# Best way to get proper imaging from MidRANGE



## tinctorus (Oct 5, 2009)

Hey guy's I am trying to finish up my install and am debating on proper placement of my midrange and midbass setup....

I have my tweeters in the sail panel and those will be on axis with me NOT off axis like alot of people seem to like to do as I dont see how you can get proper imaging with tweet's aimed at each other and away from the listener.

My question is about placement of my midrange and mid bass speakers, I have heard that they should be in a vertical line from each other with the midrange aimed at the listener and midbass can be off axis since you shouldnt be able to localize there frequency...Am I wrong in thinking this??

I was building kick panels but got to thinking that even with them aiming up as much as possible towards me that the driver sice would STILL be getting blocked by my legs.

I DONT want the mid range and midbass to share the same airspace obviously since I would assume that with higher output on the midbass my midrange would almost become passive radiators, Is this correct thinking???

I plan to put the midbass in sealed enclosures inside the door and have the midrange mounted to pods in the door panel but a bit higher up than what the stock location would have been

Can anyone help me out on this as I dont want to use fancy processing unit's as I feel you should be able to get away without using them

Just looking for tips and pointers as to best/proper mounting location and aiming of my midranges


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

Don't assume your tweeters will work better on axis than off. That's the problem most people had with Quart tweeters. Off axis they're brilliant, on axis they were WAY bright. 

Same thing with the mids. Some work better on axis some work better off axis. You're going to have to play with them.

Midbass placement is less of a problem. Mine fired into my ass cheeks (it was a MkV GTI) and sounds like they were on the dash after they were T/Ad and EQd. With the midbasses I'd be more concerned about proper mounting and a good seal than their placement/orientation.


----------



## tinctorus (Oct 5, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> Don't assume your tweeters will work better on axis than off. That's the problem most people had with Quart tweeters. Off axis they're brilliant, on axis they were WAY bright.
> 
> Same thing with the mids. Some work better on axis some work better off axis. You're going to have to play with them.
> 
> Midbass placement is less of a problem. Mine fired into my ass cheeks (it was a MkV GTI) and sounds like they were on the dash after they were T/Ad and EQd. With the midbasses I'd be more concerned about proper mounting and a good seal than their placement/orientation.


Proper mounting is not an issue I will make sure whatever is mounted and wherever it is mounted will me SOLID

It just seems to mee that speakers should be on axis "atleast thats what I gather from the VERY limited knowledge of physics that I have"
However I will play with there aiming and find the BESt spot possible

As far as the tweeters being harsh I dont seem to think that way at all with the Quart Q tweeters, Plus I can ALWAYS attentuate them if they need to be up to I think -6b

I didnt think that the midbass aiming was NEARLY as important as the aiming of the midrange and tweets.

AmI correct though in assuming that while kick panels MAY be better than stock mounting location it is still not IDEAL since NO MATTER WHERE you aim them or how far up you aim them your leg will still block the soundwaves coming from them, I mean dont get me wrong the kickpanels are a night and day difference from the stock location HOWEVER I KNOW they can be improved upon.....

aAs of now I am running the Quart QSD 216's passive but I don plan to run them active in the not so distant future with seperate amp's for the tweeters,midrange,mid bas AND subs...So between 4 to 5 amp's in total depending on which sub setup I decide to go with

I also have some questions about subwoofer aiming/placement but I sill start another thread for that as I want to have the subs almost fire through the openings in the back deck where the stock 6x9's used to be


----------



## fastlane (Apr 6, 2009)

I'm in the exact same quandry as you. While kick panel seems like a better way to go compared to factory locations; I don't think it's the end all placement. Some vehicles might lend better to kicks than others. In my truck, kickpanel mounting seems less than optimal based on how high I sit and the angle of the lower dash. 

I have been less than impressed with the kick installs I have seen based on the fact that you have to sit a certain way to keep from blocking the speaker, and you lose a crap load of already precious foot space when installing them. 

Back in the days before TA and major processing power, I think it was more critical due to PLD's; but with todays high powered eq's, I think there are more options with equal, if not better, results IMO.

While I also agree that you need to try different mounting angles as far as best sound is concerned; I have had much better luck with my tweets on axis as opposed to off. I think the more you can limit reflections, the better off your imaging is. Each vehicle is different however.


----------



## tinctorus (Oct 5, 2009)

fastlane said:


> I'm in the exact same quandry as you. While kick panel seems like a better way to go compared to factory locations; I don't think it's the end all placement. Some vehicles might lend better to kicks than others. In my truck, kickpanel mounting seems less than optimal based on how high I sit and the angle of the lower dash.
> 
> I have been less than impressed with the kick installs I have seen based on the fact that you have to sit a certain way to keep from blocking the speaker, and you lose a crap load of already precious foot space when installing them.
> 
> ...


Yeah I agree about the tweet's...Currently they are OFF axis and I DONT like the sound of them at all so I wen out today and grabbed some stuff I needed to switch the position in which they aim.

I currently have kickpanels made and installed and I have to say I am NOT impressed, However I think I was expecting MORE than I should have....It a manual car and that may be part of the issue as I couldnt get the aiming I wanted but I still think that even if I could it wouldnt give me what I want....

This is the reason I think that the midrnage mounted to the doorcard "semi IB" would be a better solution with the midbass mounted in sealed enclosures on the door car as well so as that two sets of mids playing two different frequencies dont screw with each other.

I can place the midbass MUCH further back in the door since it should not be able to be localized....

I guess I will just have to play with the drivers and see which position AND aiming gives me the best results possible

I can always attentuate the tweeters if after moving them on axis I feel that they are to harsh, I believe my crossover allows for up to -6db of attentuation


----------



## petern23 (Oct 9, 2006)

Try pointing the tweeters in another direction off-axis. I've had mine in 3 different positions (off-pointing forward, then on-axis, now off-pointing up) and I like the third set-up, but hated the first. The on-axis was impossible to sustain listening for more than about an hour.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

Don't worry about the midbass and your legs. Midbass is a LOT less directional so your legs won't really be an issue. Like I said, mine fired into my ass cheek and were fine. You said you're using the 216s but what midrange are you using? I'm guessing you'll use the mid in that set as a midbass, correct? if you have a small 4" like the QSD210 then I'd put it on the dash on axis.


----------



## jhmeg2 (Nov 6, 2009)

i've used stock locations in my trailblazer. i've used kicks and was not impressed, now i have them (midrange and tweet) in the a-pillars midbass in the door with ta on all three setups, and so far I like the pillars best even with off axis almost 80* driver pillar and aprox 30* passenger pillar. when in the stock location i added dome tweets in the dash and wow, awsome. i need to still eq it but i think the pillars will prove to be the best. oh midrange 6 1/2, midbass 6 1/2, sub t-line 8". but reguardless.... ta is a must!!!


----------



## fastlane (Apr 6, 2009)

jhmeg2 said:


> i've used stock locations in my trailblazer. i've used kicks and was not impressed, now i have them (midrange and tweet) in the a-pillars midbass in the door with ta on all three setups, and so far I like the pillars best even with off axis almost 80* driver pillar and aprox 30* passenger pillar. when in the stock location i added dome tweets in the dash and wow, awsome. i need to still eq it but i think the pillars will prove to be the best. oh midrange 6 1/2, midbass 6 1/2, sub t-line 8". but reguardless.... ta is a must!!!


You have a 6.5" driver in your a pillar!!??  Pic's.


----------



## tinctorus (Oct 5, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> Don't worry about the midbass and your legs. Midbass is a LOT less directional so your legs won't really be an issue. Like I said, mine fired into my ass cheek and were fine. You said you're using the 216s but what midrange are you using? I'm guessing you'll use the mid in that set as a midbass, correct? if you have a small 4" like the QSD210 then I'd put it on the dash on axis.


For speakers I have the QSD 216 set meaning the tweet's and midrange that came with them, For midbass I am using the Elemental Designs E3.6.s

I am not worried about the placement of the midbass as I know that they are not directional like mid range is that is why I planned to have them placed towards the back of the door in a sealed enclosure and plan to have the midrange towards the front of the door but placed a bit higher up than the factory location....

Both drivers will be mounted on the actual door card not on the door sheetmetal so that I am able to properly aim the midrange driver to the position that is best suited for on axis listening

I really didnt want to ditch the quart mid range and switch to something like a 4 inch driver but I guess if I REALLY have to then I will, I was just hoping to use what I already have since the QSD set to me at least is an AMAZING set of components

BTW so there is not any confusion when I say the back of the door I am talking about the area closest to the latch and the front of the door being closest to the hinge "I just wanted to make it clear since some people can call it different things

Also if I need to I can use the midbass inthe back doors but I REALLY dont see that as being an ideal location


----------



## tinctorus (Oct 5, 2009)

petern23 said:


> Try pointing the tweeters in another direction off-axis. I've had mine in 3 different positions (off-pointing forward, then on-axis, now off-pointing up) and I like the third set-up, but hated the first. The on-axis was impossible to sustain listening for more than about an hour.


Tweet's off axis make NO sense to me hence the reason I am changing that issue as we speak...I dont see how you can get proper acoustics with speakers being OFF axis, You can eq or attentuate them them but speakers were not designed to be listened to when they are pointing away from you




FWIW guys I know ALOT of you guys HATE peter euro but if you sit back for a minute and actually put some thought into what he is saying instead of just hating on him he does seem to have a firm grasp on physics and acoustics, Granted he may come off as an ******* to ALOT of people but if you think for a minute about what he is actually saing alot of it does make sense


----------



## bboyvek (Dec 16, 2008)

tinctorus said:


> FWIW guys I know ALOT of you guys HATE peter euro but if you sit back for a minute and actually put some thought into what he is saying instead of just hating on him he does seem to have a firm grasp on physics and acoustics, Granted he may come off as an ******* to ALOT of people but if you think for a minute about what he is actually saing alot of it does make sense


yo gonna get flamed for saying this :laugh::laugh:

Even when he sounds like he knows what he is talking about, he doesnt really know car acoustics . As for criticizing someone elses work, he simple is not the one to throw the first stone, his work is ****, thats why you never see anything of it online.


----------



## ryan s (Dec 19, 2006)

I want to say it was in a Patrick Bateman thread...it was discussed about off-axis tweeters. The conclusion was that (and I'm paraphrasing heavily here :laugh: ) when you have a speaker on-axis, your first reaction is to turn down the high frequencies.

With MBQ tweeters on-axis, my Pioneer HU's EQ doesn't have enough pull to reign in the tweeters nor does the stock passive's -6dB attenuation max...IMO. 

Also, tweeters have a wider dispersion of the sound so they don't need to be on-axis like a midrange. With my MBQs mounted coaxially in the doors, it sounds like the tweeters are in the sail panels. If I'd actually _put _them in the sail panels, I'd bet the stage would be squarely at eye level, all the time.

If they're firing (basically) at my legs and can make it sound like it's at chest/eye level while being mostly off-axis...


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

tinctorus said:


> For speakers I have the QSD 216 set meaning the tweet's and midrange that came with them, For midbass I am using the Elemental Designs E3.6.s
> 
> I am not worried about the placement of the midbass as I know that they are not directional like mid range is that is why I planned to have them placed towards the back of the door in a sealed enclosure and plan to have the midrange towards the front of the door but placed a bit higher up than the factory location....
> 
> ...


If you're using a 6.5" midbass I wouldn't go larger than a 5.25" mid, simply because smaller drivers are usually better in the midrange. I'm not saying a 6.5" won't work as a mid but if you're going to to use a mid that large I'd look at 8" midbasses. 

The QSD is a very, very good set. I'm still thinking about using them. Only thing holding me back is they don't have an 8" midbass and I'm silly but I like to match. 

I think your setup will be fine, especially if you aim the mid but if you haven't bought the 3.6s I'd highly suggest something like the 3.8 or the SLS 8.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

tinctorus said:


> Tweet's off axis make NO sense to me hence the reason I am changing that issue as we speak...I dont see how you can get proper acoustics with speakers being OFF axis, You can eq or attentuate them them but speakers were not designed to be listened to when they are pointing away from you


Simple, Quart deisgned them with a rising on-axis response. This sin't home audio, it's car audio. You have to throw home ideas out the window. I guarantee you that if you mount them on axis you're going to hate them. They were designed for off-axis pillar or upper door mounting. Trust me, don't run them on-axis.


----------



## razholio (Apr 15, 2008)

tinctorus said:


> Tweet's off axis make NO sense to me hence the reason I am changing that issue as we speak...I dont see how you can get proper acoustics with speakers being OFF axis, You can eq or attentuate them them but speakers were not designed to be listened to when they are pointing away from you


I used to feel the same way, and then I got edumacated (mostly by patrick bateman). Tweeters are almost never perfectly flat in their frequency response. They also are capable of quite a wide angle of dispersion. This means that listening at 30* off-axis is much the same as listening on axis, EXCEPT, that all drivers will begin to beam at a specific frequency. This means that above a certain frequency (dependent on the driver's size) the off axis response will drop, and drop more as the frequency rises.

Each tweeter is different, but with the ones I have now (SBAcoustics dimple-dome) their frequency response is pretty flat from 600Hz-17Khz at which point it starts to rise. On-axis, the response is not flat up at the top-end, but i can flatten that response by listening off-axis. Furthermore, you can point your tweeters however you like, and the fix up any dip or rise in frequency response with EQ.

Why does this even matter? well, if you locked yer head in a vice when listening to music, you wouldn't much care, but if you plan on letting your head wander about while sitting in your seat, or *gasp* want to provide a descent listening experience for your passenger, then this whole wide-dispersion and off-axis response thing becomes pretty important.

On a side-note, the reason I like the SBAcoustics so much is that in addition to being so smooth and flat, the 2nd order harmonics at 3k are a full 50db below the fundamental, and it just goes down from there as frequency rises.


----------



## lycan (Dec 20, 2009)

Tweeters off-axis makes sense in environments where :

- the listener is not centrally located
- lots of near-field reflections

Waveguides can make even _more_ sense. The reasons have been spelled out, time and again, on this forum. Stop thinking like home audio ... we're not trying to "duplicate" the home audio environment. We've got a unique set of constraints in car audio, no more or less "valid" than the home ... just different. What we're trying to do is _optimize_ driver placement & signal processing for _this_ environment ... we're not trying to shoehorn or force-fit the living room into our cars.

EDIT : what quality_sound said  Maybe the tweets are designed with a rising on-axis response, with the intention of listening off-axis? Also, do you care about _both_ front seat listeners? In the IID range of frequencies, you can't _electronically_ attenuate the near-side speakers for _both_ front seat listeners ... but you can _approximate_ near-side attenuation for _both_ front seat listeners _mechanically_  Are you worried about reflections from your side windows? You should be ... this will impact your tweet aiming as well ...


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

> we're not trying to shoehorn or force-fit the living room into our cars.


but I miss my La-Z-Boy


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

lycan said:


> - lots of near-field reflections.



All the more reason why you can actually get away with pointing a tweeter off axis, and setting it’s crossover point much higher than you typically would. Take advantage of the reflections down low, while playing to the tweeter’s roll off up top.
Ie: Tweeter FR shows a drop at 10k 30* off axis. 
Use gain and crossovers to work with your car and with your drivers. Try raising your gain up a bit. Note how crazy, stupid ear aching it is at your 2khz crossover point. But, you also lose some things above 10khz, just as you suspected. 
Rather than boost the top end via EQ, increase your crossover point to about 12.5khz (one step after your tweeter has fallen). Set your slope to 6dB or 12dB, and see now if your top end has leveled out to match up with the rest of your tweeter’s output. 
You may find you’ll have to use less EQ cuts or raises than you otherwise would have had you simply left done the norm. 

Not gospel… just some ‘try it’ advice. 
It just might work, or not...



Edit: Wasn't this thread about midrange?


----------



## razholio (Apr 15, 2008)

lycan said:


> T
> 
> EDIT : what quality_sound said  Maybe the tweets are designed with a rising on-axis response, with the intention of listening off-axis? Also, do you care about _both_ front seat listeners? In the IID range of frequencies, you can't _electronically_ attenuate the near-side speakers for _both_ front seat listeners ... but you can _approximate_ near-side attenuation for _both_ front seat listeners _mechanically_  Are you worried about reflections from your side windows? You should be ... this will impact your tweet aiming as well ...


here, here! and that's the money quote right up there. hope that made sense to you. 

Hey Lycan, I've got my SBAcoustics cross firing right now and I gotta say I like it a LOT, however, I know that the off-axis response on my near tweeter is not as flat as the on-axis response of the far tweeter, and I've been thinking about wave-guides. Is is practical at all to consider adapting a wave-guide for these tweeters? I've got them in the windshield corners right now with a make-shift acoustic-foam baffle to limit early reflections off the glass and dash.


----------



## lycan (Dec 20, 2009)

razholio said:


> here, here! and that's the money quote right up there. hope that made sense to you.
> 
> Hey Lycan, I've got my SBAcoustics cross firing right now and I gotta say I like it a LOT, however, I know that the off-axis response on my near tweeter is not as flat as the on-axis response of the far tweeter, and I've been thinking about wave-guides. Is is practical at all to consider adapting a wave-guide for these tweeters? I've got them in the windshield corners right now with a make-shift acoustic-foam baffle to limit early reflections off the glass and dash.


worth a try ... one way to view the advantage of waveguides is this : the off-axis response MORE resembles a frequency-independent attenuation of the on-axis response (something beaming alone can not accomplish). Which MAY be just what the doctor ordered, for attenuating the near-side tweeter for EACH front seat listener.

Patrick is the dude to ask ...


----------



## lycan (Dec 20, 2009)

bikinpunk said:


> All the more reason why you can actually get away with pointing a tweeter off axis, and setting it’s crossover point much higher than you typically would. Take advantage of the reflections down low, while playing to the tweeter’s roll off up top.
> Ie: Tweeter FR shows a drop at 10k 30* off axis.
> Use gain and crossovers to work with your car and with your drivers. Try raising your gain up a bit. Note how crazy, stupid ear aching it is at your 2khz crossover point. But, you also lose some things above 10khz, just as you suspected.
> Rather than boost the top end via EQ, increase your crossover point to about 12.5khz (one step after your tweeter has fallen). Set your slope to 6dB or 12dB, and see now if your top end has leveled out to match up with the rest of your tweeter’s output.
> ...


Yeah, it was about midrange 

But nice post anyway. You know, the concept of "on axis" does not even exist for BOTH front seat passengers listening to TWO tweeters  If you find yourself "aiming" tweets so as to MINIMIZE REFLECTIONS from dash, side-window and windshield ... which may not be a bad place to start, by the way ... you may find the tweets sound best on-axis with your dome light 

Yeah, I know ... the "home audio" crowd would be aghast


----------



## tinctorus (Oct 5, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> Simple, Quart deisgned them with a rising on-axis response. This sin't home audio, it's car audio. You have to throw home ideas out the window. I guarantee you that if you mount them on axis you're going to hate them. They were designed for off-axis pillar or upper door mounting. Trust me, don't run them on-axis.


Well I actually just mounted them on axis today in a cheap tweeter pod just to be able to do the aiming and even at 0db off attentuation I REALLY like them MUCH better on axis then off...I didn't feel they were to harsh at all in all honesty and that is what I was always afraid of but that was ALWAYS going off of everyone elses opinion instead of testing it out myself which I should have done in the first place LOL

I already purchased the ED3.6's so going with an 8 now really isnt an option as I dont want to buy anything else I would prefer to work with what I currently have.

while I do realize that 4 or possibly 5 inch midrange MAY be better in some respects I think the QSD's will function fine for me....HOWEVER if I dont feel they are ginving me what I need/want I will change them but for now would like to stick with what I currently own

Also for what it's worth I COULD GIVE TWO ****S ABOUT PASSENGER ENJOYMENT :laugh:.....seriously its MY car so as far as I am concerned it could sound like the passenger is listening from tin can speakers, I am NOT trying to get a 2 seat soundstage, I sit in the driver seat and THAT is wehre I want the best sound.

I know alot of people like to try and set up there car for 2 set listening but I think that opens up a whole NEW can of worms, One in which I am NOT about to explore :laugh:

My main concern and the reason I started this thread WAS about midrange as it is MUCH easier to adjust tweeter aiming than it is to adjust midrange aiming if for nothing other than the size of a tweeter compared to the size of a midrange "I.E. it takes quite a bit more work to re aim a mid whose enclosure and brackets have already been made than it does to re aim a small tweeter"

Now keep in mind I may be going about this all wrong and that is the reason I wanted peoples opinions other than mine who have tried mids in different locations


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

They won't be harsh, they're going to be bright. WAY bright. If you like them that way, cool beans. Just make sure you leave them that way for a couple of weeks. A lot of times bright speakers sound great at first because you're hearing a lot of exaggerated detail but then it just gets to be too much. Older Pioneer 4-way speakers are a prime example.  

Seriously though, give them some time and make sure you _really_ like them up there. 

Mids in the kicks can work fine and how much you lose due to leg blockage will depend on how directional the speakers are and what the low pass point it. I'd say throw them in the kicks with some towels as a temp thing and see if you like them in the kicks or not.


----------



## lycan (Dec 20, 2009)

Just a few more random thoughts about the pure folly of "on axis tweeters" in a car environment. Intended to be food-for-thought 

1. How do you aim two tweeters for two front seat passengers, so that _both_ tweets are on-axis for _both_ front seat listeners?

2. Think about the "phantom image" model for reflections. Especially valid near hard reflective surfaces, like glass ... even for treble wavelengths. The "image" model is simply this : there is a "phantom" tweeter, wherever you see the reflection. You can imagine that phantom driver playing, with the reflective glass removed  So, lets count how many tweeters are playing (real plus phantom) in the very reflective nearfield, just counting _first_ reflections : Three reflections from left tweeter (left window, right window, and windshield), plus the real left tweeter, plus three reflections from the right tweeter, plus the real right tweeter, for a grand total of EIGHT. Yes ... in a nearfield reflective environment, you don't have TWO tweeters playing, you have EIGHT. *Like it or not, in a nearfield reflective environment ... you have an ARRAY of at least EIGHT tweeters playing*.

Now ... exactly which ones of these EIGHT are you going to "aim" to be on-axis? And has your aiming taken into account the comb filtering resulting from the delayed arrival from the phantom drivers?

Yes, virginia, that's what the nearfield reflective environment gives us ... like it or not.

3. At treble frequencies, wavelengths much shorter than the distance between our ears, it's all about IID (inter-aural intensity difference) for localization. Even ignoring reflections for a moment, if we care about both front seat listeners, how can we attenuate near-side intensity for EACH front seat listener? Sure can't do that electronically  But we can approximate near-side attenuation for _each_ front listener mechanically, by exploiting off-axis attenuation. Of course, this approximation is improved with waveguides 

These are the main reasons why "aiming" tweets in car may very well lead to surprising (or at least, non-obvious) results. It may be that aiming somewhat centrally to minimize reflective intensity ... in other words, aiming so that the PHANTOMS are as OFF-AXIS as possible ... may ALSO result in acceptable attenuation for each near-side listener. Hence, my comment about dome-light aiming 

When you consider reflections, you may ponder this question : 

*Do you want your main tweeters MORE on-axis, or would you rather have the phantoms MORE off-axis?* 

Bottom line : "on-axis" tweeters _might_ make sense in a larger, less reflective environment for more centrally-seated listeners. But don't try to force-fit home-audio thinking where it just doesn't apply.


----------



## HIS4 (Oct 6, 2005)

I ran Q series in my Audi and the biggest imrpovement I made to that set was to ditch the passive crossovers and run them active. From there, I moved the crossover frequency much higher than the OEM 3.5kHz as they were just way too harsh at the frequency when mounted on axis. Like others have suggested, you should play with the aiming a little as you might like the sound of it off axis better. In my case, I was using the stock location so it was on axis. It also needed to be attenuated a lot more than 6db to make it listenable. Once I did get it dialed in though it was great.


----------



## razholio (Apr 15, 2008)

lycan said:


> Just a few more random thoughts about the pure folly of "on axis tweeters" in a car environment. Intended to be food-for-thought
> 
> 1. How do you aim two tweeters for two front seat passengers, so that _both_ tweets are on-axis for _both_ front seat listeners?
> 
> ...


Damn, nicely put, lycan. I hadn't thought of the 'dome-light aiming' scenario. any data (or at least experience) on this? I just might give this a shot before I permanently fix the aiming of my tweeters. thanks for the idea.


----------



## lycan (Dec 20, 2009)

razholio said:


> Damn, nicely put, lycan. I hadn't thought of the 'dome-light aiming' scenario. any data (or at least experience) on this? I just might give this a shot before I permanently fix the aiming of my tweeters. thanks for the idea.


The problem is, as we know, that the environment (including phantom drivers) is just ... complex. It's not "beyond" the understanding of properly-applied acoustic principles, of course, it's just difficult to include all variables into a single rule that applies for all cases.

I encourage experimentation, above all else. I would start by imagining a "string" extending from each tweeter. Extend the string in a direction that tends to be the same distance from each close reflective surface. Start by aiming in that direction. NO, you won't be aiming your main tweeters _on-axis_ ... but you'll be aiming the phantoms _off-axis_  Depending on the off-axis response of the tweets (which you DON'T necessarily want to be wonderfully the same as the on-axis response, for side-bias reasons discussed above), you _may_ find that direction to ALSO provide some decent near-side, off-axis attenuation for _each_ front seat listener.

Just remember : you aren't aiming two tweeters. You've aiming an array of at least eight tweeters. And if you care about both front seat listeners, you'll have to listen from each seat


----------



## tinctorus (Oct 5, 2009)

lycan said:


> The problem is, as we know, that the environment (including phantom drivers) is just ... complex. It's not "beyond" the understanding of properly-applied acoustic principles, of course, it's just difficult to include all variables into a single rule that applies for all cases.
> 
> I encourage experimentation, above all else. I would start by imagining a "string" extending from each tweeter. Extend the string in a direction that tends to be the same distance from each close reflective surface. Start by aiming in that direction. NO, you won't be aiming your main tweeters _on-axis_ ... but you'll be aiming the phantoms _off-axis_  Depending on the off-axis response of the tweets (which you DON'T necessarily want to be wonderfully the same as the on-axis response, for side-bias reasons discussed above), you _may_ find that direction to ALSO provide some decent near-side, off-axis attenuation for _each_ front seat listener.
> 
> Just remember : you aren't aiming two tweeters. You've aiming an array of at least eight tweeters. And if you care about both front seat listeners, you'll have to listen from each seat


I said in a previous post I could care less what the passenger listening enjoyment is :laugh: as far as I am concerned it could sound like I have tin can speakers in the passenger seat as long as MY listening is enjoyable that is what matters to me

As of right now I am playing with the tweeter aiming until I find the spot that works best for ME, I was AMAZED at the difference in sound from justt moving the tweeter a few degrees one way or the other, And just for ****s and giggles I even aimed that as the windshield "even though I KNEW it would most likely sound like ****" since I had seen others do this and wonder WHY they would do that because it honestly sounded AWFUL just like I thought LOL

Another thought that came to my mind is what about mid bass in kicks and midrange in door on axis??

I think it makes more sense to me to stick with my original idea of both drivers in the door but the midbass in sealed enclosures so as the back waves and air pressure do NOT mess with the midrange acoustics


----------



## fastlane (Apr 6, 2009)

tinctorus said:


> Another thought that came to my mind is what about mid bass in kicks and midrange in door on axis??
> 
> I think it makes more sense to me to stick with my original idea of both drivers in the door but the midbass in sealed enclosures so as the back waves and air pressure do NOT mess with the midrange acoustics


That's exactly what I'm currently playing with. Mid bass in lower door off axis, mid range in mid door aimed between center of seats (behind the giant bose speaker grilles), and tweet either at top of door or in sail panel also aimed between front seats.


----------



## lycan (Dec 20, 2009)

tinctorus said:


> I said in a previous post I could care less what the passenger listening enjoyment is :laugh: as far as I am concerned it could sound like I have tin can speakers in the passenger seat as long as MY listening is enjoyable that is what matters to me
> 
> As of right now I am playing with the tweeter aiming until I find the spot that works best for ME, I was AMAZED at the difference in sound from justt moving the tweeter a few degrees one way or the other, And just for ****s and giggles I even aimed that as the windshield "even though I KNEW it would most likely sound like ****" since I had seen others do this and wonder WHY they would do that because it honestly sounded AWFUL just like I thought LOL
> 
> ...


i know dude ... i was just offering some ramblings for "general consumption".

feel free to ignore me ...


----------



## Problemhouston (Apr 2, 2009)

fastlane said:


> I'm in the exact same quandry as you. While kick panel seems like a better way to go compared to factory locations; I don't think it's the end all placement. Some vehicles might lend better to kicks than others. In my truck, kickpanel mounting seems less than optimal based on how high I sit and the angle of the lower dash.
> 
> I have been less than impressed with the kick installs I have seen based on the fact that you have to sit a certain way to keep from blocking the speaker, and you lose a crap load of already precious foot space when installing them.
> 
> ...


What kind of truck do you have? I have an F150 which I think would lend well to kickpanel mounting provided there is enough space down there to get it to look and function well. The problem with my truck is the pillars. There really is not a flat enough surface to mount anything on them. Not only that but the drivers side would be so close that it would take as much T/A that any processor had available to get it to work. 

Im from the old school of thinking and try and get the far tweet on axis and the near tweet off axis. By doing this the on axis tweet will have a better freq responce and be higher in volume thus pulling the image more towards the middle of the vehicle. But some of these newer speakers coming perform very well on and off axis so it has just become more difficult to follow that way of thinking.


----------



## GSlider (Jun 11, 2009)

Very informative info guys. I do have a question to add, though. 

Is it a true saying that the tweeter placement should be nomore than 6" from the midrange/midbass in a comp set? I've always been told this, but, in my new setup I want to do things as right as possible.


----------



## fastlane (Apr 6, 2009)

GSlider said:


> Very informative info guys. I do have a question to add, though.
> 
> Is it a true saying that the tweeter placement should be nomore than 6" from the midrange/midbass in a comp set? I've always been told this, but, in my new setup I want to do things as right as possible.


That's generally the case, but there are quite a few very good sounding installs that utilize the mid in kick and tweet in the a pillar. In fact, my current install will probably go that direction.


----------



## lycan (Dec 20, 2009)

GSlider said:


> Very informative info guys. I do have a question to add, though.
> 
> Is it a true saying that the tweeter placement should be nomore than 6" from the midrange/midbass in a comp set? I've always been told this, but, in my new setup I want to do things as right as possible.


If the waveforms from each driver arrive at the ear at the same time, what will the constuctive/destructive interference pattern look like? Is physical proximity the _only_ way to guarantee equal arrival times? Finally, who cares where the _midbass_ is placed in the VERTICAL plane, if the ear can't localize it in the VERTICAL plane?


----------

