# Plastic OEM speaker mounts vs MDF



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

I was hoping to get some opinions on the factory speaker mounts that are mounted in the doors of later model fords. Is it best practice to just replace these with something heavier like MDF? I should have done that from the start. Instead I added many layers of sound deadening to these plastic mounts inside and out to the point where it's hard to undo it and do it right. Can enough sound deadening equal the solidness of something like MDF or is it a case of "at the end of the day it's still thin plastic"? 

The vehicle is a 2008 Ford fusion. The photo below (hopefully I uploaded it properly) is of how these mounts look from the factory. It's pretty thin material and is just riveted onto the door skin. I've covered mine with about 3 layers of deadener inside and out along with most of the door. I'm lacking mid bass and wonder how much I could gain in mid bass quality by replacing these mounts with something heavier. Common sense would say, it couldn't hurt but at this point it's a hell of a project to remove all the sticky sound deadening and redo it. I was just hoping that I could hear some opinions before doing this to see if it's worth the effort


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

Definitely replace them. You want something much more rigid to mount aftermarket speakers to.

If you live somewhere dry (like Arizona), then MDF will work well.
However, if you are succeptable to rain or humidity, then you'll want to use HDPE or UHMW plastic.
Can be bought on Amazon, among other places.


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

I have a 2011 ford fusion. That plastic is fine. There is so much room between the door to use 3/8 in mdf or plastic adapter rings and a 6.5 woofer without hitting.

You will need to spray primer on that aluminum if you wanna use cld. It won't stick harldy at all to that surface.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

Here's a shot of it. I have 1/2" thick PVC adapters so at least the morel tempo 6's are mounted to something solid on top. The plastic mounts underneath which were once 1/8" thick are now about 3/8" thick from all the sound deadening I added. I guess I just wonder if sound deadening thickness can compare to the rigidness some kind of plastic or MDF. I've just had so many disappointments in this project that I'm hesitant to tear all this out and redo it only to be disappointed. Has anyone ever sound deadened the hell out of these mounts like this and been disappointed and then later upgraded to a more rigid material and seen an improvement? I've had multiple different speakers installed and same result. Hertz HSK 165, Infinity reference 6x8, JL XR6.5. Midbass lacking in every scenario. Like tapping on an empty cool whip bowl


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

Mine are similar to yours. My midbass and midrange got allot better after deadening the door card and the outside door skin. And using ccf on the door card also. I cut a hole for my 6.5s in the door card and put a grill in place cause the door card blocks allot of the speaker.


----------



## RRizz (Sep 4, 2012)

Most of the OEM plastic mounts Ive come across are just fine, provided it is mounted solidly to the door. Most are quite rigid. Some may even remove them, and put a stiff weatherstrip underneath and re-mount them, to help keep resonance at bay.
I dont believe they are the cause of your midbass lacking.
I use the OEM rings in my 370z, weatherstrip underneath, and treated with sound deadener just as you have, and added fast rings, and I have more Midbass than I can handle.


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

Here is what my door and door cards look like. I have really good midbass. The outer door skin is also done. You can pull of the whole aluminum panel where the window motor is and do the inside of it and the outside door skin pretty easily. You will need zipties to replace the ones you have to cut when removing all the wires from the door. I was hesitant to do it because I thought you had to drill rivots but it's bolted on.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

I did apply some deadening to the outer door skin but only 2-4x8 patches near the speaker. I haven't put any on the door panel itself. Quite a bit on the inner door skin though. I've gone back in about 3 or 4 times adding more deadening and just never noticed enough improvement to add more than I already have. The doors are already pretty heavy from all I've added. By the sound of the speakers you'd think I haven't added any at all. 

It's just been this mystery to me for the longest time. I've even considered getting some advice from the local stereo shop. It just seems like for whatever reason the acoustics of the interior just don't allow good mid bass. I've went from passive to active, got over 100 watts going to the speakers from a alpine PDX V9. Got a good solid sub in the trunk. I've tried multiple crossover configurations. I currently have the sub and mids crossed at 80hz with 18 dB slope. Used Room EQ Wizard to try to tune things better. Maybe my expectations are just too high. Something like this will drive you insane.


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

MrHyde said:


> I did apply some deadening to the outer door skin but only 2-4x8 patches near the speaker. I haven't put any on the door panel itself. Quite a bit on the inner door skin though. I've gone back in about 3 or 4 times adding more deadening and just never noticed enough improvement to add more than I already have. The doors are already pretty heavy from all I've added. By the sound of the speakers you'd think I haven't added any at all.
> 
> It's just been this mystery to me for the longest time. I've even considered getting some advice from the local stereo shop. It just seems like for whatever reason the acoustics of the interior just don't allow good mid bass. I've went from passive to active, got over 100 watts going to the speakers from a alpine PDX V9. Got a good solid sub in the trunk. I've tried multiple crossover configurations. I currently have the sub and mids crossed at 80hz with 18 dB slope. Used Room EQ Wizard to try to tune things better. Maybe my expectations are just too high. Something like this will drive you insane.


I think if you blend your sub with the fronts it'll have allot more midbass also. Work on your door cards and use some ccf between them and the door also. That Pic didn't show mine but it's in there. My car seems to have a big null from about 50 to 60 hz. But once I get it blended we'll it's not bad sounding at all. 

I don't know about your car but my original door speakers had a ton of bass before I yanked it. One of my brothers asked if it had a subwoofer.


----------



## RRizz (Sep 4, 2012)

MrHyde said:


> Something like this will drive you insane.


Ahhh, welcome to the fray!:laugh:


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

RRizz said:


> Ahhh, welcome to the fray!:laugh:


Yea, I hear ya, despite all the frustration at times I think we all enjoy every minute of it 

I'll do some testing with the door cards off and on and see how much that's restricting things. Also I've noticed that it's better with steeper Crossover slopes but I'm limited to 18dB with my current setup. Eventually am going to install a DSP so will have more capabilities. I think that's the final frontier but that's what I said last time...


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

MrHyde said:


> RRizz said:
> 
> 
> > Ahhh, welcome to the fray!<img src="http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/images/smilies/laugh.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" class="inlineimg" />
> ...


Me too. It's always the search for perfection. As long as what you do is making it better then your on your way. I experimented with my doors for awhile. Ended up buying door cards off ebay after I knew exectly what I wanted to do.


----------



## hankhowdy1 (Jul 21, 2016)

The best thing I ever did to improve midbass was to replace the plastic speakers adapters with MDF baffles that I made. 

IB mounting a speaker needs mass and rigidly to produce midbass. 

My vote goes to making some your own with thick plastic or MDF is in a dry climate. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

Just in Case this helps. Here's a buidlog of a fusion and he did use wood to make a baffle. Maybe it could help.

https://www.diymobileaudio.com/foru...ion-thread-v2-0-audiofrog.html#/topics/187762


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

hankhowdy1 said:


> The best thing I ever did to improve midbass was to replace the plastic speakers adapters with MDF baffles that I made.
> 
> IB mounting a speaker needs mass and rigidly to produce midbass.
> 
> My vote goes to making some your own with thick plastic or MDF is in a dry climate.


Makes sense to me. Course a lot of things have made sense but not worked out the way I anticipated.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

While a more dense and resonant free baffle is ideal, it's probably more important to make sure sound is funneled out past the door panel and the rear wave isolated to between the inner & outer skin. Something that most mdf or custom baffles don't accomplish alone like some factory adapters. If sound bounces between the inner door skin and panel, you haven't accomplished much regardless of baffle material.

Man & Machine... Power Extreme!


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

Bayboy said:


> While a more dense and resonant free baffle is ideal, it's probably more important to make sure sound is funneled out past the door panel and the rear wave isolated to between the inner & outer skin. Something that most mdf or custom baffles don't accomplish alone like some factory adapters. If sound bounces between the inner door skin and panel, you haven't accomplished much regardless of baffle material.
> 
> Man & Machine... Power Extreme!


I thought you were gonna say summon a ghost train. Haha. Like the profile Pic man.


----------



## syc0path (Jan 23, 2013)

My instinct is that the mount/sound deadening is not your problem. I suspect a phase issue, which could be between the midbasses and the sub(s), the midbasses and the midranges, or even between the midbasses in the driver and passenger doors. Try playing just 1 midbass and see what kind of response u get then.

And just for the sake of completeness, is the back wave from the midbasses completely isolated from the front wave?


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

syc0path said:


> My instinct is that the mount/sound deadening is not your problem. I suspect a phase issue, which could be between the midbasses and the sub(s), the midbasses and the midranges, or even between the midbasses in the driver and passenger doors. Try playing just 1 midbass and see what kind of response u get then.
> 
> And just for the sake of completeness, is the back wave from the midbasses completely isolated from the front wave?


That's 1 good thing about this car. It's a totally sealed door. 

I agree with you it migjt be phase issues. The op told me he is getting a dsp so I'm not sure if he has the doors time aligned yet. Here is a link that may or may not help the op. It explains phase and time very strait forward.

https://www.the12volt.com/installbay/forum_posts.asp?tid=100789


----------



## jrwalte (Mar 27, 2008)

Wouldn't an 18dB crossover cause a phase change of 270? I doubt the fronts and sub are in phase.

Maybe try 12dB on both and then reverse polarity on the sub to get them in phase. Do you have time alignment with your HU?


----------



## ambesolman (Feb 5, 2018)

syc0path said:


> And just for the sake of completeness, is the back wave from the midbasses completely isolated from the front wave?


Noob question: How is this accomplished?


----------



## jrwalte (Mar 27, 2008)

ambesolman said:


> Noob question: How is this accomplished?


You seal the back wave by making sure no large openings exist between the outer skin of your door and the inner, where your speaker mounts. You then seal the front of the speaker baffle to the inner door skin. Usually with a gasket and sound deadener. The front and back wave are now sealed on the inner door skin.

Now you need to seal the front wave to the cabin of your vehicle by using CCF/Rubber foam (local hardware store weatherstrip tape works. Just keep layering it until you compress a little against the door card) to seal the speaker wave to the grill of the door card so it prevents the sound from bouncing back between the door card and the inner door skin. If your speaker grill is bigger than the speaker you can seal it on the back of the grill to prevent sound leaking from the cabin into your door card.

But you also need to factor in resonating/rattles. And you'll have just made them worse because you limited where the sound can go. This is why you use sound deadener wherever you can and isolate the door card from the inner door skin by means of CCF, to limit vibrations between the two.

Some people even add a noise block layer called MLV between inner door skin and door card. But unless you are wanting to reduce road noise, it isn't as important.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

Like Mahapederdon was saying the doors on the fusions are pretty much sealed as is, no holes other than for the door panel clips. All of those have CCF gaskets. I sealed the speaker to adapter and adapter to factory mounts with CCF. The only problem area I can think of is where the factory plastic mount meets the door. I haven't had it off since it's riveted on and it may not have a proper seal. If I go as far as checking that I may as well replace them anyway. 

My HU does have time alignment and I do have that set by measurements and the center image and staging seems good. I have tried every possible distance and phase with the sub. I've reversed the polarity on my mids and it seems to help the mid bass slightly when reversed but then with phase reversed it seems impossible to get the time alignment right. Is it possible to be 90 degrees out of phase or some other degree other than 180? and how would I fix that? Could you not rely on distance measurements at that point with reverse polarity?

It's only a 2 way active setup and I have the mids and sub crossed at 18dB slope. I've tried 12 but 18 sounds better. The steepest I can go with my current setup is 18dB but I'll be installing a helix dsp in a couple weeks so I will be able to play with slopes more then. I feel like 24dB will improve things. It seems like something is just really wrong overall and I just haven't found it yet. For the last 3 years I've been trying to get the mid bass to sound right. You'd think it would be an easy fix, I feel like I've tried everything possible at this point and that's why I was asking for opinions on the mounts. 

I have some good 1" thick MDF panels set aside for the mounts and may go ahead and redo them. If anything, for a learning experience because I really have never tried a before and after test like that. I'll probably wait until after I see how the tuning goes with the DSP before doing that. I appreciate all the input from you guys. My first post on this site and I was not expecting this level of feedback, thanks


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

There's probably a few minor things you can do to the install to maximize performance, but It's rather hard to get a linear response out of a simple 2-way one seat tune without left &right EQ. 

Man & Machine... Power Extreme!


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

MrHyde said:


> Like Mahapederdon was saying the doors on the fusions are pretty much sealed as is, no holes other than for the door panel clips. All of those have CCF gaskets. I sealed the speaker to adapter and adapter to factory mounts with CCF. The only problem area I can think of is where the factory plastic mount meets the door. I haven't had it off since it's riveted on and it may not have a proper seal. If I go as far as checking that I may as well replace them anyway.
> 
> My HU does have time alignment and I do have that set by measurements and the center image and staging seems good. I have tried every possible distance and phase with the sub. I've reversed the polarity on my mids and it seems to help the mid bass slightly when reversed but then with phase reversed it seems impossible to get the time alignment right. Is it possible to be 90 degrees out of phase or some other degree other than 180? and how would I fix that? Could you not rely on distance measurements at that point with reverse polarity?
> 
> ...


I'm still relatively new. I signed up years ago and just recently started posting on here. I figured all the guys who have answered the same question 100 times could use a break. So I try to help out the people who are a little behind where I am. Plus work is slow and I love car audio. I'm glad we all made you feel welcome and hopefully in a year from now you can answer some of my questions.


----------



## syc0path (Jan 23, 2013)

MrHyde said:


> My HU does have time alignment and I do have that set by measurements and the center image and staging seems good. I have tried every possible distance and phase with the sub. I've reversed the polarity on my mids and it seems to help the mid bass slightly when reversed but then with phase reversed it seems impossible to get the time alignment right. Is it possible to be 90 degrees out of phase or some other degree other than 180? and how would I fix that? Could you not rely on distance measurements at that point with reverse polarity?
> 
> It's only a 2 way active setup and I have the mids and sub crossed at 18dB slope. I've tried 12 but 18 sounds better. The steepest I can go with my current setup is 18dB but I'll be installing a helix dsp in a couple weeks so I will be able to play with slopes more then. I feel like 24dB will improve things. It seems like something is just really wrong overall and I just haven't found it yet. For the last 3 years I've been trying to get the mid bass to sound right. You'd think it would be an easy fix, I feel like I've tried everything possible at this point and that's why I was asking for opinions on the mounts.


It is possible to be anywhere from 0-360° out of phase (technically it's possible to be even more than that, but I digress). Time alignment, phase, and polarity are closely related.

Imagine a sine wave that goes up and down. This represents the sound from a speaker. Now imagine another sine wave from another speaker. If the 2 waves are perfectly aligned (both hit the peaks and troughs at the same time) then there will be constructive interference and they will be louder than 1 speaker alone. 

But in a car environment, it's very rare that 2 speakers are exactly the same distance from your ears. So the wave from the more distant speaker takes just a little bit longer to reach your ears, and now it's not perfectly aligned. It's out of phase, and the degree to which it's out of phase depends on the frequency and the distance. But it's generally in the range of a just a few degrees.

Proper time alignment counteracts this by delaying the sound wave from the closer speaker so that it reaches your ear at the same time as the wave from the more distant speaker. This puts the waves back in phase. Improper time alignment can make phase issues worse rather than better.

Reversed polarity creates a 180° shift in the wave. So when 1 speaker hits its peak, the other is hitting a trough. This destructive interference will cause the sound waves to cancel each other out... unless the 2 speakers are far enough apart that they're actually closer to being in phase by the time the sound hits your ears.

Crossover slope also causes a phase shift, primarily around the crossover point. For this reason, it's best to have the same slope for all speakers.

Getting back to your specific issue, u can tell it's a phase problem if the midbass sounds good when just 1 speaker (ie, just 1 woofer) is playing but not as good when multiple speakers are playing. If that is true, start by making sure all your speakers have correct polarity and that all your crossover slopes are the same. Then use time alignment to fine-tune.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

The polarity is correct (double checked recently) and the 2 mid bass speakers sound overall better together than individually. I've set time alignment by distance and fine tuned by ear. I did have a phase issue on the sub and corrected that yesterday as per jrwalte's advice. Before I didn't understand how slopes affect phase. After studying up on that now it's a little more clear how different slopes cause different degrees of out of phase. That's very helpful for me to have learned that. I've changed phase on the sub many times but always at 18dB slope. It was always better either one way or the other depending on my other tuning. I brought down the sub to 63hz and left mid at 80. Then set slopes to 12 dB. Once I reversed phase on sub I noticed a definite improvement in lower end and blending with mids. Before on the RTA curve I had a spike at 40hz and a big dip at 60Hz. After making this change it smoothed that out somewhat. 

However even though it sounds better my mid bass is still not impressive. I've spent a lot of time tuning recently since switching from passive to active a couple weeks ago. More like semi active since I'm still limited by a 13 band graphic EQ. I'm limited on crossover slopes to choose from. 18 dB being the steepest. I have a band pass filter built into my amp that I'm using to cross my mids from tweeters so can't adjust the slopes there. 

So I'm very limited in my tuning capabilities at this point. I will have a DSP installed soon so I'll have to start all over from scratch anyway. One question I have unrelated to the midbass. The 12dB slopes threw my sub out of phase 180 degrees which I believe I've fixed. My amp (PDX-V9) I believe has 12dB slopes. So if the mid and tweeter are bandpassed at 12dB slopes would that put my tweeters 180 degrees out of phase also? I've tried flipping the polarity on them but find it hard to tell a difference either way.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

Firstly, unless Ford did something really strange, those doors are not sealed like some people want to claim. You have windows that roll up and down, and that seal isn't even water tight, let alone air tight.

My guess is that it's a tuning issue. Midbass can be tricky because you have to blend them well with the sub and the tweeter (or midrange). Let the sub do the heavy lifting on the low end, and you'll need the tweeter (or midrange) to take over the high frequency harmonics. Those harmonics need to be in time with the fundamental, so TA is important. Level matching is also important. Measure SPL at the crossover point. It's ok to have the sub several decibels above the mid, but the levels need to be the same at the crossover point. If the sub is 10dB louder, that's not a problem but you need to make sure you blend the sub and mid at the crossover point.

I suspect your lack of midbass is purely a tuning issue, or at least mostly a tuning issue. Not having a DSP is going to leave you with few options, but you may be able to improve the level matching at the crossover point.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

gijoe said:


> Measure SPL at the crossover point. It's ok to have the sub several decibels above the mid, but the levels need to be the same at the crossover point. If the sub is 10dB louder, that's not a problem but you need to make sure you blend the sub and mid at the crossover point.


So to get levels equal at the crossover point between mids and sub I can think of 2 ways I might do that. Right now my sub is at 63 Hz and my mids are at 80. Maybe play a 70 Hz tone through mids then sub and adjust sub level to match mids? Or use an RTA and cut levels to make it a flat transition? Please forgive my lack of knowledge


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

MrHyde said:


> So to get levels equal at the crossover point between mids and sub I can think of 2 ways I might do that. Right now my sub is at 63 Hz and my mids are at 80. Maybe play a 70 Hz tone through mids then sub and adjust sub level to match mids? Or use an RTA and cut levels to make it a flat transition? Please forgive my lack of knowledge


What are your crossover slopes? An RTA would be helpful, but in the absence of that you can measure the SPL of the frequencies 63-80hz from each speaker and make sure they transition smoothly.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

gijoe said:


> What are your crossover slopes? An RTA would be helpful, but in the absence of that you can measure the SPL of the frequencies 63-80hz from each speaker and make sure they transition smoothly.


Currently at 12 db slopes. I can see how this would be easier to achieve with steeper slopes but right now I'm limited to either 12 or 18. Also with using an RTA I'm limited there with my graphic EQ. At this point I've already flattened out my curve with the graphic EQ through the whole range as best as I could. Well not flat but using a JBL target curve. I will have a DSP soon though with much more tuning options.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

What are you using to set your crossovers? You don't have a DSP yet, but are you trying to run active anyway, or do you still have the passive crossovers inline?


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

Yes, I'm running active without a DSP. The passive crossovers are gone. All crossovers are from the amp now. My amp (PDX v9) is set up to run active since it has a bandpass filter as a feature. I'm using the crossovers on the amp. My headunit (4000NEX) also has crossovers that I've used while the system was passive. The specs on my amp say it has 12dB slopes and the headunit has 18, 12, and 6 for choices. Even though it's technically active I'm very limited on tuning this way. 

My original intention was to just get a DSP but when I realized my amp was set up to run active I thought I'd play around with it until my DSP arrives and I can have more flexibility with tuning.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

MrHyde said:


> Yes, I'm running active without a DSP. The passive crossovers are gone. All crossovers are from the amp now. My amp (PDX v9) is set up to run active since it has a bandpass filter as a feature. I'm using the crossovers on the amp. My headunit (4000NEX) also has crossovers that I've used while the system was passive. The specs on my amp say it has 12dB slopes and the headunit has 18, 12, and 6 for choices. Even though it's technically active I'm very limited on tuning this way.
> 
> My original intention was to just get a DSP but when I realized my amp was set up to run active I thought I'd play around with it until my DSP arrives and I can have more flexibility with tuning.


Ok. Even with the settings on your head unit flat through the crossover region, the amp gains are different between the subs/mids/tweeters, so they still need to be level matched so that they have the same SPL when sound transitions from one speaker to the next. Not matching the SPL at the crossover point will cause all kinds of problems with the speakers blending. 

Use a basic SPL meter, mute the sub and tweeters, play 63 hz through the mids, play 70hz through the mids, and play 80 hz through the mids. Record these SPL numbers. Now, without changing the volume level, play the same tones through the sub with all other speakers muted. The results should get you within a few dB's, the smoother the transition, the better.

Does that make sense?


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

Yes, it makes sense. The way that I level matched between mids, tweets, and sub was by using an RTA. I could see on the curve, while comparing it to the JBL target curve that either the sub or tweeter levels on the curve were too high/low compared to the mids. I adjusted tweeter and sub gains down to to get as flat a line as I could on the RTA curve. Before you ask I used a DMM to set gains 

I'll try using the test tones and level match that way. Thanks for your help on this


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

MrHyde said:


> Yes, it makes sense. The way that I level matched between mids, tweets, and sub was by using an RTA. I could see on the curve, while comparing it to the JBL target curve that either the sub or tweeter levels on the curve were too high/low compared to the mids. I adjusted tweeter and sub gains down to to get as flat a line as I could on the RTA curve. Before you ask I used a DMM to set gains
> 
> I'll try using the test tones and level match that way. Thanks for your help on this


Using a DMM to set gains is pointless, and won't help level match. 

An RTA with all speakers playing wont show the different in SPL around the crossover point between the two speakers that are being crossed. 

If, for example, your sub has a LPF of 63hz, and your mids have a high pass filter of 80hz, then 63hz from the sub should be the same SPL as 80hz from the mid. The only way to tell that is by measuring each set of speakers with the others muted.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

gijoe said:


> If, for example, your sub has a LPF of 63hz, and your mids have a high pass filter of 80hz, then 63hz from the sub should be the same SPL as 80hz from the mid.


Is this regardless of slope? These are the test results:
Mid
60hz 99.9db
70hz 97.4db
80hz 99.1db

sub
60hz 87.1db
70hz 87.6db
80hz 85.1db

Since these results are out of proportion I couldn't match the sub level to all three tones from mids. I matched it to 70hz. I didn't even have enough level adjustment on my HU to match it. Will have to bring sub gain up more to match it another time, 2 more db. It's 110 degrees in the garage. I did set the sub gain originally slightly lower than I could have so I have some leeway. So you're saying I should have matched the 60hz tone db level from sub to 80hz to mids since those are close to my crossover settings instead of matching at 70hz. I don't know if it's normal for these differences in db to be out of proportion with the different tones.. Maybe I also need some eq work and may have some peaks that need cutting. 

At this point the sub is really hitting hard. Seems too high to me and I'm still 2 db short of being matched. Since getting the phase better the other day the sub has never hit this hard so it gives me some hope. I hadn't messed with sub levels after getting the phase improved the other day since I was basing it off of my RTA curve, which you said not to do. I mean I've messed with sub levels to no end in the past but maybe since I was somewhat out of phase on the sub it always sounded sloppy and always kept the level lower. I'll listen to some of my usual test tracks on the way to work tomorrow and see if the mid bass is improved.


----------



## jrwalte (Mar 27, 2008)

I don't agree to level match 63 to 80. Everyone I've ever seen prefers to run a higher dB output on the sub by 10-14dB over the rest of your system (Like JBL house curve), when considering at 40Hz and below, then it starts to roll off up to 120Hz or so where it stays flat. It's at the 80Hz drop in the curve where you typically want to match your sub to mids.

Your cross over point 'goal' is 80Hz. Period. Not 63 and 80. You can only have 1 cross over point. Both your sub and mid should play at the same dB AT 80Hz while 63 Hz should be louder for the sub and quieter for the mid.

The reason you set the sub to 63 instead of 80, for example, is because your sub is playing louder and it isn't dropping off fast enough to level match with your mids at 80. So if you crossed it at 80, it would be louder than your mid at 80 and you would be out of phase. The trick then is to cross the sub at a lower Hz so the dB level matches more closely at the 80Hz crossover point.


----------



## jrwalte (Mar 27, 2008)

Also I'd use the RTA with pink noise to see how the drop off curve flows for sub and mids separately and then compare them on the same RTA graph where the crossover point is, to confirm that they both drop about the same. So if mids have a curve drop from 90dB down to 80dB at 80Hz, the sub should also have it's curve drop down to about 80dB at 80hz. Then you run RTA with both playing and it should be a smooth drop in the curve (without a bump or dip at 80Hz) transitioning from the 10+dB at 40Hz down to 120Hz.

I don't think a dB meter is as accurate. At least most of the cheap dB meters we would buy.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

Yes, I do understand that there is only one crossover point. Using an RTA to check how drop off curves flow for mids and sub separately would seem to be a better method to me than tones. That way I can see everything happening in the bass frequencies at once. 

I do also prefer the sub frequencies to run higher than the rest of the system. I had mine set low because I thought I had my levels matched pretty well with the JBL target and also because I was out of phase to some degree before and it was very muddy. Raising sub levels didn't make sense to me earlier before testing the tones because my curve and frequency levels matched to the JBL target pretty close. I didn't have time earlier to run a new curve but I would imagine my bass frequencies would be all way above target now. Granted I matched all levels from subs through tweeters pretty closely I still have a lot of uncorrected peaks and nulls that were unfixable with my graphic EQ. 

I am anxious to have another tuning session this weekend and spend some more time matching levels better and maybe redoing some EQ adjustments. I'm also anxious to have some steeper slopes to work with, maybe this would all be a lot easier with some 24 or 48dB slopes.


----------



## jrwalte (Mar 27, 2008)

Keep in mind you want your levels set before you set your final cross over. As the volume level of each set of speakers will impact their crossover point.

24dB LR crossover is basically all you ever need. Keeps your crossover points in phase. Then you just need to make sure each speaker (on both sides of the crossover) has the same roll off of the crossover point 'goal'.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

jrwalte said:


> I don't agree to level match 63 to 80. Everyone I've ever seen prefers to run a higher dB output on the sub by 10-14dB over the rest of your system (Like JBL house curve), when considering at 40Hz and below, then it starts to roll off up to 120Hz or so where it stays flat. It's at the 80Hz drop in the curve where you typically want to match your sub to mids.
> 
> Your cross over point 'goal' is 80Hz. Period. Not 63 and 80. You can only have 1 cross over point. Both your sub and mid should play at the same dB AT 80Hz while 63 Hz should be louder for the sub and quieter for the mid.
> 
> The reason you set the sub to 63 instead of 80, for example, is because your sub is playing louder and it isn't dropping off fast enough to level match with your mids at 80. So if you crossed it at 80, it would be louder than your mid at 80 and you would be out of phase. The trick then is to cross the sub at a lower Hz so the dB level matches more closely at the 80Hz crossover point.


I'm not suggesting to level match across a wide range, but at the crossover point you want the levels the same, otherwise you have a strange change in SPL when sound goes from the sub to the mid, and vice versa. The 63hz-80hz example was based on where the lpf for the sub and hpf for the mid were set. I choose the same point (80hz typically) for both, and use a 24dB/octave slope.

You definitely want the subs to be louder, 10dB is pretty common, but you don't want to simply raise the gain on the sub, and if you do, you need to EQ so that at the crossover point the transition is smooth. A smooth transition between the mids and subs, and mids and tweeters (Crossover, TA, level matching, and EQ) will give much better midbass realism. The sub takes over the hard work from the mids, and the tweeters may play the upper harmonics, if you get all of the transitions right, then it's much easier to get strong midbass, and upfront sub bass.


----------



## drop1 (Jul 26, 2015)

I like to use as large and thick a piece of MDF as will fit. My last truck had 12 inch ovals for 6 I ch speakers. The MDF I used was 3/4 inch thick.

I used focal liner on both sides of the mdf and the door behind it. This adds a lot of weight and somewhat decouples all that mass from the door a bit. Those were the deadliest doors I've ever had. 

My current truck is a close second. 

I used plastic adapter rings. Focal liner thetwen the plastic and metal then liner again between the speaker and plastic rings. 

Full coverage on the outer metal and inner metal then as much coverage to to rear if the door panel as possible. Then black hole tiles behind the drivers on the outer skin and blackhole tiles between the door card and frame. You have to compress the foam with the door panel to mount it ZERO rattles or funkiness of any sort.


----------



## jrwalte (Mar 27, 2008)

gijoe said:


> I'm not suggesting to level match across a wide range, but at the crossover point you want the levels the same, otherwise you have a strange change in SPL when sound goes from the sub to the mid, and vice versa. The 63hz-80hz example was based on where the lpf for the sub and hpf for the mid were set. I choose the same point (80hz typically) for both, and use a 24dB/octave slope.
> 
> 
> 
> You definitely want the subs to be louder, 10dB is pretty common, but you don't want to simply raise the gain on the sub, and if you do, you need to EQ so that at the crossover point the transition is smooth. A smooth transition between the mids and subs, and mids and tweeters (Crossover, TA, level matching, and EQ) will give much better midbass realism. The sub takes over the hard work from the mids, and the tweeters may play the upper harmonics, if you get all of the transitions right, then it's much easier to get strong midbass, and upfront sub bass.


We're thinking the same thing. But in your original comment of 63Hz of sub should match 80Hz of mid, is not true. 63hz of sub should actually be louder than mid because it's in the higher dB scale on your curve dropping from sub to mid. 

It's the 80Hz of sub that should match 80Hz of mid. The reason you sometimes cross sub at lower than 80 is because you play the sub at a higher volume. So rather than using eq to try and lower the drop off curve of the sub to match up with the drop off curve of the mid at 80, it's better to lower the crossover of the sub to make its curve closer matched to mid. Then you can do some fine eq adjustments on top of that if the drop off curve still has peaks or nulls.

So you set your sub or mid crossover to give you the best matching curve as close as possible to the target crossover you want. Then adjust with eq from there.



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

jrwalte said:


> We're thinking the same thing. But in your original comment of 63Hz of sub should match 80Hz of mid, is not true.
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


I didn't say that, exactly, but after reading my previous posts I can see the confusion. 

The point is simply to have the SPL as close as possible at the crossover point. From there you can (and should) ramp up the output on the sub, but the transition needs to be smooth, you don't want the curve to jump suddenly by several decibels. If there is a huge mismatch at the crossover point it ruins the "blending" which generally causes more sub localization, and a less satisfying midbass response.

So, I agree completely that one way to get around this is by leaving a gap between the sub (63hz) and mid (80hz). This allows the sub lpf to work and line up closely when it meets the midwoofer. I think we're on the same page, and my original posts weren't clear.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

Just an update, have installed the DSP and have gotten more familiar with REW and the helix software. Have got the mid bass sounding better. Have really been able to see what's going on in my system. I have the mid woofers low in the door and I can see how it causes a lot of problems in that location. For whatever reason I found that flipping phase 180 degrees on both mids helped the mid bass quite a bit. Playing with phase on sub would not give me the same result. Not sure why that is exactly but I went with what sounded best. All bass feels up front. Sub levels look pretty high on the screen shot and I know I need to do some work on that still but it sounds good and blends well with the mids unless I play something really bass heavy. I have a lot of rattles in the trunk that I need to deaden. I wonder if the rattles are causing the frequency levels to read higher than they actually are.

I found that my mids with crossovers disabled will not play much above 3K so I put my mids/tweets crossover at 3K. Originally when the mids were in my passive set up they were crossed at 3800Hz according to the morel spec sheet so I wonder if I was missing a whole frequency range. 

I know the curve doesn't look that great but it does sound better than it ever has in the past. The soundstage and center image are spot on and music sounds really balanced and natural. The highs are a lot smoother now but I still need to bring down between 1-3K I think. This is the result of maybe 15 hours sitting in the car. I made a lot of mistakes, not having settings in REW right and having to start over 4 or 5 times. 

Anyway, I'm open to any critique of the curve or advice in general


----------



## drop1 (Jul 26, 2015)

MrHyde said:


> Just an update, have installed the DSP and have gotten more familiar with REW and the helix software. Have got the mid bass sounding better. Have really been able to see what's going on in my system. I have the mid woofers low in the door and I can see how it causes a lot of problems in that location. For whatever reason I found that flipping phase 180 degrees on both mids helped the mid bass quite a bit. Playing with phase on sub would not give me the same result. Not sure why that is exactly but I went with what sounded best. All bass feels up front. Sub levels look pretty high on the screen shot and I know I need to do some work on that still but it sounds good and blends well with the mids unless I play something really bass heavy. I have a lot of rattles in the trunk that I need to deaden. I wonder if the rattles are causing the frequency levels to read higher than they actually are.
> 
> I found that my mids with crossovers disabled will not play much above 3K so I put my mids/tweets crossover at 3K. Originally when the mids were in my passive set up they were crossed at 3800Hz according to the morel spec sheet so I wonder if I was missing a whole frequency range.
> 
> ...


You can make the curve pretty or you can make it sound good . From where you are now I'd take over with my ears. Your system, if everything is in time , in phase and crossed over properly should be sounding pretty good based off that graph. 

Are you measuring the whole system with correlated or uncorrelated pink noise? 

Try stereo pink noise if you havent and I'd bet a lot of those bumps will be much smoother. 

The problem with correlated (mono) pink noise when measuring an entire system is that mic is picking up all the phase anomalies when moved. 

Stereo pink removes much if this from the equation because the 2 sides are not synced with each other. You really want to do tonal balancing with stereo pink. Mono pink will lie to you and have you chasing issues on the graph that arent really there.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

drop1 said:


> Are you measuring the whole system with correlated or uncorrelated pink noise?


I'm using Periodic (Pink PN) generated by REW. Mono right? I do about 100 averages while moving mic ear to ear. What's the opinion on sine sweeps vs pink noise? I'll have to find a good source for a stereo pink noise download. I'm hesitant to start out with a new source of pink noise and then spend hours tuning again only to find out later I got a bad source file.


----------



## drop1 (Jul 26, 2015)

MrHyde said:


> drop1 said:
> 
> 
> > Are you measuring the whole system with correlated or uncorrelated pink noise?
> ...


Try this. I use this when I'm getting close just to see what really a problem and what's being caused by phase. 

If you are close this should put out a pretty smooth graph. 
https://youtu.be/7CMf3s3TSEE


----------



## Mahapederdon (Aug 19, 2016)

MrHyde said:


> Just an update, have installed the DSP and have gotten more familiar with REW and the helix software. Have got the mid bass sounding better. Have really been able to see what's going on in my system. I have the mid woofers low in the door and I can see how it causes a lot of problems in that location. For whatever reason I found that flipping phase 180 degrees on both mids helped the mid bass quite a bit. Playing with phase on sub would not give me the same result. Not sure why that is exactly but I went with what sounded best. All bass feels up front. Sub levels look pretty high on the screen shot and I know I need to do some work on that still but it sounds good and blends well with the mids unless I play something really bass heavy. I have a lot of rattles in the trunk that I need to deaden. I wonder if the rattles are causing the frequency levels to read higher than they actually are.
> 
> I found that my mids with crossovers disabled will not play much above 3K so I put my mids/tweets crossover at 3K. Originally when the mids were in my passive set up they were crossed at 3800Hz according to the morel spec sheet so I wonder if I was missing a whole frequency range.
> 
> ...


That looks really good, and what matters most is how it sounds.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

delete


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

Just an update. Am finally going to find out if there is any mid bass improvement by switching from these flimsy original door speaker mounts to heavy solid MDF mounts. Originally these doors came stock with these flimsy plastic tunnel type mounts. I had previously coated them with several layers of sound deadening. After removing them I realize just how bad they were, They may as well have been made from cardboard.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

I wanted to do a project without spending money for a change so scavenged a sheet of 1 inch thick MDF from a scrap pile at work. Had to sandwich 2 layers together to equal the height of the old mounts. Used titebond 2 wood glue and some wood screws to bond the 2 layers together. Sealed with 2 coats of Minwax wood hardener and 2 coats of oil based primer. Used a Q-tip to get sealer down in all the screw holes. Hopefully it holds up to the elements over time. The wood hardener is really great stuff, it really soaks down into the MDF without swelling it and dries within a few hours.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

I used 1/8" thick closed cell foam to seal the mounts to the metal door. Luckily the door was a nice flat surface and looks like it really sealed nice and flush.


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

Everything sealed and installed now. The mounts seem solid as a rock with very little vibration transferring to the metal door. Right off the bat without any tuning changes I can see that there is improvement in mid bass. I did a little playing around with crossovers and noticed that I am able to run the speakers way down to 50-60 Hz now without any vibration or signs of strain. It's like the sound is coming from a larger driver now and small whimpy drum hits now hit with more authority. Maybe 30% better. This is not a blow your mind night and day difference from before but without a doubt an improvement. I need to do a complete system retune from start to finish to really get an idea of what has changed in the sound. I'll follow up in a week or so after I retune if anyone is interested.


----------



## hankhowdy1 (Jul 21, 2016)

MrHyde said:


> Everything sealed and installed now. The mounts seem solid as a rock with very little vibration transferring to the metal door. Right off the bat without any tuning changes I can see that there is improvement in mid bass. I did a little playing around with crossovers and noticed that I am able to run the speakers way down to 50-60 Hz now without any vibration or signs of strain. It's like the sound is coming from a larger driver now and small whimpy drum hits now hit with more authority. Maybe 30% better. This is not a blow your mind night and day difference from before but without a doubt an improvement. I need to do a complete system retune from start to finish to really get an idea of what has changed in the sound. I'll follow up in a week or so after I retune if anyone is interested.


Very nice work. No doubt you had more mid bass. 

What drivers are we seeing here? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MrHyde (Aug 31, 2019)

hankhowdy1 said:


> Very nice work. No doubt you had more mid bass.
> 
> What drivers are we seeing here?


Thanks, and also for your advice early on in this thread. The drivers are Morel Tempo 6. Am anxious to do some tuning this week to see what else I can get out of them.


----------



## hankhowdy1 (Jul 21, 2016)

MrHyde said:


> Thanks, and also for your advice early on in this thread. The drivers are Morel Tempo 6. Am anxious to do some tuning this week to see what else I can get out of them.


Tempo 6  nice mid bass driver. You can probably drop it to 70hz and let it thump. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

