. 

If you want to bring your car to Colorado, dood I would love to hear it . (J.k.)
It sure would be cool to play around for a weekend tho.


----------



## Elgrosso

High Q boost/cuts and you let dirac figure out about the phase? Or was it all fir too.

Interesting... I have few things I want to test like slightly higher xo for sub to see if the effect on the 10s, and tweak the midranges that are a bit crazy in the middle of their bandpass, maybe I could try.
But I'm afraid to lose this tune 

Yeah I think I'm at a point where I need an external point of view.
Either to optimize, or to restart! Maybe there are some major issues that I just don't realize, or that I learned to live with.

Oh man visiting you would be cool, and that would be an awesome drive.
I have a plan that when I'll quit my job to take few weeks to drive across the country before going back home.
But I know the company I work for has some stuff in Denver, and I keep pushing to go there for any reason, maybe I'll succeed


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> High Q boost/cuts and you let dirac figure out about the phase? Or was it all fir too.
> 
> Interesting... I have few things I want to test like slightly higher xo for sub to see if the effect on the 10s, and tweak the midranges that are a bit crazy in the middle of their bandpass, maybe I could try.
> But I'm afraid to lose this tune
> 
> Yeah I think I'm at a point where I need an external point of view.
> Either to optimize, or to restart! Maybe there are some major issues that I just don't realize, or that I learned to live with.
> 
> Oh man visiting you would be cool, and that would be an awesome drive.
> I have a plan that when I'll quit my job to take few weeks to drive across the country before going back home.
> But I know the company I work for has some stuff in Denver, and I keep pushing to go there for any reason, maybe I'll succeed


It would be speaker heaven  


Yeah I accepted the compromise of a lesser beautiful IR for a cleaner stop band on horns via peq. 

The es compneo has a BuNch of gain at 724hz (on or off the horn) 
I'm thinking resonance, and it audibly sounded better to sacrifice a couple more IR tail issues, you have to be zoomed into the IR a bit to even notice but it's worth it to keep the lower crossover on the horn of 1.35k (2nd order) where right at -12db stop band lies a 8db tall resonance hump that wants to color everything around it. I'm sure if a spent the time and made tiny peq changes spread a few hz apart I could have smoothed the IR ripple but dam , that would have taken hours and I'll eat the small intermodal issues with a blast of flor (the band) 


But that's it , just the horn on one peq for now. Ir clean as I've gotten barley stretched for a car not bad, , got rid of almost all the modulation sounds completely .


So yeah , a boost at 1k Q15.6 +1.8db and a cut at 724 Q 8 -9db all post Dirac and a blend of linearphase eq and minimum phase eq . 
But measured IR via REW and so far so good. I can push into the comb a tiny bit.

What I also discovered is have you ever had like around 800-1.6k on the horn push the image to the left (or right) but only a small part of certain songs stage pullls in that area? 

If there is a dip in frequency responce amplitude, phase at the Dip will move ahead of the rest of the magnitude, and so we runto our eq and turn down the offense frequency when actually the Dip needs to be boosted a tiny bit with a minimum phase IIR peq (if it responds to boost) and that would pull phase back and fix the imaging issue.

Im just saying that because if I ever in the past had a stray frequency that would pull one side I would always use channel peq or eq and turn that part down , not knowing that cutting before it and boosting after it could have been a better fix that makes the mid more bell sounding rather than irritating reflective reinforcement gone bad.


----------



## oabeieo

How's it sounding ? 

Do any good tunes .....

My wife got me a dope t shirt for Father's Day.
I'll post a pic of it on my thread tonight 
It's totally me (you need one)


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeahh man you're not dead :beerchug:

Well you know what... first I didn't have my car for 10 days it was at the shop so drove the oldy with no music.
Some electric **** I think, I hope not related to the amps.
I got all blamed because apparently it’s not drivable anymore 
The boss was laughing but my friendly mech didn't appreciate, I think he got scared once :laugh:

But got it back yesterday, and I was not that impressed! Not like 2w ago.
It was cool, but not the same.
Today I checked the tune and it's not the right one, not the last one. 
IDK maybe they changed some presets without knowing.
Well anyway I saved the tune in different places, I’ll bring it back 

So where’s your pic? :indian_chief:


----------



## Elgrosso

Got the good tune back! It was probably just me that changed the presets without knowing.
Anyway still sounds great.

But... there’s something a little on bass, like some bloated notes on some tracks, I don't know where exactly I’d say around 80Hz, maybe lower.
It’s a bit strange because compared to the headphone it’s less clear, less detailed, but also better in some way, more presence for sure, more fun at the end.
Maybe I ask too much of the 10 in these small boxes, I'll try a little higher XO like 70/80Hz, now it’s 60Hz.
There is also a big resonance down low, not sure if it’s the sub box or the midbass, or my floor, or something else, or everything combined!

I have in plan to build a clean box for the sub, using all volume I can and and with a better look/finish, somewhat stealth.
So here there’s certainly room for improvement, more bracing, and a bit more volume.
If I manage to use a modular baffle I’ll try 1 or 2 subs. 
SBP15 or the 2 alpine SWS15 that I just received, they simulate very well in the actual box, half excursion for the same response than the sbp!

Another thing, I’m now more and more bothered by the change in response when I increase the volume (Equal-loudness contour).
One target will sound great at 85/90db but too heavy once higher near 100/105, and in the other way if I use the flatter target it sounds great higher but very thin at 85db...
So now I have two targets, but I can't switch easily with the ddrc in the trunk now.
And it’s really not something you want to think about when you enjoy music, it should be automatic!
I hope miniDSP will work on this like they said.
It would be very cool to have a dynamic target.

There’s the compressor in the 8x12 that can maybe give similar effect?
IDK I need to learn about this.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yeahh man you're not dead :beerchug:
> 
> Well you know what... first I didn't have my car for 10 days it was at the shop so drove the oldy with no music.
> Some electric **** I think, I hope not related to the amps.
> I got all blamed because apparently it’s not drivable anymore
> The boss was laughing but my friendly mech didn't appreciate, I think he got scared once :laugh:
> 
> But got it back yesterday, and I was not that impressed! Not like 2w ago.
> It was cool, but not the same.
> Today I checked the tune and it's not the right one, not the last one.
> IDK maybe they changed some presets without knowing.
> Well anyway I saved the tune in different places, I’ll bring it back
> 
> So where’s your pic? :indian_chief:


No not dead....lol 
Man I had end of month been working 12hr days , it's been hard. 

I finally got the pic posted


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Got the good tune back! It was probably just me that changed the presets without knowing.
> Anyway still sounds great.
> 
> But... there’s something a little on bass, like some bloated notes on some tracks, I don't know where exactly I’d say around 80Hz, maybe lower.
> It’s a bit strange because compared to the headphone it’s less clear, less detailed, but also better in some way, more presence for sure, more fun at the end.
> Maybe I ask too much of the 10 in these small boxes, I'll try a little higher XO like 70/80Hz, now it’s 60Hz.
> There is also a big resonance down low, not sure if it’s the sub box or the midbass, or my floor, or something else, or everything combined!
> 
> I have in plan to build a clean box for the sub, using all volume I can and and with a better look/finish, somewhat stealth.
> So here there’s certainly room for improvement, more bracing, and a bit more volume.
> If I manage to use a modular baffle I’ll try 1 or 2 subs.
> SBP15 or the 2 alpine SWS15 that I just received, they simulate very well in the actual box, half excursion for the same response than the sbp!
> 
> Another thing, I’m now more and more bothered by the change in response when I increase the volume (Equal-loudness contour).
> One target will sound great at 85/90db but too heavy once higher near 100/105, and in the other way if I use the flatter target it sounds great higher but very thin at 85db...
> So now I have two targets, but I can't switch easily with the ddrc in the trunk now.
> And it’s really not something you want to think about when you enjoy music, it should be automatic!
> I hope miniDSP will work on this like they said.
> It would be very cool to have a dynamic target.
> 
> There’s the compressor in the 8x12 that can maybe give similar effect?
> IDK I need to learn about this.



Your not the only one that tunes for loud the first time around 

Sq is a demand as time goes on..


It may be a compound reflection that changes volumes a time different levels,

My car does that pretty bad at 1.1khz
Left get way louder up high, combfilters get compounded and cause just this.

Find your combfilters, eq each speaker flat with near mic measurements than RTA at listening position. Find the peaks and nulls, 
One of the peaks should be where it's too loud on one side


----------



## miniSQ

Whats with the photobucket upgrade warnings? I cannot see any pictures.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> No not dead....lol
> Man I had end of month been working 12hr days , it's been hard.
> 
> I finally got the pic posted


Hang on, this means more cash for the family, the house... or some gears! 



oabeieo said:


> Your not the only one that tunes for loud the first time around
> 
> Sq is a demand as time goes on..
> 
> 
> It may be a compound reflection that changes volumes a time different levels,
> 
> My car does that pretty bad at 1.1khz
> Left get way louder up high, combfilters get compounded and cause just this.
> 
> Find your combfilters, eq each speaker flat with near mic measurements than RTA at listening position. Find the peaks and nulls,
> One of the peaks should be where it's too loud on one side


Yeah it’s annoying, so far I prefer using the flattest so at least it’s ok for both levels. But both seem pretty symmetric, I don't hear big changes in the overall balance.
But I’ll try to measure everything at different levels, also to check if the output stays flat even at +20db.





miniSQ said:


> Whats with the photobucket upgrade warnings? I cannot see any pictures.


Yeah what a pain... I won't upgrade anything with them now, nor update the old links, as soon as they’re visible on clic/new tab.
Seems the case no? It is to me, but maybe I messed up something when I saved the album before they trash everything.
Next pics will be on imgur
Old ones are still all here: grosso's Library | Photobucket


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah!!!


----------



## Babs

Nice!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## oabeieo

Sick! 

That some decent little power packs there !!!


Sorry haven't been able finish my Lil project, I had my hands ful 
Good news is a took my MECP recertification today, passed 90.5%
Didn't study , missed a couple video connector questions. Oops 

What made u choose those apples? How much power ?


----------



## Elgrosso

Thx guys, yeah they're nice, I always liked the look of them, a little bling bling, but I like the idea to use brit' amps in the jag 
They could be nice as a vertical rack in the trunk.

+ they were at good price, the two bigs are new (just a small scratch on the four). The small one is used.
Sm60 pushes 2x55w/4ohms, so around 25 at 8 ohms, should be ok on the horns, if clean.
The compact four I don't know exactly, but I guess around 4x65-75w/4ohms, Around 2x170/4ohms, so less than 100w/8ohms, maybe just ok for the audax.
And the four pushes 4x95w/4ohms, 300w/bridged at 4ohms, should be ok on the 10".

I'll try different combos, with my jl on sub and/or midbass.
The idea was anyway to downgrade a bit the power now that I have a great tune.
But I'm also waiting for an MC140 and a ref300 in great shape + maybe some more.
Funny, I've never really been into old school, but it's starting slowly.


Hey comgrats Andy on your certif'!
Is it something you need to pass regularly to keep working, or something for a new path... ?


----------



## oabeieo

I have to do it every four years. 
Install mangers have to be master or advanced certified.

They don't pay any more for master so why bother doing that again. 
I just do the advanced and save the 105$
I used to think it was cool being master but I could care less anymore.

The company does pay 5% more to be advanced, which I don't know why anyone would work there and not get that, that's like 500.00$ a month extra. So I'm good till 2021


I didn't know those were Brit made. That seems like a huge step down in power output. 
Those 8ohm CDs are only 8ohm around 1.6k (iirc) than they slope up towards 20ohm , 
I have a 360w ch @4ohm amp on horns so they getting a healthy 180w but I tend to think they only getting about 40w based on RMS voltage on DMM on peak hold with music up loud.

I don't dare run a sine sweep with it up that loud as I would for sure fry a coil. 
Load resistance isn't accurate. Speaker impedance changes with frequency. 

Well I guess it depends on the amp also, but 25wcb seems really small. I mean maybe it's underrated. I had. Clairion 25x2 amp work perfect on horns once so I could be wrong but it seems like your going to want more


----------



## oabeieo

Not trying to be a party pooper , 
It will sound good. Sorry to ba a downer  

I just bet you want more


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Not trying to be a party pooper ,
> It will sound good. Sorry to ba a downer
> 
> I just bet you want more


Haha no you’re not pooping 
I didn’t need the sm60 but I took it to match the others. It is tiny, smaller than the little pio!
I know it’s a stretch here, it’s less than a 1/3 of what I have right now.
The compact four on the horns and the four on the mids might be better.
I’ll test and see, although last week ends have been pretty hot and I have hard time to work on anything so it will take time.

The faitals are really not bad on impedance, like 50 ohms around 1K and a peak at 10 near 2K, the rest is lower around 6/8. 
But yes right now they have around [email protected]@8 and I’m plenty happy with this, no need for more.
I’d sure like to know how to measure what I use exactly.
And how much do we need to keep for transients etc.
You see that I went full power to at least not to have to think about limitations here, but it's a bit silly to keep it like that. ([email protected]/[email protected]/[email protected]/[email protected] from horns/mids/bass to sub)

Midbass and sub for sure I can downgrade safely, now with 0 gain and minus few db on dsp, so half power would still be plenty.
Well you know we discussed this I want to hear for myself the good A/B stuff, or even high biased A. Thus why I’m planning something with the soundstream modified (MC or r300 or r500).

If the charging system doesn’t like it, or if I don't hear anything good I think I’ll return to full prs-d800.
These guys are really neat and clean, good power 125w or 300w bridged.
I could build a nice rack with 9 of them 
Or maybe keep an HD or 2 for subs only.

For the subs, I’m actually working on the new box.
Finally I didn't bother to rebuild one from scratch, as I found a dual 10 for mustang that has almost the right dimensions (little angled etc).
So now I’ bracing it, adapt for 2x15, and reinforce in few places as it's not so great build. 
So next sub stage will be 2x15 SWSd4, a real 4 way!


----------



## oabeieo

It will be fine. Just not what your used to. 
It should be noticeably better in overall sq vs the JL amps especially down low and in the midbass. 

Transients or crest needs at least double rms power to work its best. But with compression on our Spotify and such it's almost a non issue what so ever. 


It's crazy how bad Spotify sounds when the system is tuned it's best. 
It's listenable but man you can really hear the problems, compression throws out frequencies that human brain throws out like 80hz for example. Makes me wonder why the house curve is so popular now days when flat responce would win comps in the 90s 

My house curve sounds good on Spotify but is way too midbass heavy on a cd recorded in the 80s-90s 

After a few hundred hours trying to tune a problem that can't be tuned because of crappy media I've gotten used to highs that sound somewhat harsh and total loss of depth. 
Pop in a cd from time to time just to assure myself the system still sounds the way it should. 

I'm completely discusted with the media industry, I can't believe we still have single ended signal and the only thing on hi-res is some stupid flutes or some singer in another language. 

You ain't kidding about the heat. I wanted to be fiberglassing my dash but even in the evening the garage gets to 98deg. By the time it cools down I'm so tired I just want to go to sleep.


----------



## oabeieo

Did some reading up on those amps. 
Pretty dope actually. Maybe I withdraw what I said.
Didn't know those were considered so high end. 
I knew they were good, but they're really good


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah they're pretty good, well have a nice reputation.I'll confirm, or not.
With all dsps we have it might not change anything...
So you see them to be better on lows too? Funny I would have expected more on the mids/highs.

For power I usually target twice the rms/aes/whatever spec they give.
With PA stuff it's cool because it's more realistic.
Here I would be more around the rms values, but with unregulated power.
Maybe I'll have to change a bit my tuning habits, check the voltage at least?

Kind of finished the box and installed it, as draft, damn' it's heavy.
But I now can push my seat to the max without hitting them.

It's was just too hot to continue more or start tuning.
112 yesterday, around 100 today so I could at least move a bit


----------



## oabeieo

On lows yeah, 
The damping factor at lower impedances on an A/B 
Is so much better than any D can do. 

The HD amps iirc are [email protected] ohms and drop to like 35 or something at 2ohms 
And those are excellent D amps. 
Where as an A/B would be able to be in the hundreds at 2ohms. 


Also a class D amp may have a good damping rating at low impedance but the published specs might be measured at 1k or something. 

I DONT KNOW FOR SURE 

It's just what I read. The AB amps do so much better by design 
And the only thing that makes an AB inefficient is half volumes.

We listen loud , so an AB will be points away from a D in efficiency how we listen. 

So yeah , I do believe you'll notice a difference mostly down low. 

I can tell my focal amps are hooked up under 1k above 1k I can't tell the difference that much between the HD amps and my ABs 

So, you'll hear a difference all over , because amps sound different.


----------



## oabeieo

The more I read about modulation on a sequentially spaced triangle wave inserted on a switch at frequencies in the RF band the more I realize the only part of a D that is a resonant circuit would be between the LPF at the output and the load (or speaker) 

The rest is just balls to the wall full blast switches. 

Whereas an AB it seems the entire output stage is a resonant circuit to the load. 
That would give engineers a LOT more flexibility in CAD to get the signal to do what it's doing on the input with a variable frequency dependent load. In my ponderings about it (as I am not an amplifier engineer (nor do I claim to know didily squat) but I am a thinker and I can comprehend what I read most of the time. It seems to me the subtle changes in amplitude AND polar responce within the magnitude would be much better realized if one was able to better tune circuit resonances in the amp design. 

It makes sence why a D needs the output monitored at a fairly high frequency. In a weird analogy like a over sampling circuit does to a digital stream but for the analog magnitude and polarity to be correct. I mean , a LPF inserted in between a speaker and amp at higher than 20khz seems would have to have some sort of real high energy air core coil , and with as much stuff going on in a D seems that small large gauge wide spread air coil would have to leak and absorb EMI in some fashion. I just don't see how it's possible to keep a true relationship that's faithful to the input when a passive crossover is in the mix that is not designed for a that load on it. It also makes sence why a D with much more than 65V per rail could even keep higher frequencies in tact without some sort of hysteris distortion happening. Maybe that's why JL 750/1s and 1200/1s aren't recommended to go much higher than the midrange. 

I've always thought the JL HD amps "barley sound good" and I mean they do sound very good. But barley, and you can almost hear it in its reproduction that it is almost artificial and somewhat grainy , especially when they get hot.

Maybe it's just me , but I'm fascinated how amps work. Would love to find a amp design book for dummies.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Maybe it's just me , but I'm fascinated how amps work. Would love to find a amp design book for dummies.


That is the only part I understood :blush:
Yes please share if you find soemthing like that because I have really no idea of how it works.

Some kind of chart that explains the typical components on a board would be cool too. I can find the cap, the psu, but that's it!  No idea what are all thoses little things around and their roles.


----------



## oabeieo

Yeah. I was a programmer for a SMT machine in a past life and worked in electronics assembly, my specialty was the universal HSP 4792,4791 , Fuji, mydata, wave , reflow programmer.

So I got the basics on just about every part imaginable. 
Would love to learn autoCAD . I learned to fiddle with Gerbers but that's about it , 

Man . It would be so fun to do a diy amp build that's not a complete joke like some of the diy builds out there. I would want to make more than 40w


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Yeah. I was a programmer for a SMT machine in a past life and worked in electronics assembly, my specialty was the universal HSP 4792,4791 , Fuji, mydata, wave , reflow programmer.
> 
> So I got the basics on just about every part imaginable.
> Would love to learn autoCAD . I learned to fiddle with Gerbers but that's about it ,
> 
> Man . It would be so fun to do a diy amp build that's not a complete joke like some of the diy builds out there. I would want to make more than 40w


Cool this! So did you get the basic about soldering manually?
I can think of few things to ask


----------



## oabeieo

Basics , lol ....yeah I think so.

I'm still ICP certified (which means I can build military or medical equipment) 

But yes ask away. Hand-soldering is quite easy, I have a metcal station and all the re-work gear. BGA soldering is tricky, I don't have an x ray for that but can do it if I had one.
Can do anything else (fine pitch no problem)


----------



## oabeieo

So......



I was just kiddin.



Was makin fun of a movie..



Have you done anything new?

As soon as some of this doom and gloom n Korea crap stops freaking me out I really want to do some door pods like yours


----------



## Jscoyne2

oabeieo said:


> So......
> 
> 
> 
> I was just kiddin.
> 
> 
> 
> Was makin fun of a movie..
> 
> 
> 
> Have you done anything new?
> 
> As soon as some of this doom and gloom n Korea crap stops freaking me out I really want to do some door pods like yours


For what. 8in midbass?

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## oabeieo

Jscoyne2 said:


> For what. 8in midbass?
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


No , lol


I was talking about hand soldering.
And was trying to be funny but epic fail to deliver humor 

Realized a week or so after posting it , read what I wrote and was astonished by how vein it sounded.


I saw a type of blunt humor on a movie and had it in my mind and in expression failed to convey ....


----------



## Jscoyne2

Loll 

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## DeltaB

oabeieo said:


> On lows yeah,
> The damping factor at lower impedances on an A/B
> Is so much better than any D can do.
> 
> The HD amps iirc are [email protected] ohms and drop to like 35 or something at 2ohms
> And those are excellent D amps.
> Where as an A/B would be able to be in the hundreds at 2ohms.
> 
> 
> Also a class D amp may have a good damping rating at low impedance but the published specs might be measured at 1k or something.
> 
> I DONT KNOW FOR SURE
> 
> It's just what I read. The AB amps do so much better by design
> And the only thing that makes an AB inefficient is half volumes.
> 
> We listen loud , so an AB will be points away from a D in efficiency how we listen.
> 
> So yeah , I do believe you'll notice a difference mostly down low.
> 
> I can tell my focal amps are hooked up under 1k above 1k I can't tell the difference that much between the HD amps and my ABs
> 
> So, you'll hear a difference all over , because amps sound different.


Damping on a Class D can vary widely. I do know the NVX JAD900.5 I use in my XJ8 has fairly decent damping factor on the sub channel @ 2ohm. (>200) However, I prefer no lower than 4 ohm load for my sub usage. After about 150Hz, damping factor becomes irrelevant. Also, the interconnects play a huge role in proper setup. (gauge)

Some switching amplifiers like Class D amplifiers have a lower damping factor than their Class A/B counterparts because the output of the amplifier has to pass through an inductor. Since the inductor is wound with copper wire which has resistance (albeit a very low resistance), the damping factor is reduced. Some designs can even be regenerative. Switching amplifiers with higher damping factors typically take the feedback signal from the speaker terminal side of the output filter inductor instead of the output transistors side of the output filter inductor. This gives the feedback servo circuit a greater ability to maintain the correct output, increasing the damping factor. It does really come down to the way in which attention was paid to the design by the manufacturer.

From Brian Morelli @ NVX Tech;

"Minimum impedance for all channels is 2ohms. You can have different loads on different channels. (4ohm on the fronts/rear, 2ohm on sub). 

The damping factor for all JADs is greater than 200

NVX Tech"


----------



## Izay123

DeltaB said:


> Damping on a Class D can vary widely. I do know the NVX JAD900.5 I use in my XJ8 has fairly decent damping factor on the sub channel @ 2ohm. (>200) However, I prefer no lower than 4 ohm load for my sub usage. After about 150Hz, damping factor becomes irrelevant. Also, the interconnects play a huge role in proper setup. (gauge)
> 
> Some switching amplifiers like Class D amplifiers have a lower damping factor than their Class A/B counterparts because the output of the amplifier has to pass through an inductor. Since the inductor is wound with copper wire which has resistance (albeit a very low resistance), the damping factor is reduced. Some designs can even be regenerative. Switching amplifiers with higher damping factors typically take the feedback signal from the speaker terminal side of the output filter inductor instead of the output transistors side of the output filter inductor. This gives the feedback servo circuit a greater ability to maintain the correct output, increasing the damping factor. It does really come down to the way in which attention was paid to the design by the manufacturer.
> 
> From Brian Morelli @ NVX Tech;
> 
> "Minimum impedance for all channels is 2ohms. You can have different loads on different channels. (4ohm on the fronts/rear, 2ohm on sub).
> 
> The damping factor for all JADs is greater than 200
> 
> NVX Tech"


Actual damping factor is also affected by the size & length of speaker wire used. Do a google search for pro audio damping factor calculators--You may be surprised to find that an amp's damping factor is often reduced to 1/4 of the rated damping factor or less depending on wiring used....


----------



## oabeieo

Excellent info guys ,

Yeah damping matters in LF considerably.
Yeah most higher end Ds do okay at/above 4ohms 
Like the HDs (JL) or a few others , 

It's crazy tho how much a amp has to be "built" to do what a AB can do with much less design involved.

I use Ds and ABs , and as the never ending argument goes , I can hear a difference, but I wouldn't go as far as to label the topology as the reasons , more every amp has its own fingerprints on how it behaves , so IMO overall design and implementation has its role


----------



## oabeieo

David.......come out come out wherever you are oke:


----------



## Elgrosso

Finally I got something pretty good today. 
I've spent the last few weeks or months to test few amps: my old JL HD, Genesis, Soundstream Ref, Zukis, Pio.
I think I have rebuilt the rack at least 10 times, trying to find an easy way to swap amps with each different wire/power constrains.
Ended up with these Phass from Mic, 4.100 on horns and mids, 2.150 on midbass (this one is out for connection repair).

But I was chasing an alt hiss that became really disturbing with this new combination of amp and dsp (Waveflex A8 so 2v out).
This dsp sounds much better than the 8x12 but gains have to be well adjusted, when before I could just use a lower gain with more powerful amps (like full HD).
So had the alternator and power cables checked etc and they were all good, but still I couldn't figure out where it came from.
Battery in trunk, fuel pump right above, antennas and all kind of wires there probably didn't help.
I was also afraid that these bigger amps would put too much strain on my charging system, I had few strange gizmos sometime but I am not sure of anything.
The alt is pushing 120A at 3000rpm, but I'm most of the time around 1500 only.

Playing with the amp layout, like as far as possible from the fuel pump or the power block, careful routing of all cables etc helped but it was still there on high rpm.
I tested few classic PAC isolator but it didn't help.
Tested a bunch or rcas too from dirt cheap to a little more expensive, and to my surprise these rcas (KnuKonceptz Krux I think) helped to lower it a bit.
I found a used Newmar 80A noise filter that I was about to test but first tried this Jensen isolator, and it got rid of everything!

Pretty cool I can know put my gains where I want them, meaning up to an acceptable noise floor on the horns, and much higher for the mids (all 8 ohms).
And finally get all the power I need (like easily +9db from the starting point).
Soon I should re-install the other Phass for the midbass, I hope it would be enough power because the zuki here is a beast and sounds great I really like it. 

At first the tube sound was disturbing, super soft and sooo smooth, I wasn't used to that (the Genesis were a bit like that too but less clean).
I like it more agressive so I re-adjusted some XOs and my house target to flatten even more the mp1 curve.
Today's tune is too fresh but it seems better than my best previous one that I kept for the last 4 months with all amps (except little adjustments when needed).

This Jensens isolator is pretty good stuff, I was at a point thinking about another alt, dual battery with filters etc, but no need!
Here on the bottom left near the dsp > isomax
I still have to clean the wiring etc now that I know it’s good.


----------



## oabeieo

Ok JEALOUS! 


Heya when I hook up my vac tube pre amp , it sounded like Dirac was doing something wired with its "linear distortion reverb" effect or "tube sound artifacts " 

It totally could have been just me , but I thought it sounded better to insert the tube after running Dirac , 
With an actual tube amp, I don't know how that would work.....I think you'll have to keep it in. The polar responce of a vac tube amp is most likely different than a solid state , so not sure if an amp swap to tune would work all that good.. 


Anyway very curious how all that works for you. Keep us posted .

Dam that's a sick setup tho 


Tell me about this DSP , what makes it cool? 


About the noise ......is there a isolation jumper in the dsp? Or where ever the noise is coming? 



I got that Tru line amp and had the same problem. It was so so so noisy and couldn't get rid of it.


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah the tube added something for sure, I'd say it's the one that suffered the most of my non-retuned technique when I swapped amps.
Now re-tuned it's much better (It's a pre-amp tube only if important)

When I swapped all amps I didn't want to retune everything every time.
For time reasons, and also to compare all on the same thing, so I kept the same dirac setting all along.
I just did a reference measurements at first, and adjusted gains for each new amps to match. I'd say within 1db max, mostly less.
Fr was usually really consistent, phase not so much sure, of course on highs especially.

But what are you saying my friend on polar responses? I can see phase difference but effect on polar?? Or then the fr would be dramatically impacted too.
Well no such thing for now. Sure stage changed a bit though, but mostly due to my adjustment settings.

Yeah this dsp is pretty good, based on mini 2x8 with few mods.
Waveflex Caraudio
Has mini digi, a nice box, good psu, but I don't remember the tech mods in it. Snr is much better, voltage out is lower than 6x8 or 8x12 but still the result is better. Can push the gains to what I need with still very low floor.
It's the first time I could try to raise a bit the horn gains, before it was always between 0-5%, now I can go up to 50% (on the phass or the pio).
If needed I could get no noise floor at all for ex, zero, nada, queude.

But the alt hiss appeared.
Never had any issue with alt hiss before, only with horn noise floor, that drove all subsequent gains. Before I used mostly class D, with higher voltage in, big power, so the alt hiss was hidden by the low gain while I still had enough power (except on classical). So here I think these more sensitive amps picked everything around.
Had to fix something I wasn't aware of, but it's good.
I thougth about alt change and all kind of charge upgrade (tru line driver too yeah, they're so close I have to visit them).
But the Jensen fixed the last thing, I can confirm again after a long drive at higher speed today > 000000 hiss, it's incredible, even at 6000.

Actual gains are kind of high, I decided to push the amps a bit, I'll see once I have tried my full library. A it overkill because I couldn't max out so far while on some tracks it can get dirty, so I'll lower a bit later, maybe 
Also I'm super reasonable with dirac gain, -8db.

So about this dsp, first it just sounds cleaner, silent moments are dead silents, and honeslty this makes a big change on dynamic perception.
Richer, more detailed, so it makes everything deeper/wider.
And this already before all my amp changes, on just the jl it helped.
Now with the phass it's even better.
I still have to install my dual remote for sharc/dsp, this will allow me to toggle each device setting independently with an lcd etc.

Oh and let add the most important thing. The value of this device is not in the dsp, but in the knowledge of the man behind.
Pierre has been very very helpful, and I've met some helpful guys here and there in real, it's not an understatement.


----------



## oabeieo

You can plug a mini shark into it that's ****ing badass 


I was thinking about going with mini sharks , and an external dac, the mini HDs are already set up nicely , low jitter , 2vrms. Can't complain. But that would be a cool platform tho. 

Get away from the codec da . 


As far as your noise goes all I can say is HA HA YOU GOT HORN HISS!!! (said in a 6yr old voice) lol  
Find unity gain and get everything in the chain at unity , if noise is present it's not a signal issue , probably a ground loop or a transformer talking EMI. hard to say exactly 


So, all amps have there own fingerprint if you will. Phase is one of the many attributes, that's why it's bad to mix match amps without a means of correction. But Dirac will fix all that so no worries. 

It's about how the amp responds to impedance. As impedance changes with frequency the amps behavior will change, damping , phase ...etc. in a resonant circuit with variable frequencies (music) the load and how it responds to the circuit will change different from amp to amp especially in As and ABs. 


Also on the noise , find out if the amps rebuffer the input (opamps) or if it's a step up transformer . JL amps rebuffer and have opamps drive the input up starting from all the way down (basicly a line amp as a gain) other amps have transformer in them. Those type need to find unity gain. Like the alpine amps "nom " is center and is unity gain. And uses transformers. Iirc ........

Don't try to impedance match gains , it sounds like **** , and noise filters (another type of transformers) sound like poop also. Go after the source


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah I could fit the sharc inside there's room for it, + the digifp.
Might be a little too hot with the psu nearby, but I planned to do it.
Nothing urgent but it would simplify the setup.

Did you check this: https://waveflex.myshopify.com/products/8-channel-output-stage-for-tpa-9018
You could go with dual sharc and buffalo 3 for 8ch out.
Probably close to the price of a good ready made dsp but with top components.
Might be one of my future steps, with my dirac sharc.


I know my amp swap method was not optimized, but time was precious last few months.
For once I went more by the feeling than by numbers.


This hiss... what a pain. I had it on mids too, but much lower of course.
Must be EMi because I checked my ground 2000 times and they were fine.
But I'm done, no more chasing the source since now it's gone.
I should get back the other amp soon, I gave it to zed he's close by.
If he has time I'll ask him for more advices.


----------



## oabeieo

That’s a cool DSP.


Mic sold you that? Was he convoluted like us? (Lol)
What car did he have that in is what I’m sayin ( pics?)


----------



## oabeieo

So, just want to also give you a big ole heads up now, pretty important 


So I have a collection of CDs and a collection of bad diaphragms. 
Here’s why;

When using linear phase crossovers , I was using rectangular windows and optimized to -150db ..... and than using peq to cut the peaks in the acoustical response. So, the fir performance was good using that method, however I kept blowing CDs , one of my 2408h voice coil came unglued from diaphragm. What was happening was the stop band wasn’t cutting LF. After a really close look , a 100db measurement showed at -50db some LF peaks at 200hz and 50hz ........ so it was getting a few watts still way down low. 


A purely linear phase crossover in an fir will have stop band issues. I talked to pos over at diy and apparently that’s pretty normal for an fir. So, I came up with a better approach and a better sounding filter all together. 

1. Use an IIR crossover to find what slope and xo point you want to use, than make it in a 
Fir but use this recipe. 

If you want a LR4 and you notice the acoustical shape is LR2 with your IIR -LR4 than make a linear phase LR2 and add a BW2 on top of it in IIR. This will do two things , 1. Make it truly linear phase and 2, give you adequate stop band rejection. 


I didn’t want the ringing from an IIR from its inherent ringing from its loopbacks, but it’s such a tiny tiny tiny arguably inaudible ring that it so much outweighs the risks of blown drivers. 

On a different subject. I’ve also found the GD caused by an IIR can be desirable to get alignment to mid on the HP side , meaning the horn using a purely minimum phase crossover. 


On my setup if I use a LR4 at 1k acoustically it looks like approximately 9 dB oactave roll off using a LR4 overlay shows that also. I am now using a 18db linearphase LR xo and a BW2 IIR on top of it (at 1Khz) I’m liking it quite a bit. It’s acoustically a LR4 and overlay is almost perfect. However electrically its a mutant LR BW with 36db attenuation. The measured phase is flat. And uniform at stop band and sums to mid much better.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> That’s a cool DSP.


Yep,
did you see that? https://www.minidsp.com/products/dirac-series/ddrc-88d
Might be cool if you want to play with Dacs.
Don't know how the taps are distributed in 3 way mode, or if it’s even the same sharc inside (probably). But nice all in one solution!





oabeieo said:


> Mic sold you that? Was he convoluted like us? (Lol)
> What car did he have that in is what I’m sayin ( pics?)


The amps only yes, I think he had them in an acura, the last one.
They got all kind of mods from Gordon, can't see anything to add.
Just playing with different tubes maybe.


----------



## oabeieo

Wow , I missed that one . 

It’s “ideal” for cinema ....

BS to English means low taps low delay. I wonder if it’s a single minisharc and uses a one forward and one reverse FFT to get 8ch. And if it goes to 198K taps would be pretty whimsy 

Have to wait and see what it actually is


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> So, just want to also give you a big ole heads up now, pretty important
> 
> 
> So I have a collection of CDs and a collection of bad diaphragms.
> Here’s why;
> 
> When using linear phase crossovers , I was using rectangular windows and optimized to -150db ..... and than using peq to cut the peaks in the acoustical response. So, the fir performance was good using that method, however I kept blowing CDs , one of my 2408h voice coil came unglued from diaphragm. What was happening was the stop band wasn’t cutting LF. After a really close look , a 100db measurement showed at -50db some LF peaks at 200hz and 50hz ........ so it was getting a few watts still way down low.
> 
> 
> A purely linear phase crossover in an fir will have stop band issues. I talked to pos over at diy and apparently that’s pretty normal for an fir. So, I came up with a better approach and a better sounding filter all together.
> 
> 1. Use an IIR crossover to find what slope and xo point you want to use, than make it in a
> Fir but use this recipe.
> 
> If you want a LR4 and you notice the acoustical shape is LR2 with your IIR -LR4 than make a linear phase LR2 and add a BW2 on top of it in IIR. This will do two things , 1. Make it truly linear phase and 2, give you adequate stop band rejection.
> 
> 
> I didn’t want the ringing from an IIR from its inherent ringing from its loopbacks, but it’s such a tiny tiny tiny arguably inaudible ring that it so much outweighs the risks of blown drivers.
> 
> On a different subject. I’ve also found the GD caused by an IIR can be desirable to get alignment to mid on the HP side , meaning the horn using a purely minimum phase crossover.
> 
> 
> On my setup if I use a LR4 at 1k acoustically it looks like approximately 9 dB oactave roll off using a LR4 overlay shows that also. I am now using a 18db linearphase LR xo and a BW2 IIR on top of it (at 1Khz) I’m liking it quite a bit. It’s acoustically a LR4 and overlay is almost perfect. However electrically its a mutant LR BW with 36db attenuation. The measured phase is flat. And uniform at stop band and sums to mid much better.


I need to install my 2nd sharc to try manual fir... now that my amps are close to be done I could start on that.
Did you try the eclipse soft/ fir designer? Looks easy and Michael seems helpful.
But I would need to re-read this whole thread


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> I need to install my 2nd sharc to try manual fir... now that my amps are close to be done I could start on that.
> Did you try the eclipse soft/ fir designer? Looks easy and Michael seems helpful.
> But I would need to re-read this whole thread


Yeah I’ve filldled with a few different convolution platforms 
rePhase is the best still in my humbleness. 

rePhase gives me everything useful to me without the need to import a measurement into it. Although for doing a full correction for a channel that is the best way to import a measurement, but for crossovers and some small phase rotations I find it faster to just use REW and calculate any small adjustments from there manually. 

My new method works better by adding a minimum phase filter on top of lineage phase until I achieve acoustic linear phase. Keeps everything even as far as maintaining minimum phase behavior in the crossover. And only cutting big peaks out of stop band with peq to avoid any pre ring. 

I’ve noticed you can go down in phase all you want as long as attenuation is constant. Once there’s a rise in amplitude and phase is “flat” on a prediction it will ring and sound echoing. Or pre echoed. Another words , on a linear phase PEQ for reproduction will sound normal except the frequencies that go from bottom of peak to top of peak . Those will ring . Same principle. 
Can been seen with GD and the ETC function in REW.

So basically, mixed phase crossovers sound great. It’s more linear that a purely linear phase crossover, unless the acoustics match the fir, but I have never seen that. At least not in a car .


----------



## Elgrosso

Hey my friend, 
I wanted to do a long post about that 'cause it's something I wanted to test for a while, but I don't feel like it... this weekend I tried a bunch of horns, regular/home horns in my car.
More than a dozen, from super cheap from PE to moderate price found here and there, small to wide mouth like some faital aluminium, think jbl, seos, etc
In kicks or on dash or just wherever I could fit them, horizontal and vertical, angled or not, measured and listened every time.
Final result, nothing beats the ES, in term of overall experience.
Almost all measured way better than the ES, like much smoother. They loaded better, more extension etc. But the dispersion pattern just never made sense.
Measurements in position, not outside or on baffle as it doesn't make sense like I've seen some.
Few point, mostly 6pts off to on axis around my head, but this was useless.
Real listening all of them sounded like crap.
it's not that I thought I would discover anything, but I wanted to check for myself.

Only thing I see, would be to fit them vertical right below the windshield.
But that means heavy modifications of the dash.

So now I want to test other stuff, like big domes or planar.
Tbc


----------



## oabeieo

Nothing beats the es , that is no joke ! I’ve done a lot 
Also, I like the wide sound field pa horns give but the controlled dispersion really truly lays the coverage pattern exactly what you want close proximity, off center , off axis . 

It’s like dumping scrabble out on floor to have perfect arrangements fall into place.



Heya check out my rePhase thread ,I was feeling silly tonight . It’s a good laugh it’s in the members review


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep, some sounded ok, and probably really good for home (like the sth100 from faital), but in car it was just too controlled.
I mean not enough reflections, a little too "pinpoint".
This + some other stuff are changing my perspective on the pattern control.
I mean for long time I thought the good sound of the horn came from its directivity, roughly the idea of reducing off axis and all related reflections to an acceptable level. It's really obvious on the minis with their high crosstalk, but it doesn't mean that the rest is much controlled.
(it's still kind of hard to visualize the horn dispersion since it's so variable per frequency, flip thing, dash effect etc, even after tons of readings and simulations)
But it's a moot point in a way.
It's sure about dynamic and sensitivity, but about the pattern it 's now more clear to me that it's just a different way to manage the chaos, not real control.

So now I want to try other stuff, going back to full dispersion drivers, cones or domes or others, but keeping high sensitivity, and above dash for ex.
(I had an idea for a midrange in door with phase plugs but it's still too early to report).
Even if I really love my audax, they can't play too high being so off axis.
While they're clearly designed for that, the near on axis fr is crazy high above 2k, that's where it really starts singing!
I have a pair of phl to test, + just received some bg neo 8&10 and I'm waiting for some audax 1.3" and some other guys.
Might try line array too at one time, eon one style (i think it's a peerless tc6, based on what I've seen yesterday).

I'm saying that because I had another visit at harman, the whole tour this time, that was soooo cool 
Got the chance to talk to few designers/engineers, a demo of few stuff like the new scl2 (really cool, powerful and clean).
Some interesting drivers in this, a small CD (0.8") on a very shallow waveguide (m2 like) that maybe we'll be able to buy in parts later.

About short throat, or minimal load, I also tried my CD hornless last week end.
And it's not bad at all! 
You can put them in dash corners, stage gets really great of course. Big diffusion since it's small throat, minimal loading with just 1" tube. I measured and distortion was low no worries.
But there was still something strange, like a thin metallic sound sometime.
I just played 20 min swithcing with the real horns below, at moderate volume without any eq. Might be a stretch for them at real level, but might be ok since in car it's still much lower than what they were designed for.
Something to study, there is something here, maybe with a beefier driver...

Well anyway I have a bunch of ideas for next steps.
But this week end I'll try my new steg A 

Sure I checked your rephase thread, I just don't want to interrupt, keep going!


----------



## Elgrosso

Oh my my my, I think my amp quest has ended... installed the steggy yesterday.
Sure it's a bit too early for final words but putain de bordel de merde it sounds soooo good!
This guy is pure heaven and breathes quality in every aspects.

It's the first time I wanted to spend more time than needed in my car, parked, just for listening.
Usually yeah I go there and tune, listen a bit etc, but rarely more than 20min.
I just prefer the driving experience, and it feels a little silly to spend time in this box when I have real life around.
But today I went there for my expresso, and I went back for a smoke, and went back for nothing, just to check I wasn't cheating myself.

This is a wonderful piece of art, punto.
It was not easy to spot the difference at first, but when I switched back to the other amps it just jumped at me. Sure this is just subjective ******** to you but I tried my best to compare objectively... I have to accept my feelings, this is just heaven!
And I think you can only spot heaven when you tried audio hell, when in this case hell was already pretty good for few months, top I was able to get at least.

****, the Italians created another masterpiece! I so love these guys (...read women )


----------



## Elgrosso

Ok so now the plan is to get another MSK classe A, or put mids and horns on the same guy.
I checked about adjustable passive crossovers, not much thing around (someone tried vidsonic?)
A focal crossblock would be perfect, if it can work with 8 ohms.
But for the price I'd prefer another amp direclty...

For now I'll try some passive ready made crossovers from PRV and Eminence.
I assume power would be enough, [email protected], if the passive block doesn't eat too much.
I have less about 1ms delay between them, even with asymetric slopes dirac should be able to fix that, hope it will work, that could be the next step after heaven


----------



## thehatedguy

I still have a MSK3000 and a pair of MSK1500s.


----------



## Elgrosso

Emails sent!


----------



## Elgrosso

I tried again few more drivers/horns today, goal being to try again something on dash, but without losing too much on dynamic.
I'm really not sure 'll go there but I wanted to hear again a more regular setup.

First the last of my short and narrow horns, the whole thing can get small and manageable, but it didn't sound right.
It's possible to get a nice FR but sense of space is lost anyway.




















Then with a bigger CD, a radian 745 that I want to fit one day on the fullbody.
But for now test on dash with or without a small waveguide, I know it sounds silly but worths a try:


























Not much to gain compared to my 1", they can go lower but FR is really messy.
With the waveguide it sounds too small, too narrow, and tonality is not great, like metallic.
Without it's a little better, more reflections so it's less restricted, but tonality will still need too much work.
And for its size there's no benefits, also it would be quite underused (-15db).



hivi rt2 pro








It's a test, I wasn't sure I could remove the faceplate but yes it went well.
This guy is probably one of the smaller/thinner/long planar with high sensitivity (98/99db)
Wide horizontal dispersion but quite narrow vertically of course.
I tried all kind of places and orientation, flat on the dash in the corner was not bad for the dispersion, but high suffered too much.
Best was vertical at the edge pillar/dash, but no way to fix it here and it's too intrusive.
2nd place not far behind was high on pillar, very discrete.
It's a little higher than my head so direct sound was still ok while the the wide horizontal one brings a good sense of space.
It sounded really good, really clean and airy, should be even better in stereo.
I think I'll get another one. It is so small it would be easy to integrate cleanly.
And it high sensitivity allows to play with XOs still safely.
But it's quite heavy...




























And then the Audax with the waveguide adapted (enlarged the hole a bit to fit cleanly)
It's the TW034XO, waveguide is a monacor wg300, they sounded better like that than last week without it.
They gave me the best results today, so kept them for almost an hour while listening.
FR is pretty smooth and symmetric before EQ, more than with the all small cones I had on dash before, must be the waveguide.
So it was easy to tune quickly for something listenable. 
Down to 1600/24 with no issue, with still some room for power as it has good sensitivity (I saw a mod on troels' site maybe I'll try).
It was really a cool experience, back to all the subtile highs that I lost with the horns.
And naturally a stable high stage, much wider on left. The pr17s disappeared completely. 
A little in your face, but I hope with perfect TA and a good tune they should blend perfectly and be amazing.











Yes it's on the big size… but they appear bigger on the photo than in real, and it's not an ugly setup with the simple dash shape.
As they’re shallow even with the waveguide I could play with tilt etc more, here they are vertical and firing to the center.
I think I can cut the waveguide to put them slightly deeper/wider/lower so they won't hide the view.

I also wanted to test these waveguide on the gb15 but it won't be so easy, the little guy has a deeper recess to manage.
Also its dome shape is clearly round, maybe not a fit as good as the audax that is closer to half an egg shape.

For now back to the horns that still sound lovely but tbc...


----------



## oabeieo

Been there , done that, have a shelf full of plastic horns , Stevens hits the spot for me every time. 

Stevens horns with no time delay has always been just right. Or very minimal time delay less tha .5ms 



I liked how wide the small horns sounded with no delay and how they were more open and airy up high , but they forced me to delay to get centered . And that’s where everything collapsed. Too high in frequency to do anything useful in fir , 

What about Stevens horns down low with a 6db LPF at 1.6khz and a small horn tweeter up top crosssed at 3k (6db) with proper eq to kill the 2nd oactave (or an overlapping filter in fir) that way you can get the highs up high but get patter control to 2.5k .....

I did that in my focus and lived the way it sounded , I couldn’t tell there was an under dash horn at all. Hass it to the tops and your golden 


Btw I wanna try those radian drivers . Lmk when your over it with them


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah nothing new we talked about it but I waited so long to get enough horns from everywhere at an ok price I had to test for myself. After the few first last weeks I knew it won't go well, but finished anyway you never know.
Clearly the ES full or minis have the best pattern.
Yesterday during my little thing I was able to toggle quickly between horn/new driver when one side only. And it happened few times that I forgot the preset and which driver was playing. Everything appeared to come from the same spot, in the corner of my dash at the same level than the other driver tested, impressive.

Yes I could try a supertweeter, it would bring more depth and rise the stage, but I'd need 5 way, doable but only later maybe. I also wanted to re-test regular dome tweeters. Just a little beefier so they could handle more dynamic.
My minis are actually at around 6k/12db, acoustic it's more like 2.5khz/24, and I like very much the audax up there.
I was afraid it would be too much in beaming but fr is still pretty consistent, if I have a hole it's not really hearable.
They are really sharp and I like their snap, plus they're the wider drivers so it helps.
Only on specific tracks I could still get the rainbow, nothing much to do I think.
And left side is still too compressed, barely behind the mirror.

Dirac doesn't help here, it brings a lot of definition and clarity, but the stage is pretty good already pre-dirac. Many times I don't even turn it on just to check.

For the radians, well they're ready to go if you want. Won't be able to fit them down there anyway :/


----------



## oabeieo

I fired up the cd10nd , my goodness they have dam good lows and highs 

They belt out the midrange and it’s smooth as can be. 

I’m startin to have a fettish for 1.75” Mylar domes (or the new poly stuff) 2” would be pretty sweet. 

I hated the cd10nd for a long time , I talked a lot of trash about it, I concede.
For a larger diaphragm CD it has a **** ton of efficiency above 5k plays to 22k and plays to 500hz (700hz full power) 
The size of it you wouldn’t think it’s a neo but it is and it’s got one hell of a motor. 

I think you would like it quite a bit , definitely needs a lot of eq up high to sound right as it’s 10db louder at 5khz-20khz under 5k it’s about 104db and above 5khz it’s 114db 
Very cool and nice sounding driver. Just big. 

I blew one up , (I’ve blown one of all my CDs now tho


----------



## thehatedguy

They fit on the mini horn bodies?


----------



## oabeieo

thehatedguy said:


> They fit on the mini horn bodies?


_With a little sanding. Yes _

Or a little gasket tape for a imperfect mount.


----------



## oabeieo

Grosso I’ve decided you need an avatar, or profile pic how about a pic of a horn


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> I fired up the cd10nd , my goodness they have dam good lows and highs
> 
> They belt out the midrange and it’s smooth as can be.
> 
> I’m startin to have a fettish for 1.75” Mylar domes (or the new poly stuff) 2” would be pretty sweet.
> 
> I hated the cd10nd for a long time , I talked a lot of trash about it, I concede.
> For a larger diaphragm CD it has a **** ton of efficiency above 5k plays to 22k and plays to 500hz (700hz full power)
> The size of it you wouldn’t think it’s a neo but it is and it’s got one hell of a motor.
> 
> I think you would like it quite a bit , definitely needs a lot of eq up high to sound right as it’s 10db louder at 5khz-20khz under 5k it’s about 104db and above 5khz it’s 114db
> Very cool and nice sounding driver. Just big.
> 
> I blew one up , (I’ve blown one of all my CDs now tho


Looks nice yeah, something similar to my hf108r but maybe even better on midranges.
Had to sand a bit my minis to fit them, like 4/5mm in the corner, good that they have enough material.

But now I play them higher and higher, in fact I wonder if I should try one of the other sfaital that have better highs since I don’t need much mids.
I’d imagine it’s more about the angle of the plug to match the throat than the driver itself. 
108 is 31 degrees and they work very well, but curious about 15/20 degrees.
On the full I had a very smooth transition by sanding, here with the minis it’s not as good though.


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Grosso I’ve decided you need an avatar, or profile pic how about a pic of a horn


Got the perfect one!


----------



## captainobvious

Must it be a horn? How low do you need the HF solution to play? What efficiency matches best with your mid?

I could recommend some HF drivers with good sensitivity.


----------



## captainobvious

For example....

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...ring-dome-tweeter-with-neodymium-motor-black/

The Satori TW29RN has excellent, smooth response, a 700hz FS and is very sensitive at 96db. 



For tweeters that have more controlled directivity:

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...covery-r2604/8330-tweeter-dual-ring-radiator/

The Scanspeak Discovery dual ring radiator has nice response, is 92db efficient and has a low 440hz FS.
The Peerless XT25 double magnet is similar, with a little higher sensitivity.


----------



## Elgrosso

Thx Captainobvious!

Yes I'm already on this path for the highs, either dome tweeters or planars.
The mids are Audax PR17 and good for 96/97db, maybe even more in the car.
Here are the two I selected so far: the Audax TW034 and the hivi rt2 pro.
Audax is less sensitive but beefy, and works perfectly in the waveguide.

Audax:







(0/30/60 here)

HIVI:







(very high sensitivity)


But I still have a few to try, like a pair of HD13D37R (very similar but with a bigger back chamber, so should go even lower cleanly)









And the Wavecor TW030WA13:








http://www.wavecor.com/html/tw030wa13_14.html

that I wanted to try in my dash corners firing up (due to their quickly dropping off axis response)
They're less sensitive but so tiny and all plots look very good, maybe what I will lose on the stage would be ok compared to what I'd gain on stealth. (Test Bench)

I don't need super low but I appreciate flexibility for mounting, 1600/12db acoustic would be the lowest probably if on dash.
I have to correct what I said earlier in one post, the pr17 can play up to 3k without problem, maybe even higher.
I measured them more and couldn't find a big difference between off and on axis, except super off like near the door glass).
I think the door panel shape acts as a diffraction plug, there is a roundover that covers the upper part a bit like 10% of the cone, not sure…

The Satori TW29 you posted look very good.
Great sensitivity and much smaller, though a little less higher up than the Audax with their rising response.
I expect good power response from the Audax once firing the center of the cabin, and since I have the PR17 I like the idea to go full french drivers  (even have some 10 to try in kicks one day but here I doubt they would do better than the Beymas).
I measured them quickly with only XO no EQ and spent some time listening, and I really liked them.
They work well with the waveguide, not sure a ring radiator would do the same.
They gave me a very similar stage than the horns, but wider and more refined.
I'm not sure of the weight of the psychoacoustics on all this, but they really disappeared during testing.



















The scans I never really bothered due to their off axis response, but this one is interesting yes.
Though seem too deep for my dash mount, I'll measure.


But I'm chasing too many rabbits here, so for now I'm focused on finishing my amp rack.
My goal was to test mids and horns on the same classe A amp since it sounds so beautifully.
I tried few passive crossovers from PE but it didn't work well. Not too bad but not to what I want.
The 8 ohms drivers on a 8 or 4 ohms XO create a big underlap, while in the same time the horns fill it partially back with their higher sensitivity.
EQ and Dirac will fix a lot but I want a good starting base.
I still needed more flexibility so I got one Focal crossblock that I wanted to test for a while. 
This thing is a masterpiece, really beefy and well made, clearly a keeper.
But for the same reasons, it was designed for 4 ohms or lower drivers, I really wasn't sure it would do well, but apparently the range of settings is pretty wide, so it can even work with 8 ohms drivers!
Here a quick test of extreme settings, I'm now sure I can get something of it 











So once the rack is done, I'll study the tweeter things again.
Will keep the horns installed so I could quickly compare both with presets.
But the tweeter that big with a waveguide will need some good work on the pillars.
Well basically I'll have fun for 6 months


----------



## captainobvious

Well I guess my question is, why do you need the waveguide?

The Satori model is fantastic. I owned a pair and I preferred them over the Scanspeak Revelator 7100. I currently run a set of the Satori Beryllium TW29BN but that TW29RN is pretty excellent. It most certainly does not lack detail in the upper end.

-Steve


----------



## captainobvious

Oh, I also have a pair of the BG Neo8S and the BG Neo3 which are planars so if you want to play around with those, you're welcome to. Just shoot me a PM.


----------



## Elgrosso

captainobvious said:


> Well I guess my question is, why do you need the waveguide?
> 
> -Steve


I’m not sure I need it, but that’s what I want to find out, and learn.
I had great experience with the 660gti waveguides, used them in all the places in this car before, door, door handle, sail, pillar etc and it worked great especially in pillars.
And since I want to test again without horns while still keeping some kind of pattern control.
If I cross between 2-3k it should be helpful, reducing glass reflections a bit, increase gain/lower distortion, while giving a good dispersion higher up with I hope more constant directivity.
So far it worked well but I didn’t measure these driver without the waveguide yet. It is only 1” larger than their faceplate so it’s not a dramatic change.




captainobvious said:


> Oh, I also have a pair of the BG Neo8S and the BG Neo3 which are planars so if you want to play around with those, you're welcome to. Just shoot me a PM.


Tried the 8&10 recently, but couldn’t figure a good spot in my case.
Pillars a little too angled for their limited vertical dispersion.
But didn’t try the neo3 so yes I’m interested thx!


----------



## captainobvious

What about trying the neo8S mounted horizontally? If this is for one seat, it may yield some benefits. You will have good response regardless of your seat height/head position vertically and horizontally you will have greatly rolled off response off axis, limiting reflected material off of the side glass. The driver being 8" in length means you have enough wiggle room (with it mounted horizontally) in the horizontal plane that it won't be a crazy small sweet spot. It's worth at least trying.

PM sent.


----------



## Elgrosso

I tried! With these exact goals in mind.
Thought I posted some pics but can’t find them.
So basically I tested the 8 & 10 in pillar, high mid or low heigth, then in corner aimed or not, and on the dash more in front like you described, aimed or not again, + in kicks, flat or aimed.
The 10 was really too big but sounded ok, the 8 I couldn’t find a good angle and I always preferred the hivi, they sounded more airy. But they’re also smaller so easier to place.
But the 10s were impressive, so thin, it’s a really cool concept of driver.
For the next car I’ll seriously think about them, could be used for semi-midbass in tight space in kicks with a pair maybe. The 8 could do well up in doors too. They could redefine the way we think about the layout.
Expensive but with really high space constrain it’s a great option, especially in array with many channels. (still have something here for later)

But it’s always hard to judge a driver so quickly. I used only xo and levels but no eq and no enclosure, just a piece of felt and tape behind. Some time in front for the dispersion but it was not that effective.
I could have missed a driver that sounded bad like that, but would have sounded really well with more adjustments. While I kept the ones that sounded good at first, without knowing if they will really shine later. Just gut feelings.


----------



## Elgrosso

The crossblock is really cool, I’m still playing with it but I can get what I wanted.
Ex:
Woofer LP (8ohms)
The range goes from 2.5k to 10k here, so maybe from 1.25k to 5k with regular 4ohms. I played with the Q but the lowest is what I need.









And horns HP (8 again)
Variable HP with lowest tweeter attenuation setting.
Here the sensitivity compensate the higher XO point from the 8 ohms driver, so it’s totally usable.









And TA is great, just based on the mids.
I’ll do some dirac tomorrow if I can but it sounds good already.
It looks like the passive smoothed out a bit the mids, I had some serious ripples before but now they’re less prominent.


----------



## Hanatsu

You almost as damaged as me now, sitting in the car measuring, measuring... 

Good job, those large tweets fits around that 'large' dash somehow. Go for it, heh.


----------



## Elgrosso

Hey Han’, good to read you.
I still have to try something else that I just received but yeah I think I’ll go with the big tweets.


----------



## oabeieo

I love the avatar , very classy 

Sorry been busy still installing remote starters all dam day 
Almost over , come feb we’ll be dead as nails , 
So hopefully I’ll have more time (as long as war day doesn’t come first) 
The EMP should be here in just a few weeks I hope all the costal areas are okay


Anyway , I need to get up to speed , I’ll be reading


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> I love the avatar , very classy
> 
> Sorry been busy still installing remote starters all dam day
> Almost over , come feb we’ll be dead as nails ,
> So hopefully I’ll have more time (as long as war day doesn’t come first)
> The EMP should be here in just a few weeks I hope all the costal areas are okay
> 
> 
> Anyway , I need to get up to speed , I’ll be reading


Hey, so you changed job already, closer to family?
Yep avatar is perfect, french horn 


Some news here, the tweeter stuff on dash will not happen before long, and since I’m happy with my amps now I started to fine-tune.
Changed a bit my method, spent more time on the dsp first.

I used the one laid out by Waveflex, you can find the MOOCs here: Waveflex Caraudio
I recommend this readings to anyone even non noob as it's very clear and well made. The perfect guide for REW in a car.

It's very similar to what we know like from Han' or many here, but just more optimized around biquads for the crossovers.
I've never tried this before as I thought the crossover section used only the equivalent of 2 PEQS, but in fact it's up to 8 depending of the minidsp!
So in my case on my passive mids/horns I'm using the 5 inputs + 8 per crossover and 5 outputs, so 18 PEQS!
More than enough to fix everything. And 13 only for the midbass (inputs already used). Of course I had to carefully dispatch the input biquads so they applied only to the drivers intended. For XO and output biquads it’s like you want it doesn’t change anything as they all sum at the end.

Still have some phase issues on right mids and something on left midbass that I'll try to fix later with some AP filter once I read more.
No EQ on subs for now, will do later.
I will also go back to the passive block to optimize a bit more, looks like something is going on at 3khz. Had to inverse one or two drivers on it and lost track.

But it sounds really good, I did a quick dirac after but prefer dirac off 
Honestly I'm surprised it sounds that good.


Post EQ measured at one point only, no AVG yet, so not so representative for highs



























temp rack that will probably stay like this for long


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> I love the avatar , very classy
> 
> Sorry been busy still installing remote starters all dam day
> Almost over , come feb we’ll be dead as nails ,
> So hopefully I’ll have more time (as long as war day doesn’t come first)
> The EMP should be here in just a few weeks I hope all the costal areas are okay
> 
> 
> Anyway , I need to get up to speed , I’ll be reading


Man, where are you?  
I need some help on rephase... can’t figure out how it works. It seems it asks for thousands of paragraphic phase stuff to get where I want.
Now I have my 5th settings using Waveflex method, and I still have some phases issues between sides in 2/3 places.
Dirac can fix them partially, makes it sharper/cleaner, but it also kills a bit of my ambiance. Too much, I still prefer it off, so would like some manual control now.


----------



## oabeieo

Sorry 

Pm me I’ll give you my phone and just txt me silly 

Yeah I have been very busy , got shop move done , 
Just been busy with installing remote starts. Still thousands of $ In uninstalled Christmas gifts to get through. As soon as feb comes we sllllloooowwww way down 

Yeah Dirac is good but I honestly think post Dirac is where’s it’s at


----------



## Elgrosso

Don’t be sorry man nothing urgent! Ok > PM


----------



## oabeieo

I did it , got TIDAL HIFI 

no more Spotify , good riddance , 
So much better sq music has depth again. 

However plain old PCM off of a CD still sounds better than streamed FLAC. They say your not supposed to be able to tell but you can pretty easily. 
Cool thing is if military or student it’s only 10mo instead of 20, the 24.99 mo is no loner as of the 1st , Pretty cool 


I got my 10s in the back playing to 3k now.....loving it quite a bit. 

Probably not as nice as yours but I have a rediscovered love for rear fill. 
You have rears?


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah I wonder sometime if I’d have different results with a Good HU. Now everything is wave or lossless in the phone directly, no streaming as I have a tiny 1go contract only.
I don’t think it would make a big difference in digital anyway, but maybe.

No rearfill now, have the two spots with boxes in sides but they’re empty. Still have 2 channels on dsp so I could. And I have some ms8 for later tests. But I’m happy and already busy with what I have right now 

Got a mini flood last week, after 2 days of heavy rain. And my car being kind of old and always in sun, door and top seals are half baked, I got 1 gallon of water behind my seat. Only found out in the next morning when the wipers didn’t want to clean the inside glass 
The water stayed behind because of all the deadening and foam I had there.
Well had to strip everything, seats, carpet, deadening, midbass etc to let it dry.
I hope there’s no other spot because they’re some places where I can’t really check now due to the extansive use of expansive foam (silly me). Seems ok no more condensation, I’ll remount everything today.

In the mean time I swapped my sharc chip for the non dirac one, so ready to try again rephase!
But before I wanted a cleaner starting point so yesterday I re-tested some different combos on the crossblock between mids and horns, lowered a bit the xo point to about 2.5khz. Found out only the left horn needed to be inverted for better compromise.
I would sure benefit from full active here but don’t really want to add another amp the trunk is full.
Got a spare msk1500 but don’t know how to fit it!

Btw did you check the pdfs from waveflex? I’d be curious to get your feedback around his method of peqs use. The crossover blocks biquads are super powerful, and the rew simulations work really well, usually only a few peqs needs to be confirmed/removed by ear. The midbasses look and sound marvelous, for the highs it’s a bit harder it’s more by listening.
Next step is to optimize sum and phase in few spots on the mids before rephase.
20-300hz is full “flat” and they sum perfectly, I should not need any taps down low so one sharc should give me great result!


----------



## Elgrosso

captainobvious said:


> For example....
> 
> https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...ring-dome-tweeter-with-neodymium-motor-black/
> 
> The Satori TW29RN has excellent, smooth response, a 700hz FS and is very sensitive at 96db.


Well finally Steve I followed your advice, just ordered it 
I overlooked its size, and it looks really good everywhere.
+ sb21, 26 and 29.
I’m curious about the sb21 off axis response, even with its lower sensitivity.
I loved my hiquphon long time ago so maybe it has some similarities.
And the other ones it’s more to compare and/or for potential mounting issues.

The big audax is a bit too much, too heavy for here I think.
And no real need since I decided to cross high.
But I’ll still try the gold one before, TW025A28, just because it’s smaller and has a rising response.
I hope to try the volt in doors this week end, if my midbass play well up to 4/500hz it could be great. Fix off axis from midrange for crossing even higher!
But I fear to miss the snap of the pr17, shall see!


----------



## Elgrosso

So, I tried the volt VM527 this week end, the flying saucer:










Got a pair some time ago for a veeeery good price but never took the time to properly test them.
Since my car was still half naked with carpets and some panels out it was the good time.

I first tried quickly just roughly placed with a towel in front of the actual door drivers.
Didn't sound great, got some strange distortion, maybe it was just some vibrations from the door.
So had to do something better but still quick and dirty to mount them in place of the audax.
Just cut a fat and large ring to support the irregular mount of this driver (that should really be reverse mounted)
It's like mounting a 4" driver in a hole made for 8*» as the door skin would accept 8 but not the door panel. :/
It was not a too bad fit for something temporary, placed high a bit and the mini horn fits right near the edge of the panel, + here with the foam added at the end to clean up the space and make it smoother:


















At first it sounded harsh, it was even hearable during sweeps with crossover applied. Like they didn't want 500Hz.
Took me some time to get something listenable, I don't know if I got used to them or if they just needed a break in, or maybe I just had something wrong in my settings.
But only after few hours it started to sound better, almost like if they needed higher volume to perform, or like if my amp power was not linear.
Maybe their impedance is causing this, since it's playing at their peak at 500hz.
Last time I checked with the audax all amps were perfectly linear (was curious to see the classe A bias effect on power).
And the distortion plots on Rew were not really useful, as I battled between noise floor and super low sweeps full range to determine the right XO.

Then I reinstalled quickly the Audax for fair comparison, not an A/B but the best I could do.
Sure the Audax win in output, like 5/6db easy, and go lower near 300Hz, but they also need quite a lot of EQ, when just 1 peq was good enough on the dome (enough not great). 
So I listened to similar tune, 500-5k for all 4 drivers, too much for off axis response on the audax for sure.
I was afraid to lose the characteristic of the pr17, the super fast snap they can give on some tracks, transients I guess, on cords pinch etc, the big strike they can give.
On the dynamic I think it's ok, it might be a tad little less but it's also a bit more refined, or soft, hard to say yet.
At the end I'll lose 6db on max volume but it should be ok, I listen lower and lower than before anyway.

But the domes were pretty good, nothing seemed to be lost in comparison really (except the lower FR), but some gains, image felt more stable.
And something surprising, they also disappeared more easily, all good for psychoacoustic.
I need more time to confirm but it's quite good, and don't know what could cause that:
- better dispersion from 2Khz? (pretty homogeneous on/off axis from 500-5K)
- lower distortion? never had an issue with the Audax here

Well you guess if I decided to clean up the install and keep them mounted for a while, they're good enough to give them a longer try.
So now they play 500 & up cleanly, no low pass on top, the natural response is almost exactly what I need, 5K/24db, but I might come back on this once I'll have other tweeters.
Same for the high pass, I’ll see how they react to very loud, so will keep them like that for few days for more subjective listening.

Removed the minihorns to let the midbass play up to 500Hz too (they were right in front), and then had to placed two small tweeters in the dash for the week only until I receive some new ones.
Some Wavecor TW030WA13, they should be good drivers but apparently they don't react well with the crossblock.
I'm near the max high pass setting for reasonable output but they would still need higher. I think it's 12db, so even at 5K it’s not the slope I need and I get some sibilance and not enough level.
Might have to go back to active here.

Also the over the dash stuff is quite different than my usual now, it will need a rework on the target etc, but it's ok it's just for few days.
If I like them I think they would call for tweeters in kicks or maybe just above in door if it fits.
But cool driver! I’m looking at the 3" version as it should play a little lower, the new one apparently has a better response, smoother like the 2".
But it’s damn expensive, and is much bigger.


----------



## Elgrosso

Quick update, I'm still on my double path between horns and domes.
But I’m definitely convinced about an under dash setup, kicks or horns.
I'm very pleased with the the actual setup, all 3 drivers between doors and kicks.
If the rainbow effect was present at the beginning of each tune now I'm getting better and better.
I didn't expect this kind of results but after spending some more time than usual, it sounds great.
To the point that I can't say by myself if it still rainbows or not, I shouldn't be the judge of this but I had hard time this week to detect some.
Also I listened to more and more acoustic music so full of harmonics.

Anyway, got some new goodies:

CD for later, this Faital hf102 is super small, not obvious on the pic but half the volume of the 108r.
I wanted to try it for its smooth high response and its very specific phase plug.
Just to see if it would work well with the minis, as I crossed them high anyway when they were installed.
And on top of that maybe due to the size I'll be able to gain 1" of width, pushing the horn a little more.




















Then some domes that I'm into these days, after testing the VM527 next would be the L3pro, Dyn md140, Audax HD37 with a custom chamber (not on the pic).











Tried the Volt for 2/3 weeks, they sounded really clean and it was easy to cross very high as they don't beam before 5K (there's still some loss off axis but it's homogenous), so they shine as midranges and it made an easy tune.
Removing their semi-waveguide helped even more the off axis response up to 6Khz, but since they also need to be crossed near 500Hz I moved on.
It's too high in my case, my midbass don't sound nice enough up there.
And I also missed the snap of the Audax. it’s hard to be definitive but I was missing something, this is not about distortion as in both cases cones or domes it's very low, but they lacked of "fun". This for the same target.
They have a regular sensitivity around 90/91db so maybe it's related, compared to the PR17, or it's the wave shape, or just their sonic signature, or just my tune or my ears I have no idea.



That's why last week end I reinstalled my td6, the midrange version (H or M I always mixed them up since one label is wrong on one driver).
And here clearly I can go lower, 250hz for now, will try even lower as their FS is around 100Hz.
I wasn't sure to gain anything over the Audax, and I would need to confirm my impressions by reinstalling the PR17 once.
But I think they are a little more detailed, a tiny bit but some tracks revealed new things.
But there's a drawback, a clear dip near 7/800Hz, like 5db. It's already a mess around here on both sides but it's worst with them.
So finally I have to use a lot of EQ and I'm still studying if it's too much or not.
Also they are very big and heavy, I'm not sure my spacers will accept this for long, they broke an HDPE one already. The motor is almost larger than the cone! 


For the other domes I don't have big expectations, but I want to close this part of the story by trying everything I can.
The L3 pro is much smaller so maybe I could try it higher somewhere in doors, and it could counter balance their more limited bandwidth.
For the Dyn I'm just curious to see what a 3" dome can sound like.
If I like it, I might try the VM752… but here I would need serious work on the doors, the motor on the 3" is 20cm large for 9 Kgs!


One of the other option is to test another HE 6", the Ciare NDK 6-1.5.
It's a driver few talked about but I never found full reviews, super compact and muuuuch lighter. 
The small size/depth could help to aim a bit with some angled spacers.



































Oh and I also found one Audax with plug, I lost the reference right now, something like pr17HR60 maybe, they're interesting.
I can't check the T/S as the foam is rotten, will have to change that.
I got only one so it's not very useful for now, but I keep searching, I'm sure I'll find an old shop in France that still stocks some.
They might allow to cross even higher than before with the plug.
For example now I have the td6 at 3.8Khz/12dbLR, with the tweeter right beside.
Tried many from 2 to 3.8 but here really they sound great. No lowpass just EQ and no visible break up, super smooth falling on measurements.
And if there's one hearable, then I am just liking it.




















Found 3 pairs of PHL too (1660/1180 and 1070), I quickly tried the 1070 but they're 16 ohms and here it's really a stretch.
I might use them at home for a cc.
Others are 8 ohms so will be ok. But they are more midbass/midranges than full midranges, the 1120 is just impossible to find.
They have some new stuff very interesting, but I still didn't find any way to import them.

All of them, td6, NDK, Audax and PHL clearly have something in common. For the last two it's no surprise. And the first two I think have been designed as pr17 killer.
I got some other cool stuff too like jbl cmcd, or array of 2s in pillars but this would be for later, much later.
I need to focus, at least try, but this disease is strong


----------



## Niebur3

Don't know how I missed this build log....cool stuff.


----------



## Elgrosso

Thanks Niebur3,
Well it’s also full of crap at the beginning.
Probably still now, but I’ll only be sure next year


----------



## thehatedguy

I still have to get those horns out to you to try too.

The TD6M was designed with the the PHL 1120 in mind...which the PHL 1120 is a beefier version of the Audax and were both designed by the same person.


----------



## Elgrosso

thehatedguy said:


> I still have to get those horns out to you to try too.
> 
> The TD6M was designed with the the PHL 1120 in mind...which the PHL 1120 is a beefier version of the Audax and were both designed by the same person.


Oh yes the veritasss! 

Yep Philippe Lesage, this 1120 must be really great if it combines the higher sensitivity and extended response of the audax with the low end response of the td6.


----------



## Elgrosso

Got a pair of MW13 few weeks ago and they’re still waiting to go in doors.
They will wait a bit more ‘cause I broke my hand but in the mean time I received these little boxes from Eminence:

https://www.parts-express.com/eminence-iso-5-5-midrange-midbass-isolation-enclosure--290-5506

And the little satori fits perfectly!
Bolt pattern isn’t the same but it will work.
Really curious to try them, angled or not I’ll see.


----------



## thehatedguy

You have a package coming sir.


----------



## Elgrosso

Very cool thank you Jason.

If you want some of my stuff I’ll make you a list


----------



## thehatedguy

Just play around with them when you get a chance. No hurry to get them back if you don't like them or want them.


----------



## GreatLaBroski

That little eminence enclosure is so cool. I love this log.


----------



## Elgrosso

GreatLaBroski said:


> That little eminence enclosure is so cool. I love this log.


Thx! Yes it is well made, didn’t test yet but will report.
Really good for trying different spots on the fly.
They should build 3/4/6.5 or even 8” versions!


----------



## GreatLaBroski

Elgrosso said:


> [They should build 3/4/6.5 or even 8” versions!


Agreed! That’s one of the main reasons I’m planning on buying a 3D printer.


----------



## thehatedguy

The box get there ok?


----------



## Elgrosso

GreatLaBroski said:


> Agreed! That’s one of the main reasons I’m planning on buying a 3D printer.


Oh cool, and you're in LA, we should meet someday!




thehatedguy said:


> The box get there ok?


Just picked them up!
For some reasons they didn’t want to drop them off, package is pretty beaten up but inside box was intact, they're safe.
It might take few weeks before I try, but thx again


----------



## GreatLaBroski

Elgrosso said:


> Oh cool, and you're in LA, we should meet someday!


Totally! I’d be up for getting together when I finally get a chance to do my build in a few months.


----------



## Elgrosso

GreatLaBroski said:


> Totally! I’d be up for getting together when I finally get a chance to do my build in a few months.


Let me know, I’m in the valley




Hand is healing fast so I was able to check my boxes.
Then ordered few guys for different scenarios.
It seems the WO24P would fit without too much mods. I could easily test it on the right side with minimal change to see if it’s the right direction at least. If it doesn’t change much I’ll drop all the following.

Then one SB29SWNRX, the sub version. A little deeper than the 9.5” again, so hard to fit with the brake pedal, but I’m ready to cut it a bit if needed.
It has a much wider flange but I have no real limit in this area, sure it will require much more work on the box, maybe even new ones, but simulations are so nice in comparison.
If it works I could also try the woofer version, no gain in small boxes, but higher sensitivity, and maybe a different sound.
I thought about their shallow sub but first I’m not sure it will sound better, and then the protruding cone will probably not fit with the pedal.

If both don’t fit, I want to try dual 6” again, 2xMW16.
I didn’t have so great results before with 4x660gti, it certainly sounded “full” but not that clear, but they didn’t have enough volume.
And since I putted back the crossblock for mids/tweets I now have two free channels so maybe I could optimize.
Either both verticaly deep in the footwell, wide as possible, or in a 2.5 way fashion if I can place even wider. With these I would be able to find more volume, with an sd comparable to the 9.5”. But distorsion wise I’m not sure.

Wide enough would be really cool as it is a limitation right now in my setup.
I really like the big domes but they need more than a 500hz HP, more 800 for the 2”, the 3” I didn’t try yet. So I imagine 2x6” placed right would allow high enough to cross to the domes.

The 25/26w will be for next car, I don’t want to cut the side “rails” as they’re already internally reinforced for the soft roof.
There is another solution, I have a good spot to vent right into the wings, if I can relocate some stuff. But to be sure I would need to remove them, maybe I’ll study this on next big check up with my mech. If he let me try 

SB Acoustics :: 9½" Satori WO24P-8
10'' SB29SWNRX-S75-6 :: SB Acoustics
10" SB29NRX75-6 :: SB Acoustics
6½" SATORI MW16P-8 :: SB Acoustics


----------



## GreatLaBroski

Elgrosso said:


> Let me know, I’m in the valley


I'm in SGV, so not too far at all.

My models suggested that the MW16P-8's love larger boxes, which is why they are pretty well suited for a well-sealed door application. They'll get fussy in a little kick. The MW19P-8's however, those love little sealed boxes.


----------



## Elgrosso

The mw19 was nice yes, but can’t fit two. And one 24 only would be better.
I hope I can get 1 full cuft for the 6s, without the big ass 10” I can find space everywhere.
But I’ll check my sims again.

There’s also the ported solution... it never ends!


----------



## Elgrosso

Hello guys, 
Some news in my kicks.
I received 2xsatori24 and adapted my boxes quickly for testing, just a smaller ring on top.
It's tight, the left one is offset and still It can go in place only if I first remove the rubber on my brake pedal (few mm) 
I filled them quite a lot and reduced a bit the peak of resonance, but can't do as much as with the beyma as they have a pole vent.

First full sweeps were ugly, uglier than with the beyma
I almost thought I did a mistake, more distortion, no improvement in detail/clarity.
I could let the beyma full range and it was ok, not SQ of course but good.
Once tuned, the sato are ok, but I can't say better than the beyma.
But the boxes are clearly too small for them, they might be smaller than I thought too.
While the beyma were more forgiving here.

See the bigger bump near 100Hz compared to the beyma, that matches my simulations.
And notice the big difference in low midrange, really strange as they’re in the same spot. Or maybe I stuffed them too much?









I'm waiting for the 2xSB29SWNRX that would need less volume while still allowing a lower FS.
While waiting I can still work on the boxes, to find volume or vent outside.
Because the sb29 might not fit at all.

So I need your advices guys, I'm not fan of cutting structural panels, especially since it's a convertible.
But I also want to push it a bit, here's what I came up with:



Some context (pics mixed from internet + old or recent of my car):

The floor, with the foot support panel on the firewall (angle piece).
This one is not exactly like mine, and I partially removed it panel to gain some volume and "lock" the boxes.









Behind the wing, lot of space below the A post 









Again not mine here , but to show a box option in front of the firewall









And since it's a convertible, it has an added tube all along inside the sills











So, I ended up with 5 choices:









A upper side panel
+ flimsy panel, 1 layer for sure, I would cut it in a heartbeat
+ easy relocation of the stuff outside in the wing
+ no relocation of connectors
- too high to connect to the existing enclosures, might even need a tube to reach there avoiding some dash stuff.
Think some sort of ported box with an external tube going outside.

B mid side panel
+ not flimsy, 2 layers, but I'm guessing not really structural
- need relocation of all the connectors
- need relocation of the EVAP stuff in the left wing, and a container in the right wing (don't know what is is yet)

C side rail/sill
+ easiest to connect to the enclosure
- most structural, inside is the reinforcement tube, I can touch it with my finger in an existing small hole
- unknown volume, but not free air

D upper firewall
+ easy to cut
+ not much structural
- not very big hole, and not best spot to connect to the box
(would be great for a horn, but not deep enough)
- too hot? it's not in the engine bay but very close, exhaust is 1ft away under the floor.
- fumes? security?

E lower firewall
+ bigger hole and easy on the box
+ not much structural
- harder to cut
- too hot?
- fumes? security?

I'm leaning toward A or B, but if D&E look ok to you I could try as it would be easier.
A if someone says a tube would have a manageable impact on impedance.
C would be the fastest as it doesn't imply any other work, but it's my last choice.


External right wing here









left arch, with a shot of the box behind the firewall, created by the reinforcement / sill closing panel









left wing









Inside right side, typical connector set, and upper empty space









Thx!


----------



## nadams5755

It’s not uncommon to have a huge peak in 100-200hz with kickpanels. Small box, corner loading.

15+dB is a lot to cut but your 400-800hz valley will probably come up once you cut the midbass peak.

It looks like they want to be in a bigger enclosure though. 

At least left channel response is pretty close to the right.


----------



## Elgrosso

I’m not surprised about the global bump but more about the sound itself. Without eq they sound way worst than the beymas, especially down low.
But once filtered they’re correct again so I hope the proper box would allow them to do better than the beymas.
Or all this is done for nothing 
But yeah L/R id pretty good, happy with that.
For the 400-800hz I can’t see how it could come back (other than cutting -30db around ), but it’s ok they won’t see more than 300hz, most likely cut near 200/250hz.
Also my under dash was half out during the sweeps, maybe it can change the response, I’ll test again.

You got any thoughts on where to cut?
I think I will have to remove one wing to check further...


----------



## nadams5755

center of your left channel peak is like 140-150hz? start there with a wider q than the usual default 4.3. then tackle the other peak just below 100hz.

taking it all the way down to 75db would be a challenge and probably sound weird. maybe down to 80-85db instead and see how it sounds.


----------



## Elgrosso

Ha, I meant where to cut the metal


----------



## nadams5755

where's the floorpan vent option?


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah sure it’s the least structural, but then all the projections to manage... so variovents + cloth etc, and maybe backwave into the floor?
While in A/B it could be completely free air and safe for the driver, it's very clean behind there


----------



## nadams5755

why can't you vent the floor into completely free air? 

i've seen people put metal vent covers underneath where the opening is facing the rear of the car.


----------



## Elgrosso

Ok I see what you mean I’ve seen some, yeah I can check that too.
But honestly I feel like the water would still be an issue, it doesn’t rain often here of course but when it does the streets are filled, it’s common to have to pass over mini floods everywhere.


----------



## Elgrosso

Ok... I was about to post a thread in the HLCD section to get more response, but I couldn't wait, so F*** it and go cut:



















4" round for now, then anti rust and CLD around.
But I doubt they will see any water it was super clean there.
I expect it to be large enough, but if needed I could come back later and cut more like 6x4".
I expected a nightmare to remove the wing but it went fast, CA weather is so good to cars, 18yrs old and no rust around 

I’ll try to make the left one tomorrow so I could drive again.
But it might be longer as I have some BS evap stuff there.
Then I’ll have to find an easy way to fit all the connectors, and re-do part of the box to join this area.
I’m waiting for some scans vario-vents, but I’ll try empty first, with just a flared tube of fiberglass coming out of the box up to the hole.
The tricky part will be to optimize the box volume and air flow while keeping it easy to insert and remove!

This car can be a PITA sometime like for subs, but here I believe I'm lucky to have this huge panel. I mean a shop or someone crazy good could fit a 12" here!


----------



## LumbermanSVO

Awesome!


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah I hope!
If I can gently but cleanly touch the low second octave I could go subless


----------



## Elgrosso

Left side done!
A little harder to remove the wing as there’s more stuff everywhere behind this side, but I’m happy to close this in a week end.
For now I just have some cld around the hole to keep its size near maximum, then some in the inner wing as well.
Linner, wheels etc back, I’ll drive like that to see if I get some engine or fuel fumes. To get an idea of what the driver will see.
Had to bypass the drains from the cowl as they were firing right in this area.
I didn’t see any debris or even traces of water but I won’t take the chance.
Will just have to check more often if the water doesn’t get stuck on top.

Next, cut the boxes.
Or, I wonder if I should just create a baffle to close the corners.
This would save some depth for future drivers, and might be easier/faster than fierglass (but not sure).
Also I’m not quite sure of what to use to attach it, just clay and cld maybe.

But using the metal sheets as panels might create some resonances, even if it’s quite rigid it’s still connected to the floor, dash etc.
My actual boxes have 1/2” at least of foam all around to isolate.
And I ordered some sorbothane to create better pads in case I keep the boxes.


----------



## Elgrosso

Have been waiting for the SB29SWNRX quite some time since backorder on Madisound.
But finally went with a pair of 25W as I don't really care about the volume requirement anymore.
These things are even smaller than the beymas!
So now I can build something with a little more clearance without the need to gain volume everywhere, should be easier.
Last week end I cleaned up a little all wirings in kicks, finished CLDing/ensoliting everywhere.
Next step would be fiberglass as I can't reuse my old boxes, they don't fit well anymore.
Hope next week end will be around 85F for an easy glassin'


----------



## Hanatsu

Up front bass huh? 

Looking forward to the end result.


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep 
Wel it's more for the quality of the midbass than really all upfront as it was quite already the case. But I hope it will sound better cause for all these efforts. And one month without music so far.
Maybe I’m getting burned or lazy, but last WE I started to glass and what a pain it was deep in the footwell, much worst than last time.
The left one especially with the wiring that leaves less room to play with.

Results:









Right side would be easy but the left one is a little more tricky, cause I want to optimize the surface area of the hole, optimize breathing path, and ease of mount.

Still don't know what technique I will use to close them, probably captain obvious' one with tape and heavy filler from outside.
And what technique I will use to make a perfect junction with the holes.
Was checking home depot for all pipe adapters, screw on from inside out etc, might be a solution to get a tight seal. But I would need to remove the wings again.

I also changed my sub as a side thing as it’s easier.
Went with a passive radiator, always wanted to test that in big.
So Dayton HO15 + the PR, in the same box adapted.
On sims it looks much nicer and useful, like +6db from 20 to 30Hz and -3 above 45hz, where I cut anyway.
And still well below max excursion for my needs.
I hope it sounds good


----------



## captainobvious

Looks good. Nice choice on the 25W. I really like mine. Hope they work out good in that vehicle for you.

Now that you have the molds done, reinforce those guys. Try to get 1/4" thick at an absolute minimum (thicker is even better/stronger) and use some fiberglass strand reinforced resin to do it as it's very easy to simply coat it in there.

As for attaching, securing and sealing to the metal...Use butyl rope. Get the stuff from Don at sounddeadenershowdown.com It's crazy good stuff. After you have the shaping and finishing/wrapping done on the kicks and they are ready to install, press a nice bead of it on the backside of the enclosures around all edges and around the hole cutout, heat it up with your heat gun a bit and then press them into place firmly. Line the insides with some CLD and lightly stuff with acoustic foam or recycled denim.


----------



## Jscoyne2

I built 10s so lmk if u have any questiond bout mounting or such 

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

Jscoyne2 said:


> I built 10s so lmk if u have any questiond bout mounting or such
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


Thx Jscoyne2, well I already had 10s there in small sealed, the beymas 10mwnd.
I was plenty satisfied but always thought something was still missing.
The lowest octave could be more detailed and cleaner.
So had to try a different kind of driver with lower FS, thus the need for a lot of volume and semi-IB mounting.





captainobvious said:


> Looks good. Nice choice on the 25W. I really like mine. Hope they work out good in that vehicle for you.
> 
> Now that you have the molds done, reinforce those guys. Try to get 1/4" thick at an absolute minimum (thicker is even better/stronger) and use some fiberglass strand reinforced resin to do it as it's very easy to simply coat it in there.
> 
> As for attaching, securing and sealing to the metal...Use butyl rope. Get the stuff from Don at sounddeadenershowdown.com It's crazy good stuff. After you have the shaping and finishing/wrapping done on the kicks and they are ready to install, press a nice bead of it on the backside of the enclosures around all edges and around the hole cutout, heat it up with your heat gun a bit and then press them into place firmly. Line the insides with some CLD and lightly stuff with acoustic foam or recycled denim.


Reinforcing sure I will!
This time I've made them thinner for easier removal (didn't help that much ).
But I want to try your technique for better control of the thickness/volume.
Last time I ended up with 1/2" or more in some areas.
Boxes were sturdy but I lost a lot of internal volume it goes fast.
And the internal surface was very rough and I’m sure I had some air bubbles.

Now I don't need that much to gain internal volume but I still want to optimize we never know what driver I could mount there later.
And with the wiring relocation I have less constrains on the external volume.
Except to be able to fit them and remove them...

Thx for the reminder on the butyl rope, just ordered some more.
I will try this first to seal the hole area.
To secure the boxes in place I’m not worried as I shaped them to lock themselves in some existing cavities by force.

For the acousta-stuff, you think I should still use some even venting outside like that?
I was concerned it could hurt the flow, the hole is not so big I was thinking.
Well it's easy to test.


----------



## Jscoyne2

Ever try the sls?

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## captainobvious

Elgrosso said:


> Reinforcing sure I will!
> This time I've made them thinner for easier removal (didn't help that much ).
> But I want to try your technique for better control of the thickness/volume.
> Last time I ended up with 1/2" or more in some areas.
> Boxes were sturdy but I lost a lot of internal volume it goes fast.
> And the internal surface was very rough and I’m sure I had some air bubbles.
> 
> Now I don't need that much to gain internal volume but I still want to optimize we never know what driver I could mount there later.
> And with the wiring relocation I have less constrains on the external volume.
> Except to be able to fit them and remove them...
> 
> Thx for the reminder on the butyl rope, just ordered some more.
> I will try this first to seal the hole area.
> To secure the boxes in place I’m not worried as I shaped them to lock themselves in some existing cavities by force.
> 
> For the acousta-stuff, you think I should still use some even venting outside like that?
> I was concerned it could hurt the flow, the hole is not so big I was thinking.
> Well it's easy to test.



Better to have thicker, stronger walls- especially since volume of these is not much of a factor now that you are venting them out. 1/2 thick makes them very solid and dead- a good thing. Yes, still use acoustastuff or other absorbing material as it's about absorbing some of that rear wave so it doesn't reflect back through the cone. It should not impede the air flow assuming you don't pack it in very compressed. Just loosely stuff it. I know you said the molds are built to fit tight. I'd still recommend using the bead of butyl rope on the backside for decoupling purposes. Less energy transfer to your feet which will drag down perceived stage height.


----------



## Elgrosso

Jscoyne2 said:


> Ever try the sls?


Nope, a little too deep maybe




captainobvious said:


> Better to have thicker, stronger walls- especially since volume of these is not much of a factor now that you are venting them out. 1/2 thick makes them very solid and dead- a good thing. Yes, still use acoustastuff or other absorbing material as it's about absorbing some of that rear wave so it doesn't reflect back through the cone. It should not impede the air flow assuming you don't pack it in very compressed. Just loosely stuff it. I know you said the molds are built to fit tight. I'd still recommend using the bead of butyl rope on the backside for decoupling purposes. Less energy transfer to your feet which will drag down perceived stage height.


Ok I will follow the advice, I can use some butyl for front and side panels.
I have few layers of ensolite to decouple there so I might have to choose.
For the bottom panel I used a 1/2" sorbothane pad to test, being the one touching the flexible floor (+few layers of thick CLD on the entire floor).
For the rest I think I will remove the mdf rings and apply more layers first, + some cloth outside I still have 1 or 2mm to play with.
And then filler mix with chopped strands and I think I still have some aerosil.
Thx!


----------



## Jscoyne2

I havent been paying attention. Are these supposed to mate to horns?

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

Nope, or maybe later again. (still have to test yours Jason, hope you can wait)
For now it’s with TD6M and TW29RN.
But I have plans to retry big domes as midranges, and a bunch of other things


----------



## Jscoyne2

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*

I have an sls 8 sitting around if you just want to try it and if u like it. U can have it


Elgrosso said:


> Nope, or maybe later again. (still have to test yours Jason, hope you can wait)
> For now it’s with TD6M and TW29RN.
> But I have plans to retry big domes as midranges, and a bunch of other things


Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

Cool 
With these 10s I should be covered, and I would go smaller midrange if I can.
But just in case later maybe, thx!


----------



## thehatedguy

No worries.

I have a whole lot of Peerless/Vifa drivers that I am selling...what smaller size are you looking at? I know there are a few Exclusive 4s, Jordan Eikonta 2s, and JBL pro mids- 2166, 2168, and 2169s (I can't tell you what size they are off of the top of my head).


----------



## Elgrosso

Cool then,
For the drivers well I already have more than needed, 5/6 dome midranges, few 5/6/7’’ cones HE or regular and few tweeters (+waiting for a nice new pair of alloy/Mg tweeter).
I’d like to put the domes in kicks if they can be placed wide enough, but that’s the next steps. It’s hard to let go the Audax / TD6, it will all depend of the XO I can get between woof & mid.
And still have in mind small coax/CD like Bms/faital/B&c etc but that will be much later if needed.

Didn't know these two brands: Jordan and what’s the other one, OmnesAudio?
Btw is it a relative, wilmslow-audio in uk?


----------



## Elgrosso

Finally finished these boxes! Well kind of but enough to test them today.
I used your technique Steve, it worked very well.
But instead of tape like you did here:










I just used what I had around so some old CLD.
It's great as it's rigid enough to form a shape and stick itself of course but also to the mat.
So it was super easy to place the first layer of mat.
Then I filled first with a mix of filler/resin/mdf dust and chopped strands.
Easy to build thickness quickly.


















And I closed again with mat and clothe, and ended with filler and resin.
Inside too I added a few, didn't take a pic of all steps, but had to add another mdf ring to build enough thickness and keep driver clearance
So at the end I have about 1" everywhere, more in the flat areas.
I would have stopped before as they felt really sturdy but since I still had some resin I wanted to use everything.

Then I couldn't wait to test so I putted a little butyl near the hole to seal as possible.










And pressed the boxes in place.
Had to mount the drivers after so kind of a pita but it worked.










I'll test like that but I will probably remove the wing another time to check the sealing from outside.
Possibly with some sort of clamps to add pressure.

For now it's like that:


















Yeah ugly but I still have a lot to do.

And then first tests!
I screwed up with the speaker/box connection so I drilled in place some more here.
And then light music playing, full range… not bad
And first sweeps. 
Really different than the beymas sealed.
I didn't check if I could still place some horns but the response allows high enough XO.










I don't remember what kind of power I had for the beymas sweeps here I just remember my dsp setting (-30db), but you can still see the difference.
Crazy how cabin gain works below 80Hz
While I guess the slightly new placement change a bit the response around 100Hz.
Also the under-dashboard is still half out here, so a lot of pockets that can trap the sound.
But I'm happy, it plays higher, lower, and same distortion, like below the noise floor of the mic.

Then did a super fast tune:










And listened 
Too early to say but clearly subless is an option


----------



## Jscoyne2

Heck yea! Got a link to these speakers? I may have to try these as well


----------



## GreatLaBroski

Wow that doesn’t look too bad at all, nice result post-tune


----------



## Elgrosso

Jscoyne2 said:


> Heck yea! Got a link to these speakers? I may have to try these as well


These guys: https://madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-10-woofers/scanspeak-classic-25w/8565-00-10-woofer/


----------



## Elgrosso

GreatLaBroski said:


> Wow that doesn’t look too bad at all, nice result post-tune


Yep it should be all good. Post tune is 1 mic only here but usually below 300hz it’s close enough.


----------



## Hanatsu

Really nice output for ”mids”. Those mids will sound fantastic with your final setup I’m sure 

Wish I had such lowend from mine...


----------



## captainobvious

Elgrosso said:


> Finally finished these boxes! Well kind of but enough to test them today.
> I used your technique Steve, it worked very well.
> But instead of tape like you did here:
> 
> I just used what I had around so some old CLD.
> It's great as it's rigid enough to form a shape and stick itself of course but also to the mat.
> So it was super easy to place the first layer of mat.
> Then I filled first with a mix of filler/resin/mdf dust and chopped strands.
> Easy to build thickness quickly.
> 
> And I closed again with mat and clothe, and ended with filler and resin.
> Inside too I added a few, didn't take a pic of all steps, but had to add another mdf ring to build enough thickness and keep driver clearance
> So at the end I have about 1" everywhere, more in the flat areas.
> I would have stopped before as they felt really sturdy but since I still had some resin I wanted to use everything.
> 
> Then I couldn't wait to test so I putted a little butyl near the hole to seal as possible.
> 
> And pressed the boxes in place.
> Had to mount the drivers after so kind of a pita but it worked.
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> And listened
> Too early to say but clearly subless is an option



Nice job! 

The only thing I would recommend is where you have put the butyl rope, remove that thin foam layer you have behind there. You want the butyl to be the mechanical bond between the enclosures and the metal there behind them and it also does a good job of decoupling. But this will ensure a tight fit (that won't go anywhere and stay locked in place) and good seal at the backside of the enclosure where it meets the floor.

And yeah...they can certainly play low, eh ? 


They have limited xmax for sub use so that really depends on your output volume needs but I was pretty surprised how much output they had at 30hz myself as well.


----------



## Elgrosso

Yes I will try the butyl directly and remove the foam.
This area was too messy to start with, half the foam and some cld came out with the fiberglass and both surfaces, box and car, were far from flat like I planned.
It's a pita to work there deep in the footwell, honestly I now want to spend the minimum time there, but I was just too eager to test them so just cleaned a little the area by quickly covering more.
After all its closed foam too, but sure it's not as sticky as the butyl.
But I will try butyl for isolation too, as right now it's not enough.
So far they didn't move, I'll keep them like that the time to put the sub back and tune a little more.
Then when I'll have a better idea of what I need I'll remove the wings and clean this from outside.
And of course carpet them etc

After few days I can see that the sorbothane pads I have right now are probably not enough, but woofers are playing full range and this will change.
For moderate levels sub-less is ok, but yesterday I had a long drive with a need for more power and clearly I needed a sub.
For deep deep bass of course but also for cleaner sound.
Floor was going crazy and it was too much for the woofers, and it was not crazy loud.
I think 50W is already too much for full range, but a simple LR2 at 50Hz helps a lot (did some sims but I will trust my ears first).

It's funny as I discovered some new resonances, not only from the floor like before, but I'm guessing from the wings themselves!
Much more than the ones I got with the sub only, or also more than with the previous sealed boxes, not so big surprise but still.
I tested the level from outside and here again even at moderate levels you can hear the bass, friends at home could now hear me tuning 
I will also have to find something for that, more CLD on the wings, maybe some thick foam, and something on the wheel liner itself.

Other than that... it sounds gooood 
Definitely better, not on all points though.
I clearly gained some depth, not on the stage but on the articulation of the bass, the richness.
It's more natural and detailed, almost like on my home system.
Without the sub I didn't play heavy bass to preserve them so only jazz and acoustic guitar stuff like that.
Male voices too are getting better.

But the whole tune is far from perfect yet, did it in few minutes only, with just quick daily adjustments.
So it's just different for now, more refined and less punchy.
And you guess that in a car it’s not always better overall, depending of speed/traffic etc, I might have to tweak my target.

I also want to test the sealing of all this, don't know how I can start.
Maybe with just some subsonic test tracks at very low levels with the mic around the boxes.
Or moving a flame around the seal?
The measurements look good though, except maybe the boost still present at 200Hz.


----------



## Jscoyne2

https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-ls10-44-10-low-profile-subwoofer-dual-4-ohm--295-251

I haven't checked all the drivers you're using but this looks interesting for my particular install.

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

I don't use the LS10 anymore, it was just a tentative to smooth out the sub response by spreading the bass.
Kind of worked but at that time I still preferred 2x15, cleaner, while still smooth response. 4x10 were almost like 2x15, but still less excursion and more distortion.

For a different vehicle I might try again if sub response is a problem, they’re compact and play in small volume.
But right now I’m trying an HO15 with its PR15, seems to work fine compared to the 2xSWS15, clearly more output below 40Hz.


----------



## Jscoyne2

Got a ls10 I could borrow n try?


Elgrosso said:


> I don't use the LS10 anymore, it was just a tentative to smooth out the sub response by spreading the bass.
> Kind of worked but at that time I still preferred 2x15, cleaner, while still smooth response. 4x10 were almost like 2x15, but still less excursion and more distortion.
> 
> For a different vehicle I might try again if sub response is a problem, they’re compact and play in small volume.
> But right now I’m trying an HO15 with its PR15, seems to work fine compared to the 2xSWS15, clearly more output below 40Hz.


Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

All sold!


----------



## Jscoyne2

Well I'm thinking of trying the ls10 in the kicks for 40-230hz. Think it can do that?

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

I didn't try that high but don't think it will be great, especially in comparison to your peerless (right?).
Also it’s not deep but the frame is still quite large.

Check this: Test Bench: Dayton Audio LS10-44 and LS12-44 Shallow-Mount Subwoofers | audioXpress


----------



## Jscoyne2

Yea I have the peerless. The link says. He tried to do all tests but they were so low that he just posted the factory response anyway. That's uh.. totally useless info for me. If one were to believe manufacturer data. 250hz would be 5db down from average. That's not terrible but that is dead on axis as well. Cars usually get gain around that area anyway. 

I've been looking at the sundown sd3 as well. I bet I could talk the owner into making something custom to hit the 250 mark

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

Yeah but only graph 9/10 comes from Dayton, rest his from Vance, but I agree it’s strange.
What are you trying to do exactly, fix your dip? 
Could try brute force with a PA driver, or just move them a bit deeper if possible?


----------



## Jscoyne2

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Elgrosso said:


> Yeah but only graph 9/10 comes from Dayton, rest his from Vance, but I agree it’s strange.
> What are you trying to do exactly, fix your dip?
> Could try brute force with a PA driver, or just move them a bit deeper if possible?


Yea fix the dip but I need something that can cross at 40-50hz cuz my ib3s have...issues.


And there is no moving them back more. Don't PA drivers have a lack of low end? What exactly is a PA driver anyway
Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## GreatLaBroski

Elgrosso said:


> I didn't try that high but don't think it will be great, especially in comparison to your peerless (right?).
> Also it’s not deep but the frame is still quite large.
> 
> Check this: Test Bench: Dayton Audio LS10-44 and LS12-44 Shallow-Mount Subwoofers | audioXpress


Funny that you’re talking about this driver today. Last night I was thinking about an up-front sub hidden in the dash and was looking at it. The AudioXpress testing turned me off (THD, yikes).

Then I was considering the Tang Band W8-2022. Looks pretty interesting, very intriguing design. TB patented it.

More info on it:



“Josh Rocco @ DIYAudio.com” said:


> What TB has done here is use a mirrored suspension system. Typically a suspension component will exhibit non uniformity in performance in opposing directions. This causes distortion. When the a pair are mirrored they should even each other out to some extent so that the nonlinearity is more identical in both directions. This is a trick that can be used with spiders as well with a mirrored pair. Typically you have a surround and a spider and these both may behave a bit differently. By ditching the spider and using a 2nd mirrored surround this removes that difference and makes the surround behavior more symmetric in both directions.
> 
> The other measures taken are a pair of shorting rings in the motor to linearize inductance variation.


I need to see if there’s any chance of getting this to fit but it sounds like it’s worth a shot at $134 from PE.


----------



## Jscoyne2

T


GreatLaBroski said:


> Funny that you’re talking about this driver today. Last night I was thinking about an up-front sub hidden in the dash and was looking at it. The AudioXpress testing turned me off (THD, yikes).
> 
> Then I was considering the Tang Band W8-2022. Looks pretty interesting, very intriguing design. TB patented it.
> 
> More info on it:
> 
> 
> 
> I need to see if there’s any chance of getting this to fit but it sounds like it’s worth a shot at $134 from PE.


That does look neat. I like the super small enclosure. There a 10" version?

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## GreatLaBroski

No 10” is available unfortunately.


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Jscoyne2 said:


> Yea fix the dip but I need something that can cross at 40-50hz cuz my ib3s have...issues.
> 
> 
> And there is no moving them back more. Don't PA drivers have a lack of low end? What exactly is a PA driver anyway
> Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


PA for High power handling and high sensitivity, yeah less low end in theory but it can still be counterbalanced by the previous two and EQ.
But I guess if you can't move them and still want low, port them! 




GreatLaBroski said:


> No 10” is available unfortunately.


Is this one the same serie?
Tang Band WQ-1814SB | Loudspeaker Database


----------



## Jscoyne2

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Elgrosso said:


> PA for High power handling and high sensitivity, yeah less low end in theory but it can still be counterbalanced by the previous two and EQ.
> But I guess if you can't move them and still want low, port them!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this one the same serie?
> Tang Band WQ-1814SB | Loudspeaker Database


NOOOO room for porting. Honestly, if you saw the way these things are in here and the Tinyyyy airspace they are working with, you'd prob understand why i have that dip in midbass. They are vented outside the vehicle but its like an enclosure just big enough for the 10" driver, then a 5x5 hole venting into 2 3" holes. Maybe i need more venting or maybe i need a larger hole for the enclosure to open up into. 

Honestly what i should do is cut into my door pods and port those because they are around .4 cuft each and i could throw some 6.5 and port those bitches, then run a midrange in the kicks. That'd involve a total rebuild and some risk if i couldnt pull it off. The car works and sounds good right now and i dont wanna go full tilt on it anymore. 

Im waiting for around September to see what the new minidsp stuff is gonna look like. I've decided to let a professional tune my car. Probably Niick for on here. He is very local to me but he hasn't been on in 6 months or more and im too lazy to call the shop and track him down.


I saw that 12" as well but its an OEM product, probably for Bmws? they offer 8s and 12s in stuff but no 10s. Sigh.


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Jscoyne2 said:


> NOOOO room for porting. Honestly, if you saw the way these things are in here and the Tinyyyy airspace they are working with, you'd prob understand why i have that dip in midbass. They are vented outside the vehicle but its like an enclosure just big enough for the 10" driver, then a 5x5 hole venting into 2 3" holes. Maybe i need more venting or maybe i need a larger hole for the enclosure to open up into.
> 
> Honestly what i should do is cut into my door pods and port those because they are around .4 cuft each and i could throw some 6.5 and port those bitches, then run a midrange in the kicks. That'd involve a total rebuild and some risk if i couldnt pull it off. The car works and sounds good right now and i dont wanna go full tilt on it anymore.
> 
> Im waiting for around September to see what the new minidsp stuff is gonna look like. I've decided to let a professional tune my car. Probably Niick for on here. He is very local to me but he hasn't been on in 6 months or more and im too lazy to call the shop and track him down.
> 
> 
> I saw that 12" as well but its an OEM product, probably for Bmws? they offer 8s and 12s in stuff but no 10s. Sigh.


I think I remember where they are, like really on the edge but not so much deep under the dash right?
You really can't move them a bit while keeping the breathing in the same spot?
Because bigger box or not will not change your dip, it must come from the cabin interaction.
Did you try to find out what wavelength and then which panel could cause it?
Back to door could be a solution yes, but also more resonances and tactile feedback to fight, and probably still some dips due to the geometry, just in a different sport.


----------



## Jscoyne2

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Elgrosso said:


> I think I remember where they are, like really on the edge but not so much deep under the dash right?
> You really can't move them a bit while keeping the breathing in the same spot?
> Because bigger box or not will not change your dip, it must come from the cabin interaction.
> Did you try to find out what wavelength and then which panel could cause it?
> Back to door could be a solution yes, but also more resonances and tactile feedback to fight, and probably still some dips due to the geometry, just in a different sport.


I could add like .5in to it but not much more. The dip is in the same place on both drivers so definitely cabin. Idk the math on how to figure out the reflection. 

Those door pods are super solid. There is no way any resonance would happen. Maybe I'll throw a 6.5 sls in the pod and see what the response would be. Then add 4in mids in the pillars. Midbass array that *****.

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Jscoyne2 said:


> I could add like .5in to it but not much more. The dip is in the same place on both drivers so definitely cabin. Idk the math on how to figure out the reflection.
> 
> Those door pods are super solid. There is no way any resonance would happen. Maybe I'll throw a 6.5 sls in the pod and see what the response would be. Then add 4in mids in the pillars. Midbass array that *****.
> 
> Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


Here maybe? 
Speaker Placement 101: How to Fight Boundary Interference


----------



## Elgrosso

Running with these since 2/3 weeks:










Replaced the HD600 and 1 MSK1500 with an HD900 to cover sub and midbass bridged.
Everything is on the same level now so more accessible and easier to play with, while I added some room to increase air flow as it’s getting hot now.

So TW29RN, MW16P-8, W25 and Dayton HO15/PR15.
With a low XO point for the mid/tweet, something like 2Khz, and it sounds really good.
The DDRC22 is plugged but I didn't feel the need to tune with Dirac yet, just the A8 (below here).

The HO15 with its Passive radiator is fine, I played a bit with the number of disc to modify the response and sure it has some impact, like up to 6db near 40Hz.
Still playing, I think I’ll go with the mid number as it seems to give the best of both low extension and free hump. More than 4 discs doensn't change anything and might even reduce the global output. Only thing is... I feel like I can hear the added delay. 

The classe A on horns was wonderful, and I want to see if I can get «*some*» of this magic back.
So next, passive crossover again to get midwoofer and tweeters on the same amp. Waiting for a second crossblock to optimize the acoustic slope for both channels. I would then probably remove the second msk1500 for a lighter system.
With only 5 amplified channels I could even try some new amps, like the Mosconi 5|30 that seems really cool.

The many more drivers to test too but it’s just too hot right now.


----------



## Elgrosso

Got my 2nd block so I continued my tests to get similar acoustic slopes on both sides.

Temp install here:








the red wire you see above the crossblock is dead here 

And few sweeps, with many combos of HP/LP.
I kept my old settings from previous test so I knew where to search:










Selected these twos:
It's only 1 pt here, my nose, so kind of ugly but I know enough the car now and few bump will not appear like that in later averages.
I used heavy smoothing as I just wanted to get in the ball park.










Then measured both L/R mids+tweets full range in my usual 6 positions:










Averaged:










And tuned, the full spectrum here with sub and midbass:










Not bad at all. The gap between left and right tweeter is not really present on listening.
I tested few more peqs to get them aligned and it didn't help so went back.
Right one might be increased by the left window, and left one blocked by the steering wheel (all in kicks).

Then since it sounded pretty good I added Dirac in the loop.
Blue before/green predicted:










Funny how the tweeter mismatch doesn't appear here.
The target is not exactly the same as I adjusted a bit but the before shows hotter tweeters.
I guess the 2 added point smoothed them, + probably some different windowing or something else.

Dirac didn't add much here it was a clean base, soundstage was really good already.
Still it helped to clean up a little more, stabilize the FR in few spots, so it got sharper.
But I also lost 6db… 
So -3db at least with one amp only, -6db with Dirac, starts to be a little problem on some quiet tracks if I want really loud.
95% the time it should be ok but still I just don't like to miss juice.

Was pretty happy with the sound last week end, so kept it like that.
But, IDK why but every day it got a little worst, or I started to like it less and less.
Tried to re-adjust gains, a little less hot on HF, different bias on the amp, all kind of tracks, even a complete retune with only cuts on 1/3 smoothing, nothing helped.
I really don't know what's going on, maybe the crossblock act funny on the impedance of the mw16/tw29.
Or some kind of distortion appeared, IMD maybe.

To the point that tonight I couldn't stand it anymore so I removed the blocks.
Should have tried some other amps first, especially the phass to see if the added warmth could help.
But I just quickly put back the msk1500 for a regular 3 way as everything was already wired.
Still have to reload my old setting and check levels later.

In fact I think I miss my horns, I think more and more about them...


----------



## Hanatsu

You can predict that a system got highish IMD if it also has high harmonic distortion and high spectrum noise. If I were going for a simple semi active 7ch system with 5ch amplification I'd just place a poly cap in series with a center freq at 6-7kHz on the midrange output for the tweeters (depending on what drivers you got ofc). If you got the drivers placed near each other it's usually not a problem just using the natural rolloff of a small sized midrange speaker as "lowpass".


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep they are like 4” apart, but I did especially want the flexibility of the crossblock to test variable xo and get similar acoustic slope. Last year I tried a bunch of passive crossover from PE like prv, eminence, dayton etc. I think it was on the horn but not sure.
Anyway it was fun but just too hard to find a good one.
When I tried the 1st crossblock I got very good results with horns and he woofer, all 8ohms drivers, on this same amp.
Thought I could optimize even more with a second one, especially now with mismatched 8 and 4 ohm drivers (and then why not building diy passive at the end).
Also 2khz is the place I finally like it the most. FR wise I got something very similar to active, except this thing.
And didn't notice any high distortion during the sweeps, and still don;t know if the reading on REW is accurate or not for that (but it's very low).


----------



## Elgrosso

Horns are back!
With clearly a greater dynamic, real pleasure 
I'm not sure it's the end of my exploration of regular hifi domes/cones but I will keep the horns for a while.
Soundstage is slightly different, a little more compressed on the left side as usual/like before, but everything else is clean.
And I don't think I lost any details.
But for the dynamic hell yeah! Much more realistic, lively, enjoyable.
And no need to play loud, they're just super reactive.

I tried to fit your horns Jason but could only fit the minis with the new 10s there.
But I want to try again, in few weeks.

So back to HF108R on mini horns, and for the mids: Ciare NDK6.



















Specs here: http://oem.ciare.com/pdf_oriz_1.php?info=438


I had to modify my rings to fit the MW16 and couldn’t easily re-fit the Audax PR17 anyway so good time to test.
They're more compact, lighter, and have a little foam ring to protect the flat surround that was useful.
I really didn't expect more than the Audax that so far were the best mids I tried. But they are surprising, will need more time to finally judge, but they are better on few points:
More sensitive, yes even more, and on a larger band.
Break up is really high it was not an issue.
Can play a little lower like 250Hz, I have them at 300/24 right now (they're given for 3mm Xmax but I highly doubt that)
And my measurements show them playing higher and smoother than both Audax and TD6.
So really easy to integrate, I will continue to play with different XOs, for now 50/24-300/24-1800/12





















I will stop any mods for few weeks but already have some plan for next steps.
Some really cool tweeters just arrived from Germany, and these that I couldn't resist to:


----------



## GreatLaBroski

Wow, really cool update!


----------



## Elgrosso

Oh and I forgot to say, gained back my 10db with even lower gain


----------



## Elgrosso

Found them!
During my vacation in France I was able to get a pair of these unicorn drivers, the PHL1120
Can't wait to try them, once the heat allows me to work on it.


















The actual Ciare NK6 are really good, easier to integrate with higher average sensitivity and lower FS.
But they're still missing a little something compared to the PR17.
To be confirmed with a swap again but that's how I feel.
Now these PHL should bring the best of both world.


Also found my next DSP, Waveflex products again as the A8 was already awesome compared to 6x8 and 8x12.
This one should be a good step up again, in term of analog stage, dac, and processing power (dual sharc)


































the fun never ends


----------



## EmptyKim

Where do you store all your old gear?


----------



## GreatLaBroski

Ooooooo nice gear! Is that an A8 MkII?


----------



## Elgrosso

EmptyKim said:


> Where do you store all your old gear?


What do you need man? 
I sell everything usually, but I’m a little slow since few months...




GreatLaBroski said:


> Ooooooo nice gear! Is that an A8 MkII?


The Mk2 is the one I have right now (and that I will sell later) 
This one doesn’t have a name yet, it's more a special serie/request.
But I know he already sold a bunch of the home version.
The things is that you need to find a buffalo3 (The Buffalo-IIIse Pro (Stereo Edition) 2-Channel DAC)
Check here if you’re interested:https://waveflex.myshopify.com/pages/gallery


----------



## EmptyKim

Elgrosso said:


> What do you need man?
> I sell everything usually, but I’m a little slow since few months...


I don't need anything. Just curious. I still haven't done anything with the AE SBP15 I picked up from you.


----------



## GreatLaBroski

Elgrosso said:


> The Mk2 is the one I have right now (and that I will sell later)
> This one doesn’t have a name yet, it's more a special serie/request.
> But I know he already sold a bunch of the home version.
> The things is that you need to find a buffalo3 (The Buffalo-IIIse Pro (Stereo Edition) 2-Channel DAC)
> Check here if you’re interested:https://waveflex.myshopify.com/pages/gallery


How much does something like that run? I’m interested in that. PM me if you don’t feel comfortable posting publicly.


----------



## Elgrosso

Sure MP!


----------



## Jscoyne2

Reading through this thread again. Gotta say, you were a huge influence in me building my door pods. So thanks for all the detailed post and pictures.


----------



## Elgrosso

Thx man,
and I must say... I thought more than twice about the fur!  :laugh:


----------



## Jscoyne2

oabeieo said:


> Okay here's a Dirac vid ....
> 
> Pretty dam easy to do
> 
> https://youtu.be/flW9w4MiGoY
> 
> I'll do rephase one and minidsp tomo


This got banned. Stupid UMG


----------



## Elgrosso

Good ol’ Andy... I wonder if he’s still locked in his shelter


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Good ol’ Andy... I wonder if he’s still locked in his shelter




Lmao :-D 

I just came out -


----------



## oabeieo

Got a lot of catching up to do. I’ll be reading tonight


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Lmao :-D
> 
> I just came out -


:laugh:

Nothing really fresh here, was so happy with the system I kept it untouched for months, and started trying things at home.
But I’ll update soon, new dsp arrived and install is almost done.
Recent rain caused some troubles though and slowed me down.


----------



## oabeieo

MAN! 
Geesh! 

I am jel about now . You cut up metal for fitings 
I love it! The fender cut is awesome ! 

I need a different car.


----------



## oabeieo

I miss the ddrc22 

Do you have a 22 or 24 you want to sell ???


----------



## Jscoyne2

oabeieo said:


> I miss the ddrc22
> 
> Do you have a 22 or 24 you want to sell ???


Walk away slowly. Real realll slowly.

Before you fall in the pit again

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## oabeieo

Jscoyne2 said:


> Walk away slowly. Real realll slowly.
> 
> Before you fall in the pit again
> 
> Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


OH oh no no no


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> I miss the ddrc22
> 
> Do you have a 22 or 24 you want to sell ???


Yep! 
1 ddrc22, well open-drc or ddrc mode as you want I have both sharcs to fit in.
With rem and power converter.


----------



## oabeieo

Elgrosso said:


> Yep!
> 1 ddrc22, well open-drc or ddrc mode as you want I have both sharcs to fit in.
> With rem and power converter.


Pm me and I’ll send you want you want for it,

Hellahs! So stoked now !

F yeh ! :-$   

THats actually badass , that way I can capture the Dirac impulse In REw and load Dirac impulse in rephrase and add my own twist for comb Filtering or whatever than load fir into open 

Still 6144t from ddrc to open yeah ?


----------



## oabeieo

If don’t want sell that’s ok I can go through mini 

Just seein if you needed unload anything, I know how things can stack up


----------



## Elgrosso

Message sent!


----------



## Bnlcmbcar

Elgrosso said:


> Yep!
> 1 ddrc22, well open-drc or ddrc mode as you want I have both sharcs to fit in.
> With rem and power converter.


Hold up!? Am I misinterpreting this? You can fit both Sharcs in one unit and switch between OpenDRC and Dirac in one unit? If so is there still only 1 SPIDF input and 1 SPIDF output or are there now 2 sets?

Hey oabeieo I’m finally getting around to installing the DDRC 22 you sold me months ago.


----------



## oabeieo

Bnlcmbcar said:


> Hold up!? Am I misinterpreting this? You can fit both Sharcs in one unit and switch between OpenDRC and Dirac in one unit? If so is there still only 1 SPIDF input and 1 SPIDF output or are there now 2 sets?
> 
> Hey oabeieo I’m finally getting around to installing the DDRC 22 you sold me months ago.


BAdass !!!

Yeah I’m starting all over, got to buy a new laptop and all. It’s all good tho. 

Yeah his is the opendrc with the ddrc Dirac upgrade 
They both same box , different sharc chipset plugged in. 
All you do is swap the sharc card and it’s back to a opendrc 

Yours was bought is a ddrc so dosent have the open sharc 

It’s such a bad assss setup 
Especially with other sharcs upstream. 


I’ve been on the fence with the 88a but the 22d and 2x4hds as a dac is so much better. 

Rephrase just added an invert phase feature on the linearization tab , it’s basically the comb Filtering tool for cars wet dream along with a Dirac upstream of course . 

Get it hooked up man! What you been waitin for geeeeeeeeesh!


----------



## robertallinson

Not doing it is a good way to pop some speakers.


----------



## Elgrosso

Bnlcmbcar said:


> Hold up!? Am I misinterpreting this? You can fit both Sharcs in one unit and switch between OpenDRC and Dirac in one unit? If so is there still only 1 SPIDF input and 1 SPIDF output or are there now 2 sets?
> 
> Hey oabeieo I’m finally getting around to installing the DDRC 22 you sold me months ago.


Nope, like Andy explained it was just a regular box with manual sharc swap.




robertallinson said:


> Not doing it is a good way to pop some speakers.


Not doing what?


----------



## oabeieo

Lovin’ the ddrc buddy 
Thanks again.
Waiting on the b&cs to arrive ——— wonder is he’s shipped yet. 
That will get me back in business the 10” Celestions in using now are just pitiful 
They are not awesome , but for 30$ ea BNIB I can’t complain 

The audax says should arrive today also 
We’ll see


----------



## Elgrosso

Hoho, which Audax, the pr240, 330?
I bought a cheap used pair of the 240 to try in my kicks, they looked nice and clean... but at the first test sweep the foam surround completely disappeared


----------



## oabeieo

^^ the hg240go 
10” I already installed them , so much better than the Celestion, not even close to the b&c 
Still waiting on danno14 to send them. (Hint hint nudge nudge)  

Getting excited tho to get those installed 

But the audax will get me by till than . 

I think I decided on a sub (the sundown u10) do a single 10” ina bandpass 
Specs look great except fs is 41 which seems high , I did a bandpass for a sundown 6.5” with an fs of 53 and it sounded like complete ass at 50hz 

So I hope the fs thing isn’t a issue if I tune at 36-38 it shouldn’t 


So your using ddrc24s now strictly


----------



## oabeieo

Wow ! 

Man, I have been reading the whole last year I’ve missed 
And I’m missed your thread a lot


----------



## ToNasty

oabeieo said:


> ^^ the hg240go
> 10” I already installed them , so much better than the Celestion, not even close to the b&c
> Still waiting on danno14 to send them. (Hint hint nudge nudge) <img src="http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> Getting excited tho to get those installed <img src="http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Razz" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> But the audax will get me by till than .
> 
> I think I decided on a sub (the sundown u10) do a single 10” ina bandpass
> Specs look great except fs is 41 which seems high , I did a bandpass for a sundown 6.5” with an fs of 53 and it sounded like complete ass at 50hz
> 
> So I hope the fs thing isn’t a issue if I tune at 36-38 it shouldn’t
> 
> 
> So your using ddrc24s now strictly


The u series is the new zv3 or supposably. That being said i had a zv3 in a 4th order and it was awesome. Im hoping to start an spl build at the end of thr year using 2 u18s


----------



## Elgrosso

oabeieo said:


> Wow !
> 
> Man, I have been reading the whole last year I’ve missed
> And I’m missed your thread a lot


Thx for keeping it alive 
I need to update it, soon I hope, too busy!
Maybe I’ll share what I played with at home too.


----------



## oabeieo

I went through a cone stage 

Got 900$ in morels and focals and they sounded good till I smoked 1600$ tweeters rated at 20w and eh 

Even the very best is just mediocre 

The good is called pro audio for a reason , professional audio wouldn’t think about running a silk tweeter


----------



## steo86

Just have read a few posts here. Very interesting comparison of midrange drivers!
I am currently also looking for a midrange driver for my three way home theater using from 300/400Hz to 2khz.

Which one of those four is the best sounding in your opinion?

audax pr170m0
Ciare ndk6-1.5
PHL 1120
AE TD6M


----------



## Elgrosso

Oops sorry I answered the MP without reading everything.
For home I'd go Audax or PHL.
Phl gives more flexibility for the xo but is also so hard to find.
In car the ciare is best I think, plays lower like the phl, and is much lighter/easier to install and probably more reliable.
PHL/Audax are like 99% the same except PHL accept to play lower, but since you don't need this > Audax 

What is the rest of the system?


----------



## Jscoyne2

Elgrosso said:


> Oops sorry I answered the MP without reading everything.
> 
> For home I'd go Audax or PHL.
> 
> Phl gives more flexibility for the xo but is also so hard to find.
> 
> In car the ciare is best I think, plays lower like the phl, and is much lighter/easier to install and probably more reliable.
> 
> PHL/Audax are like 99% the same except PHL accept to play lower, but since you don't need this > Audax
> 
> 
> 
> What is the rest of the system?


Ive Been running the satori mr16p. Im a huge fan. Its a pure midrange.

Unless you're looking for high sensitivity stuff to make with horns. 

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

Got the MW16 at home and love them. They were easier to tune and with enough spl anyway (Well ordered a 2nd pair to try to get a better impedance match to go passive).
Real smooth yeah, maybe not as fun as the audax, but for now I’m happy.
In the car they were not adequate in my setup though.

I’d like to try the MR16 too, but on paper there’s not enough difference, and I cross them low.
Tried the MR13 but the MW16 fit better.


----------



## Jscoyne2

*Re: Jaguar XKR, Jbl, Audiofrog, Acoustic Elegance &amp; iphone source.*



Elgrosso said:


> Got the MW16 at home and love them. They were easier to tune and with enough spl anyway (Well ordered a 2nd pair to try to get a better impedance match to go passive).
> 
> Real smooth yeah, maybe not as fun as the audax, but for now I’m happy.
> 
> In the car they were not adequate in my setup though.
> 
> 
> 
> I’d like to try the MR16 too, but on paper there’s not enough difference, and I cross them low.
> 
> Tried the MR13 but the MW16 fit better.


Do you just have like an endless supply of drivers? Is your closet like Narnia of speakers?


Whats the lowest you'd cross the audax?


Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk


----------



## Elgrosso

Haha sure I’m just as junkie as everyone here, never enough room to stock everything. Usually I force myself to sell after testing but I kept a bunch for my home project, kept few others rare enough for later (sure )
Should make a big sale soon, if I’m not too lazy.

The Audax, to my taste 300/24 minimum, 400/500 better!


----------



## oabeieo

You get any radians ? Or any de550s tn or non tn ?


----------



## Elgrosso

Yep got some, 745neo or something like that.
Paired with the XR1464C they were amazing at home, like super flat without any EQ!
But in car they’re way too big, and 1.4''
Wanna try?


----------



## oabeieo

1.4” throat. Oh man I don’t know if that would work. Dosent the horn have to be re drilled 

I’m just super curious how a aluminum Diaphram sounds.


----------



## oabeieo

That horn is square , did you put it in your car? It looks pretty big


----------

