speakers

[C_D_B]

hey all, I'm looking to upgrade my 4 speakers.. I'm curious to know what to buy.. When i look around there are component, 2,3,4 way speakers.. First what is the difference between them. Second, which do you recommend.. I listen to mostly Alternative Rock.. Price isn't really an issue... I have a pair of subs in my trunk that works nicely to fill the car w/ better base.. Any thoughts or recommendations appreciated.. Thanks...

[IcESouL]

Originally Posted by C_D_B

hey all, I'm looking to upgrade my 4 speakers.. I'm curious to know what to buy.. When i look around there are component, 2,3,4 way speakers.. First what is the difference between them. Second, which do you recommend.. I listen to mostly Alternative Rock.. Price isn't really an issue... I have a pair of subs in my trunk that works nicely to fill the car w/ better base.. Any thoughts or recommendations appreciated.. Thanks...

components up front, nothing or coax (2,3,4 way speakers) in the rear. You want your sound stage infront of you. (take for instance a live band, you don't turn around to listen to the music you face the band) Amp the components run the coax off the HU. Components usually consist of tweeters, woofer, and external crossover. Usually component sets sound better and since the tweeter is seperate it's better for imaging.

As for a 2 way speaker is a tweeter and a woofer combined. 3 way speakers has a midrange incorportated into it and 4 range has a super tweeter incorportated into it. Don't be wowed by a 4 way or a 5 way speaker.
Some suggestion on companies cadence, PG xenon set is pretty cheap ,JL ,eclipse, focal ect. there are alot of them out there.

[Jet-Lee]

Time aligned is better than a frontal image, imho.

I don't know snot about brands, cause I don't look at names, only t/s specs.

For a good time-aligned system, don't play a lot of highs from the back. mount your tweeters up high and pointed across. Put your mids down in your doors. Time align + correct speakers makes crossovers obsolete.

[PaulD]

Originally Posted by Jet-Lee

Time aligned is better than a frontal image, imho.

??? YOU TIME ALIGN TO GET A BETTER FRONT IMAGE

I don't know snot about brands, cause I don't look at names, only t/s specs.

I HAVE A FEW BRANDS I PREFER, T/S SPECS AREN'T GONNA DO MUCH FOR YOU WHEN LOOKING FOR A MIDRANGE OR TWEETER.

For a good time-aligned system, don't play a lot of highs from the back. mount your tweeters up high and pointed across. Put your mids down in your doors. Time align + correct speakers makes crossovers obsolete

????? IF YOU HAVE SEPERATE MIDS AND TWEETERS, YOU MUST HAVE A CROSSOVER OF SOME TYPE - FAILURE TO BLOCK LOWER FREQUENCIES FROM A SPEAKER THAT IS INCAPABLE OF HANDLING IT WILL DESTROY THEM VERY QUICKLY. SEPERATING THE MID AND TWEET BY A FOOT OR MORE WILL CAUSE COMB FILTERING - A NASTY SOUND THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO FIX. IF YOU PUT TWEETS IN THE A-PILLAR, CROSS THEM OVER HIGH, LIKE 5-6 KHz.
.

I think you are trying to say something different and using the wrong terms.

[Jet-Lee]

Time aligned is better than a frontal image, imho.
??? YOU TIME ALIGN TO GET A BETTER FRONT IMAGE
I think we're talking about 2 different things, probably. Or maybe we just align them differently. For me, it gets aligned so it sound like I'm wearing some really high end headphones.

I don't know snot about brands, cause I don't look at names, only t/s specs.
I HAVE A FEW BRANDS I PREFER, T/S SPECS AREN'T GONNA DO MUCH FOR YOU WHEN LOOKING FOR A MIDRANGE OR TWEETER.
Midrange, yes. Tweeters, no. I take recommandations on tweeters.

For a good time-aligned system, don't play a lot of highs from the back. mount your tweeters up high and pointed across. Put your mids down in your doors. Time align + correct speakers makes crossovers obsolete

????? IF YOU HAVE SEPERATE MIDS AND TWEETERS, YOU MUST HAVE A CROSSOVER OF SOME TYPE - FAILURE TO BLOCK LOWER FREQUENCIES FROM A SPEAKER THAT IS INCAPABLE OF HANDLING IT WILL DESTROY THEM VERY QUICKLY. SEPERATING THE MID AND TWEET BY A FOOT OR MORE WILL CAUSE COMB FILTERING - A NASTY SOUND THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO FIX. IF YOU PUT TWEETS IN THE A-PILLAR, CROSS THEM OVER HIGH, LIKE 5-6 KHz.
Don't get midranges that can't play low. Like I said, I look at t/s specs. Full range drivers all around with the highpass filter set at 80hz on the amp. The only reason there is any filter on that line is because the switch is broken and I can't change it, so I just have it turned down to as low as possible. I have yet to hear anything nasty from my tweeters as result of the lower tones, maybe they've got "bass blockers" inside. Comb filtering, ain't heard nothing yet. Crisp, clean, without faults.

I'm actually thinking of making a subwoofer wall right behind my back seat, maybe incorporate some good powerful mids into that as well.

[PaulD]

time alignment is when you delay a speaker closer to you by a few milliseconds to trick your ear into thinking it is the same distance from you as the other (further) speaker - this only works for the frequencies in which your ears are time sensitive.

What you are calling alignment is just matching relative intensity (volume). That's a normal part of tuning but I don't use rear speakers, all six of my drivers are in front of me.

As for comb filtering, you may have never heard a properly setup front stage - so you may not know comb filtering if you heard it.

[ngsm13]

Further proof Jet-lee is a moron.

nG

[Jet-Lee]

time alignment is when you delay a speaker closer to you by a few milliseconds to trick your ear into thinking it is the same distance from you as the other (further) speaker - this only works for the frequencies in which your ears are time sensitive.

What you are calling alignment is just matching relative intensity (volume). That's a normal part of tuning but I don't use rear speakers, all six of my drivers are in front of me.

We are talking about the same time alignment, we obviously go about it different ways. I wasn't talking about matching relative volume, but changing the degree of phase of each speaker dependent upon where it is in the car in relation to you, or the focal point wherever it may be.

As for comb filtering, you may have never heard a properly setup front stage - so you may not know comb filtering if you heard it.

Possible. Description?

Further proof Jet-lee is a moron.

nG

Or if you waited 'till I got back from my honeymoon, you'd see that I had a response.

[ngsm13]

Originally Posted by Jet-Lee

blah blah blah

Nope. Simply put. You're just a...

NUMB SKULL

nG

[PaulD]

changing the phase of a speaker is not time alignment either ..... keep guessing

[ngsm13]

Keeps digging himself a deeper hole. Further proof of his LACK of knowledge.

nG

[Jet-Lee]

5) Time aligned:

When a speaker system is said to be time aligned it usually refers to the ability of the speaker to produce a sharp, single rise in acoustic output, followed by an exponential decay (with some oscillation) when subject to a step change in input signal. Non time aligned systems typically produce a distorted rise, consisting of multiple pulses associated with the woofer and tweeter seperately. More simply put, in a time aligned system the initial woofer and tweeter signals, in response to a step change in input, reach the listener at the same time. Of course, this only happens on the design axis. Time aligned system may or may not be phase coherent, phase aligned, or truely transient accutate.

Soooo.......phasing the speakers differently to get the sound to reach your target at the same time....is Time Alignment.

[OffRoadSonoma]

hmmmm. Pauld has 1,815 posts in almost 4 years and Jet-lee has 2,270 in 2 years. It is obvious to me that in half the time, jet-lee has posted double the amount of the posts as Pauld. I think we've really been overlooking the righteousness of jet-lee. I for one nominate him for president of AF, Communism and all knowing for all. .....PS, Maybe Pauld should learn something from jet-lee and post more, even if it is not true or he has no idea about the topic. LOL> J/k PaulD

[OffRoadSonoma]

[Jet-Lee]

Originally Posted by OffRoadSonoma

hmmmm. Pauld has 1,815 posts in almost 4 years and Jet-lee has 2,270 in 2 years. It is obvious to me that in half the time, jet-lee has posted double the amount of the posts as Pauld. I think we've really been overlooking the righteousness of jet-lee. I for one nominate him for president of AF, Communism and all knowing for all. .....PS, Maybe Pauld should learn something from jet-lee and post more, even if it is not true or he has no idea about the topic. LOL> J/k PaulD

I simply post more in OT.

And where was post counts ever brought up as who was smarter?

EDIT-And who said I was smarter than PaulD? Not I.