Impious

Interested in what you used for a consistent load as well as how you measured the current and distortion. I wonder if I should repost our discussion from the for sale thread? Sean is exactly correct with his comments in that thread. "Power testing" is useless if not conducted in the proper manor with the proper tools. Same reason I loathe people performing or discussing "clamp tests". Sure, you got some #'s to put in your review and on your site, but what is their usefulness or reliability? Pretty much zero. And FYI, there isn't much of anything "real world" about that test. Please don't use that as a defense. A properly conducted set of scientific measurements represent the "real world" far better and much more accurately than any random and improperly conducted test, and the information gained from the scientific testing is much more useful and relevant than in the latter. People have this ignorance based confusion that there is some large disconnect between "scientific" and "real world", and then try to use the "But I'm testing it in the real world" defense. That's utter nonsense.

Cancellation in the subbass isn't really a problem in an automobile, the dimensions are too small. Basically as long as you have all of the subs pressurizing the cabin at the same time, you're good.

Zaph has tested those drivers: Zaph Audio Personally, if you're not extremely budget limited, I'd spend the extra $60 and go with something like the SB Acoustic mids. The Silver Flutes do okay for the price, but IMO the difference between $30/driver and $60/driver isn't that large.

It sounds like you have your subs, sub amp and headunit taken care of. So really all we need to focus on is the speakers, amplification for them and their locations/installation. With your budget and goals, what you really need is simplification. All of those speakers are just going to mess up the frequency response, confuse the sound and ruin tonality. One thing to keep in mind that is your car is a difficult environment to work with for audio reproduction. Equipment selection is only part of the equation....how and where that equipment is installed is going to contribute just as much to the sound as the speakers, which is the other area for improvement. IMO ditch the Pioneer 4" Co-axials and 4 tweeters. I would look instead at purchasing two sets of 6.5" components to use for the front left, center and right (one mid and one tweeter per channel via passive crossover...so you'll end up with one "spare" mid and tweeter), and a pair of good 6.5" co-axials for the two rear surround channels. Properly amplified this should provide more than sufficient output yet still provide good sound stage representation and overall sound. Wide on the rear deck would be fine for the rear surround speakers. For the front speakers, I would ideally put the left and right 6.5" component speakers in the kickpanels, and find a good location on top of the dash for the center channel mid and tweeter. If building kickpanels isn't possible, then the front door locations would be sufficient but less ideal IMO for the front left and right speakers. For amplifiers, I'd probably look at a pair of 4-channel amplifiers. Bridge a pair of channels to each front left, center and right set of speakers and use the remaining two channels for the two rear surrounds. For equipment, SSA happens to be running some good deals at the moment that would fit your needs quite well. If they have the inventory, you could go with two pair of the Bravox CS60CF for the front speakers, Bravox CX60CF coaxials for the rear surrounds and a pair of the Zed built Boss 4-channel amps. That would put the equipment total around $785, well within your budget and give you some extra $ to put towards additional sound deadening (such as in the doors if you install the front speakers there) or other installation materials. But I don't want to sound like I'm just hocking what SSA is selling, so you are more than welcome to look for different equipment selections.

I understand your goal. And can tell you with 100% certainty that you are going about it entirely the wrong way. You can't just start tossing a bunch of speakers in random spots in your car and experience good results. It's just going to make things worse. I can tell you with zero doubt that your car with the intended installation will sound much worse than both your house and a movie theater, and much worse than a properly planned and executed system. There are so many problems with it, that it's really hard to tell where to start explaining the issues with it. So, for now, let's just take it on faith that your planned system layout is not going to be a good match for your goal. You need to start over from scratch. If you're willing to listen, we can help you actually achieve your goal with good results. What is your budget and what equipment is in the Rover that you were wanting to carry over to the Saab? It sounds like you are pretty open to customizing installation locations? What fabrication skills do you have (can you fiberglass, etc)?

Really, if all you are doing is angling the subwoofers some on the front baffle I really wouldn't worry about measuring the small difference in volume unless the fiberglassed section ends up being extreme and adds significantly to the area of the enclosure. In the grand scheme of things, a few tenths of a cubic foot in a 3.5cuft enclosure is not going to make one bit of audible difference.

11 speakers, as in 11 sets of speakers, meaning 11 tweeters and 11 mids? Why on earth would you want to do that? I think we need to take a step backwards, and have you go into a little more detail on the system goals and planned execution. I don't know anything about Saab's OEM systems. So for starters, it would be helpful to know; If the Saab factory system has a 5.1 decoder or how you plan to accomplish "true" 5.1. What OEM equipment you plan on using in the new system (i.e. factory headunit, etc) Where are the factory speakers actually located (not just "on the dash", but where in the dash, for example) what speaker sizes the OEM speakers are What speakers (model # or link to them) you plan on using Where you plan on installing these aftermarket speakers including more details on the planned location of these 4 "extra" speakers What amplifier(s) you have to use or plan to use Your actual goal for the system as far as accuracy, staging/imaging goals, or if you're just looking to be "engulfed in sound" No offense, but right now your planned system sounds a little clusterfucked. With more detailed info I think we might be able to help you de-clusterfuck it a little and come up with a better game plan. That or I'm just misunderstanding what you are trying to do....but I don't think that's the case.

You will want two midbass speakers on opposite sides of the vehicle. Ideally located as wide as possible, and ideally they would be equal distances from your head. Placing them in the middle of the car would be a mistake.

Not that they ever had much, but CA&E lost what remaining respect I had for them when they rated CA.com as one of the top car audio forums or whatever it was.

:peepwall:

IIRC from his other thread, he was not wanting to obstruct the path at the front of the trunk due to his fold down seats. That said, he could probably use the same idea and build a manifold to hold a pair of 8's or 10's on each side, not obstruct the fold down seats, and double to quadruple his displacement at the same time.

So, I'm laying in bed by myself last night and in part of my dream, I dream that the fan in my bedroom shuts off. I wake up drenched in sweat, because the fan is off. I know damn well I turned it on when I went to bed. Wife and son were gone, daughter was already asleep and doesn't come into our room anyways.....so no one else in the house would have turned it off. We didn't lose power. And while I have walked in my sleep just a couple times when I was younger, I haven't for 20+ years and when I woke up I was just as covered up with the comforter and sheet as I was when I laid down....I really don't think I would have been able to do that if I was sleepwalking. So all in all, I really have no fucking idea how that fan turned off. Ghosts? Aliens? Mental Telepathy? WTF?!?

That is nearly sig worthy. No actually, I don't want to see that. Keep the fat women to yourself.

Aaron, I'll see if I remember to snap some pictures tomorrow. All 3 drivers are going down in the kicks in my install.

You aren't understanding the purpose behind setting the gain. When you set the gain, you are setting the input sensitivity of the amp (ideally) so that it operates at maximum rail voltage without exceeding that voltage. You aren't setting the gain based on the impedance of the load, that's simply one means by which to help figure out where to set the input sensitivity control. Almost every amplifier has a fixed amount of gain. If you drive the amplifier with 1V of input and it outputs 20V, then the amplifier has a 20:1 gain ratio. If the amplifier has a maximum operating rail voltage of 40V (400w @ 4ohm), then it needs 2V of input signal to achieve that level of output. But, almost every amplifier is also designed to be capable of operating at it's full power output with a wide range of input signals....hence, the gain knob. Setting this knob to a certain position manipulates the level of the input signal so that the input signal is at the proper level for the amplifier will operate at it's maximum rail voltage without trying to exceed that voltage level. So if you have a 4V headunit outputting the full 4V, and you set the gain control to the "4V" level, then essentially the amplifier is attenuating that input signal by 2V so that after the 20:1 gain the output voltage will be 40V, right where it needs to be. But wait.....if the knob doesn't have a "4V" mark on it's dial, how do I know where the 4V setting is? Well, that's where the chart comes in. Since we normally aren't given the rail voltage of the amplifier, we're forced to calculate it back out of the information we are given. So if we know the amplifier is designed to output 400w @ 4ohm, we now know that the amplifier's going to output 40V. So, we now know the target rail voltage to achieve for a "proper" setting of the input sensitivity is 40V. So we put on a test tone and turn the gain knob until we achieve 40V. Make sense? Now, I'm not saying this is the ideal method of setting the gain. For starters, it assumes the amplifier is capable of cleanly outputting exactly rated power. On an underrated or overrated amplifier, the gain setting may not be accurate. In addition, there is also an issue with the actual level of the input signal. Using 0db will keep the amplifier from clipping (since HU output will be at it's maximum), but music is almost never at that level so we end up reducing the actual average power we'll receive from the amplifier. Etc, etc, not worth rehashing right now, but you get the point. The gain setting is really independent of the actual load or impedance rise. If the amplifier is capable of 40V, that's not going to change with impedance (for amplifiers with non-regulated outputs)*. Hence why amplifiers are normally rated at, for example, 400w @ 4ohm, 800w @ 2ohm, 1600w @ 1ohm. If you run the numbers or look on the chart, you'll see that the voltage for each for is the same....40V. If your load rises to 8ohm, you can't try to set it for 400w @ 8ohm because you'll exceed the rail voltage of the amplifier. You would set the gain for 200w @ 8ohm, maintaining that 40V rail voltage. *EDIT: I should mention that it's possible and not atypical for an amplifier's output to not hold true to the "double each time impedance is halved" rule for several reasons. A weak power supply, internal losses, current capabilities of the outputs, etc will limit the ability of the amplifier to double output as impedance decreases. As a result, the voltage at lower impedances may decrease. Sundown 1200D as an example. sqrt(360*4) = 37.95V, sqrt(720*2) = 37.95V, sqrt(1200*1) = 34.64V.

I just finished cutting the speaker rings for them about an hour ago So plan for this weekend is to start work on aiming them in the kicks. :bigok: :bigok: :bigok: The 603CF's saw power for the first time today Think I have my aiming figured out. Now the hard part....finishing the kicks

Eh, it's alright. I'm cursed to begin with given I share the same name as the deceased crocodile hunter. Glad you found value in the review.

I just finished cutting the speaker rings for them about an hour ago So plan for this weekend is to start work on aiming them in the kicks.

Mine showed up early Sept, about 6 weeks ahead of schedule

Ideally you would make it a part of routine maintenance.

Certainly it's possible. But not everyone has the skill or desire to run an active setup. There are advantages and disadvantages to both active and passive. Active can provide worse results if not setup properly. The user has to determine which route best suits them based on their skill set, knowledge level and wants/needs. And really, going active isn't as cheap an option as it's made out to be after you factor in the cost of the necessary processing and additional amplifier channels, etc. With the added cost of processing, the additional channels required, and the drivers, an active setup would probably cost as much or more than the Bravox passive at full MSRP. But at these current blowout prices, even if someone were to buy them and toss the passives in the trash, they still only have $225 into all of the speakers and an average cost per driver of $56. That's pretty much in-line with the average active driver cost from the DIY market. Certainly it's possible to go cheaper, but results wouldn't be similar.

I guess for starters I really don't see the point behind any of these charts. Not to devalue stephan's work.....but com'on, it's basic math that anyone capable of successfully operating a computer should be able to figure out on their own in a matter of minutes with a calculator. It would probably take more time to pull up a chart than it would to just figure it out by hand. I mean seriously, would people really not be able to figure out the area of more than one circle, then compare that number to another, on their own without use of a chart? Can someone not look on the companies website for Sd, multiply it by the number of drivers they want to use, and do the same for a different sized driver and then compare the two? If someone can't manage to figure out this little bit of information on their own, then they should probably to revisit elementary school as that is where the basic skill sets required to accomplish this feat are acquired. My main issue with the use of that chart, aside from the laziness required to even need to use that chart, is that it is teaching people wrong information. It may be close enough for government work....but it's still wrong. And if it's teaching novices wrong information, then that will simply confuse them more. They'll be missing out on a basic but fundamental concept. Cone area is a simple driver parameter, that is apparently disturbingly misunderstood. It'll only make things worse if we start them off by teaching them wrong information. When you were in school, your educators hopefully didn't teach you that Pi was 3 since that's "close enough" (there have actually been laws passed throughout the years to attempt to change the "officially recognized" value of Pi in various states and localities....ignorance abound). Second, there can actually be a fairly significant difference in Sd between two same sized drivers. If we assume there's no difference by using incorrect values for determining area, then we are again missing important details. A 12W7 for example has approximately 1db worth of additional cone area than the SSA drivers listed above. That's breaching the realm of audibility, due simply to difference in cone area between two different "twelve inch" drivers that the original chart completely ignores. Last, most people interested in cone area are trying to determine potential output differences. Cone area alone is useless for this purpose. For that, you would need to know Vd not just Sd. In order to obtain an accurate Vd, you would need an accurate Sd and Xmax. Using inaccurate Sd will misrepresent potential output capabilities and differences. Again, making the information useless and teaching novices wrong information. Overall, I can't think of a single reason to suggest or recommend the use of wrong information.

Displacement actually needs to quadruple to maintain the same SPL level one octave lower. At one meter; SPL = 102.4dB + 20log(Xmax) + 20log(Sd) + 40log(Freq) or SPL = 102.4db + 20log(Vd) + 40log(Freq)

Here you go: Click Me Gives a brief history of the progress on loudspeaker design, and a more detailed description of the seminal work by Thiele & Small which set forth the set of parameters that define the properties of a loudspeaker, which are still used to this day.

That's how/why I got mine