Need advice on going active
Need advice on going active
This will be my first active set up. Actually my first set up of any decent quality, and I need some help on picking a crossover/crossovers that will do the trick here.
This is the gear I am accumulating for the build.
I have
Pioneer 90BT (have)
2 pair of CDT DRT-25 tweets (have)
1 pair of CDT es62 6.5 Mids (have)
1 pair of 8" audiopulse RMB's
1 pair CDT 6.5" coaxials for rear fill (have) (will run off the deck).
1 pair 12" FI audio IB3's
The power will be
2 zed audio leviatians 150x6
will and audiocontrol DQXS will do the trick run 2 in from the deck
run hipass for tweets
bandpass for mids
hipass to midbass and filter thru the amp
Power rear fill off of the deck
then all low pass to the subs channels 3 4 &5 6 bridged
or if you have any advice on what I could do to make this a better build?
Thx.
This is the gear I am accumulating for the build.
I have
Pioneer 90BT (have)
2 pair of CDT DRT-25 tweets (have)
1 pair of CDT es62 6.5 Mids (have)
1 pair of 8" audiopulse RMB's
1 pair CDT 6.5" coaxials for rear fill (have) (will run off the deck).
1 pair 12" FI audio IB3's
The power will be
2 zed audio leviatians 150x6
will and audiocontrol DQXS will do the trick run 2 in from the deck
run hipass for tweets
bandpass for mids
hipass to midbass and filter thru the amp
Power rear fill off of the deck
then all low pass to the subs channels 3 4 &5 6 bridged
or if you have any advice on what I could do to make this a better build?
Thx.
Last edited by phxgold; May 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM.
Sounds pretty solid honestly, not sure why you want to use two sets of tweeters though? Thats not a very good idea, with such short wavelengths, the likely hood of avoiding a raged response is very low...
Also, honestly if you are going three way active I would reduce the mid to a 5.25 or even a stout 4 to prevent beaming and cross over the tweeter higher. You should use the midrange from around 200hz to above the vocal range, so at least 5khz+, where the tweeters can pick up all the way to 20k.
Also, honestly if you are going three way active I would reduce the mid to a 5.25 or even a stout 4 to prevent beaming and cross over the tweeter higher. You should use the midrange from around 200hz to above the vocal range, so at least 5khz+, where the tweeters can pick up all the way to 20k.
Sounds pretty solid honestly, not sure why you want to use two sets of tweeters though? Thats not a very good idea, with such short wavelengths, the likely hood of avoiding a raged response is very low...
Also, honestly if you are going three way active I would reduce the mid to a 5.25 or even a stout 4 to prevent beaming and cross over the tweeter higher. You should use the midrange from around 200hz to above the vocal range, so at least 5khz+, where the tweeters can pick up all the way to 20k.
Also, honestly if you are going three way active I would reduce the mid to a 5.25 or even a stout 4 to prevent beaming and cross over the tweeter higher. You should use the midrange from around 200hz to above the vocal range, so at least 5khz+, where the tweeters can pick up all the way to 20k.
would you reccomend dealing with the crossovers and just adding the larger midbass on a seperate channel?
I would recommend doing without the upstage all together IMO. I have tried a similar setup, and all it does is ruin the horizontal imaging, with only a marginal raising of sound stage.
Vertical cues start as low as 2khz, but 4khz is when they really start to become significant. What does this mean? Mounting the tweeters on the a-pillars does a pretty good job at creating the illusion of a higher sound stage, with careful tuning. If you mount them firing across the dash towards each other, the parallelism with the reflection surfaces (dash, windshield) will reduce the effect of early reflections (tonality). You can run the midrange in the kicks, midbass in doors, and tweeters in the a-pillars.
A better setup would be to get a smaller midrange, and mount both the midrange and tweeter at the a-pillar. You would need Time alignment for this though, which the DQXS doesn't have IIRC. Obviously, you need to have some experience with fiberglass to achieve this. Also, aiming has to be carefully done, trying to avoid early reflections as much as possible is key.
Personally I wouldn't run passives. Much rather have the control to do what I want.... experimentation is key. Play with different locations, phasing and aiming. This can take several hours. Then find a way to mount everything and experiment with crossover points, phase again, and levels. Don't be afraid to go outside the norm!
Vertical cues start as low as 2khz, but 4khz is when they really start to become significant. What does this mean? Mounting the tweeters on the a-pillars does a pretty good job at creating the illusion of a higher sound stage, with careful tuning. If you mount them firing across the dash towards each other, the parallelism with the reflection surfaces (dash, windshield) will reduce the effect of early reflections (tonality). You can run the midrange in the kicks, midbass in doors, and tweeters in the a-pillars.
A better setup would be to get a smaller midrange, and mount both the midrange and tweeter at the a-pillar. You would need Time alignment for this though, which the DQXS doesn't have IIRC. Obviously, you need to have some experience with fiberglass to achieve this. Also, aiming has to be carefully done, trying to avoid early reflections as much as possible is key.
Personally I wouldn't run passives. Much rather have the control to do what I want.... experimentation is key. Play with different locations, phasing and aiming. This can take several hours. Then find a way to mount everything and experiment with crossover points, phase again, and levels. Don't be afraid to go outside the norm!
The reason I was going to use the 2 sets of tweeters is I have this cdt 620z componants and the upstage kit. so it carries the 2 sets. I was going to run the componants in kick panels and place the upstage speakers in the a pillars to relect off the windshield and raise the soundstage. actually the only reason I was thinking of going active (it is alot more expensive) was to eliminate the 4 crossovers needed for the comps and the upstage kit. just because they are pretty large and unsightly.
would you reccomend dealing with the crossovers and just adding the larger midbass on a seperate channel?
would you reccomend dealing with the crossovers and just adding the larger midbass on a seperate channel?
Last edited by Fast1one; May 14, 2009 at 04:58 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 164
From: Socal
Well,Im no expert on this but I dont think you can even go active with that HU.You have to have a HU that has at least a 2 way active crossover built it.I dont thing any double dins have this.I know that the Alpine 9887,Eclipse 7200 mk II, and the Pioneer PRS 800 have this capability.
To be honest running sctive can be very difficult and frustrating.Do some research on some car audio forums and most will tell you not to do it.Its not for everyone.
To be honest running sctive can be very difficult and frustrating.Do some research on some car audio forums and most will tell you not to do it.Its not for everyone.
The amplifiers have full active capabilities built in on board (HP, LP and BP)...
Well,Im no expert on this but I dont think you can even go active with that HU.You have to have a HU that has at least a 2 way active crossover built it.I dont thing any double dins have this.I know that the Alpine 9887,Eclipse 7200 mk II, and the Pioneer PRS 800 have this capability.
To be honest running sctive can be very difficult and frustrating.Do some research on some car audio forums and most will tell you not to do it.Its not for everyone.
To be honest running sctive can be very difficult and frustrating.Do some research on some car audio forums and most will tell you not to do it.Its not for everyone.
I would recommend doing without the upstage all together IMO. I have tried a similar setup, and all it does is ruin the horizontal imaging, with only a marginal raising of sound stage.
Vertical cues start as low as 2khz, but 4khz is when they really start to become significant. What does this mean? Mounting the tweeters on the a-pillars does a pretty good job at creating the illusion of a higher sound stage, with careful tuning. If you mount them firing across the dash towards each other, the parallelism with the reflection surfaces (dash, windshield) will reduce the effect of early reflections (tonality). You can run the midrange in the kicks, midbass in doors, and tweeters in the a-pillars.
A better setup would be to get a smaller midrange, and mount both the midrange and tweeter at the a-pillar. You would need Time alignment for this though, which the DQXS doesn't have IIRC. Obviously, you need to have some experience with fiberglass to achieve this. Also, aiming has to be carefully done, trying to avoid early reflections as much as possible is key.
Personally I wouldn't run passives. Much rather have the control to do what I want.... experimentation is key. Play with different locations, phasing and aiming. This can take several hours. Then find a way to mount everything and experiment with crossover points, phase again, and levels. Don't be afraid to go outside the norm!
Vertical cues start as low as 2khz, but 4khz is when they really start to become significant. What does this mean? Mounting the tweeters on the a-pillars does a pretty good job at creating the illusion of a higher sound stage, with careful tuning. If you mount them firing across the dash towards each other, the parallelism with the reflection surfaces (dash, windshield) will reduce the effect of early reflections (tonality). You can run the midrange in the kicks, midbass in doors, and tweeters in the a-pillars.
A better setup would be to get a smaller midrange, and mount both the midrange and tweeter at the a-pillar. You would need Time alignment for this though, which the DQXS doesn't have IIRC. Obviously, you need to have some experience with fiberglass to achieve this. Also, aiming has to be carefully done, trying to avoid early reflections as much as possible is key.
Personally I wouldn't run passives. Much rather have the control to do what I want.... experimentation is key. Play with different locations, phasing and aiming. This can take several hours. Then find a way to mount everything and experiment with crossover points, phase again, and levels. Don't be afraid to go outside the norm!
sell the frontstage kit and the 2 way crossovers on ebay that should probably cover the cost of the dqxs.
OK so I can scrap the upstage and i have found some CDT ES-4 midranges for a steal. so I will not buy the audiopulse midbass. I can use the 6.5's for midbass duty and use the 4's and 1 set of tweets.
sell the frontstage kit and the 2 way crossovers on ebay that should probably cover the cost of the dqxs.
sell the frontstage kit and the 2 way crossovers on ebay that should probably cover the cost of the dqxs.
Heres a good quote on the Audison Bitone vs. the DSP6, feature wise. If you wait a bit, Audison might have the bugs worked out. But currently, the DSP6 is the reliable unit:
LINK: http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/...tml#post723283
Also note that the DSP6 is six channel, NOT 8 channel. So you would have to run the sub channel from another output of the HU. Should be ok, since the amps have all the crossover options and generally you don't need T/A for the sub channels. Plus response problems are easily cured acoustically (different box, position, etc) so EQ is not required.
Originally Posted by bikinpunk
I have zapco amps and had the bit one... well, still have a bit one but it's at Audison so I don't have it in my possession. :/
Just a quick rundown, and I bolded what I think are important features to both.
The above is correct... you're comparing 6 channel active to 8 channel active. Slope features are also different (48db on the audison as mentioned).
Audison:
x-over slopes up to 48db in 6db steps.
Currently cannot use different slopes on each end in 'bandpass' mode
Set x-over points to choose from (ie: can't choose your own)
Can t/a in .02ms increments.
Can EQ in 0.2dB increments.
+/- 12dB on EQ
Digi coax and toslink inputs.
Controller comes with it.
4 presets can be called up from the controller; no need to pull out a laptop when switching to a different setting.
Fixed 31 band graphic EQ per channel.
Non-Balanced input
CAN NOT use the DRC (controller) to make changes; only fade/balance/sub/preset callup. You can only use the laptop to make changes.
Zapco:
x-over slopes up to 24db in 6db steps
Different slopes on each end in bandpass mode
Can type in your own x-over point
(can't remember t/a increments)
EQ adjustments made in only full 1dB steps.
+/- 18dB for EQ steps
Toslink only (can be modded for digi coax, though)
Controller (DRC-SL) must be bought separately (an extra $200+ depending on used/new)
Can type in EQ points (ie: not fixed EQ bands)
10 band Parametric EQ per channel: Can type in Q (EQ curve) from 0.5 (REALLY wide) to 9.0 (very steep)
*keep in mind if you bridge a set of channels you actually have 20 bands of EQ for that driver*
Balanced input
Can make changes with the DRC. Nice +.
Both:
PC control
Can store multiple settings on PC (kind of a 'duh')
If anyone can think of others, feel free to add.
Just a quick rundown, and I bolded what I think are important features to both.
The above is correct... you're comparing 6 channel active to 8 channel active. Slope features are also different (48db on the audison as mentioned).
Audison:
x-over slopes up to 48db in 6db steps.
Currently cannot use different slopes on each end in 'bandpass' mode
Set x-over points to choose from (ie: can't choose your own)
Can t/a in .02ms increments.
Can EQ in 0.2dB increments.
+/- 12dB on EQ
Digi coax and toslink inputs.
Controller comes with it.
4 presets can be called up from the controller; no need to pull out a laptop when switching to a different setting.
Fixed 31 band graphic EQ per channel.
Non-Balanced input
CAN NOT use the DRC (controller) to make changes; only fade/balance/sub/preset callup. You can only use the laptop to make changes.
Zapco:
x-over slopes up to 24db in 6db steps
Different slopes on each end in bandpass mode
Can type in your own x-over point
(can't remember t/a increments)
EQ adjustments made in only full 1dB steps.
+/- 18dB for EQ steps
Toslink only (can be modded for digi coax, though)
Controller (DRC-SL) must be bought separately (an extra $200+ depending on used/new)
Can type in EQ points (ie: not fixed EQ bands)
10 band Parametric EQ per channel: Can type in Q (EQ curve) from 0.5 (REALLY wide) to 9.0 (very steep)
*keep in mind if you bridge a set of channels you actually have 20 bands of EQ for that driver*
Balanced input
Can make changes with the DRC. Nice +.
Both:
PC control
Can store multiple settings on PC (kind of a 'duh')
If anyone can think of others, feel free to add.
Also note that the DSP6 is six channel, NOT 8 channel. So you would have to run the sub channel from another output of the HU. Should be ok, since the amps have all the crossover options and generally you don't need T/A for the sub channels. Plus response problems are easily cured acoustically (different box, position, etc) so EQ is not required.
Last edited by Fast1one; May 15, 2009 at 12:24 PM.
Agreed... the potential is there for the BitOne, but the reliability and service is severely lacking. I think its beginning to work for some fellows over at DIYMA, but I wouldn't deal with it...
It certainly has potential, but releasing something waaaaay too early with so many problems just screams greed on the companies behalf. This is something that even when finally working properly I could not stand behind and endorse. Such a shame too since it was so appealing originally.
It certainly has potential, but releasing something waaaaay too early with so many problems just screams greed on the companies behalf. This is something that even when finally working properly I could not stand behind and endorse. Such a shame too since it was so appealing originally.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post