# MLI65 aka Mach 5s mids



## Mless5 (Aug 21, 2006)

I've been searching for the mid I like for quite a while. This board has a lot of valuable information, but sometimes it is just overwhelming. My main goal was to find a smooth midrange for active 2way that will have smoothness and detail of a paper cone, yet be powerful in the midbass department. I am not very expirienced, but I have tried about a dozen of different 6.5 mids in my life, yet I was never happy. There was always something missing, lacking. I am not sure that I cannot draw final conclusions just yet, because my kicks are still to be finished, but I've been experimentig with position and aim for quite a while. They are just sitting on the floor in their baffles, "floating" in the cloud of polyfill to isolate waves from each other.

*Setup:* Pioneer 880 as active processor, Morel MDT12 tweeters, by the rear view mirrors aimed to the center mirror, Mach 5s on the floor aimed roughly to the opposite "oh ****" handles, Image Dynamics IDQ10" in 1ft^3, whole thing powered by OS Memphis Belle known as Fultron, 75wrms per channel with 300wrms to the sub.

Optimal crossover points for my vehicle are:

Tweeters - 5000hz 12db
Mids - 80hz and 2500hz 12db both ends
Subwoofer - 80hz 12db

*Initial impressions:* those are BEEFY! I thought my previous Boston Acoustics Pro (older version with 6.4LF woofers) were beefy - na-a. Mach5 are heavier, with nice rigid basket and pretty stiff cone material. They are bigger than 6.5", more like 7" I would say. Visually there is no bling, straight bizness.

*Sound:* I immidiately noticed fuller and deeper midbass that is very balanced and pleasant to listen to. They don't have the kick of Pros, but they sound very even across the range. They can play low and they are not afraid to do that. Even at full volume I got a feeling that they want more power. Gains are under half way on Fultron. 

*Detail:* I expected a little more detail from a paper cone, but I am not complaining by any means. These speakers are very smooth, and I never wanted to turn the volume down because of the harshness. I had a few eq cuts from previous setup, but no more than 1db, except for 800hz where I cut by 3db. On the upper end I used 2500hz 12db highpass, but with all honesty if I didn't have it - I would not be upset and plots confirm that. I go by what I hear, not what they tell me so it was a pleasant surprise to find out that what I hear is actually normal  . Just for kicks, I disabled lowpass: managable. There is an overlap with tweeters somewhere and it makes things a bit harsh at certain moments, but I think my aiming plays a big role in this. 

*Overall:* IMO they absolutely blow away everything I have tried before whether it was $50 FS section special here or higher end big name type of thing. I trully feel that these are the best $50 (used) I've spent on the mids so far. At $40 a piece shipped, I think you can't go wrong. I am a poor college student so pricepoint is a consideration. Yes, you will not get goose bumps from the level of detail, but they are smooth and mellow, yet detailed without being harsh. If I had to do a budget setup for one of my relative's vehicles - I would pick them without a doubt. 

*Link:*

http://www.mach5audio.com/zen/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=66&products_id=183

"The MLI-65 has enjoyed great success both in the home and car audio worlds. Depending on the box configuration, the MLI-65 can dig deep why providing nice easy going midrange sound up to 3kHz. Folks have commented on the extended mid-bass of the MLI-65 in the car, calling it a 'mid-bass monster'. If you want this, look no further."

Images - courtesy of Mach5 Audio:


----------



## crosspug (Jul 14, 2008)

Thanks for the review, will be very interested to see how they go in my car (off axis mounting).

Can I ask what type of music etc you tested these with? did they suit a particular type?

Thanks,

Jono


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

EQ the mid range a little bit. Zaph showed a dip in the response, and my own use of the woofer had me bumping up EQing around 2kHz a few dB too. The woofer opens up a bit by doing this and doesn't sound so dark/muffled in the midrange.

It might be useful to run an EQ test of some sort and check response. Any dips and peaks will also influence the x-over point too. This will also help with the harshness issue you're getting. I find most harshness/annoyance comes from an imbalance in the frequency response, either a relatively large spike or dip somewhere that turns things funny. These oddities can become very noticeable and annoying. I'll suggest a pink noise test. Just run pink noise and move up and down your EQ balancing out each frequency point. No single point should be lacking or overshadow the other. Pay attention to overally output relative to all the other points as well as tonality with the points immediately around the one you're adjusting. Once done, the system will be a whole heck of a lot more balanced and even.

Yes, the detail is the only gripe I had too with these woofers. It's not a matter of muddiness or anything but rather the "edge" in the music is rounded off. It's nice for fatique, but the bite is missing. I'd be curious to see a second iteration of the Mach 5 woofer with a composite cone. I just think the current one is physically too soft. It is rather flexible, even for a paper cone.

Any reason why your tweeter is crossed so high relative to the woofer? No gap in the response from that? The pink noise test I mentioned above will show you if there is one or not. When you run through the EQ, any dips or peaks will show up in the EQ adjustments. For example, if there's a dip from 3k to 4.5k, you will find yourself EQing up this range. This shows that the x-over should be set closer together. As well, if you find yourself EQing everything from 5kHz up 2dB higher than everything from 3kHz down, you might consider bumping up the tweeter level 2dB to balance out the system, rather than doing it via the EQ. It's a good tool for balancing but also a good tool for pointing out trouble spots. Pink noise is also not effected by time alignment which is nice.


----------



## Mless5 (Aug 21, 2006)

Thanks for suggestions. I want to finish off my kick panels first and than see what it gives me in terms of response. Build and than fine tune. 5K is just what sounds good to my ears, I haven't looked into actual response graphs yet.


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

*Very nice review. I lay into mine 3 hours a day.*


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

Nice write-up.. Thanks.. This little mid doesn't get much press. Looks like a good value.
A two-way upfront with some neo's and maybe even another pair in rear-fill for midbass ONLY duty might be a cool little budget setup. Might be a fair free-air rear-deck midbass maybe. ?? I dunno.


----------



## snaimpally (Mar 5, 2008)

Nice writeup. Sound like a good set of budget mids. Have you tried hessdawg's ID OEMs for $90 shipped? I'd be interested to hear a comparison of the two.


----------



## Mless5 (Aug 21, 2006)

snaimpally said:


> Nice writeup. Sound like a good set of budget mids. Have you tried hessdawg's ID OEMs for $90 shipped? I'd be interested to hear a comparison of the two.


No, but always wanted to, no $ unfortunately unless somebody is kind enough to let me borrow some for a month or two  .


----------



## Gideon's_Test (Nov 20, 2008)

Mless5:
I bought a set of these for my 2 way active set-up (paired with a set of Seas 27TFFNC/G tweeters). Glad to see this review as I haven't installed them yet. I have a question: I also have the same headunit (Pioneer P880prs). Did you use the auto time alignment and the auto eq feature and, if so, any noticable improvement?

Thanks!


----------



## Mless5 (Aug 21, 2006)

Nope. Auto eq = crappy results. I do have $100 RTA that helped me find a big dip. As far as TA goes, I closed my eyes and played until I got my stage where I wanted. 

If I were you - I'd unload those tweeters.

Good luck!


----------



## tophatjimmy (Dec 16, 2005)

what's the mounting depth of these? Mach 5's website doesn't list the dimensions....


----------



## evan (Dec 2, 2006)

tophatjimmy said:


> what's the mounting depth of these? Mach 5's website doesn't list the dimensions....


2-5/8" according to their site:


----------



## tophatjimmy (Dec 16, 2005)

hmmmm....must've been looking in the wrong places. Thanks!


----------



## crosspug (Jul 14, 2008)

Finally got mine installed last week the day before a comp! Woops.

Initial thoughts are very good, especially for the cost. Totally embarass the old Infinity Kappa's that were in the doors. 

Mids are in the stock locations in the door with a sandwiched baffle of 6mm MDF and 3mm Aluminium (can't fit anything thicker beneath the door trims). Crossover is still being worked out but I've had it from 50hz-3.15kHz and 80hz-2.5kHz and they haven't shown signs of breaking a sweat yet.... But still yet to find the perfect spot. 

More to come in the future.....

Jono

PS. 6.5in my a$$..... tried to drop them in where the old mids were and couldn't get them even halfway in!! Not that that is really a bad thing!


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

The mounting flange is 6.5". The basket is wide though, so you may run into the sheet metal or whatever's behind.

Most woofers will put the Kappa woofers to shame. That's not a hard thing to do.


----------



## crosspug (Jul 14, 2008)

mvw2 said:


> The mounting flange is 6.5". The basket is wide though, so you may run into the sheet metal or whatever's behind.
> 
> Most woofers will put the Kappa woofers to shame. That's not a hard thing to do.


LOL, I see your point re: the kappas....

After some modification of the mounting location (removal of some plastic on the inner door) they look perfectly at home. 

Midbass has serious impact even off 50wrms while not being unrulely, initial thoughts are that I'm not going to run them below 65hz or so. Midrange is better than I expected even with a relatively high low pass crossover point like 4k.... I personally wouldn't leave it at that point as they seem more confortable at 2.5k or 3.15khz. 

Now to choose to ditch the tweeters and go 3way or get a decent tweeter for 2way..... Something laid back I think as the current Visaton Titanium domes just aren't sounding like I want, too busy if that makes sense.

Jono


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

With such a usable midrange, it's a shame not to make good use of it. These are the sort of mid woofers you buy _because_ you run 2-way.

They're definitely one of my favorite mid woofers, user friendly and fun to listen to. I just wish they'd make an 8" version.


----------



## evan (Dec 2, 2006)

Have any of you compared these to any of the Seas RNX mids? What are the odds that after their in the door I'd be able to tell that the Seas are worth four times as much money?

BTW Thanks for the review.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

I was running the W18NX before the Mach5.  I haven't used any of the RNX drivers, no. I have done reviews on both drivers, so you can look for that yourself. You may want to look into the ER version of the RNX woofers, supposed to be rather good. Monetary worth lies within the wallet of the beholder.


----------



## Viperoni (Oct 14, 2006)

I had mine running off an MTX 2150x (so figure about 80 watts RMS a piece) in my doors, and they got the job done nicely. Not subs, but they're not missing out on much!
They go loud, not particularily details, but not lacking anything, not harsh... they do everything pretty well, and honestly, I don't think you can do any better for the money.

Now I've got them running off my deck, and they do a pretty decent job still... considering the very limited amount of power.


----------



## matt62485 (Jun 7, 2008)

yea i love mine, im about to purchase another set for my girlfriends ride.


----------



## King Nothing (Oct 10, 2005)

Id really like to see a comparison between these and the ID OEMs


----------



## Mless5 (Aug 21, 2006)

*UPDATED REVIEW*

It has been about 3 months since I finished my kick panels and things have changed a bit. I am now running T class Alpine which to me sounds way more revealing than my previous amplifier. Just what I needed. Also waiting on 1507 (A/B) to arrive for the subwoofer. 

Original settings were:

Tweeters - 5000hz 12db
Mids - 80hz and 2500hz 12db both ends
Subwoofer - 80hz 12db

New setting are more like:

Tweeters - 4000hz 12db
Mids - 63hz and 2000 24 on both ends
Subwoofer - 63hz 12db

*BUT!* I found myself looking for a bit more detail and I tried getting rid of low pass on the mids altogether: much better, but now it reveals mistake I made when building my kick panels. I now realize that the aim of the right mid is a bit off. 

Overall, I am still very happy with the mids, they have great output in the lower end of things, upper midrange is very pleasing to listen do.


----------



## King Nothing (Oct 10, 2005)

that seems like a huge gap between the mid and tweeter


----------



## B_Rich (Mar 29, 2009)

Hey guys, I gotta bump this year or so old thread. I was going to start a new one, but knew this was here so I figure I'd give it a bump.

I'm highly considering these for dedicated midbass in my 3-way setup. I've got an S10 with custom built kick panels. What I need to know is if these *need* an enclosure or not. The kick panels that I made are .07 cubic feet each (that's the most I'm gettin out of these) but that's way small for a 6.5" speaker. My idea is that I'll just cut out the back of the kick panel to get rid of the "spring" effect that an enclosure has on a speaker.

With that said, I'm looking for a good midbass driver (mainly looking for impact). These have a qts of .61 (I hear the closer to .707 you get, the better) and the price can't be beat.

If anyone could confirm to me that these don't need an enclosure I would REALLY appreciate it.

*When I say "don't need an enclosure" I mean the driver doesn't get loose or sloppy without an enclosure*


----------

