# Alpine SPX-17PRO review



## Masi994

I finally got the speakers in today, and thought, as promised that i'd give an initial review.

system as it is right now: 

2005 Mini Cooper S

CDA-9887
Alpine SPX-17PRO running passive
Mids in sealed factory door location
Tweets in factory door location by the door handle
100 watts RMS per side from an Amp.

Still waiting on my Marv box and sub amp...

I only have about 40min of listening time and a limited amount of tweeking also. I promise to update this thread as time goes on and my system gets completed.

That all said I really like the tweeters on this set! They have a mellow/brightness thats not over powering, and they really are clean sounding for lack of a better word. I listened to the diva Cd by Annie Lenox and the air was super! Detail was all there, but seemed to be less fatiguing than I expected for out of the box! 

I'm sure as the mids break in i'll have more to say but as of right now they need more break in  ...

The passives have different modules that you can switch out for the type of spacing/location that you have for your speakers. Can be bi-amped! It seems that the parts are of an adaquate manufacture. 

The tweets are a ring design with an Al wave guide. The mids are a "nomex like" material that are very shallow and share a design with the typical alpine scan/vifa mids.

So far I'm very happy with the alpines!!! I'll update as I get more time on them!!

M


----------



## M3NTAL

Did you happen to listen to the factory speakers with imprint to compare the changes between the two sets?

I also have a 05 S with a 9887. I have been looking at the same speakers also, but have been held over with the stock stuff on imprint for the time being.

What kind of enclosure is Marv making for you?


----------



## hc_TK

did you let the speakers to break in before you wrote this test?
If they it is the scan speak revelator`ish tweeter, it think it will just sound better when they soften up. I have the original scan speak revelators at home, and as whit all drivers, they needed quite a long time to sound right.

You have to post some pictures!


----------



## mvw2

Ah, it's finally good to see a review!

I'm curious how much the Pro set differs from the Ref set though. Considering double the price to step up to the Pro, there's that whole matter of "is it worth it?"

I'm glad to see you're enjoying the set so far.

Pics!!! Pics!!! and um... Pics!!! 

Someone needs to let npdang borrow a set too. 


Exactly how bad is the tweeter location? Older Subarus were the same way, woofer down in the door and the tweeter right by the door handle. I hated it. Even stock, I moved the tweeters down by the woofers. For me, it's something I can't live with without TA and attenuation control to fix the proximity issue. I know the passive setup that Alpine has is outstanding, so I'm sure there's lots of control that will include attenuation, x-over point, and maybe even some phase adjustment. Still, if you find the woofers and low end remaining in the background in the music, you should really, really consider moving the tweeters. Maybe the Mini isn't as bad with their locations. I don't know. Anytime I hear high in the door panel, I cringe.


----------



## s10scooter

I have the tweeters in my s-10 high in the door panel and I am pleased. What issues do you find with the tweeter in that location? Try to be as non-technical as possible.


----------



## mvw2

Well it's science.

Sound radiates out from a source. It's loudness depends on proximity. The closer the speaker is to you, the louder it is.

You have a tweeter and woofer playing the same music at the same time. It takes time for the sound waves produced at the speaker to travel through the air to your ears. If the tweeter is closer, its sound waves hit your ears first. The woofer and tweeter are out of sync.

Our minds perceive importance of audio information by what gets their first. We learn to ignore echos for example. The closer tweeter gets heard first. It becomes important/dominant. The woofer, reaching some milliseconds later, receives less importance. The woofer becomes less noticable and the tweeter more noticable. The Alpine tweeters are quite mild/smooth/laid back where they will not punish you heavily for a poor install. However, other tweeters are more direct, and with an install like this, some can become quite overpowering and harsh. You have to be careful.

Independent control of attenuation(volume level) as well as time alignment(delay) can counter these effects. We can fix a less than ideal install. However, this can't be done passively. You are forced to run active to get this capability.


----------



## Masi994

Speakers are breaking in nicely! I'm still loving the tweet although I'm taking it down -1.5DB on the passive as I notice that the stock location is a bit high and "in your face sounding." Having a few sibalence(sp?) issues as well, I'm sure this will be corrected with eq and tweeking. I just haven't had time to do it yet.

The mids are starting to come alive! nice snappy mid-bass but do seem to be power hungry!! I'm know more when i switch to active in a month or two!!

Someone asked about the stock speakers on the imprint-- I don't have imprint and my mini had the HK system. Needless to say that s^#t is long gone!!!!

Again will update as time goes on!


----------



## M3NTAL

> Someone asked about the stock speakers on the imprint-- I don't have imprint and my mini had the HK system. Needless to say that s^#t is long gone!!!!
> 
> Again will update as time goes on!


The imprint made a night and day difference over my non HK setup. Enough of a difference that it has held me off from purchasing a nice set of fronts and a sub. It is defiantly not a competition worthy setup, but it is quite enjoyable at moderate SPL. The boomy bass from the rear speakers has tightened up an amazing amount and been pushed up towards the dash instead of coming from way back in the rear seats.

How much room did you have between the midwoofer and the door panel? I've heard some people on NAM say that they get contact between their surround and the grill during high excursion. Kind of worries me since I have been looking at the Boston SPZ set.

Thanks.


----------



## bafukie

would love to see some photos of ur installation


----------



## Masi994

M3NTAL said:


> How much room did you have between the midwoofer and the door panel? I've heard some people on NAM say that they get contact between their surround and the grill during high excursion. Kind of worries me since I have been looking at the Boston SPZ set.
> 
> Thanks.


I used a 3/4 MDF to make the brackets and I have about 1 inch left if i needed it. The depth in the actual door is the bad news. You have the window rail right behind the hole. Makes for a little craftyness!!


----------



## DejaWiz

Thanks for posting your initial impressions on this set. I've been waiting the better part of a year for the local dealers to get them in, but still nothing. Hopefully in the next couple/few weeks since they are really starting to crop up on retailer sites across the net.


----------



## Masi994

Install is complete!!

Running alpine spx-17pro active off 9887 HU with about 130w to the mids and 100w going to the tweets. mids at 63hz to 3.2khz with 18db slope. tweets are crossed at 3.2khz with 24db slope. This sounds the best to me in my car!

All I can say is these tweets are still some of the best i've heard. They have really come alive going active. BUT I must say that if you run these passive you'll not be dissapointed at all! 

The mids have really opened up with some nice snap and WOW the midrange is fantastic!! 

"shower the people" live by James Taylor: great twinkle during triangle hits. JT's voice was dead center. I could hear and see the backup singers to the far left of me. The drums were just off the right of JT. Perfect image here folks!! 

The dynamics of the live concert were all there! 

The bad: The mid is very power hungry!! I'd bet I could go to 200w and it would really move! I'd like a little more bass from the mid but I'm thinking that I can eq and get a little more out. The tweet is beamy in my door location. I think a kick, low door or sail panel location would be best with these. 


For the money I think these are much better than most of the other passive set's I have tried. I'd really suggest them to anyone. The tweet is worth it for the price alone! 

Other passive sets: SR6500 polk- tweets are very close! The alpine tweet has more sparkle up top and more umph to it... I'd bet this is a newer version of the same.

Focal 165k2p set: I didn't really like this set to much. tweet was not my thing.


----------



## bdubs767

for your sound stage, I would suggest bumping the xover up to around 3khz w/ 24 db slopes.


great review tho I really want to try these.


----------



## tyroneshoes

Highpassed at 1k?


----------



## Masi994

bdubs767 said:


> for your sound stage, I would suggest bumping the xover up to around 3khz w/ 24 db slopes.
> 
> 
> great review tho I really want to try these.


I did try a higher crossover point and I really like the lower setting. I'll keep playing with it though!

Thanks for the "props" and suggestions!


----------



## egm220

how much do they differ with the spx 17 ref in terms of sound quality? 

anyone  thanks


----------



## hc_TK

1k for the tweeter is just murder. I doubt it would work last very long if you turn up the volum some..


----------



## DejaWiz

1K HP on the tweeters?!?!? 


You should _really_ consider bumping both the mid and tweeter up to 2.8K to start. If you don't, you're likely going to be looking for some replacements soon. Just some friendly advice.


----------



## rhinodog00

DejaWiz said:


> 1K HP on the tweeters?!?!?
> 
> 
> You should _really_ consider bumping both the mid and tweeter up to 2.8K to start. If you don't, you're likely going to be looking for some replacements soon. Just some friendly advice.


x3! You will cook those things


----------



## Masi994

OK---I just moved the tweet cross to 3.2Khz and I like it even more!!  So stop worrying!!!

The stage height moved up too!!


----------



## bdubs767

Masi994 said:


> OK---I just moved the tweet cross to 3.2Khz and I like it even more!!  So stop worrying!!!
> 
> The stage height moved up too!!



now try 4khz


----------



## minotaurus98

I can't wait to get mine - I ordered a set after reading this review.  

Good stuff!!! Thanks for the info all!


----------



## DejaWiz

Masi994 said:


> OK---I just moved the tweet cross to 3.2Khz and I like it even more!!  So stop worrying!!!
> 
> The stage height moved up too!!


Atta boy!


----------



## minotaurus98

Just got mine - the quality and construction seems to be VERY top-notch. I have not installed them (and it will be quite some time before I do) but I am quite pleased with the build quality.

I can't wait for the weather to get better and to get some time on my hands to get these installed and installed right!


----------



## Infinity

Hey, can someone post or send me some high-res closeups of the woofer terminals, and the tweeter hardware? I'd appreciate it.


----------



## mvw2

minotaurus98 said:


> Just got mine - the quality and construction seems to be VERY top-notch. I have not installed them (and it will be quite some time before I do) but I am quite pleased with the build quality.
> 
> I can't wait for the weather to get better and to get some time on my hands to get these installed and installed right!


Send them to npdang then if you're waiting anyways.

Ditto with Infinity. I am thoroughly disappointed with the lack of pics here...


----------



## "that boy asad"

what are some thoughts to the Alpine F1 Status components... how good are they?


----------



## mvw2

Wrong place to post. The Search button helps a good deal by the way.  

Alpine SPX <not equal> Alpine F1

Alpine F1 <equal> Scanspeak Revolator


----------



## Booger

I can tell you from the rate of dealers orders that we are getting....THESE ARE A BIG HIT!!!!

Type X will have a great year!!

Thanks for the early reviews!!


----------



## rollnsf

Thanks for the review...can I ask what phase link module you used?


----------



## placenta

These have a shallower mid depth than the PRS. These speakers have always tempted me, mainly for the tweet and all the passive crossover options..

the best pics are always found here. super huge and super clear.

http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_10648_Alpine+SPX-17PRO.html


----------



## EricP72

which set do you like more the alpine or the prs set? I have heard both now, and i agree the tweet on the alpine are nicer, but the mid-bass response on the prs is way better in mho. Also i noticed it was easier to get the prs to blend with the 12w7 because of the more bidbass presence that the prs has. again just mho. Also isit me but doesn't the alpines have great airness to them, creating more of a "spacious" sound.


----------



## placenta

manish said:


> which set do you like more the alpine or the prs set? I have heard both now, and i agree the tweet on the alpine are nicer, but the mid-bass response on the prs is way better in mho. Also i noticed it was easier to get the prs to blend with the 12w7 because of the more bidbass presence that the prs has. again just mho. Also isit me but doesn't the alpines have great airness to them, creating more of a "spacious" sound.


me, or anyone? I personally take the PRS 50X over the type-x. They do blend way better with subs, and I also like the PRS tweet better to be honest. It has a musical clarity that is rare when i finally tune them right. (around 4000hz for me). The type-x do excel in "voice/vocals" which I heard immediately. The voice does seem wide and magical. But that was the only thing I liked at first when I tried the type-x. after that, all the PRS positives made me go back again.


----------



## chadillac3

Personally, I prefer the Type-X over the PRS having owned both sets. I find the midbass on the Type-X to be snappier with more impact whereas the PRS have more of a "boomier" sub-esque sound to them. Depends on what you like. In terms of the tweeter performance, the Type-X tweet is simply a better sounding driver in almost all respects. In terms of midrange, I find both to be pretty neutral sounding.


----------



## EricP72

yeah i thought so too. It was so evident in the midbass range that the prs was hands down better. I do give the alpine props though cause if i had a small car with a small cabin i would go with those in a heartbeat. Now if i can just find a 3" midrange to go with those prs i would purchase them myself. But i guess i will have to go with the Hybrid l1/l3 combo....


----------



## placenta

chadillac3 said:


> I find the midbass on the Type-X to be snappier with more impact whereas the PRS have more of a "boomier" sub-esque sound to them. Depends on what you like.


Ya, I could agree with that description..



chadillac3 said:


> In terms of the tweeter performance, the Type-X tweet is simply a better sounding driver in almost all respects.


Purely an opinion and taste for the tweeter.


----------



## chadillac3

placenta said:


> Purely an opinion and taste for the tweeter.


I believe most people would probably agree with my taste, simply since the PRS tweet is frequently described as on the harsh side. It's not a unit like the MBQ QTD25 that when attenuated properly and installed off axis sounds great; it's not a bad tweet by any means, just not the value the mid is on that set.


----------



## placenta

chadillac3 said:


> I it's not a bad tweet by any means, just not the value the mid is on that set.


well ya. everyone buys that set for the mids. i was thinking about playing with my alpine tweets a bit, but theyre gonna sell on ebay tomorrow and i'd rather just have $. I spent way too much in the last 3 months on stereo parts.


----------



## an2ny888

anybody here compared these pros to the older refernce set? that's what i have currently and i'm tempted to give these pro comps a try


----------



## GlasSman

an2ny888 said:


> anybody here compared these pros to the older refernce set? that's what i have currently and i'm tempted to give these pro comps a try


Whats the model #?


----------



## an2ny888

my current speakers are the spx-177r

http://www.sonicelectronix.com/item_3217_Alpine+SPX-177R.html


----------



## Bald Bull

i just upgraded from the 177r to the pros. the most obvious and fundamental difference being paper vs. stiff cone, with the stiff cone offering greater clarity but with an expense. in my install, the pros have a harsh breakup somewhere in the midrange and without eq, makes it painful to listen to at loud volumes. the 177r were never offensive. it's just like npdang has said before, paper is much easier to work with.

one thing i love about the pros is i can crank it and still sounds great. the old refs would lose its composure and sound strained if turned up too loud. 

both are neutral sounding and to the average listener, might not even notice a difference between the two. but after listening to both i see no reason to go back. the pros just sound more 'real' to me

is it worth the $400? i think it depends. if you have the time and expertise to go active, by all means save yourself the money and get similiar if not better results. but if you're newb like me and want good sound with minimal tuning, this set might be for you


----------



## dbrown

Here is a review of the Alpine SPX-17PRO from someone who has had alot of different sets of comps in the same car.

The alpines are fantastic in the right setup. I was torn between the Alpine's and the polk sr series. I have the polks in my BMW and they are hard to beat. In my bmw, I have a simple setup with good sq equipment. Sony C90 Hu, old school ppi amp. The polks midbass is better that the alpines, and I think that is the consensus here. Tweets are almost identical in sound since they are the same tweet minus a fraction of an inch.

Now on to my 02 Camaro. This car is the new home of the alpines. Here I am running a similar setup. Sony C90, old school ppi amps, polk sr subs (10's) and a xdp-4000. However I have a mb quart midbass kit installed up front along with the alpines. With this setup, I am very very pleased. As a matter of fact, I think I reached audio bliss. My sound stage is perfect, bass is up front, and the system wails if needed. 

Moral of the story? The alpines are very accurate in the mid/tweet department and on paper the driver can perform just as well in the mid bass.
My advice is to either have a good eq setup or something to supplement the midbass with these. I would choose the latter and let the alpine mids sing.

An for those that wonder, no I do not have 2 Sony C90's, I have three


----------



## pyfocal

I just bought a set of the SPX17PRO tweeters.Anyone have a good crossover point when going active-how low will they play.


----------



## dbrown

pyfocal said:


> I just bought a set of the SPX17PRO tweeters.Anyone have a good crossover point when going active-how low will they play.


Im not sure about the alpines but the vifa xt's do not like lower fequencys at all. I had a set x'd at 3800k and damaged them within in a day.


----------



## placenta

pyfocal said:


> I just bought a set of the SPX17PRO tweeters.Anyone have a good crossover point when going active-how low will they play.


I did my PRO tweets at 4k/24 usually.


----------



## pyfocal

Thanks guys.I am going to try them out this morning.I ordered 4 and got 3.They said they were the last 3 available and you can't get anymore so I guess I have a spare.But I really wanted to try them out in both my vehicles.I think I'll be happy for what I spent-about $18.00 apiece.


----------



## placenta

pyfocal said:


> Thanks guys.I am going to try them out this morning.I ordered 4 and got 3.They said they were the last 3 available and you can't get anymore so I guess I have a spare.But I really wanted to try them out in both my vehicles.I think I'll be happy for what I spent-about $18.00 apiece.


ha. i got 2 of the last set also.


----------



## pyfocal

I hooked em up this morning in the garage.I used the woofer and crossover from the SPX17REF set I got for father's day.They are in a .8 cuft ported box running off of a Rotel RB981 and a Rotel preamp.About 200-250 clean watts a side at 4 ohms.I really liked the tweeters that came with the REF set but these are a big step up.Very good imaging but very laid back and smooth.I cranked em a little and they get loud but still sound really nice.I think they would do great on 100-150 a side in the car.I heard things on the new Eagles album that I didn't here on my Studio 100's in the house.I tried a little bit of everything and they were great on just about any kind of music.If you set them on axis in a vehicle I think they would really shine.I can't wait to get them active in the truck-but I need to add another amp for my midbasses first.


----------



## bbfoto

dbrown,

Glad you've achieved or are quite near to audio bliss! 

I've got a few questions for you if you don't mind divulging your secrets, as I just picked up a set of the SPX's to try as well, lol...

In your '02 Camaro, where do you have the Alpine SPX-17PRO Mids mounted?

And where do you have the MB Quart's mounted?

Are the MB Quart's the 6.5" QSD mids?

What X/O frequency and slope do you have the Alpine mids and Quart Mid-basses set at in your vehicle?

OT: You wouldn't happen to have a spare Sony CDX-C90 Faceplate in Excellent condition that you'd be willing to part with??? My display is fading and has horizontal and vertical lines through it now.  

Thanks for any and all info! Keep up the reviews, peeps! I'll post mine when I get a chance to install them as well.


----------



## bbfoto

Also, has anybody listened to the SPX-13PRO set or just the mids? Hmmm. Would be great to have these tested on the Klippel along with the 17PRO mid and Tweeter, right?!


----------



## less

Hey all

Anyone know who actually makes the drivers in the Type X Pro system? I've not seen Scan - Vifa - Seas - Peerless - etc. drivers with similar appearances, so I am getting curious. I notice the mids have the scan "slit pattern" which is at least intended to make you think Scan made them... and I thought the only companies making the ring radiators were Scan/Tymp and Vifa, but don't recall seeing one with a spike quite like the Alp has on top. 

Thanks for all the input here. I picked up a pair of the tweeters wholesale too and may end up using them for upstaging - but at the moment, I am more in the market for a really nice midrange capable of getting down to 300ish and up to 4k.

Enjoy your new toys!
Less


----------



## ErinH

Now that these have been out for a while, does anyone else have any long-term reviews?

How much power are you sending them?
Where are they mounted (on/off axis)?
How much processing are you giving them?

Details, people... details. 


*if no one responds here, I'll have to make a new post in general*


----------



## ErinH

less said:


> Hey all
> 
> Anyone know who actually makes the drivers in the Type X Pro system? I've not seen Scan - Vifa - Seas - Peerless - etc. drivers with similar appearances, so I am getting curious. I notice the mids have the scan "slit pattern" which is at least intended to make you think Scan made them... and I thought the only companies making the ring radiators were Scan/Tymp and Vifa, but don't recall seeing one with a spike quite like the Alp has on top.
> 
> Thanks for all the input here. I picked up a pair of the tweeters wholesale too and may end up using them for upstaging - but at the moment, I am more in the market for a really nice midrange capable of getting down to 300ish and up to 4k.
> 
> Enjoy your new toys!
> Less



Jim,
Here you go:



me said:


> Got a question for you about the type-x pros: do you know if their still a Scanspeak derivative like the F1 speakers way back? Any idea who's actually designing/mfg'ing these speakers for you guys? They look like the scanspeak revelators from the f1 set... curious if alpine's just carried over the design a bit.





source said:


> Yes, still Scan.
> 
> The guy who "voices" them is a guy named Jason Kemmerer.



Not sure if the source wanted this publicly known, but by all accounts, I can't imagine this information being bad for Alpine.


----------



## starboy869

bikinpunk said:


> Now that these have been out for a while, does anyone else have any long-term reviews?
> 
> How much power are you sending them?
> Where are they mounted (on/off axis)?
> How much processing are you giving them?
> 
> Details, people... details.
> 
> 
> *if no one responds here, I'll have to make a new post in general*




I'm thinking about ditching my 3 way in favour for a 2 way setup and I wouldn't mind hearing some lt reviews.


----------



## mikey7182

Depends on what sound you're looking for. Reviews are nice, but unfortunately, since everyones' tastes are different, the only good way to know is to buy them yourself. These can be had for ~$300/set, which is a great deal. I paid $400 for mine the first week they came out, and kept them for about a month. I'll say that the tweeters are the most impressive part of the set. Just enough sparkle while maintaining a "laid back" sound. Crossed low too from what I remember. I think the passive xover point is 2khz. I got quite a bit of lower midrange resonance in the mid that I didn't get again with the next set of components I bought and installed in the same location, so I'm not sure what that was all about. Overall the mids were nice, although I found them to be lacking in midbass. Find a sub that's comfortable taking care of <[email protected]/oct and you'll probably be very happy with the set. Unless you don't like a lot of midbass, which reiterates my point about reviews being subjective.


----------



## an2ny888

mikey782, im assuming you preferred the 720 prs over the alpines?


----------



## hc_TK

bikinpunk said:


> Jim,
> Here you go:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if the source wanted this publicly known, but by all accounts, I can't imagine this information being bad for Alpine.


is this both the midbass and tweter? 
The tweeter looks like a downgraded revelator.


----------



## mikey7182

an2ny888 said:


> mikey782, im assuming you preferred the 720 prs over the alpines?


 I would have paid for the 720PRS what I paid for the SPX-17PROs to eliminate the cost factor and still preferred the PRS. Those are my ears though. Ideally, find a used set of PRS, and a used set of SPX, install them in the same locations, feed them some power, and see which ones you like.


----------



## EricP72

*spx-pro x-over question*

i have a question, now that I have finally secured a pair of alpine tweets from a fellow michgander, I looked at the passive x-over from that set and i was wondering should i pick one of those up as well and try to find a full range 3"-3.5" driver that would be compatiable with the x-over? or should i go ahead and build my own 2way passive x-over. and if that is possible an someone suggest some drivers that would work with that x-over? I don't have access to the info on that item so i could really use the help.


----------



## placenta

*Re: spx-pro x-over question*



manish said:


> I looked at the passive x-over from that set and i was wondering should i pick one of those up as well and try to find a full range 3"-3.5" driver that would be compatiable with the x-over?


I liked the PRO crossovers a lot more than the PRS crossovers. So many options..


----------



## mikey7182

Manish, I'd PM MiniVanMan about that before you do it. The SPX passives are indeed amazing, but it's not as simple as finding out what the xover point is. A lot goes into designing a crossover besides slope and xover point, as I recently learned in a thread on the subject.


----------



## EricP72

mikey7182 said:


> Manish, I'd PM MiniVanMan about that before you do it. The SPX passives are indeed amazing, but it's not as simple as finding out what the xover point is. A lot goes into designing a crossover besides slope and xover point, as I recently learned in a thread on the subject.



yeah i figured that. I was just hoping that there way a midrange driver out there, any brand, that met the specs to work with that x-over. I'm not to found of passives, but that alpine is really nice and it would be even sweeter if i was able to utilize it by searching for a driver with simlier specs


----------



## starboy869

hmm I kind of want a decent mid-range what has a good thump to it.


----------



## EricP72

mikey7182 said:


> Manish, I'd PM MiniVanMan about that before you do it. The SPX passives are indeed amazing, but it's not as simple as finding out what the xover point is. A lot goes into designing a crossover besides slope and xover point, as I recently learned in a thread on the subject.


wow i need some sleep when i get off work! i just reread your comment and i thought you said you already pmd MiniVanMan...lol. i will in a few seconds.


----------



## EricP72

starboy869 said:


> hmm I kind of want a decent mid-range what has a good thump to it.


see i need a midrange that has great imaging, that is a most important to me esp since i'm mounting them on axis, but i need my mids to blend seemless with my tweets and my mid-woofers (sls 8") ...that is going to be hard to decide on. the alpine spx- mids are near perfect for the vocals and meaty part of the midrange, if i could find a 3" full range driver that has that upper range sq of those spx-pros mid woofers i would be set!


----------



## mattldm

Has anyone been able to find out what the crossover point is on the SPX-17pro's?


----------



## fit_tuner

Masi994 said:


> Install is complete!
> Other passive sets: SR6500 polk- tweets are very close! The alpine tweet has more sparkle up top and more umph to it... I'd bet this is a newer version of the same.
> 
> Focal 165k2p set: I didn't really like this set to much. tweet was not my thing.


how would you compare the spx-17pro to the sr6500? were both given the proper time to break in and get installed properly?


----------



## nosmose

I had two sets of these components and I did not enjoy them at all. So much so, I sold one set after hearing the first set. I sold the car the first set was in a year later and didn't even bother taking them out. 

IMHO , these woofers were only suitable for playing a narrow wavelength range. I'm sure they do a good job in this range but you should not get these speakers unless you also have a midbass also. I was using them as full range speakers and frankly my 80$ kenwoods did a better job handling any bass. 

They were powered by a pdx4100 amp and any song that came on with any bass would distort and anything more than half volume on my 9887 deck. 

I was very dissappointed in the sound and would not recommend these to anyone, except for maybe as part of a 10 speaker hifi set up.


----------



## kvndoom

Bit of a necro there, but your point does stand. These aren't worth the money. The tweeters are fantastic but the woofers are underwhelming. Some have said on here that your doors have to be sealed and deadened to perfection for these to rock good midbass, but there are much more forgiving speakers out there for less money.


----------



## nosmose

^ I'm not sure what necro means other than the literal translation. 

That was how I felt about them a year ago. And I still feel the same today. A Hughes waste of money.


----------



## nosmose

I did try to install the spx17 pros last night despite how I feel about the sound of them I just wanted some sound for now. I dropped one from 8 inch off the ground. It landed on the magnet and this caused the cone in the centre of the woofer to become loose. I understand a speaker is not meant to be dropped but it wasn't much of drop at all. Apparently they aren't very robust speakers either. Now they rattle when playing.


----------

