# Pioneer prs 720 teaser



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

I'm too tired to write a full review, but I thought I'd drop some quick comments. Once again, a big thank you to SJ for donating these for testing.

1. The set is rather inefficient, especially the tweeter. I have to turn it up quite a bit to get it to the same level as the Seas Lotus 27. The mid sits at around 85dbwm, but unlike most DIY drivers has good low end sensitivity. Unfortunately, you could put half the power to a set of Seas RNX drivers and still achieve the same output as these mids.

2. Very impressed with the sandwich cone. Thin, stiff, straight profile. I believe it's almost as good as the latest generation Focal Utopia cones, which in my experience is one of the best composite cones available. The old 6w2's you are used to don't count... think more like the Focal Audiom or 6w4311. What does this mean? Usually you have to choose between two extremes, a well damped low coloration soft cone that sacrifices clarity, or a stiff cone that rings like a bell but offers better resolution. Composite cones generally offer a varying compromise between damping and stiffness... with the best composite cones offering both top notch damping and stiffness. 

3. Fuzzy microfiber surround. I'm abivalent about this one. A high loss surround provides superior damping and smoother frequency response, but also a loss of detail. Needless to say, the frequency response of this driver is ruler flat, with ~5-6db high q peak at 4.2khz. Off-axis, the peak may even completely disappear (will have to investigate further). If you examine the impedance curve as well, there's no ripple in the 800-2khz region (typical of soft cone drivers), and also no associated bump or dip in that region either. You also don't see multiple higher end breakup nodes either. Excellent.

4. Motor - top notch. I was pleasantly surprised, but this driver did very well on the Klippel. Is it underhung? I don't really know, but the BL curve is very reminiscent of one with a broad flat plateau. There's also a copper shorting ring, although it's effectiveness is not nearly as good as in the Scan or Peerless drivers.

Another thing to mention, peak to peak excursion is rather limited. You're probably looking at no more than 16mm p-p, a far cry from the 22mm of a driver such as the Seas RNX, or W18NX. 

5. How does it sound? I think the tweeter is ok. A bit aggressive and sibilant in the top octaves, and low end sensitivity is rather poorish. Driving it a bit harder, it begins to spit. I believe the low efficiency maybe why it sounds "mellow" to some.

Midbass... I think these are keepers. They sound exceptionally clean, they're easy to work with, and they have good low end sensitivity. For all that, I can overlook the lowish efficiency and peak output. Compared side by side to the Peerless Exclusives, they sound more open and revealing. The Exclusives are a bit huskier, softer sounding.


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

whoa... certainly didn't expect that kind of review from the mid, better than the peerless. bravo pioneer, bravo.

whats the passive xover point?


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

Thanks for the teaser, N!!! 

Good to get this kind of data....

I thought the surround on the mid was a bit of a surprise to me too, however regardless, this mid was one of the best looking drivers I've layed my eyes on recently.

I also must admit the efficiency of the mid turned me off a little a bit, but I appreciated that they did seem to play pretty low, and clean. However, to me they did not sound as snappy "out of the box" as the Dyn MW150s and MW160s I compared them to. Midrange was good, but not as nice as you would get from a stiff metal cone, and IMO, still sub par to the MW150 in this regard.

But as you said, the ease of use of these is a HUGE factor. I honestly think alot of people getting into DIY initially underestimate the challenge of getting some driver combinations tuned up. There is so much that can go amiss. It's not a trivial exercise. Having a driver like this designed for a car door takes ALOT of the work out of the equation, and makes generally good results easier to obtain, whether active or passive. The price point on the set also makes this EXTREMELY attractive. I could see your review sparking a trend of many going out and buying the set just to get their hands on a pair of these mids. They are darn nice!


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

give them some time they sound better after a while of playing.. i noticed the tweeter had a few "hot" areas that have since seemed to level somewhat out. not the best tweeter out there but def still a good one.. i did not notice any of the spitty sounds you spoke of..and i am a stickler for that i hate that in a tweeter.. 

the main reason i kept telling everyone to use much more power than recc is the efficiency i know for sure they can handle 150 rms per mid with no issues

npdang now my question is how do they compare to the scan rev's mids i am still interested in getting those and have little time with them.. i def like these mids. are they the best... no are they worth the price they can be obtained for oh hell yes...

and i also agree the build of these is very very very nice for their asking prices.. i was very suprised


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

Interesting... I found the midrange top notch. Definitely among the best I've heard. The cone design is really well executed, with the motor being better than average.

My only concern is that these will crap out much faster in the bass region than I'm accustomed to... and in general I'd rather just buy a pair of W18NX's than to buy a whole set just for the mids, for which I'd have to dump 2x the power into to achieve the same output  Although these are much smaller; not sure I can fit a W18NX in my car.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

@Zfactor - I found the mid to be quite easy to overdrive mechanically, at least compared to the Peerless Exclusive and Usher I have here. Also, underhung coil typically has lower thermal powerhandling. 

As far as the tweet, I found it has a rising on-axis response with a peak in the upper octave IIRC ~15khz. I don't believe that further break-in would reduce this, as I think it's a function of the dome coating and profile. With dynamic recordings (and test tones) the driver also begins to get spitty at levels noticeably lower than the Lotus 27 I have on hand.


----------



## Anatoli_KZ (Mar 4, 2007)

There are still drivers for the middle - Pioneer TS-S101PRS
http://www.pioneer.eu/eur/products/TS-S101PRS/print.html

"...It has a dual-layer composite cone made of Aramid Fibre and pulp, to make for a strong bend rigidity, whilst still being very light..."


----------



## ATB (Aug 30, 2005)

Speaking of not being able to fit a W18NX, these are one of the few mids that should easily fit in the door of a modern Subaru which are notorious for requiring shallow mids. How to these compare in excursion / output to other shallow mids?

Do both/any of you think it would be worthwhile to get an amp that would push 150w to the mids vs 50-70? I was all set to go with an amp that does 70x4 for these active, but worry it may not be enough. Mind you this is for the family wagon, so ear splitting sound levels are not required 

npdang - did you try the mid with the lotus tweet? This is one of my planned upgrades if I don't like the PRS tweets.


----------



## SOHCKing03 (Nov 21, 2006)

Ha yeah baby my mids sure are going around getting tested lol.

I am very happy with the great reviews coming out about these. I need better midbass which, according to many reviews, is great with these speakers.

I am not too worried about tweeters because my ears are young and hopefully won't mind the harshness (even though apparently harshness is reduced off-axis).

I cannot wait till later this spring to get my hands on these!

Thanks for the great reviews guys!

-Brad


----------



## khail19 (Oct 27, 2006)

ATB said:


> Speaking of not being able to fit a W18NX, these are one of the few mids that should easily fit in the door of a modern Subaru which are notorious for requiring shallow mids.


Mine are installed in an 02 Impreza. They are fairly shallow, at around 2 5/8" but the metal magnet cover is very large in diameter. So large that I needed to cut about 3/16" off of the metal track that is attached to the bottom of the window glass. I used a 3/4" HDPE spacer to mount them and longer door panel pins as well. If you have an 05 or newer you could use a deeper 1" spacer and not have to alter the window since they have more clearance under the door panel.

I'm very happy with the sound. My doors are well deadened and sealed up as much as possible, and I'm pleased with the midbass output without using any EQ at all. They did start sounding better after the first week or so of being installed, apparently these need a break in period.


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2007)

Not to hijak, but if you can't fit the W18NX in a door, give some consideration to the new W16NX. Same motor, as far as i can tell. Very similar specs in all regards, in fact, except one ... cone area, of course


----------



## SOHCKing03 (Nov 21, 2006)

And speaking of not fitting... are these ideal for IB in doors? Or should I look at sealed door pods or even kicks?

Tweeters will most likely be off-axis and mids will too. But if I put them on-axis should I expect a little harshness? Or is midbass fine on-axis (with the exception of that peak)?

-Brad

p.s. I'll probably have more questions by next class, I just have to get in line for lunch lol


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

well i have these installed in both our cars off axis and i know i dont really notice any of the spitting.. yes they have a touch of bite up top but nothing that couldnt be fixed with a bit of eq.. they are far from what i would call bright though

also they were designed to be run in a door application so free air is just fine


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

npdang said:


> Interesting... I found the midrange top notch. Definitely among the best I've heard. The cone design is really well executed, with the motor being better than average.


LOL.  Goes to show you that there's always going to be a diversity of opinion when there are subjective evaluations happening. That's why I appreciate all the measurement data you and others that are in DIY community have posted on the web. It REALLY helps alot when comparing drivers.

To be fair, I'd have to give the edge in midrange to the Pioneer vs. the similarly sized Dynaudio MW160. Side by side, it had greater definition/clarity. However, having had the MW150 in my daily driver for many years now, I've grown very fond of its midrange presence. It IMO has a very engaging sound, which I think many would enjoy, but probably not everyone's cup of tea; it can scream at you a bit if not integrated/tuned properly.....



SOHCKing03 said:


> And speaking of not fitting... are these ideal for IB in doors? Or should I look at sealed door pods or even kicks?
> 
> Tweeters will most likely be off-axis and mids will too. But if I put them on-axis should I expect a little harshness? Or is midbass fine on-axis (with the exception of that peak)?


Definitely mount the mids in your doors. They are ideal for IB and their shallow mounting depth makes them a piece of cake to install. (they do include a nice spacer ring in the set too!) They will sound best and be easiest to tune that way IMO.

I played around with the tweeter kick mounted in my car, directly on axis and they seemed to work fine that way. I don't see any issue using them off axis either, but I think you just need to experiment with your car, preferences, etc...

After more time with the tweeters, esp. in the car, I'm growing a little less fond of them than before. I found them a bit tiring to listen to, but honestly, I don't think the majority of people will find these unpleasant at all. Relatively speaking, these are still pretty nice car audio tweeters.


----------



## 300Z (Mar 20, 2005)

shinjohn said:


> Goes to show you that there's always going to be a diversity of opinion when there are subjective evaluations happening.


That's because a lot people don't have the trained ear, don't know what to listen to.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

werewolf said:


> Not to hijak, but if you can't fit the W18NX in a door, give some consideration to the new W16NX. Same motor, as far as i can tell. Very similar specs in all regards, in fact, except one ... cone area, of course


You have God like status around here and ECA...you can do what you want.  

Yes, that W16Nx driver is under a 3" depth(2.89") however, in my car(I am sure there are some others out there) I would still have to squeeze them in. I have a 2.75" mounting depth with very little room to move the drivers outwards. I thought about those Excels when they first came out. Would make for an awesome two-way front. The verdict is still out as to whether or not I would spend that kind of cash for dedicated midbasses if I run a three-way front. Those new Excels do look incredible! I really need to get a set oneday. 

The PRS drivers on the other hand at a 2.63" depth should drop right in. Hats off the Pioneer...that driver is attractive in more ways than one.

Hmmm. Seems both drivers would need at least a 150 watts x 2 amps to make it worth the effort?


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

shinjohn said:


> LOL.  Goes to show you that there's always going to be a diversity of opinion when there are subjective evaluations happening.





300Z said:


> That's because a lot people don't have the trained ear, don't know what to listen to.


I agree with shinjohn...
While that may be true what 300Z is saying, let's not forget that even those with a so-called trained ear don't all hear the same and have different ideas about what sounds good. The musician and the sound engineer don't always agree.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

It's been my experience that 99% of times when you have strong differing opinions it's due to differences in testing and setup, rather than the driver itself. 

I'm usually quite demanding on a driver during testing. I do use tones which allow me to more easily discern differences in distortion performance, and I also make some effort to smooth the frequency response. I play songs with massed vocals and I crank it pretty hard, then I turn around and put a 10 tone burst through them from 20 to 100hz just to see how much noise it makes. So really, when I say something is "ok", it's usually pretty good in the greater scheme of things, it's just not something better or as good as the best I've seen before 

Also a big one... I don't test these in the car! Although it is the intended application, I find that the car introduces too many extraneous variables such that I no longer know where the speaker ends and the car begins. Is that tweeter really harsh? Or is it just heavy diffraction... or is the top end dull, or is the driver just mounted too far off-axis... etc.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

werewolf said:


> Not to hijak, but if you can't fit the W18NX in a door, give some consideration to the new W16NX. Same motor, as far as i can tell. Very similar specs in all regards, in fact, except one ... cone area, of course


Good suggestion, I'll have to look into it


----------



## rekd0514 (Sep 24, 2006)

Wow great review and info. I found a lot of the things said to be true in my application as well. Makes me more glad I got a set when they were at $225 shipped! It was well worth the investment when these are being compared to drivers worth many times more! I really have to applaud Pioneer as well. Congrats on coming out with the awesome PRS line for such incredible prices!


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

npdang said:


> Good suggestion, I'll have to look into it


very very interested in the breakup, it is a rather odd sized mag cone. I'm sure it would be a killer setup with the rt27 covering 2khz up.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

Man you guys need to stop all the raving about the this set, are going to make Pioneer rise the price.  

It just makes me wonder, if these are this good, how good are the new ODR line that is not shipped here.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

Too late, the price is already higher than when they first came out, and I doubt they'll be getting cheaper any time soon.

Nice to see the positive initial impressions.


----------



## Guest (Apr 4, 2007)

cvjoint said:


> very very interested in the breakup, it is a rather odd sized mag cone. I'm sure it would be a killer setup with the rt27 covering 2khz up.


interesting point ... the fundamental breakup frequency seems quite similar between the W18 and W16NX, which is a bit surprising given the different effective piston areas


----------



## vwtoby (Oct 28, 2005)

sorry..didnt see it, but are these run using the passives anywhere in the review?


----------



## B&K (Sep 20, 2005)

werewolf said:


> interesting point ... the fundamental breakup frequency seems quite similar between the W18 and W16NX, which is a bit surprising given the different effective piston areas


When I stopped by Madisound they were super excited about the 16. Nearly quoting them, the clarity of the Excel with more than the bass output of the 5.25 Rev. The segment is to slide into where you can't fit a 7 but don't want to lose out on the midbass. For its cone size the driver is a monster as well. I just hope that they release a larger cone version of it.


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

^^^ maybe ill have to give them a try.. hmmmm


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

zfactor said:


> ^^^ maybe ill have to give them a try.. hmmmm


Those W16s do look great for car use, where space is tight!!!!
Man, I wanna try them too! 

Has anyone actually acquired a set?


----------



## Guest (Apr 4, 2007)

B&K said:


> When I stopped by Madisound they were super excited about the 16. Nearly quoting them, the clarity of the Excel with more than the bass output of the 5.25 Rev. The segment is to slide into where you can't fit a 7 but don't want to lose out on the midbass. For its cone size the driver is a monster as well. I just hope that they release a larger cone version of it.


it really is hard to resist a comparison between the new Seas W16NX and the Scan Revelator 15W. Parameters are remarkably close, with the W16NX edging out the Scan on volume displacement ... linear as well as maximum. So i would agree on the (somewhat) better bass output from the W16NX, and of course I'm a real fan of the Excel midrange detail and clarity  But the Scan 15W could undoubtedly be crossed a bit higher, given the breakup behavior of the Seas mag cone.

I suspect that finding a small-format tweet to mate with the W16NX in a two-way front stage would present similar challenges to mating a tweet to the Seas W18 drivers (given cone breakup behavior). But let's not discount the possibility of using the W16NX as a dedicated midbass in a space-limited 3-way front stage  I'm a fan of small-ish "mighty mouse" drivers, low on cone area but high on linear excursion


----------



## floats (Nov 23, 2005)

mvw2 said:


> Too late, the price is already higher than when they first came out, and I doubt they'll be getting cheaper any time soon.
> 
> Nice to see the positive initial impressions.


I just paid $490 out the door for a set of the 720s and an Alpine PDX 4.100, so I think I got an awesome deal. No individual prices, but I think he said $325 for the Alpine, $150 for the Pioneers, plus tax and then took a bit off the total to get me to $490. I'm trying to downsize and simplify my system, so I'm trying these passive with the PDX rear channels bridged to an eD SQ10 sub. This is all in a Miata, where space is a premium. They will be replacing Dayton Audio RS180s, Seas 27TFFNs, a pair of Tang Band 6.5 subs and a Hifonics 5 channel amp. Pioneers should be in tomorrow and the sub is scheduled to be delivered on Friday, but I'll be out of town this weekend, so the install will have to wait until next weekend.


----------



## azngotskills (Feb 24, 2006)

want to share where you got them from???


----------



## zfactor (Oct 19, 2005)

150 is below cost on the pioneers just fyi if you got them for that you stole them basically..i actually have 2 extra sets in stock if anyone is interested they will be authorized...


----------



## PolishDude (Oct 19, 2006)

yes where did you get them from? I am looking at purchasing these speakers as well


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

floats said:


> I just paid $490 out the door for a set of the 720s and an Alpine PDX 4.100, so I think I got an awesome deal. No individual prices, but I think he said $325 for the Alpine, $150 for the Pioneers


Wanna make a quick 10 bucks?


----------



## Mister Peebody (Jun 29, 2007)

How do the Pioneer 720prs components perform compared to an active set comprised of Seas 27TAFNC/G (H1397) tweeter and Seas ER18RNX (H1456)?
I ask because these are my options. In the active setup (Seas) each of the 4 drivers will get 170 watts rms. The Pioneers will get 340 watts rms.
Thank you!


----------



## 67StangMan (Jan 7, 2009)

Any thouhgts on how the 720's would perform in a kick panel enclosure? Is there a recomended volume? Should the enclosure be ported or sealed tight?


----------



## SanPabloBoy (Jul 11, 2009)

ill be getting my 720 prs soon. ill give you my feedback


----------



## 67StangMan (Jan 7, 2009)

SanPabloBoy said:


> ill be getting my 720 prs soon. ill give you my feedback


Where did you buy from and what did you pay? I'm about to get a set.


----------



## SanPabloBoy (Jul 11, 2009)

got this on ebay. paid through paypal


----------



## an2ny888 (Jun 27, 2008)

i installed a set not long ago, didn't really like it ( in passive mode ). the tweeters overpower the mids, even at max attenuation. the mids are nice, to me they sound more like a sub. however i was looking for something with more of a midbass snap, so i went back to my old set of alpine type x seps. i wouldn't be surprised if they sound better in active mode though


----------

