altoncustomtech

Also, power is the LEAST efficient way to get louder. In a perfect world a doubling of power would yield only 3dB increase in output. That's really just not worth the overall cost involved for a system that is used to listen to in a daily driver. Increasing cone area, changing the alignment of the enclosure or both is generally much more effective. I do agree that the enclosure is definitely your limiting factor. Increase the enclosure size and ensure you have adequate port area and you SHOULD notice a notable difference in output with your current amplifier without the cost and hassle associated with the upgrade in power.

I dunno why ur going thru them but most likely that one that's bad is built onto the mobo. Just get a cheapo USB enet adapter and call it a day.

Joined up. Went through a fair bit of trouble uploading pics to the garage. Being able to upload multiples at a time would be a nice addition. Went to introduce myself and I can't post a damn thing. LOL Forum looks fantastic tho! LFTN Designs did another great job!!

This is what I would do with a $500 budget that didn't include a sub and didn't need any special bells and whistles. $130 Kenwood KDC-BT652U HU $100 Boston Acoustics GT-275 $200 JBL GTO608C 6.5" Components $27 KnuKonceptz 4AWG amp kit -------------------------------------------------- $457 Total, which leaves extra in the budget for sound deadening. Not a great deal extra, but enough to get a start on it. At least, this is one of the directions I would go if I were in the same situation and on the same budget.

I don't see how that's relevant and it's certainly nothing more than an opinion and doesn't prove anything. Inexpensive equipment CAN be installed and made to sound quite good, I agree with that completely. However, the companies that have spent major time in R&D and making strides in the technology they use and the quality of the drivers they produce have to charge more because they have more invested. While a great driver in a crappy install can generally be outperformed by a cheap driver in an ideal installation the better driver in IT'S ideal installation will generally yield unrivaled performance compared to that of the cheaper driver. It's all about compromise, knowledge and experience. While I do agree that the Alpines definitely have the background to suggest they're the better choice, it's not fact. Until someone takes the time to do measurements and direct comparisons between the sets there's no way to know with absolute certainty which is the better one. That will (probably and most likely) never happen, so then it comes down to compromise, knowledge and experience. Is the OP willing to compromise some quality in sound reproduction to save a few dollars and meet his set budget goal? Does the OP have the knowledge in driver placement and installation to ensure he can even get the best results from the more expensive set? Does the OP even have the experience to know the difference when he hears it? In almost all likelihood the OP is, doesn't, and can't. There's no intended offense to the OP in that statement either, hell I know I don't have the knowledge and experience to do that myself. That being said, my recommendation to the OP is to pick a budget for the speakers AND as close to an ideal installation as he can handle. Then buy accordingly. I don't think there's a big enough difference in the performance quality between the Alpine Type X's and Type R's to warrant the extra cost if you're just going to throw them in the factory locations and do a run of the mill install. As far as the Alpine's vs. the Sundown's, there's no way for anyone to give an opinion there yet since the Sundown's aren't out yet. It's a gamble plain and simple. Given Sundown's history to do well with their products by the numbers sold, I think there's a chance they'll perform adequately for pretty much every average listener with average installation skills. I have to admit I almost pre-ordered a set just so I could play with them and see what my opinion was, though it would only and ever just be my opinion, meaningless to anyone else and pointless. Much like my response.

I agree. My sister's DCON 12 is an amazing sub and as I've said before if I had to do it again I'm sure I would have been just as happy with a pair of DCON's in place of the Q's. They're articulate and precise with plenty of guts on their output. That's the biggest reason I bought that DCON 15 from Sean, just to have it on hand, it's too good not to.

Why do you think you have to ruin the doors to install better speakers? That doesn't make any sense to me. I've done many installs for people that when complete looked just like stock and quite a few were returned to stock when they decided to sell/trade the vehicle with no (or little and hidden) permanent damage. If you're wanting a better sounding stereo system there's MANY ways to go about it that don't involve tearing up the vehicle. A little sound deadening, a decent set of components, a sub or two and a decent amp to run it all can go a LONG way to sounding great without causing permanent damage to the vehicle just to install it.

I agree. These would make great backgrounds on a tablet or phone, but on my laptop and computer with 1920x1080 res they look pretty bad when stretched

to the forum!

to the forum!

to the forum! ^^^ I agree with Aaron, great choice on the sub. (you ninja'd in there didn't you pmureika, lol) I agree with pmureika too, lol.

I think you missed the point of my question. When I asked how much port area you had figured there, and said it looked a little narrow, I meant the width of the opening seemed narrow. The port area is the height x width. If your port was 3" wide and 17.5" tall then you'd have 52.5sqin of port area, which is likely not enough for those subs to operate without noticeable port noise. Also, your total physical length in that drawing is considerably more than 19.25 inches. The one wall of the port that's measured may be 19.25", the first wall is 15.25" by the looks of the dimensions. Depending on the port width it's more like 36" of physical port length. Where did you get the dimensions you're using in that drawing? How about posting up some more details? We can help ensure you have everything right before you go to cutting the wood.

Looks like you're getting a fair grasp on it. FYI, you can go to the file menu, click on export and export a 2D JPEG image of your sketches for uploading instead of taking a pic of the screen with a camera. Otherwise, you're on your way with it from what I see. EDIT: How much port area is that? That's one measurement you don't have on there and it's looks a little narrow. You might need more port area.

I don't know what VVX is, but if you think GCON's are better than sex, you're doing it wrong... unless you're in prison. VVX is a venereal diease I think. LMAO.... that's too funny.... you really set that one up..... To the OP, these guys are giving some real good advice and I would heed the warnings about the box being in the back seat.

I agree with these guys. Pick up the JL's and forget about the bandpass box. A good, well designed and well built ported enclosure will stomp that prefab piece of garbage, period. Hell for that matter, the W6's in a well built sealed enclosure could very possibly get louder and would absolutely sound better. Bandpass enclosures in general have their uses and utilized properly can give some great results. The problem is they're MUCH more difficult to correctly design, have no room for error in the design and build, and are pretty much never utilized correctly. I've heard a couple that were very nice, but only a couple and they were custom built, not prefab junk.

I've been using my pair of 12" Q's for about two years or so now. I've also ordered other subs from Fi for myself and friends during that time. I'm proud to report that they're all still performing just as great as they did from new and they have all exceeded expectations as well. My Q's have been one of my best audio investments to date. I'm more than thrilled with the quality of the sound they reproduce and how much output they're giving. After two years of beating on them, and believe me my wife does one hell of a job putting them through the paces, they're still just as tight and as accurate as the first time I listened to them. I helped a friend buy a pair of the X series 10's (will be back on the website soon I hope) which he threw in a prefabbed enclosure (we did do a little work to retune it) and he still can't get over their performance. They get very loud on a Sundown 100.2 bridged on them and sound amazing while doing so. He turns a lot of heads with them and consistently gets compliments on them from people he shows them off to. He often times gets told that there's no way they're just a pair of 10's on 400watts of power. The only thing I can fault Fi with is that lately their customer service has been pretty lax. They're busy and that has to be factored in. I would much rather them be working on building my sub than spending all day on the computer answering emails, but it seems like there's been a few balls dropped here lately that are closer to the core and being busy just isn't a great excuse for that. I'm a patient person and I know there's no problem with getting what I order, so it's not a problem for me. Some people on the other hand can't stand not having the communication there. I agree with the earlier comment, if you're not an especially patient person then you might well consider finding another brand to go with, but if you have patience and can understand the virtue in waiting for a fantastic product then I don't think there's many choices out there that can beat them. That's just my .02 EDIT: I need to add that Fi OEM's products as well and Ascendant Audio is the in store brand they have. Both the OEMed and Ascendant products are just as well built and have the same kind of outstanding legacy of performance. I didn't suggest any of these tho due to you asking about Fi directly and that the wait is similar on some of those items as well.

My thoughts exactly on the 10 and the 12. I think I can see the line where the dust cap goes, and if so, there's almost no cone area at all on the 10 and little on the 12.

Wanted to add though, I remember CA&E doing a blind listening test with a tube amp, class d, class a/b, and a class T (or G, been a LONG time since I read it). All connected to the same source and speakers with a switch for the listener to switch between each one. The results were surprising in that everyone could consistently hear a "difference", although it was very slight and only the better trained listeners really noticed it. However that difference was finally attributed mostly to the front-end or input stage differences of the class d, a/b and t amps than anything else as it was measurable later in a lab. As far as listening tastes, especially at higher volumes, everyone liked the tube amp the best. The reasoning for that is the difference in how distortion works between a transistor and a tube. That's if I remember that article correctly.

Technically speaking, there's no difference in sound at all. In the early days of class D, full range amps were full of problems with upper end response that's true. The class D amps had to switch on and off (digital signal) at super high frequencies to get smooth high frequency output. Thats because it takes double (or more) on the digital signal to produce the equivalent output frequency (i.e. to produce a 10khz output frequency the amp would need a digital signal frequency of at LEAST 20khz). At least I think that's how I remember reading that. Though today's full range class D amps are VERY commonplace and those limitations are gone with any amp that's worthwhile. Now the SAX-125.4 is new, so very few can speak to their use of it, but I would imagine it's perfectly fine.

I'm not sure but I would venture to guess that the v2 like the v1,v1.5 doesn't do very well in a sealed enclosure. You're simply asking more from it than it's capable of giving with how you're trying to use it. Build a good .6cuft ported enclosure for it with a good amount of port area and I'll bet you'll get much better results. Speakerz iz dum, dey only do whut u tell 'em to do. You also have to realize, it's not a 15, not a 12, not even a 10. You're simply expecting wayyy more from it than it's capable of doing, especially with the enclosure it's in IMHO.

to the forum! All I have to ask about your idea there is, are you sure you have enough width to get four 15's in the trunk of that car with the correct air space for each and not have them stifled? If so, then I think your build idea with them on each side will look really good. I know those cars have ridiculously large trunks, but four 15's should need at least 14cuft of enclosure space. I looked at DB Drive's website and they list 2.66cuft for those 15's which seems absolutely absurd to me. I know of quite a few 12's that need space in that range to operate properly, it's hard to imagine 15's could and still sound right. I'd run some numbers and see what the T/S specs say would work best and see if that will fit in the car. I think the manufacturer has listed a super small enclosure size to make it more appealing to people since the vast majority of people hate giving up any more space than they have to. You may be much better off looking into 12's if you're wanting to do four subs.

Happy birthday brother!!!!

to the forum! That's quite a build plan. I look forward to seeing it's progress.

I love the premise of your rebuild. I'd love to be able to give some suggestions but I simply have no experience with which to do so. I can say for certain I'm looking forward to seeing how it turns out no matter what direction you end up going with it.

Just a quick little update here. Work and my wife have had me running like there's no tomorrow so I've not had the free time to devote to properly checking everything out. I was able to take a few minutes and run signals through the whole setup as it sits right now and found the worst of the harshness centers around 3.3khz and starts and ends at 2.4khz and 4.2khz respectively. I've not had a chance to check each driver individually or play with phasing on this issue, but as soon as someone allows me to breath I'm jumping right on it. As it is I went through and played with the EQ a bit more and was able to tame it down to very respectable levels. It's only bad on certain (and worst on badly recorded/compressed digital music) songs now. As it sits now the EQ is as follows: BASS - 100Hz center, Q is 1.0 and level is -1 MID - 2khz center, Q is 1.0 and level is -3 HIGH - 12.5khz center and level is 0 Stefan, I'm also going to be trying the diffraction ring as well since I can knock that out very quickly. I'll see what, if any, kind of difference it makes. Sometimes I really wish there were more hours in the day and weekends were longer. Between work and family finding time to finish the enclosure for the xcon and fix this issue has been a complete crap shoot.