# 3-Way active VS. 2-Way active



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

Here's my dilemma...

I'll admit, it's a good problem to have; but I currently have an active front sound-stage, consisting of a 6.5" Dynaudio Esotar, and a Scanspeak tweeter (see my signature).

I've been considering going with a 3-way active front, and adding a 3.5" Dynaudio Esotar E430 midrange.

Obviously, the $1275 for a pair of 3.5" speakers is alarming, but if they would make a 'noticeable' improvement... then for me, it's worth the money.

That being said... the key word here is: 'noticeable'. 

My current 2-way setup already sounds amazing (better than I ever dreamed it would)... but I can't help thinking about whether a 3-way would sound 'noticeably' better. 

Any comments / input would be appreciated.


Jimmy


----------



## unpredictableacts (Aug 16, 2006)

Great speakers but there are tons of great 3-4" out there. At some point you expense and return on investment hit a wall.


----------



## Rodek (Aug 19, 2006)

If you add the third "way", you have to take complexity into consideration. Do you have the amp/crossover system to support the 3 way? Will you have to make major modifications to your vehicle and if you some how don't like the 3 way setup, how hard would it be to return the vehicle back to 2 way? Then there's the cost. If you don't like the 3 way set up obviously there's funds that will be lost and then there's the trouble of recouping your funds through a sale etc. 

I'm by no means shooting down the 3 way idea as I'm all about SQ but simply wanted to throw some things out there that you may/may not have thought about.

On a good note: The 3 way system may be so noticeable to you that you're completely satisfied. A tough decision. List your pros and cons on paper and choose based on that.


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

Rodek said:


> If you add the third "way", you have to take complexity into consideration. Do you have the amp/crossover system to support the 3 way? Will you have to make major modifications to your vehicle and if you some how don't like the 3 way setup, how hard would it be to return the vehicle back to 2 way? Then there's the cost. If you don't like the 3 way set up obviously there's funds that will be lost and then there's the trouble of recouping your funds through a sale etc.
> 
> I'm by no means shooting down the 3 way idea as I'm all about SQ but simply wanted to throw some things out there that you may/may not have thought about.
> 
> On a good note: The 3 way system may be so noticeable to you that you're completely satisfied. A tough decision. List your pros and cons on paper and choose based on that.



I'm not at all concerned with 'complexity'... the ability to build an active 3-way system is well within my knowledge/comfort level (and financial ability).

My question is more toward; 'improved sound quality'. I want to know if there would be an audible improvement with a 3-way, versus the current 2-way setup I already have.


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

The answer to that is, with the right speaker placement and tuning, probably yes. If you throw the midrange down in the door or something totally off-axis, no. If you put it up in the A-pillar or maybe dash firing toward the rearview mirror/front dome lights, cross them over so all vocals come from it, midbass comes from the... midbass, and the 6k+ or more highs are coming from the tweeter, then you'll have yourself a likely gem (after tuning).

Now let's talk about those FPD amplifiers. How we liking them suckers? I'm eyeballin'...

Speaking of amps, you have the right amount of channels but those Focals you have (I suppose in the back?) are gonna have to go. I'm sure you know this. I like rear stage which is why I will be the first to buy a 10-channel processor, but... until then... active 3-way? No rear stage for you, brother.

I'd also take a look at the Stereo Integrity subwoofer that will probably eat your JL, which is very good, for lunch...


----------



## Rodek (Aug 19, 2006)

jimmydee said:


> I'm not at all concerned with 'complexity'... the ability to build an active 3-way system is well within my knowledge/comfort level (and financial ability).
> 
> My question is more toward; 'improved sound quality'. I want to know if there would be an audible improvement with a 3-way, versus the current 2-way setup I already have.


Hope I didn't insult you in my last post. With that said, I think you will have a noticeable improvement in audio quality simply because you'll have more drivers to cover the audible frequency range. I may be off track but based on previous experience, that's my personal conclusion. I think your 3 way driver selection is a good bet although I struggle with losing the simplicity of the 2 way set up. Such is the pursuit of audio bliss.


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

sirbOOm said:


> Now let's talk about those FPD amplifiers. How we liking them suckers? I'm eyeballin'...


They are very VERY nice. I wanted to go Class D, simply for the compact size, and efficiency factor. In my opinion, these are the best Class D available right now.



sirbOOm said:


> Speaking of amps, you have the right amount of channels but those Focals you have (I suppose in the back?) are gonna have to go. I'm sure you know this. I like rear stage which is why I will be the first to buy a 10-channel processor, but... until then... active 3-way? No rear stage for you, brother.


My plan is to add another amp, as well as strap another Mosconi DSP to the system (for 14 channels out).

Here's what I'm thinking:

3-Way active front, using the 6-channel Focal amp, along with Esotar 6.5" and Esotar 3.5", and Scanspeak tweeter.

2-Way active rear, using/adding a new Focal 4-channel amp, along with new Esotec 6.5" and Esotec tweeter (I'm currently running passive rear with the Focal Polyglass).

I might upgrade the sub... but for now, I'm satisfied with the JL - it sounds clean, has tight bass, and is super-compact (doesn't take-up much trunk space, which is important to me).

As far as DSP goes; you can get a Mosconi 4to6 SP-DIF, which has optical IN and OUT, and run the output directly into another 4to6 (or 6to8) for additional channels. It has the ability to run MASTER/SLAVE for up to 32 channels, by adding more 4to6 units! 
http://mosconi-system.it/product/gladen-dsp-4to6/

In my case, I would buy a 4to6 and output it to my existing 6to8, for a total of 14 individual channels. All speakers run active. 
Of course, you'd have to program each DSP individually, but I could set-up the 4to6 to run my front soundstage, and the 6to8 to run my rear and Sub (with 3 channels to spare).

I really want to do it, simply because of the coolness factor... but it's going to cost about $4K for the additional equipment (need another DSP, a 4-channel amp, and more speakers). This is why I am debating the COST vs RETURN aspect.


Jimmy


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Get the p99 and setup a three way+ sub. Spend a couple of years learning how to tune and then see if you want to add a processor and rears. Or just add the processor for the front stage and use the p99 as a pure source. Once you are comfortable with tuning on the p99 using a processor will be simpler and it will take you further.


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

sqnut said:


> Get the p99 and setup a three way+ sub. Spend a couple of years learning how to tune and then see if you want to add a processor and rears. Or just add the processor for the front stage and use the p99 as a pure source. Once you are comfortable with tuning on the p99 using a processor will be simpler and it will take you further.


????


----------



## bobduch (Jul 22, 2005)

You need to hear from/PM BuickGN. IIRC he ended up with Esotar tweeter, mid (430) but went with MW182. A little bigger, maybe more mid bass authority. He has been messing with Dyn stuff for a while and has lots of good feedback.


----------



## tonny (Dec 4, 2010)

Are you missing some thing in the sound running 2 way? 3 way is not always better in my opinion…. Only if you can use a large enough mid range in the right location.


----------



## 2010hummerguy (Oct 7, 2009)

bobduch said:


> You need to hear from/PM BuickGN. IIRC he ended up with Esotar tweeter, mid (430) but went with MW182. A little bigger, maybe more mid bass authority. He has been messing with Dyn stuff for a while and has lots of good feedback.


+1

Where are your Esotar/Scans installed? Those Esotar 6.5's are some of the best mids in the world...what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Better imaging/soundstage? Midrange detail?


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

Architect7 said:


> +1
> 
> Where are your Esotar/Scans installed? Those Esotar 6.5's are some of the best mids in the world...what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Better imaging/soundstage? Midrange detail?


I suppose, that's my question...
As mentioned in my original post, the 2-way combo of Esotar 650 and Scan Tweeter sound AMAZING. I don't know if I'm missing anything, because I don't have (or haven't heard) a comparable 3-way system, to reference it to.

I may be looking for something that isn't even there. I mean, I can't reiterate it enough... the Esotar / Scan combo sound REALLY REALLY good! 
If I were to give the simple answer, then I would say; "I'm looking for more midrange detail"... but maybe I'm looking for something that isn't even missing. 
I honestly don't feel like my 2-way is lacking, in any way... but curiosity has gotten the best of me, and if by adding an Esotar 3.5" would provide an appreciable difference, then I'd be willing to drop the money to do it. 

The previous post mentioned that a 3-way system isn't always better than a 2-way. I can see that being the case, if we took a 2-way Esotar system, and compared it to a 3-way Alpine, or some other brand... but if we're comparing apples to apples, is that statement still true?


----------



## grim83 (Jul 15, 2011)

Will it sound better probably given install and tuning are up to snuff but I think my wallet cried at that price lol. An option to test the waters would be to pick up a good mid that's the same size and install it for a test run before dumping that kind of money. Plenty of nice ones floating around that a pair wouldn't run over a hundred bucks and you'd have a better idea if it's worth it. Sq is so subjective and install to install the results can be so different I'd have a hard time dropping that kind of money on a maybe if your current stuff sounds as good as you say. Just my .000001 cents worth lol


----------



## bobduch (Jul 22, 2005)

My impression is that people are probably under estimating your abilities with install. Do not be afraid of a 3- way (that's what...never mind). 
I really would talk to buickgn. You might even check with a Dyn dealer (Jerry on here perhaps) about borrowing a pair, maybe pay him $100 for trying them. Cheap way to find out. And you could make some money back selling the 650 and getting the MW182 IF you went that route.

If you were to re-post as "two or 3 way Esotar system" you'll get more Dyn guys replying.


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

bobduch said:


> (that's what...never mind)


LOL!!!

I sent a PM to BuickGN, earlier today, but no response yet.

I did speak to Jerry Niebur, earlier in the week. He said that the 3.5" Esotar would make an improvement.


----------



## 2010hummerguy (Oct 7, 2009)

BuickGN will tell you get the 430's...so be sure to post pics for how it turns out


----------



## bobduch (Jul 22, 2005)

Architect7 said:


> BuickGN will tell you get the 430's...so be sure to post pics for how it turns out


x2, lol


----------



## autokraftgt (Aug 28, 2012)

Jimmydee, Iam in the same situation as you and have talked with jerry many times about this. Currently running the esotar 650/ dyn T-380 tweeter on-axis in a 2-way....sounds amazing and I can't wrap my brain on how it could sound better....but jerry insists that adding a dedicated midrange (430 etc..) will improve the sound and improve output a bit as well. Because it sounds SOOO good, Im not in the biggest hurry as I am not able to control a 3-way + sub at this time....so there is some gear I need to buy before adding a midrange set....maybe a P99?? we'll see.
I think proper tuning capabilities and speaker location will make or break the 3-way....
Just my scenerio as it is similar to yours!


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

autokraftgt said:


> Jimmydee, Iam in the same situation as you and have talked with jerry many times about this. Currently running the esotar 650/ dyn T-380 tweeter on-axis in a 2-way....sounds amazing and I can't wrap my brain on how it could sound better....but jerry insists that adding a dedicated midrange (430 etc..) will improve the sound and improve output a bit as well. Because it sounds SOOO good, Im not in the biggest hurry as I am not able to control a 3-way + sub at this time....so there is some gear I need to buy before adding a midrange set....maybe a P99?? we'll see.
> I think proper tuning capabilities and speaker location will make or break the 3-way....
> Just my scenerio as it is similar to yours!


If it were simply a case of dropping $1275 for a set of E430's (although very expensive), I would probably do it. The issue, is that I also need to buy another amplifier and a second DSP, to do the full project (the way I want it done)... so this is now looking at a $4K expense. I just spent $7K to get my system to where it is now... not sure I'm ready to drop another $4K just yet.


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

If you love your 2-way, leave it alone. A dedicated midrange will prevent crossovers occuring in the vocal range, which keeps voices coming from one speaker per side. This is advantageous in many ways, sure, but, again, if you love your 2-way, invest in the stock market, buy your wife a diamond necklace, get yourself a huge spoiler that adds 50 hp. Spend your money elsewhere... or I'll hold onto it for you.


----------



## 2010hummerguy (Oct 7, 2009)

jimmydee said:


> If it were simply a case of dropping $1275 for a set of E430's (although very expensive), I would probably do it. The issue, is that I also need to buy another amplifier and a second DSP, to do the full project (the way I want it done)... so this is now looking at a $4K expense. I just spent $7K to get my system to where it is now... not sure I'm ready to drop another $4K just yet.


If you absolutely want to keep rear fill, I'd get a 2 channel for the rears and run off the same line level that feeds your 6to8. Adjust levels at the amp and go. Another 6to8 just for rear fill seems very unnecessary but that is just me


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

If money truly isn't an issue and you are aware up front that it may actually sound worse out of the gate, I would say go for it. 

I've never heard the combo you have but I'm sure the scan tweeter is great. With the Esotar 110 and 650, I can't say that I could recommend the 430 in good conscience to everyone. The e 650 seems immune to the usual problems of a midbass/midrange. Even at about 1" of travel the midrange does not muddy up or lose detail. It's level of detail is up there with the 430. I can't say I would do the 3-way if I had if to do it over again. For starters it took me damn near 6 months to get it to sound better than the 2-way. 

With that out of the way, you will end up with an improvement in sound quality after all is said and done. The 430 is just flawless. It's one of those rare speakers that impress 2 years later when you're just driving and not critically listening. They are the most life-like I've personally experienced. Not warm or cold. Not any descriptive word really. Just real. 

I don't know about the Scan tweeter but chances are it will sound better after being crossed over higher. While I don't recommend a lowpass higher than 4khz for the 430, it has no real cone breakup and can be used higher on axis. I've tried them with no tweeter but they start to run out of steam around 8khz. 

I've tried them down to 120hz/12 db and while they don't have the impact of a 6.5", it didn't hurt the midrange higher up and they had a good 3/4" of excursion. It's not something you would ever want to do but they have a good bit of excursion if needed. 

Currently my 9s play 65-700hz, the 430s play 700-4,200hz, and the tweeters play 3,000 and up. I've had great luck with the mids and tweeters overlapped. It stages better and is easier and more forgiving to tune. Don't be afraid to use non traditional crossover points. I think having one speaker playing the entire vocal range is not necessary at all. I've seen no advantage to having the mids cover 200-5khz as I originally had them based on advice from here. Keep them lowpassed low enough to keep them away from beaming but let the larger speakers play some of the lower stuff. I've found better dynamics and staging doing it this way. With the 650s able to play nicely up high and the 430 having great sound quality and impact from 200-past 6k, you have a lot of room to experiment.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

need more install specifics.

I'm going to throw in an opinion, and it's just that. So, don't get too upset and start calling me names.

I say if you're 7K into it, and it's got nothing lacking, leave it alone.

When you hear someone else's car that outshines yours, or you have a trusty dealer call you up and say 'we can do better' or something like that, reconsider your decision.

btw, I almost used the word "felching" to describe something, in this post.

Let that be a moment of clarity.


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

Architect7 said:


> If you absolutely want to keep rear fill, I'd get a 2 channel for the rears and run off the same line level that feeds your 6to8. Adjust levels at the amp and go. Another 6to8 just for rear fill seems very unnecessary but that is just me


I'm using an optical input (from a mObridge).


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

cajunner said:


> I say if you're 7K into it, and it's got nothing lacking, leave it alone.


I'm thinking this is what I'll do... (nothing - well, maybe change my sub)

I was waiting for BuickGN to chime in. Thanks for the input guys. 

For now, I'm going to be content with my current system. I really don't think I can appreciably improve it much more than what it already is...


Jimmy


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

sirbOOm said:


> I'd also take a look at the Stereo Integrity subwoofer that will probably eat your JL, which is very good, for lunch...


This is what kills me... someone suggests something... I check into it... and now I'm thinking it's time to upgrade the sub!!!

That SI sub does look VERY good... (drool). Gotta have...


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

cajunner said:


> When you hear someone else's car that outshines yours, reconsider your decision.


Honestly, I've never heard a system that sounds better than mine... I've heard a couple that are louder... but none that sound better.
I suppose that's what hours in the garage, tinkering, sound deadening, and tuning will do...

Thanks again for all the input. This site has been super valuable (and cost me a fortune)!


----------



## LeftEarDamage (May 26, 2014)

If you are looking to have extreme dimension in your sound system if you want 3 way I would go with an 12 in or 15 in for deep bass in the back and in the doors go with a 8 in woofer for mid bass, 3.5-4 inch for mid-high and 1 1/2 for the tweeters.

I have a friend that went from running 2-way components (6 1/2 & 1 1/8) and switch to a 3 way (6.5", 3", 1 1/8") component and honestly it sounded the same.

when I was talking to the guy at the local speaker shop about switching it up & when seeing what he thought he said that its better to go with the 8",4",1 1/2" speaker combo bc the small change from the 6 1/2 and 3" speaker isn't going to be as dynamic. also the 8" woofer will provide a stronger hitting mid then the 6 1/2 would. that much variation in speaker size will fill out all desired frequencies you want to hit


----------



## bobduch (Jul 22, 2005)

Awe, Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy. You had to bring up the sub. You couldn't leave well enough alone. Now the torture begins. Now you have to go find some Velodynes...


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

bobduch said:


> Awe, Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy. You had to bring up the sub. You couldn't leave well enough alone. Now the torture begins. Now you have to go find some Velodynes...


I'd love to have a set of Velo's... or do an I.B. Esotar 1200 setup. The issue is that, I'm not willing to sacrifice trunk space, so a shallow sub fits me well. 
I bought the JL sub, because I thought it was the best shallow available (at the time, it was)... but now I'm drooling over that S.I. BM-MkIV.
To be honest... the JL shallow, in tandem with the Focal 900.1 amp has a lot of kick! It just took many hours of 'tinkering' to get it to sound right (it's a finicky sub).


----------



## 2010hummerguy (Oct 7, 2009)

SI is opposite of finicky, I can aim it any way and it still makes me smile with anything from 200 to 600 watts.

I want to put a servo GR Research sub in my Jeep for fun


----------



## autokraftgt (Aug 28, 2012)

My original plan for 3-way was a bit different and I still might go this route in the future...we'll see...kinda unconventional, but different is cool
I have always wanted to try the mw182, but I LOVE my E650 too and can't sell them...SO
mw182
esotar 650
t-380 tweeter
best configuration? probably not....but dynamic as hell and fun!
Now that my 2-way sounds do good, my weakest link has become my substage...enclosure specifically....so I will be addressing that before going 3-way
I have 2 channels @ 90 watts/ea on reserve for 3-way in the future


----------



## tonny (Dec 4, 2010)

If you have a 6" mid range in the doors firing to your legs and you are thinking in upgrading your system fist improve the placement off the speakers you have and get the maximum out off them! When the current mid basses are placed at the best spot an the best angle then you can think any further!


----------



## RocketBoots (Apr 16, 2011)

Jimmy,

Could you tell us the locations of the drivers? Including the sub? Stock? Custom?


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

RocketBoots said:


> Jimmy,
> 
> Could you tell us the locations of the drivers? Including the sub? Stock? Custom?


All drivers are mounted in stock locations. 

Front active has Scanspeak tweeter in door sail, and Esotar driver in lower door.

Rear passive has Focal Polyglass components in door.

Sub is in a shallow box, bolted to the back seat (in the trunk).

It's a new Audi A4, and I'm not going to start cutting it up or building speaker pods. My criteria was to get the best SQ possible out of a completely stealth system.


----------



## RocketBoots (Apr 16, 2011)

jimmydee said:


> It's a new Audi A4, and I'm not going to start cutting it up or building speaker pods. My criteria was to get the best SQ possible out of a completely stealth system.


Well, that's really important info. I'm not overly familiar with Audi sound systems, but I'm guessing you had to do some custom fab to get the Scan tween in the sail, and make it look OEM??

But the biggest question in my mind is where you would put 430. Wouldn't it require some pretty extensive mods to the door panel, if that's where it would go? Albeit, very tasteful and OEM looking, potentially. If speaker pods are out, then I'd imagine A-pillars or dash (which, IMO, are not great locations for a small mid anyways) are not part of the picture.


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

There's an existing factory location, in the dash (I took out the stock speakers).

The factory B&O system had 14 speakers. I replaced them with 7 speakers.


----------



## RocketBoots (Apr 16, 2011)

Ahh, gotcha. 

OK, then IMO, NO WAY for the 430. It will NOT sound better, and will likely sound worse. I think the biggest advantage of a dedicated midrange in a 3-way is that you don't have to cross it over in the critical range, you don't stress each driver (tweet and 6.5" mid) to the limits, and thus get a 'better' (to be concise) sound. But if it were me, I would want the mid in the door, close to the 6.5", on the same plane and axis.

Your drivers in the 2-way are about the best that you can buy, and do so many things right.

BTW, so how did your audio upgrade sound compared to the B&O? If I recall, the B&O system was pretty decent.

Off topic, but I wonder how your Focal FPD's compare to Arc's XDi V2's... they look almost the same...


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

To be honest, the factory B&O was pretty good... but after a year, i got bored with it.

The new system absolutely kills it!


----------



## JimmyDee (Mar 8, 2014)

RocketBoots said:


> Off topic, but I wonder how your Focal FPD's compare to Arc's XDi V2's... they look almost the same...


Ya, those Arcs are nice too.

For Class D amplifiers, they are probably very similar in spec and design. They are both ranking as the best out there right now.

One created by Steven Mantz, and the other created by Robert Zeff. It doesn't get much better, whichever brand you choose.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

RocketBoots said:


> Ahh, gotcha.
> 
> OK, then IMO, NO WAY for the 430. It will NOT sound better, and will likely sound worse. I think the biggest advantage of a dedicated midrange in a 3-way is that you don't have to cross it over in the critical range, you don't stress each driver (tweet and 6.5" mid) to the limits, and thus get a 'better' (to be concise) sound. But if it were me, I would want the mid in the door, close to the 6.5", on the same plane and axis.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't say absolutely no way. I prefer kicks myself but here are a lot if great sounding cars with dash mounted midranges. 

I think not crossing the driver over in the "critical" area is a myth. I've had zero issues with it. In the beginning I had 150hz-5khz being played by the mids. As time went on I realized they sounded better with the 9s covering up to 800hz. That was true in this car with the 162, 650, 182, 142, and 430. It has always sounded better with a higher midrange highpass right in the middle of the vocal range. It stages just as well and it's more dynamic with the 9s playing more of the lower stuff. 

I believe Andy W has mentioned that it's fine to cross over on the vocal range.


----------



## RocketBoots (Apr 16, 2011)

BuickGN said:


> I wouldn't say absolutely no way. I prefer kicks myself but here are a lot if great sounding cars with dash mounted midranges.
> 
> I think not crossing the driver over in the "critical" area is a myth. I've had zero issues with it. In the beginning I had 150hz-5khz being played by the mids. As time went on I realized they sounded better with the 9s covering up to 800hz. That was true in this car with the 162, 650, 182, 142, and 430. It has always sounded better with a higher midrange highpass right in the middle of the vocal range. It stages just as well and it's more dynamic with the 9s playing more of the lower stuff.
> 
> I believe Andy W has mentioned that it's fine to cross over on the vocal range.


I admittedly have not played with a 3-way in quite a few years, so I'm just voicing my opinion on the theoretical; things I've read and things that make sense to me, but not recent firsthand experience. I'll be doing a 3-way in the next month or two though (hopefully).

True, there are a lot of cars with dash-mounted mids that sound great, but there are also a lot of cars with that same config that sound horrible. 

Especially in car audio, it seems you can go against all the guru's recommendations and have a great sounding system. Or, you can listen to those same experts, and have it sound like crap (been there, done that). I saw where you have your drivers crossed at this time. One of the best setup's I've ever heard crossed a small mid and woofer at 1000Hz. For the OP, he states his 2-way sounds great. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Curious, where do you have your drivers mounted BuickGN?? I'm contemplating a front stage based around the 430. I feel the 172 might be a better fit in a 3-way than the 650.

BTW, did you ever try Dyn's Esotar passive?? I thought I read in a post somewhere you were thinking about that at some point...


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

RocketBoots said:


> I admittedly have not played with a 3-way in quite a few years, so I'm just voicing my opinion on the theoretical; things I've read and things that make sense to me, but not recent firsthand experience. I'll be doing a 3-way in the next month or two though (hopefully).
> 
> True, there are a lot of cars with dash-mounted mids that sound great, but there are also a lot of cars with that same config that sound horrible.
> 
> ...


I fully agree with everything you said. I look at the guru's recommendations as just that. I've had the best luck with unconventional crossover points. Some say it's the center console that makes mine sound better with the doors playing up to 800hz. I have a null around 600hz with the midrange playing that area that's impossible to get rid of even with 12 db boost on the EQ and 20db on the mids overall. It's barely noticeable with the doors playing the same frequency. I guess it's just location. 

I have the 182 in the doors, 430s in the kicks IB, and the tweeters firing into the windshield. I know you're not technically supposed to fire them into the windshield but it not only sounds better, it stages better than the sails. I have no idea why. It's very temperamental. I can literally change the angle by just a couple degrees and it sounds like crap. I'm no exaggerating. The sails were a lot more forgiving to axis. 

If you decide to use the 430 for the entire vocal range, they have a lot of throw. I believe the Klippel test xmax was pretty much what Dyn published but I've had mine pushing over 5/8" and probably close to 3/4" of excursion for fun. So while it's not linear excursion, you have a TON of excursion for a dedicated 3.5" midrange to play with and they still sound good well past xmax. 

I'm getting way off topic again lol. The 650 is better in every way than the 172 in my opinion. Total displacement is about the same because the 650 has considerably more throw. With it's klippel tested 39hz Fs and it's excursion, it will have at least as much low end as the 172. It is kind of a waste for such a good driver in a 3-way though. I bet you wouldn't notice much if any difference depending on x-over point. 

Is there any chance you could fit the 182? It will fit most places the 172 will fit. It has a lower profile basket and is only 3" deep. They also play past 4khz. Mine are playing to 800hz in my 3-way and they sound great. These could be used in a 2-way on axis. The impact is unbelievable for a midbass and the larger midbasses just sound more natural and effortless. 

I wanted to give passive a go but the crossovers are ridiculously expensive and I just couldn't pull the trigger when I already had a good processor. It's something I would love to try but probably never will. I could live through you though lol.


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

I tend like midranges sunk into the dash firing toward the rearview mirror or front dome lights the best with tweeters more forward and wide in either a a-pillar or sail panel. Probably terrible to tune this but the examples I've heard have been stellar. I have been impressed by, but not in love with, tweeter/midrange a-pillar designs on axis but they many seemed to be very narrow and, if not, I just didn't care for the on-axis look. When I was down in Orlando for a meet, I heard an Illusion Carbon equipped 2-way, I think - might have been Focal - with the tweeters recessed in the a-pillars pointing at each other and the midbass in the door and that one sounded incredible. I have generally always liked a-pillar midbass/tweeter installs with door midbasses if the a-pillar install was done symetrically, either pointing at each other or up toward the rearview mirror/front dome lights. Tuning can take care of the downsides of that alignment, so I'm told by experts, but you get yourself, in my limited experience on the topic, a tendancy toward natural center stage and additional width vs. on-axis. Just usually need to use a tweeter. All over the place post but here's the point: every install I've liked I heard about how he/she spent forever positioning drivers with no EQ just to find something they liked, then installed and did EQ (less of it, because it was already closer)...


----------



## RocketBoots (Apr 16, 2011)

BuickGN said:


> I fully agree with everything you said. I look at the guru's recommendations as just that. I've had the best luck with unconventional crossover points. Some say it's the center console that makes mine sound better with the doors playing up to 800hz. I have a null around 600hz with the midrange playing that area that's impossible to get rid of even with 12 db boost on the EQ and 20db on the mids overall. It's barely noticeable with the doors playing the same frequency. I guess it's just location.
> 
> I have the 182 in the doors, 430s in the kicks IB, and the tweeters firing into the windshield. I know you're not technically supposed to fire them into the windshield but it not only sounds better, it stages better than the sails. I have no idea why. It's very temperamental. I can literally change the angle by just a couple degrees and it sounds like crap. I'm no exaggerating. The sails were a lot more forgiving to axis.
> 
> ...


Don't want to get too off topic or thread jack, but I would be interested to discuss some of your points. Maybe I'll start a new thread when I get a chance...



sirbOOm said:


> Tuning can take care of the downsides of that alignment, so I'm told by experts, but you get yourself, *in my limited experience on the topic*, QUOTE]
> 
> RIIIGGGHHTT  , unless you're a different shop than I'm thinking...


----------



## RocketBoots (Apr 16, 2011)

jimmydee said:


> Ya, those Arcs are nice too.
> 
> For Class D amplifiers, they are probably very similar in spec and design. They are both ranking as the best out there right now.
> 
> One created by Steven Mantz, and the other created by Robert Zeff. It doesn't get much better, whichever brand you choose.


I'm gonna get the Arc's. And I have your same tweet. Maybe we can do some kind of apples to oranges comparison  The specs really look exactly the same, including the unusually high 600W bridged for chan 5/6...


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

RocketBoots said:


> RIIIGGGHHTT  , unless you're a different shop than I'm thinking...


Um, what?


----------

