Tell me what you think of my setup!

[woodstockstr]

to me is sounds like this kid just wants to improve his sound.... not blow 600 to 1000 dollars on a speaker set up (i could be wrong) if i was you buddy i would just get some good componet speakers up front and coax in the back. i promise you that you will be happy. later if you want to have a bad ass system then upgrade it one step at a time, but start out with a good system and you may just be happy with that.


oh yea and dont half ass it. buy from a retail store and get some 5x7 plates and do 6.5inch in front

 

[II-Savy]

Wow I am staying out of this section. I simply stated, because it seemed no one else would, how round is the better way to go, that's it. I don't care what, or who is doing the job, round is better. That's it.
Nuff said.

"Also, rear-fill is one of the most overly misused attempts at playing "wait, my setup's alright, right" that you see everywhere. YES it has some merit, but VERY few have the talent, patience and means to execute it properly. (I know I do not)"

This is EXACTLY what I learned long ago at the Rockford Fosgate University using one amp to power everything all with passive crossovers.

 

[yeloprofan]

how much and how hard were those to make??? i was thinking about just putting the tweeters in the door pilars... but i do like the custom look you got so idk...

If I had to price them out it was probably 20 dollars in materials and 8 hours work. If you have worked with fiberglass and made a few sub boxes you could probably make these.

Here's a pic of the sub structure that is made from a piece of ABS and then stuck to the stock sail panel. A piece of old T-Shirt was then spray glued over that to get the shape, that was then resined to get some structure, then I resined some carbon kevlar over that to get the look.

 

[chuyler1]

Wow I am staying out of this section. I simply stated, because it seemed no one else would, how round is the better way to go, that's it. I don't care what, or who is doing the job, round is better. That's it.
Nuff said.

"Also, rear-fill is one of the most overly misused attempts at playing "wait, my setup's alright, right" that you see everywhere. YES it has some merit, but VERY few have the talent, patience and means to execute it properly. (I know I do not)"

This is EXACTLY what I learned long ago at the Rockford Fosgate University using one amp to power everything all with passive crossovers.

Round is not the better way to go, you have no proof of that other than what you learned at The Rockford University long ago. As Poseur mentioned...in some cases, round speakers aren't always what they seem. My previous eclipse speakers had a round surround but the cone itself was cut with sharp edges (7 or 8 sides I think). The two of us have been around the block many times and our experience doesn't come with the long ago pretense. We are here to help people with their audio systems and provide the best feedback possible. Convincing someone to install 6.5" speakers instead of 6x8" just because round is better is like telling someone a turbo charger is better than a super charger because it sounds cooler.

And another thing about the Rockford University. If it still exists today, I highly doubt rear-fill speakers using custom passive crossover networks is on the curriculum. Perhaps it could be used as a learning tool, the way programmers learn to write "hello world" but it has no real-world use today. The industry has changed, equipment has changed, and competitors have found better ways to get audiophile quality, wide sound stages, and pin-point imaging. ...and it has nothing to do with the shape of their speakers or the passive crossover network (if they even have one).

 

[woodstockstr]

Round is not the better way to go, you have no proof of that other than what you learned at The Rockford University long ago. As Poseur mentioned...in some cases, round speakers aren't always what they seem. My previous eclipse speakers had a round surround but the cone itself was cut with sharp edges (7 or 8 sides I think). The two of us have been around the block many times and our experience doesn't come with the long ago pretense. We are here to help people with their audio systems and provide the best feedback possible. Convincing someone to install 6.5" speakers instead of 6x8" just because round is better is like telling someone a turbo charger is better than a super charger because it sounds cooler.

And another thing about the Rockford University. If it still exists today, I highly doubt rear-fill speakers using custom passive crossover networks is on the curriculum. Perhaps it could be used as a learning tool, the way programmers learn to write "hello world" but it has no real-world use today. The industry has changed, equipment has changed, and competitors have found better ways to get audiophile quality, wide sound stages, and pin-point imaging. ...and it has nothing to do with the shape of their speakers or the passive crossover network (if they even have one).

owned!! (first)

 

[II-Savy]

Rockford Univ was a long set of classes to teach the Rockford way of putting a system together. There whole deal was 1 or 2 amps at the most to run everything. All passive crossovers you made by hand using caps and inductors. There was quite a bit of prep work in calculating the proper roll off for every crossover so every frqu. could be represented. It was not a small task to choose the right cap or inductor with the proper value and then chart the roll off to watch where the frequ level decreased. The later classes invloved making 12db roll off crossovers to introduce more power instead of the slower 6db down types which we learned at the begining. Also included in those later classes were days spent on calculating ohm resistance and load for chooseing the right driver (2, 4 or 8ohm) so the amp "saw" the ohm load you were shooting for. The Rock Fos amps ran best at 2 which was nice because you could get a nice bit of power out of a Punch 75 or even 45.


Electronics and car audio has changed but when you learn how systems are made and interact with the very core of the parts, you can gain a whole deep understanding of the building blocks giveing you a better sence of how audio works.

I think I remember going to these classes in 1979 or '80.

This has nothing to do with the round vs oval.

Do round speakers sound better than oval-shaped speakers (i.e. 6x9's)? The answer is yes for most practical purposes. A round cone is more rigid than an oval-shaped one, so at higher levels, an oval-shaped speaker will distort more.

This is simple fact as the round speaker is symmetrical and therefore more consistant across the whole surface. It's a matter of symmatry, the shorter distance to the sides of the oval enclosure directly effect the accuracy of the speaker. Those short sides are stiffer and will change the accuracy of the speaker. An oval can not produce the same clean sound as a comparable round.
The reason why there are oval-shaped speakers is because of rear deck space considerations by manufacturers. An advantage of a 6x9 speaker over a 6-inch speaker is that it has a bigger area, so it will move higher air volume, producing more bass. In this case a 6x9 would be much better because of the difference in size. A greater surface area is achieved because the user can have a 9 inch long driver instead of a 6.5 only...


In our friends case, even going with 2 smaller round speakers is better then 1 oval one. They can work together to make an even better or accurate sound.

 

[woodstockstr]

Rockford Univ was a long set of classes to teach the Rockford way of putting a system together. There whole deal was 1 or 2 amps at the most to run everything. All passive crossovers you made by hand using caps and inductors. There was quite a bit of prep work in calculating the proper roll off for every crossover so every frqu. could be represented. It was not a small task to choose the right cap or inductor with the proper value and then chart the roll off to watch where the frequ level decreased. The later classes invloved making 12db roll off crossovers to introduce more power instead of the slower 6db down types which we learned at the begining. Also included in those later classes were days spent on calculating ohm resistance and load for chooseing the right driver (2, 4 or 8ohm) so the amp "saw" the ohm load you were shooting for. The Rock Fos amps ran best at 2 which was nice because you could get a nice bit of power out of a Punch 75 or even 45.


Electronics and car audio has changed but when you learn how systems are made and interact with the very core of the parts, you can gain a whole deep understanding of the building blocks giveing you a better sence of how audio works.

I think I remember going to these classes in 1979 or '80.

This has nothing to do with the round vs oval.

Do round speakers sound better than oval-shaped speakers (i.e. 6x9's)? The answer is yes for most practical purposes. A round cone is more rigid than an oval-shaped one, so at higher levels, an oval-shaped speaker will distort more.

This is simple fact as the round speaker is symmetrical and therefore more consistant across the whole surface. It's a matter of symmatry, the shorter distance to the sides of the oval enclosure directly effect the accuracy of the speaker. Those short sides are stiffer and will change the accuracy of the speaker. An oval can not produce the same clean sound as a comparable round.
The reason why there are oval-shaped speakers is because of rear deck space considerations by manufacturers. An advantage of a 6x9 speaker over a 6-inch speaker is that it has a bigger area, so it will move higher air volume, producing more bass. In this case a 6x9 would be much better because of the difference in size. A greater surface area is achieved because the user can have a 9 inch long driver instead of a 6.5 only...


In our friends case, even going with 2 smaller round speakers is better then 1 oval one. They can work together to make an even better or accurate sound.

super owned!!(first) (first)

 

[woodstockstr]

it all has to do with dynamics, alright lets see the best way to explain: speakers create sound based off vibration and cone movement. with a round speaker stress and cone movement is uniform on all areas where as with an oval, stress and vibration is divided and different on the long sides and the short curves(corners if you will) ovals tend to distort because the wave pattern changes over the cone ...

here's a real easy way to look at it... an oval has different radius lengths all around... this creates different waves of sound in different directions... a round woofer allows for equal radius through the entire speaker... creating an equal sound wave from every point of the speaker... therefore the round speaker is much better...

 

[II-Savy]

it all has to do with dynamics, alright lets see the best way to explain: speakers create sound based off vibration and cone movement. with a round speaker stress and cone movement is uniform on all areas where as with an oval, stress and vibration is divided and different on the long sides and the short curves(corners if you will) ovals tend to distort because the wave pattern changes over the cone ...

here's a real easy way to look at it... an oval has different radius lengths all around... this creates different waves of sound in different directions... a round woofer allows for equal radius through the entire speaker... creating an equal sound wave from every point of the speaker... therefore the round speaker is much better...

 

[woodstockstr]

does that mean me and II-Savy win? i think it does (bow)

 

[II-Savy]

does that mean i win?

You explained it nicely. Thanks

 

[woodstockstr]

i edited what i said. i cant take full credit

 

[BKJT05]

I changed my mind

Whats up everybody, ive decided not to go with alpine throughout my car, instead im going with a complete Kicker setup, i saw a Kicker KS65.2 component system on ebay with like 10 min left, normally like $150, i got it for $60 new, by winning that i decided to go with all kicker stuff, i dont like to mis-match, plus the kicker stuff seems to be a lil cheaper with pretty good specs and reviews from sounddomain and crutchfield...OK heres my new complete stereo system setup...

Head Unit- Still Alpine
Front Components- Kicker KS65.2...$65
Rear Door Speakers- Kicker KS65...$65
Amp- Kicker ZX350.4...$135
Baught 6.5" speaker attachments to use 6.5"instead of 5x7s

Thats what im going to start with, i do plan on adding this when the cashflow comes...
DVD player- Alpine IVA-W200...$750
Sub- Kicker Solo-Baric L5 8inch...$100
Amp- Kicker ZX300.1...$120
Box-Custom...???
Hopefully i can find somebody to build a custom one to fit tight in the cargo area, i want to keep the car lightweight and cargo area clear of a huge box...

Opinions Please....!!!

THANKS (glare)

Hey guys I got another ?? for you all to answer? Is it possible to hook up 2 sets of componets...Front And Rear, then use same amp to power both sets???

 

[chuyler1]

Do round speakers sound better than oval-shaped speakers (i.e. 6x9's)? The answer is yes for most practical purposes. A round cone is more rigid than an oval-shaped one, so at higher levels, an oval-shaped speaker will distort more.

I'm not disagreeing with you there, except for the conclusion you are making. I completely agree that oval shaped speakers have the capability to distort more. However, I disagree that you or anyone else can blindly distinguish the difference between them in an auto environment and moderate or even loud listening levels. You would have to drive the speaker beyond comfortable listening levels for the distortion to become audible...and at that volume, even a round speaker would distort.

This is simple fact as the round speaker is symmetrical and therefore more consistant across the whole surface. It's a matter of symmatry, the shorter distance to the sides of the oval enclosure directly effect the accuracy of the speaker. Those short sides are stiffer and will change the accuracy of the speaker. An oval can not produce the same clean sound as a comparable round.

Symmetry has its positives and negatives when it comes to sound waves and speakers. Symmetry, such as a perfectly square subwoofer box, can cause unwanted resonations which affect the output of a speaker at certain frequencies. And there are obviously situations where shape doesn't mean a damn thing...for example, Kicker square subwoofers. They create bass just as well as round speakers don't they? And I go back to the 'more than meets the eye' situation of my Eclipse speakers. They are purposely NOT round to avoid resonations on the cone. If you want to talk about why an oval speaker might be inferior, you should be talking about the surround, which due to its odd shape can cause uneven stress on the motor structure. This is one reason I will never buy Kicker's square woofers...when pushed to their limit, they have trouble keeping the motor in-line.

The reason why there are oval-shaped speakers is because of rear deck space considerations by manufacturers.

Actually, it was the front dash that first brought oval speakers to the car...back when radios were mono and they stuck a single speaker in the center of the dash.

In our friends case, even going with 2 smaller round speakers is better then 1 oval one. They can work together to make an even better or accurate sound.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Having the same sound come from more than one speaker causes cancelations much worse than the distortion you may get from an oval speaker. Additionally, it blurs the imaging causing your center to image to become muddy and unfocused. You will never see professionals use more than one speaker to play a given frequency range unless it is subwoofers or dedicated midbass drivers playing frequencies that the human ear cannot localize.

 

[II-Savy]

Whats up everybody, ive decided not to go with alpine throughout my car, instead im going with a complete Kicker setup, i saw a Kicker KS65.2 component system on ebay with like 10 min left, normally like $150, i got it for $60 new, by winning that i decided to go with all kicker stuff, i dont like to mis-match, plus the kicker stuff seems to be a lil cheaper with pretty good specs and reviews from sounddomain and crutchfield...OK heres my new complete stereo system setup...

Head Unit- Still Alpine
Front Components- Kicker KS65.2...$65
Rear Door Speakers- Kicker KS65...$65
Amp- Kicker ZX350.4...$135
Baught 6.5" speaker attachments to use 6.5"instead of 5x7s

Thats what im going to start with, i do plan on adding this when the cashflow comes...
DVD player- Alpine IVA-W200...$750
Sub- Kicker Solo-Baric L5 8inch...$100
Amp- Kicker ZX300.1...$120
Box-Custom...???
Hopefully i can find somebody to build a custom one to fit tight in the cargo area, i want to keep the car lightweight and cargo area clear of a huge box...

Opinions Please....!!!

THANKS (glare)

Hey guys I got another ?? for you all to answer? Is it possible to hook up 2 sets of componets...Front And Rear, then use same amp to power both sets???

Sounds good. You should have a pretty nice set up there with that stuff. You can hook up 2 sets of seperates nicely on a 4 channel amp. You also can on a 2 channel but it depends on the amp...I prolly wouldn't go that way though.

 

[chuyler1]

Hey guys I got another ?? for you all to answer? Is it possible to hook up 2 sets of componets...Front And Rear, then use same amp to power both sets???

If it is a 4-channel amp, then the answer is yes.

If it is a 2-channel amp, then the answer is still yes, but you will loose the ability to fade between front and rear. You will also be running the amp at 2ohms (components wired in parallel) instead of 4ohms which can raise the distortion level slightly while often doubling the output of the amp. You could also run the amp at 8ohms (components wired in series) but that would cut the power output of the amp in half. Instead of one set of speakers getting 60w, both sets would get 30w total or 15w each...obviously you don't want to do that.

 

[BKJT05]

thanks

THANKS, the amp i am getting is a 4 channel so it should work pretty good, i was thinking about putting the front tweeters by the mirror and the 2nd set on the seat belt pilar, would that be a good spot? just facing sideways toward the middle of the car, i ordered the attachments to fit 6.5" in the front instead of 5x7s, i also think that the component system i won on ebay will go in the rear of the car, kicker has another model which is the RS model that i want for the front, since i got the ks model at last min from ebay, i think i want higher quality in the front. I think the setup when i get complete will sound pretty good,

 

[chuyler1]

and the 2nd set on the seat belt pilar, would that be a good spot?

Absolutely not. That is by far the worst place to put a tweeter. It will be blaring in your ear.

 

[BKJT05]

Absolutely not. That is by far the worst place to put a tweeter. It will be blaring in your ear.

thanks for the advice on that, lol. i cant think of anywhere else, im going to try to make a spot in the mirror cover thing for the front tweeters, then 2nd set idk.

 

[chuyler1]

You don't need a second set. One set of tweeters is more than enough to cover the highs.

Oh wait, you are talking about the tweeters for the rear speakers? Well, I personally don't recommend rear speakers at all...but if you are set on them then just install the tweeters for the rear speakers just above the woofer or mount it coaxially by hanging a bracket over the woofer.