# 10 Inch Midbass?



## jimbno1 (Apr 14, 2008)

Just to let you know I searched but did not find a lot of useful information. I was wondering how many people had tried a 10 inch midbass in the doors. Is it possible or should I say probable? 

The setup would be 3-way active from ~300Hz to say 45Hz. The speakers I have in mind are JL IB4-10's. They are 5.2" deep. The IB4-8's are 3.9 deep so just over an inch deeper. Is that really a big a deal? 

I would rather not cut a hole and mount in the kicks or floor panels. I would probably just stick to 8's or 6.5's in the door than do that. 

Jim


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

I have had 10's in my doors a few years back. They didn't fit so I had to reverse mount them. It looked horrible... to others  hehe.

Here is what I think. The bigger the driver, the better it is at lower frequencies and doesn't necessarely mean great or better midbase.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

Ask cvjoint.


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98 (Apr 5, 2008)

i'm gatherng the parts to put 10s in the doors as we speak. it's been done before. mounting depth is only a big deal if they don't fit.

1) get a ruler/tape measure/piece of string/etc.
2) use said measuring device


----------



## jimbno1 (Apr 14, 2008)

Black - What drivers are you planning to install? What made you decide or at least attempt 10s?


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

I'm thinking with 10" midbass you shouldn't go past 150 hz.

Bobditts did it with Focal 10 drivers.

Check his install thread.

I think he high tailed it out of here.


----------



## jimbno1 (Apr 14, 2008)

I remember the thread with the focal 10s but did not save it. I searched but cannot find it. If you know the thread please send the link to me. 

By the way, why would you limit the midbass to 150Hz? From what I have read on here and other forums several successful installs with JL IB4-10s and horns have been done. That would imply using the midbass well past 150Hz. 

I am not sure of the LE of the IB4s but would it come into play at 300Hz? I am planning on crossing over to 12M Scans so 300Hz would be more reasonable.


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98 (Apr 5, 2008)

i'm gonna go with dynaudio mw182s. some say it's not the best choice, some say it is. either way i have my mind made up.










lower left hand is what made me decide 10". when i pulled the bose and saw the space i had to work with sun rays beamed down from the heavens.


----------



## Kenny_Cox (Sep 9, 2007)

^^What kind of vehicle is that out of? I haven't researched 10 inch midbass very much. But I have been told the MW182 is just about as good as it gets.


----------



## James Bang (Jul 25, 2007)

I have Peerless SLS 10"s in my doors, 50hz - 250hz iirc. It's the best thing I've ever done for my system, other than getting an h701.

let me know if this link works: http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a11/mobster909/New install/


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98 (Apr 5, 2008)

Kenny_Cox said:


> ^^What kind of vehicle is that out of? I haven't researched 10 inch midbass very much. But I have been told the MW182 is just about as good as it gets.


g50 infiniti q45.

i heard the same thing, probably from the same source, but have got some other less desirable feedback.

i'll be giving them a shot anyway.



James Bang said:


> I have Peerless SLS 10"s in my doors, 50hz - 250hz iirc. It's the best thing I've ever done for my system, other than getting an h701.
> 
> let me know if this link works: http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a11/mobster909/New install/


link works. looks good. i'm going to be running an xs6600 as well until i can afford what i really want.


----------



## MrDave (May 19, 2008)

Go with the Dyns.


----------



## usmcsoldriver (Aug 13, 2007)

Dyn really is the only way to go, unless you want to save money. Remember you get what you pay for.

I'm working on getting my MW182's  They will be Xoverd all the way up to 900hz
In my Del Sol. If I can get that to work, I sure hope you can get them to work in your Infinity!


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

usmcsoldriver said:


> Dyn really is the only way to go, unless you want to save money. Remember you get what you pay for.


That's a pretty bold statement don't you think? I think that I'd put my money on the Peerless drivers to measure and sound better than the MW182 given a quality install in both cases. The Dyn's are good, but they aren't that efficient and they're ungodly expensive for what you're getting. And there are any number of PA drivers that would more than likely be better off than either one of the first two choices I mentioned! Just some food for thought.

Zach


----------



## kd81 (Oct 14, 2008)

I have a few pairs of the HDS/XLS woofers not being used. Probably your best choice for midbass out there.


----------



## jimbno1 (Apr 14, 2008)

I guess I wouldn't mind buying some other drivers, but I thought I had some pretty good drivers already on hand. I am wondering what the XLS would provide that the JL IB4s will not. Especilly IB4-10 versus XLS 8. But maybe I will buy a pair to try them out. How deep are the XLS 8's? 

The SLS 8 also looks interesting. 

It has been a while since I was into the scene, but I listened to a couple of local Dyn dealer's cars about 4-5 years ago. One with a 3-way with 8" midbass and the other 2-way with 7 inch. They had several recent IASCA trophies and were supposed to be the top shop in my area. Anyway I was not impressed with either car at all. And keep in mind I have Dyn home speakers.


----------



## kd81 (Oct 14, 2008)

according to the specs here http://www.d-s-t.com.au/data/Peerless/830491.pdf

96mm
what i like about the peerless woofers is the distortion performance. Very narrow bandwidth though, not much of a mid at all.


----------



## sqshoestring (Jun 19, 2007)

I've researched it some and seems the major advantage is you can play lower bass in front. The 10 may not go as high as an 8 or 7, depending on the driver. I am real interested in someone trying the TB shallow 10 (or what is the same one the ed?), the chart they give for it looks nice and flat like a peerless and it is quite shallow. You could run subs 35-50 LP and maybe some could do without any sub. Looking like my car would not fit it and stay stealth.


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

The TB shallow 10 has a high impendance bump around the midbase region, making it not a good candidate for midbase.


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98 (Apr 5, 2008)

Boostedrex said:


> That's a pretty bold statement don't you think? I think that I'd put my money on the Peerless drivers to measure and sound better than the MW182 given a quality install in both cases. The Dyn's are good, but they aren't that efficient and they're ungodly expensive for what you're getting. And there are any number of PA drivers that would more than likely be better off than either one of the first two choices I mentioned! Just some food for thought.
> 
> Zach


i feel that you could quite possibly be correct about there being better out there and probably for less money, however i have decided that the 182 is what i want to do. i've bought thousands of dollars worth of gear and installed nothing but a hu. the time has come for me to make a firm decision, and the ear reviews (and of course a couple points for name recognition and a matching set) win over the eye reviews. once i have everything installed i may play around with some other drivers.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

BlackonBlack, I wasn't telling anyone not to buy or use the Dyn MW182's. I just thought that USMCsoldriver's comment about them being "the only way to go" was pretty much laughable. If you have heard the 182's and liked them, then I don't see a reason why you shouldn't use them. I just don't think that they'd be anywhere near the top of my list due to their price/performance ratio. And the fact that I have never been very impressed with them. But again, that is my *opinion* and not an indisputable fact.

Zach


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98 (Apr 5, 2008)

i didn't mean to imply that you were suggesting otherwise. anyone considering any purchase should definitely have all of the info before buying. concerning the 182s, i've heard "they're the only way to go" as well as "not worth squat", both from reliable sources.


----------



## sqshoestring (Jun 19, 2007)

AAAAAAA said:


> The TB shallow 10 has a high impendance bump around the midbase region, making it not a good candidate for midbase.


Yes, would need a larger mid. My idea is to have all but the lowest power sucking bass in front.


----------



## jimbno1 (Apr 14, 2008)

Ok I certainly did not foresee this thread as "To Dynaudio or not to Dynaudio". 

If I can summarize the benefits and drawbacks for 10" midbass.

Benefits: Upfront bass, More low end impact <90Hz, More cone area = more air moved with less xmax, easier to blend with subs, possible eliminate need for subs

Drawbacks: Mounting depth and width, Fabrication/modification issues, Limited upper midbass response, overpower mids/integration and tonality, tactile issues with door mounting/side bias

I plan to install in a crew cab truck. Most of my experience has been in sedans with trunk mounted subs. I did have a Blazer for a short time but not long enough to really appreciate it (the truck burned - not audio related). If I have 2 10's under the rear seat does that negate the need for big midbass? Or put another way would 10s in the doors eliminate the subs?


----------



## Weightless (May 5, 2005)

Why would larger drivers have limited upper midbass response?


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

You guys wanting to go down to 45-50 hz aren't wanting a midbass, you are wanting a woofer. That is bass, not midbass.


----------



## splvictim19 (Oct 15, 2008)

Intresting thread 10" midbass would deff be hard 2 do in my doors lol.


----------



## sqshoestring (Jun 19, 2007)

I never run subs over 50Hz....maybe it would be a woofer but guess I use common car audio term of midbass. Hey use the driver that would work best, I was just interested in the TB because response looked like I want and would be easier install if shallow. In a truck depth may not be an issue. Seems like you could run without subs if you don't need or can't get big bass in your setup. I have four 12s IB so 20hz is easy but if your subs would not do much under 10s in doors then why bother. Years back we used to do boats with quad 6x9 and/or 7x10s, bass was not bad in those. Had more of a home speaker sound. I like >30hz if I have the means but trucks are not as easy and not everyone cares to get that low.


----------



## bobduch (Jul 22, 2005)

Nobody answered the question about the "problem" of playing the midbass to 300hz.
The larger the driver the more directional it tends to become at higher frequencies. At 300hz this is not a problem. (And not a problem in home speakers where you tend to be on axis.) In theory (and in practice) it is preferable to have the midrange driver playing all (or close to it) of the vocal range. Why? Because that is what our hearing is most sensitive to. So the reason for not playing the midbass above +_150hz is not because of a problem with midbass drivers, but rather the advantages you get by having the mid play that low. Also has to do with time arrival importance at different frequencies in terms of staging etc.
150hz is about where pathlength differences matter more.
So go for 10's if you like. But maybe xover lower than 300hz.


----------



## usmcsoldriver (Aug 13, 2007)

bobduch said:


> Nobody answered the question about the "problem" of playing the midbass to 300hz.
> The larger the driver the more directional it tends to become at higher frequencies. At 300hz this is not a problem. (And not a problem in home speakers where you tend to be on axis.) In theory (and in practice) it is preferable to have the midrange driver playing all (or close to it) of the vocal range. Why? Because that is what our hearing is most sensitive to. So the reason for not playing the midbass above +_150hz is not because of a problem with midbass drivers, but rather the advantages you get by having the mid play that low. Also has to do with time arrival importance at different frequencies in terms of staging etc.
> 150hz is about where pathlength differences matter more.
> So go for 10's if you like. But maybe xover lower than 300hz.


Good point. That then opens up the question.
What Mid Range driver will be used? Can that driver play that low? and still sound good?
A really good 3" cone, or a 4" cone could do it. Forget it if your going with a dome like the Dyn MD140.

Are you going to mount the mid really close to the midbass? In which case having a quality mid bass driver that can play higher freq 300-1k smoothly, should be fine to cross higher.

Just thought i'd throw that out there.

PS: I have to say again, that IMO, there is nothing wrong with crossing over all the way down to 40hz (unless you turn on some sort of bass enhancment and turn your system up to annoying levels, in which case you blow speakers). It actualy helps ALOT with blending your Subs into the front stage. Again, the key is having a driver (regardless of brand) that is capable of comfortably handling 40hz at moderate to slightly louder volumes.


----------



## sqshoestring (Jun 19, 2007)

I agree, to me the whole idea/advantage of using a midbass (especially an 8 or 10) is to blend the subs in and beef up the drivers in that roughly 50-100Hz+ area that still needs some power behind it. Above that you don't need the power or large drivers....yet if you run subs up in there you get localization and difficulty in blending. I spent many years back in the day sorting out IB subs and getting them to back up midbass without localization and with smooth blending, it was and often still is a weakness in many systems. Back then it was acceptable to have sound from the rear, though commonly used 6x9 in the rear were much more capable of making midbass than today's typical door drivers. Today you tend to have more power on subs and that makes it harder yet to blend. 

Like posted, running a woofer up high home-style is going to get into directional issues in a car and its typical mountings, I think the midbass better off with a narrow band to work with and so you can keep most of the sound range still from the mid/tweeter. It would be easier to keep stage quality that way as a high crossed midbass could just confuse things when it does not need to be there.

I have a set of 4" comps I like the sound of, if I get to midbass I will try it with those they seem to be able to cover the frequency needed. If I really get tired of messing with it I will slap a set of 6x9 in my doors, it may not be perfect but I know they will work; will give me a smoother overall response than something smaller (car is stealth and small door). I'm to the point I just hate anything smaller, every time I put something in it can't make midbass like I want. Here I thought after 20yr of this near any speaker would sound great by now...lol....doh. I guess that is just like thinking congress would ever become competent.


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

bobduch said:


> Nobody answered the question about the "problem" of playing the midbass to 300hz.
> The larger the driver the more directional it tends to become at higher frequencies. At 300hz this is not a problem. (And not a problem in home speakers where you tend to be on axis.) In theory (and in practice) it is preferable to have the midrange driver playing all (or close to it) of the vocal range. Why? Because that is what our hearing is most sensitive to. So the reason for not playing the midbass above +_150hz is not because of a problem with midbass drivers, but rather the advantages you get by having the mid play that low. Also has to do with *time arrival importance at different frequencies in terms of staging etc.*
> 150hz is about where pathlength differences matter more.
> So go for 10's if you like. But maybe xover lower than 300hz.


yeppers. many 10's can play midrange just fine, it's the bolded section that creates a stir. 

Now, it can be done, but to cross that high, you need to have the mid very close to the 10, to have any type of success. Even then, you may find, especially with male vocals, your stage wondering back and forth.

And I'd put the dyn somewhere in my top 10 of favorite 10" drivers. Definitly not top 5.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

Now this opens up a whole new can of worms, what Mid Range can play that low (with authority) and high enough to mate with the Tweets. :blush:


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

HAT L4, Dayton RS100, Renesis Audio 4" mid. All 3 of those can play that low and high enough to mate with a tweet.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

Boostedrex said:


> HAT L4, Dayton RS100, Renesis Audio 4" mid. All 3 of those can play that low and high enough to mate with a tweet.


With authority?


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 12, 2008)

thehatedguy said:


> You guys wanting to go down to 45-50 hz aren't wanting a midbass, you are wanting a woofer. That is bass, not midbass.




I agree


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

michaelsil1 said:


> With authority?


I can't speak for the L4 from personal experience, but I have had listening time with the other 2 and either of them can play 175-200Hz and up with authority. I LOVE the Renesis mid, but it's kinda pricey IMHO.

Zach


----------



## jimbno1 (Apr 14, 2008)

Anybody have any experience with the 12M Scans? How low can they be crossed?


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Why not 5 1\4inch drivers?


----------



## Ga foo 88 (Dec 18, 2005)

css fr125s or possibly some type of pro audio mid ranges.....maybe


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

AAAAAAA said:


> Why not 5 1\4inch drivers?


Because 5 1/4" mids don't fit on my dash/A-pillars very well.


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98 (Apr 5, 2008)

backwoods said:


> yeppers. many 10's can play midrange just fine, it's the bolded section that creates a stir.
> 
> Now, it can be done, but to cross that high, you need to have the mid very close to the 10, to have any type of success. Even then, you may find, especially with male vocals, your stage wondering back and forth.


so what about subless setups with all drivers mounted relatively close (mid/sub bass in doors, kidrange and tweets in kicks).

would the same issues arise?


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Boostedrex said:


> Because 5 1/4" mids don't fit on my dash/A-pillars very well.


You problem is that you are simply not willing to compromise enough hehe.


----------



## sqshoestring (Jun 19, 2007)

The thing that got me looking at 10" midbass is how most 8s drop off under 100Hz. Think I looked at every applicable 8 PE had one day. If I run my subs at 35-50Hz, then I have a big roll off in the midbass to fight with and try to blend into my subs. Already have IB roll off in the subs so I don't need more. I would have the subs coming on strong and the midbass dropping like a brick at ~50Hz.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Most cars have so much cabin gain in the 40-70 hertz range that you don't really NEED strong performance that low. The car will more than make up for any losses on paper. A little underlapping of the XO point would get around using so much EQ to cut those areas.


----------



## sqshoestring (Jun 19, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> Most cars have so much cabin gain in the 40-70 hertz range that you don't really NEED strong performance that low. The car will more than make up for any losses on paper. A little underlapping of the XO point would get around using so much EQ to cut those areas.


I hear that statement often, so where is my bass? Are only subs allowed to make cabin gain? I don't want subs playing over 50 and even all four door speakers can't keep up with half my subs, thus the need to install midbass to find my elusive "cabin gain". I expect four 12s IB to be strong above 50Hz no matter what, but also expect to hear 80Hz from four doors and do not. My front comps alone are a joke as was the ones before them. 

I've had weak midbass in nearly every vehicle I've used smaller than 6x9 for non-sub drivers. At this point I think cabin gain is nearly a hoax, but I did have a couple cars that had it. I just go by what the car sounds like, and I need much more 50-100Hz. When I run the EQ up at 80 I get more out of my subs running both HU xover at 50 and amp xover at 45. Sure the subs are little overboard but that is how they make ~20Hz for me.


----------



## bobduch (Jul 22, 2005)

Agreed on midbasses playing higher when close to mid. That's why my MW170's are in the low front corner of the doors just inches away from the MD140/2's in the kicks.


----------



## circa40 (Jan 20, 2008)

Ask James Bang


----------



## ChiTownSQ (Apr 7, 2008)

Why not look at the morel elate 9 s?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------

