Printable View
As a frame of reference we could use the audio frog line here though the brand doesn't matter.
As far as I've collected from other's I've heard that a big tweeter that's soft dome and a 6.5 midrange might not sound better than a smaller midrange though I just wanted ya'll's opinions before I build my three way.
Also does a 6.5" or 8" midbass sound better?
does a 10" subwoofer sound the best for sound quality? Now that one does get thrown around allot...
There are no absolutes. Driver selection of Sizes depends a lot on the vehicle chosen, Mini Van/SUV/Truck or Hatchback, Coupe, Sedan, Micro Car. once vehicle is picked contact a good installer for more lessons on driver selection.
6.5 vs 8's is dependent on what you are doing with your vehicle if you are doing 2 way vs 3 way. 8-10s can cause beaming, Size doesn't determine how high a frequency a speaker will play this is speaker dependent.
Certain vehicles may have trouble doing 8's and Kick panels( no matter what size) simply because you cant depending on vehicle type, that annoying secondary Break Lever.
Ive seen a 110mm Diameter Tweeter put in a sedan.
Speaker size selection also depends on your willingness to modify and half destroy to rebuild doors/kicks/Dash to not be off axis.
Subwoofers- dependent on the amount of space you have and how many subwoofers. as well as if you are running IB or not. 8's-18' may be used
Everything I mentioned I have seen people break that mold/reference/absolute TIPS and guidance did whatever the fuck they want. Because Money is not a factor.
TLDR: want SQ? contact a good installer that has good Helix DSP knowledge almost anything and everything works as long as you can adjust size issues through tuning or with car modifications. if not competing great, or choose to do Masters where the only rule is there almost are no rules.
Solen in Canada , check 18W/4531G00
Revelators for mid and tweet will bring an OMG feeling.
Fast-Bass-Experiment
https://www.stereo.net.au/features/t...y-woofers-slow
A sealed box will do best with transients
Revelators are similar to Ribeye or beer-boated tenderloins on grill [ Scanspeak is Technologically unequaled ]
Mid -
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.co...SABEgLcVvD_BwE
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.co...SABEgIPBPD_BwE
Tech explained used on 7 inch
Size works against you - not only in terms of raw install space, but in terms of directionality. The larger your speaker cone, the more directional it is.
What size is good for is loudness. You are pushing more air with a larger cone.
You could have some generalizations -
For example, a larger cone may have more moving mass - especially with the larger voice coil needed to push it.... that will change certain parameters, like Fs.
Or, for example, a larger driver - with a larger voice coil - may have a longer Xmax, which is necessary to play lower frequencies.
That's normal - but not absolute.
But directionality - that IS absolute. It's purely a function of the size of the cone. Whatever frequency starts resulting in different arrival times at your ear from one side of the cone vs the other, as you start to move off-axis - the speaker starts to be "beaming" above that frequency, and that's not an advantage.
So for SQ, I'd argue "the smaller the speaker you can get away with, the better"
I also can't say "going three way" (with the inherently small midrange) is "better", because it adds another crossover point, which pretty much always mucks up your frequency response a half-octave in each direction - depending on crossover slope and how far apart you mount them, and a number of other things. The more locations you have playing sound (three vs two) actually can muck up your imaging.
There's just no generalizations. You have to plan out your install, then pick speakers that fit THOSE needs.
And it's not brand names that determine that. :wink:
Did "they" expound on why/how they might sound better?Quote:
Originally Posted by punkrocker
Louder maybe... but what defines better?Quote:
Originally Posted by punkrocker
(Usually the size also impacts whether it can fit in the available space.)
Again, better in what way?Quote:
Originally Posted by punkrocker
A 10" can sound better in car where it fits, than a 24" sounds which is inside of a building, and cannot fit into the car.
These blanket, "what is better" threads often miss a whole bunch of other things.
it is like saying components always sound better than coaxials, but in many cases a coaxial works and it is easier to arrive at a decent result.
Goals and budget also play a huge factor in addition space and volume constraints.
The best speakers are those that fit your install and budget requirements... it’s like asking what’s the best car, there is no correct answer... it’s entirely down to your vehicle and the space you have available and your tastes, plus ask 100 different people for an opinion and you will get 100 different responses... anyone who tells you to buy x, y and z without asking all of the above questions and more is talking out of there backside with little knowledge and practical experience ;)
A silk dome ?Quote:
Originally Posted by punkrocker
The bigger midbass with more power than midrange and less power than subQuote:
Also does a 6.5" or 8" midbass sound better?
We could probably turn this around to theory...
Ideally the best speaker is an all in one that has a light diaphragm, and keeps all the frequencies looking like they come from the same place.
it is even better if that is a planer shape so that the sound appears to have a focus point further away than an actual point source.
Which then looks something like a Magnaplanaer.
Then the second attribute is for the speaker to have a good time domain response.
Here is a quote from a magazine:
"Atkinson: I can count the manufacturers of loudspeakers that produce good, time-coherent impulse responses on the fingers of one hand—Dunlavy, Spica, Thiel, Vandersteen, Quad. So why don't the designers of 99.9% of loudspeakers out there care about the impulse response?"
However a car poses problems not encountered in a home... and there is a reliance on DSP, in part because the speakers are not able to be place in optimal locations... because there are places for them... so the woofers go in doors or kick panels.
We have bandaids if your vehicle has problems ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Holmz
Some great points here - I think my prior post above was skimmed or ignored. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Holmz
But your post here made me think of a way to re-phrase it:
There's no generalizing on speaker size for sound quality.
Ideally, you'd have a lightweight moving assembly - even zero mass (Google "plasma tweeters" if you want to see something wild... zero mass, sound from a flame...). Problem is, the smaller and lighter the moving mass, the higher your resonant frequency is. And also, that tiny moving mass means a tiny cone - and two things make a speaker loud - cone area, and excursion.
The smaller your cone, the less loud it will be, at any given comparative excursion.
And you could give it a super-long-throw voice coil/motor, but then it won't be low mass any more, voice coils are heavy. And it will have a deep mounting depth... it could have high inductance - lots of potential drawbacks.
So maybe that's not ideal.
Same for suspension compliance - the less restrictive the spider, the higher your efficiency, but you get less control. And it's not really even suspension compliance that matters, it's suspension compliance across excursion. For sound quality, you don't want a spider that's loose at rest but then stiffens up as Xmax increases, that causes intermodulation distortion. But CMS vs excursion plots are rare to find.
So you engineer a larger cone. And you have a spider that provides a linear CMS across your entire Xmax range.
Now, your Fs is lower, and you do need Xmax to play lower... in fact, every octave lower that you ask a speaker [of a given size] to play, it needs to double it's excursion. So you need to size your Xmax to your Fs goals. And that can increase mass as well (unless you go with an underhung design).
But that added mass reduces the motor's ability to maintain control at higher frequencies...
But we're speaker engineers. So we have some tricks. We can build a wideband driver.
...problem now is, that larger cone? It's beamy.
At whatever frequency corresponds to the diameter of the cone, the speaker becomes directional. This is because when you start moving off-axis from the woofer, the sound from one side of the cone can arrive sooner than the sound from the other side of the cone, and off-axis response at the higher frequencies rolls off - more sharply as you get more off-axis with the speaker.
But sometimes - sometimes you WANT directional. Lots of off-axis sound means lots of off-axis sound being reflected by all our glass...
So there is no "ideal".
You can't have a small cone and a large cone.
You can't have light moving mass and no suspension and a low Fs.
You can't have a motor that's strong AND has a high Xmax... well, you can, but then it will have terrible efficiency, which means you need to send it more power... which means it needs heavier duty windings to handle that power, which requires a wider gap (which lowers motor strength), which reduces efficiency more... let's not go down THAT road...
...when in fact, only sometimes you want a strong motor (vented and passive radiator applications), and sometimes you absolutely do not want a strong motor (sealed and infinite baffle).
So what's "ideal" for SQ?
The right driver for your application, for your installation, for your goals.
And that's the right order to determine:
1) State your goals.
2) Figure out an installation strategy to achieve your goals.
3) Figure out drivers that work for each specific application aspect of your installation plan.
That will be as close to "ideal" as you can get.
Everyone's "ideal" will be different than everyone else's.
It's why people tossing out brand names are just tossing out their own anecdotal fallacies - if even THAT. :wink: