kickpanel speaker locations : pros, cons

[werewolf]

I figured I'd start a thread about the pros & cons of kickpanel speaker locations, because there seems to be a lot of misinformation on the topic floating around this forum :( Please allow me to first say that I'm not a huge fan of kickpanel installations ... mostly because I find them to be ugly and intrusive ... and for the record I will absolutely admit that I have not heard the finest incarnation of the art, realized by some of the best installers/tuners in the biz. I hope to correct that sometime soon.

A brief review of dominant hearing mechanisms is in order. For the purposes of this discussion, it's VERY important to decompose hearing localization into two dimensions : lateral and vertical. I think the most important points are these :

1. Localization cues in the lateral plane are dictated by the differences in the acoustic transfer function to our two ears. These include inter-aural time differences, mostly significant for lower frequencies in the midbass and lower midrange, and inter-aural level differences, mostly significant for higher frequencies in the upper midrange and treble.

2. Localization in the vertical plane is dictated primarily by the shape of our outer ears and torso. Please consider that, if our outer ears and torsos were absent, we would be left with the classic "sphere with holes in the sides" for our heads ... and the symmetry of this geometry would absolutely dictate that vertical localization would be impossible. It's my understanding that the outer ear has the largest impact on the acoustic transfer function for vertical localization ... and given the dimensions of the outer ear, this implies that vertical localization cues are only significant above ~1kHz or so.

To summarize :

1. Ears are on the sides of our heads. Through ITD, IID we use both ears for left/right cues.

2. Vertical cues are given to us by the shape of our outer ears ... not vertically symmetrical, thank you, but common to both ears ... and the corresponding impact on the acoustic transfer function to our eardrums.

Conclusions : Let's say as an audio enthusiast, you happen to care about a realistic soundstage in your vehicle ... laterally as well as vertically. Furthermore, let's say you happen to care about a realistic soundstage for both front seat passengers, at the same time (For what it's worth, this ain't me ... I'm lazy, unskilled in fabrication, and selfish). Here's why kickpanels make sense in this case :

1. Left, right pathlength differences cannot be ELECTRONICALLY compensated for both front seat passengers at the same time. Simply not enough degrees of freedom, for the four ears involved. Kickpanels almost always present the best choice for PHYSICALLY equalizing PLD's.

2. Vertical cues can be electronically compensated, by a specialized form of equalization known as head-related transfer function inversion and substitution. A great reference on this topic is :

Creating Source Elevation Illusions by Spectral Manipulation, by P. Jeffrey Bloom, JAES, vol. 25, pp.820-828, September 1977.

So, simply put, the kickpanel optimization suggests that you solve the left/right problem physically, since it can't be solved electronically for both front seat passengers. The price you pay is in stage height ... but this can be solved electronically for both front seat passngers :) And yes, the best installers and tuners have known all this for many, many years.

Incidentally, there's another interesting conclusion to be drawn : physical separation of drivers in any single channel ... like mid & tweet, for example ... is not necessarily the horror of horrors it's often considered to be, particularly if the separation is vertical. Either the ear can't tell to begin with, since vertical localization cues don't even start until the treble, or spectral manipulation (EQ) can be employed to very convincingly trick the ear. Check the AES reference above. One of the most convincing soundstages I've ever heard ... with no obvious penalties in tonality, or coherence ... had midranges in the kicks and tweets in the A-Pillars. And I'm far, far from alone on this one ;)

Armed with that background, perhaps we can list some kickpanel pros & cons :

Pros :

- Most convincing lateral soundstage for both front seat passengers at the same time.

- Early reflections ... floor, underdash ... are relatively easy to tame, compared to windshield reflections of higher-mounted drivers, for example.

Cons :

- Often ugly and intrusive (to me, anyway)

- Establishing vertical stage height requires clever EQ ... spectral manipulation, involving HRTF inversion and substitution.

- Early diffraction caused by feet and legs.

Now it may be, that some users don't care at all about staging ... only tonality. There's plenty of room for everyone in this hobby :)

[edwelly]

Let's say you are installing a system in Honda Accord 2003 EX 4 dr- where would you put the speakers?
I choose this car because I have seen both kick and doors done.

[bassfromspace]

I know more than werewolf, I just keep quiet most times. :D

[npdang]

This is a great write up. Definitely needs to be moved to the tech. articles forum.

[Thoraudio]

I don't particularly care for fiberglass blobs on the floor either.

IMNSHO, the best kick panel installs are those that cosmetically follow the natural plane of the of the factory panels, but behind, the drivers are angled to compensate for the extreme off axis angle the near side drivers present. Scott B.s 240 being a great example.

[PlanetGranite]

Linky for a good HRTF graph here (http://interface.cipic.ucdavis.edu/CIL_tutorial/3D_HRTF/HRTF_med.htm)

As Werewolf mentioned, we want to take the inverse (mirror) of the graph at a specific position (i.e. - infront and below) when applying equalization. :)

Also, Physics Today has a damn good (although slow reading) article titled "How We Localize Sound" which can be found here (http://www.aip.org/pt/nov99/locsound.html) .

[edwelly]

What about this install? I cannot comment on the stage presence but assuming this was a good sound stage, would the look of these be better in your eyes?
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4383&page=5&pp=10

PB2theMax - I hope you do not mind me using your install here. I think it looks GREAT!!!

[chuyler1]

I think that some people go a little crazy with angling the speakers. Granted some speakers have better on-axis response than off, but the difference is usually minimal and can be fixed with an EQ. Once you are willing to sacrifice the angle of the speaker in the kickpanel, you will realize it is very easy to install 3", 4" and often 5.25" speakers without taking up floor space.

When it comes to tweeters in kicks, I am not a big fan at all. All of the successful renditions of tweeter kicks I have heard were in show-vehicles that had the seats pushed back so far you couldn't drive the car. That is not practical and it defeats the entire purpose of car audio. People doing that might as well just pick up home audio as a hobby instead. With the seat in a normal driving position, the high frequencies easily reflect off your leg drawing the stage down even lower than intended. Furthermore, a passenger's leg and foot may completely block the tweeter which changes the sound of the system drastically as they shift around in the seat. So I just put my tweeters up high and as far away as possible and deal with the reflections. At least it makes for an enjoyable listening experience in any seat position with or with out a passenger.

I also have some comments about large drivers in kicks. I believe you must utilize the door locations to get any kind of midbass up front. There simply isn't enough airspace in kicks for 6.5" woofers to truely shine in this department. I tried this once and was very unhappy with the results. No amount of ventilation and polyfill could clean up the midbass region and get rid of the nasty peaks. Since then, all of my kickpanel installs have been 4-way (T,MR,MB,SW) designs with a larger woofer in the door. And since you can't utilize the lower range of a 6.5" driver mounted in a kick, you might as well stick to 3", 4", and 5.25" drivers which fit better anyway.

[3.5max6spd]

I don't particularly care for fiberglass blobs on the floor either.

IMNSHO, the best kick panel installs are those that cosmetically follow the natural plane of the of the factory panels, but behind, the drivers are angled to compensate for the extreme off axis angle the near side drivers present. Scott B.s 240 being a great example.

X2

Concentrating on angling the drivers toward a center focus on the dash as opposed to directly at the listener has worked wonders for my staging.

[FoxPro5]

Incidentally, there's another interesting conclusion to be drawn : physical separation of drivers in any single channel ... like mid & tweet, for example ... is not necessarily the horror of horrors it's often considered to be, particularly if the separation is vertical. Either the ear can't tell to begin with, since vertical localization cues don't even start until the treble, or spectral manipulation (EQ) can be employed to very convincingly trick the ear. Check the AES reference above. One of the most convincing soundstages I've ever heard ... with no obvious penalties in tonality, or coherence ... had midranges in the kicks and tweets in the A-Pillars. And I'm far, far from alone on this one ;)


Now THAT'S what I wanted to hear! Thanks for the info Wolf.

[werewolf]

Physical separation of drivers ... like mid & tweet ... probably deserves a thread of it's own. In my opinion, the old wisdom of "coherence" and "point sourcing" has ... evolved, shall we say. The more we learn about how the ear actually localizes sound, the more we learn to manipulate :)

Case-in-point : consider that vertical cues don't begin until maybe 1~2kHz. How can the ear possibly localize a dedicated midbass driver (up to ~200Hz, for example), in the vertical plane? Simple answer : it can't. There's a "circle of confusion" regarding the midbass ... as long as a midbass driver is generating the same ITD's to your ears, one location can't be localized, or differentiated, from another. So why would a dedicated midbass need to be physically located in close proximity to a tweet? Perhaps to satisfy your eyes ... because your ears certainly can't tell.

And of course, there's the AES-supported evidence of being able to trick the ear, vertically, by spectral manipulation based on HRTF inversion/substitution.

Now, there are certainly other things to consider when separating drivers. The interference pattern, or lobe, resulting from both drivers playing the same frequency at the crossover, for example. But once again, electronics can help : crossover alignments and slopes, parallel time alignment for "lobe steering", etc. Remember that one advantage offered by the otherwise miserable car environment is that listeners tend not to wander around the listening space!

By the way ... in my opinion and experience, the car audio fanatics have learned, and leveraged, much more about how we localize sound than home audio enthusiasts. Simply because they've had to ... in order to realize a convincing stage in a small, reflective environment where you can't possibly sit equi-distant between the speakers.

[raamaudio]

I learned this from one of the top installers in the world, a good buddy of mine.

1) Put your front seats where you intend to either drive the car or where you will have them if you plan to compete, this is very very important. I am talking about fore and aft, height, seat back tilt angle. If not competing then where you will drive the car at and the passenger side the same.
If you are competing in car audio comps, then all the way back and low but even with the passenger side for height, lean the seats back a bit but not real far to make them uncomfortable.

2) Sit in your seat as you would driving or listening as per above, make sure you are correctly placed, if you tend to drive leaning way forward like some do, you should adjust how you sit, better for your posture anyway, lol, lean back in the seat:)

(here is an additional hint, almost all will do better if the seats are lowered, leaned back quite a bit, etc. but in my Tacoma I had to raise the seats, go figure;)

3) Have somebody you trust to do this correctly, critically important. Roll the windows up, have them look very very carefully at where the entrance to your eardrum is on your window side ear, left ear, mark it on the window or on the pillar with a small spot of tape.

4) Move to the other front seat and do the same except of course on the right ear this time.

5) Ok to get out of the car now:) Measure 5" forward and 1.5" down from the spot marked for your ear entrance points on each side of the car, should be two marks on the car now, one for your ears and one forward and down as above.

6) Build some temp baffles for the speakers or the ones you will use, what I do. Have the tweeters mounted very low and to the door side of the baffle, the woofers go furthest forward and low as well.

7) Aim the woofers(midbasses) exactly at the forward and down spot on the glass you marked.
This is the sweet spot, instead of fighting the glass reflections you are using them to your advantage. The right speaker will reflect off the left glass into your left ear and help equalize the sound you hear from both speakers, seems odd but it works, exceptionally well. I beat a prior world champ twice in two months, two seperate installs in my truck and two totally seperate comp installs in his truck and a customers truck using these methods of alignment.

8)Take a kitchen towel and put it behind the baffels can cover the back of the speakers, then do some serious listening tests to see if you need to align them differently but this should be pretty darn accurate.

9) Be very carefull when glassing the kicks as the glass can pull them out of alignment when drying as tends to shrink so mount the baffles very well before glassing.

10) Wire the midbass on the passenger out of phase with the drivers side midbass, you may lose some midbass output but the sub can help make up for that quite well when tuned properly, better yet to have some midbasses in the doors. Try all the phasing setups you can, sometimes the drivers side is best, sometimes but not often, both in phase works)


For those not building kicks here is a simple install plan that works quite well, has been used alot in competion cars.

1) use the door locations for the midbasses, both in phase.
2) tweeters in the A pillars firing directly at each other, as wide apart as possible, both at the same exact height and about 2" above the highest point on the dash. Wire both tweeters out of phase(pos and neg wires reversed but this may have to be reconsideded depending on the midbass wiring, take your timem and try them all! Make sure to try many different aim points as well.
3) Use a dash mat, fugly but they work.

In fact, a dash mat will improve just about any install ever done, including kick panels, have one in my truck, been there for years:)"

I have done this in several cars and trucks over the years and always with great results.

Rick

[luvdeftonz]

werewolf, you have the rare gift of making technospeak fun and interesting to read. Most "science geeks" are boring writers. Not you. Great article and follow up comments.

:cool:

[chuyler1]

Rick, that's a pretty neat way of aligning speakers and I understand the theory behind it. I think your technique can be improved somewhat by using a laser pointer and a small mirror.

1) Mount your baffle and build a bracket to sling over the opening that will hold a laser pointer so it fires straight out.
2) Follow instructions above by rick to set your listening position and sit down.
3) Hold the mirror flat against the window in roughly the spot that Rick stated.
4) Turn on the laser pointer and try to line up the angle with your ear. You will need someone to move the baffle and someone else to verify the spot on your ear. You may have to move the mirror around too but only keep it 5-10" away from your ear. If you go to close the laser will bounce off your nose, if you go to far you'll end up having to lower the mirror too much to get the right angle.

[DS-21]

I'd love to respond to this post, but my brain's done for the day. Six hours running gels and another 10 tutoring - the LSAT is next week and everybody seems to want last minute tutoring...

So this post richly needs a rebuttal, but it won't get one from me until I have the intellectual energy to put into it. Maybe October 1. :)

[raamaudio]

The reason for this alignment is to utilize the glass instead of fighting it.

I have used lazers, they can be helpfull to a great degree but it still takes using your ears to fine tune;)

I aim the tweeter pretty much to the same spot as the mids, meaning they are not on a flat plane normall. It was easy with the Rainbow Ref tweeters, for others a bit more effort to aim them. I have found just a tad of TA can make a huge difference when mounted flat on the same baffle as the mids and that is the only time I have ever used TA.

I am eager to hear 21's take on this, it will be interesting to say the least. I learned this from Matt at ID, not sure if it was his method or something from Eric.

One thing I do not do, I do not try to make a car sound like a perfect listening room, I try to make it sound as good as possible and overall I like it far better than most any listening room I have been in, just more fun!!!!!

If I want sonic perfection I listen to live music, not reproduced, though I have heard some systems that are just plain incredible, being there is always better:)

Rick

[Thoraudio]

I am eager to hear 21's take on this, it will be interesting to say the least. I learned this from Matt at ID, not sure if it was his method or something from Eric.

His take will be that reasonable people only drive manual's... so kicks are stupid.

or that audio imaging is distracting. (still haven't figured that one out).

or that the audio signature of the drivers is so horribly blocked that it is more aking to chewing glass than music...

or that Steve Jobs hasn't recommened it yet...

or something equally weak.

[legend94]

RaamAudio:
Are you saying that first I should line up the mark on the window with my ear, second go 5 inches toward the front of the car and 1.5 inches down? and if my mid and tweet are mounted on the same baffle they should point to that location?

[legend94]

His take will be that reasonable people only drive manual's... so kicks are stupid.

or that audio imaging is distracting. (still haven't figured that one out).

or that the audio signature of the drivers is so horribly blocked that it is more aking to chewing glass than music...

or that Steve Jobs hasn't recommened it yet...

or something equally weak.

what are you thoughts?
i sense your sarcasm, but dont know the reasons behind it
im just now in the process of wanting to build kicks and want to gather all the options and opinions

[FocusInCali]

or that Steve Jobs hasn't recommened it yet...

boo hiss, low blow

I've always appreciated what you have to say, but that's plain ignorance speaking there. :p

Wether you use Mac or not, Steve Jobs deserves to be credited for creating a team of innovators.

[werewolf]

DS-21's post in this thread will also get a response ... i hope everyone will wait with breathless anticipation until, about, mid-December when a great intellect shall return to this thread ... ;) :p

[werewolf]

... oh, thanks for the compliments guys :) I participate in audio forums to both teach and learn ... wonder why other guys do it? ;)

[Hernan]

D-21's points of view are interesting and he gives a great pump to some threads. He's not always right but who are?? :)

[03blueSI]

The problem I have with kickpanel mounted speakers is no matter how many times you tell people to be careful with the speakers they never pay attention. Sound wise they work well except for the leg blocking the tweeters. My next install I will probably go back to kick mid, door midbass and a-pillar tweet as long as I can find or build a decent grill for a 4.5" revelator.

[demon2091tb]

I'd love to hear about this ALOT more. Actually learn something about theory and such from some intelligent people.

Currently finishing up my kickpanels with a pair of DIYMA 2" domes, and LPG 26's up top in pillars, and man it sounds good, a slight delay on the tweet to me adds just a bit more depth to the stage.....while keeping everything anchored on the dash. But could we also go into not just Cones, but domes as well, as i think domes might add a little something that cones can't.

Is synching up pairs of drivers with TA ok to get a uniform PLD between all drivers on a singular plane perpindicular to the dash, basically alighning the whole soundstage to the depth of the mid under the dash.....Does this make sense and actually hold water to being a good starting point to realistic depth??

[werewolf]

Is synching up pairs of drivers with TA ok to get a uniform PLD between all drivers on a singular plane perpindicular to the dash, basically alighning the whole soundstage to the depth of the mid under the dash.....Does this make sense and actually hold water to being a good starting point to realistic depth??
why, yes it does :)

Midrange in kicks for farthest distance to your ears, and best possible L/R pathlength equalization ... critical in midbass/midrange ... for best possible stage width & depth. Tweets in pillars for stage height ... since ears only begin to notice height in the treble (perhaps upper midrange ... but nothing's perfect). Time align to the farthest drivers ... namely, the kicks ... with parallel alignment. Add some delta alignment when you only care about one passenger (or driver) at a time.

It's a GREAT compromise ... hard to beat, in fact, if you care at all about a realistic soundstage in the car.

If you don't care about spatial reproduction in your vehicle ... why not listen in mono? :cool:

[demon2091tb]

Good deal, i had honestly been wondering this myself, domes in kicks, and domes in pillars, but just wasn't sure if this was working like i had been thinking it had. I'm going after a 2seat car if possible, i hate it so much when i have someone drive me in my car, and the passengers seat just sounds so lifeless, and utterly boring. So i'd like to have the best compromise (more like the best possible sound for both seats), with my very little experience, being my first 4way, and 2nd install.

[Neil]

Just some comments on psychoacoutics if they haven't already been mentioned....

Imaging clues of near-field sources come from ITD and IID (Interaural Time Difference and Interaural Intensity Difference, respectively).

ITD is typically used by the brain to localize low frequency sources (ie. below 500hz).
IID is typically used by the brain to localize high frequency sources (ie. above 1khz).

So what does this tell you? Well, for low frequency content that is localized by ITD (ie. lower midrange and midbass), it is imperative that PLD (Path Length Difference) is as equal as possible. Of course, physical equality is best... But for high frequency content that is localized by IID, SPL is the key factor: if you can get SPL equal at the ear from the left and right sides, there should be fairly little difference.

Of course, above 4khz, frequencies are attenuated by the head for the far side ear. A sound to your left will appear to have different spectracl content compared to the right ear. This is called HRTF (Head Related Transfer Function) and depends on the shape of your head.

Neil

[raamaudio]

It is great to have the depth of knowledge we are so lucky to have on this forum, thanks for sharing it with us, all that have done so:)

I have tried many if not most of the install ideas presented here as well as many others. I spent months on my Dynaudio dome mids and tweets in the kick panels trying to get everything just right, what helped alot was blocking some of the output of the mids. The wide dispersion pattern was the hardest to deal with until I poped off the grill and lined the inside with a layer of Ensolite foam with a 1.25" hole cut in the center. But, no matter how many aim points, listening by ear, laser pointer, long dowel methods I used, stage height and depth were just not very good. Finally I succumed to a recommendation of adding a second set of tweeters to the A pillars, crossfiring, very low level output, I think I was around 5khz or so(tried alot of freqs) and finally had it down right. Good enough to win in SQ over a prior world champ by 11 points, shocked us both and it was my 5th competition ever.

Physical location, aiming, crossover freq, phase, etc, all need to come first. TA is a band aid, fix all you can physically then if abosulutely nessesay try a bit of TA, too much and things go bad really quickly.

Even though we want it all, I will give up a bit of imaging, etc, perfection for more musicality anyday. Having both working well together is the desired goal of course and it can be done and is wonderful to hear.

Also, build your system to sound as good as possibly to your ears, in your car, and do not worry that it may or may not sound the same as some reference home audio system. I find that to be an absured measuring stick for two totally different situations.

I have found I much prefer a great sounding car system over a great sounding home system, there are things we can do in a vehicle that just are not very possible to do in a home audio environment, and then play to the high level it is best at without distrubing those around you. In a car, roll up the windows and have some fun:)

As a matter of fact, roll down the windows if you have done like I have with alot of none reflective surfaces, I can crank up my system quite loudly and outside the vehicle it is not all that noticable.

Bottom line for me, build it right, tune it right, enjoy the music for what you can achieve in a vehicle, who cares if it is the same in a home system;) (again I much prefer a great sounding vehicle over a great sounding home system)


Rick

[Thoraudio]

Kicks and there success depend greatly on the vehicle as well...

saw this on Carsound. Not commenting on the door pods, but look at the space, or lack thereof in the passenger floorboard.

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j252/dmitt30/DonniesTruck006.jpg

Seats up high, huge center console etc... would make this a terrible vehicle for kicks, as they'd get blocked no matter how the passenger sat. And the driver side would be just as bad, if not worse.

Lower cars, with the seats low and back, and small or no center consoles are the best bet for kicks.

[legend94]

I think that some people go a little crazy with angling the speakers. Granted some speakers have better on-axis response than off, but the difference is usually minimal and can be fixed with an EQ. Once you are willing to sacrifice the angle of the speaker in the kickpanel, you will realize it is very easy to install 3", 4" and often 5.25" speakers without taking up floor space.

When it comes to tweeters in kicks, I am not a big fan at all. All of the successful renditions of tweeter kicks I have heard were in show-vehicles that had the seats pushed back so far you couldn't drive the car. That is not practical and it defeats the entire purpose of car audio. People doing that might as well just pick up home audio as a hobby instead. With the seat in a normal driving position, the high frequencies easily reflect off your leg drawing the stage down even lower than intended. Furthermore, a passenger's leg and foot may completely block the tweeter which changes the sound of the system drastically as they shift around in the seat. So I just put my tweeters up high and as far away as possible and deal with the reflections. At least it makes for an enjoyable listening experience in any seat position with or with out a passenger.

I also have some comments about large drivers in kicks. I believe you must utilize the door locations to get any kind of midbass up front. There simply isn't enough airspace in kicks for 6.5" woofers to truely shine in this department. I tried this once and was very unhappy with the results. No amount of ventilation and polyfill could clean up the midbass region and get rid of the nasty peaks. Since then, all of my kickpanel installs have been 4-way (T,MR,MB,SW) designs with a larger woofer in the door. And since you can't utilize the lower range of a 6.5" driver mounted in a kick, you might as well stick to 3", 4", and 5.25" drivers which fit better anyway.


Like your install. How does having the tweets facing each other sound? could you tell me what tweeter you are using?

[chuyler1]

I have the complete DLS Iridium 6.3 set but I sold the crossovers and run them active. The tweets can be a little harsh around 4KHz because of the windshield but I just tune it down a little. Stage height is unbelievable, width is pretty decent, and depth is OK. Its the best system I've installed to date but I really don't have much to compare with.

[MarkZ]

It's a GREAT compromise ... hard to beat, in fact, if you care at all about a realistic soundstage in the car.

If you don't care about spatial reproduction in your vehicle ... why not listen in mono? :cool:

I know you said this sort of tongue-in-cheek, but I think your use of hyperbole here could give people the wrong impression. I think all too often too many compromises are made in the name of "imaging" and "soundstage". Good imaging is great, but let's keep in mind that many recordings aren't mastered with imaging in mind. Spatial PRODUCTION is an afterthought a lot of times, making the importance of spatial REproduction overblown.

Personally, I'd sacrifice the image if it meant perfecting the FR or preserving asthetic and functional qualities of the car. I mostly agree with opponents of the ankle level speaker installations, but for different reasons. I think occlusion (symmetrical or not) should be avoided at all costs because of the disruption in FR moreso than its effect on the soundstage (not that the two are completely unrelated). I also think it's worth mentioning that midbass installation in the kick panels is often not feasible for precisely this reason. Venting outside of the car and whatever other tricks people are doing can be a major modification that some folks aren't willing to make.

[npdang]

It's generally been my experience that kicks offer better tonal qualities than do dash mounted drivers. The fr deviations due to diffraction and obstruction can usually be overcome quite effectively with an eq, whereas it's much more difficult to correct tonal imbalances due to heavy reflections off the glass and dash.

[werewolf]

no fundamental disagreement Mark, but perhaps a counterpoint of sorts would be : show me the mounting location in a car that doesn't significantly alter the measured or specified frequency response of a driver? Don't like higher-frequency drivers down low because of blocking/diffraction, how about higher-frequency drivers mounted higher introducing nasty reflections? And which frequency response aberrations are easier to equalize (hint : don't waste too much time trying to invert a comb null)?

Know what I mean? Yes ... it's all a compromise, depending on your tastes and what is significant to you in stereo reproduction. To state that one choice is unequivocally bad for all tastes ... and all vehicles, as Wes points out ... is quite narrow-minded.

It's a valid point, though, that in the "con" category of kickpanel installations, we should add : significant fabrication work required to execute properly. I really suspect that this is often the most significant reason why kick locations are avoided.

[legend94]

no fundamental disagreement Mark, but perhaps a counterpoint of sorts would be : show me the mounting location in a car that doesn't significantly alter the measured or specified frequency response of a driver? Don't like higher-frequency drivers down low because of blocking/diffraction, how about higher-frequency drivers mounted higher introducing nasty reflections? And which frequency response aberrations are easier to equalize (hint : don't waste too much time trying to invert a comb null)?

Know what I mean? Yes ... it's all a compromise, depending on your tastes and what is significant to you in stereo reproduction. To state that one choice is unequivocally bad for all tastes ... and all vehicles, as Wes points out ... is quite narrow-minded.

It's a valid point, though, that in the "con" category of kickpanel installations, we should add : significant fabrication work required to execute properly. I really suspect that this is often the most significant reason why kick locations are avoided.


what tweeters would you suggest for an a pillar install? i would be using morel mids in the lower front part of the door. i prefer a tweeter that would be laid back. or is that more in tuning?

[PlanetGranite]

what tweeters would you suggest for an a pillar install? i would be using morel mids in the lower front part of the door. i prefer a tweeter that would be laid back. or is that more in tuning?
I believe the idea for a pillar tweeters is to choose a tweeter with a narrow dispersion pattern. This will help to limit the amount of reflections from the windshield, dash, etc. For compact domes, maybe try a MB Quart QTD25 or Morel MT22/23.

[legend94]

I believe the idea for a pillar tweeters is to choose a tweeter with a narrow dispersion pattern. This will help to limit the amount of reflections from the windshield, dash, etc. For compact domes, maybe try a MB Quart QTD25 or Morel MT22/23.

Im looking for a tweeter that is a not a metal dome and has a shallow surface mount. Good idea on the narrow dispersion. Any other ideas?

[demon2091tb]

I'm actually running LPG 26's in my pillars, off axis is amazing for the driver, and i beleive that the offaxis firing right at eachother or slightly in does the best for them....enough offaxis to add a spacious sound, but accurate and detailed enough to definetly know when the staging changes from L to R.

I don't think narrow dispersion for tweets in pillars is a general idea.....i think it depends on what your looking for and such.

BTW xover points are around 8k @12-18db, i forget really, also used them down to 4k 24db really well. NP at all with the offaxis response.

[CoinSlot]

-

[MarkZ]

It's generally been my experience that kicks offer better tonal qualities than do dash mounted drivers. The fr deviations due to diffraction and obstruction can usually be overcome quite effectively with an eq, whereas it's much more difficult to correct tonal imbalances due to heavy reflections off the glass and dash.

I don't disagree. EQ can really open up the possibilities in terms of driver selection and installation location. By no means did I intend for my post to be a criticism against kicks in all situations, but I think it's important to point out that most people don't EQ (tsk tsk) for FR issues arising from installation or inherent to the driver itself. The obvious recommendation, then, is to add EQ. But it's not always within the person's budget or, for whatever reason, their design goal.

Anyway, my main point was to tout the virtues of a superior FR, regardless of how you achieve it. In some cases, a dash or upper door install is the better option for achieving that goal.

[MarkZ]

no fundamental disagreement Mark, but perhaps a counterpoint of sorts would be : show me the mounting location in a car that doesn't significantly alter the measured or specified frequency response of a driver? Don't like higher-frequency drivers down low because of blocking/diffraction, how about higher-frequency drivers mounted higher introducing nasty reflections? And which frequency response aberrations are easier to equalize (hint : don't waste too much time trying to invert a comb null)?

Know what I mean? Yes ... it's all a compromise, depending on your tastes and what is significant to you in stereo reproduction. To state that one choice is unequivocally bad for all tastes ... and all vehicles, as Wes points out ... is quite narrow-minded.

It's a valid point, though, that in the "con" category of kickpanel installations, we should add : significant fabrication work required to execute properly. I really suspect that this is often the most significant reason why kick locations are avoided.

Fair enough. I would argue, however, that the FR irregularities introduced by a kick panel installation (generally speaking, of course) tend to be greater than that of comb filtering and reflections and whatnot. Do I have any data to back this assertion up? None at all. ;)

[werewolf]

I think we agree Mark ... or pretty close anyway ;) And after re-reading my post, of course I didn't mean to suggest that you were narrow-minded! :)

[werewolf]

You know it's a fair starting point, I think, when designing a system to ask : what can be fixed electronically, and what needs to be addressed physically? What's in my budget for electronic compensation, and what's in my skill set for fabrication? And as I think we've all agreed, what's important to me in reproduction ... tonality, dynamics, staging, etc ?

[werewolf]

Well this thread kinda died, just before things got interesting ;) So let's spark things up a bit, shall we?

I'll start with a couple of common objections against kickpanel speaker locations, and provide some comments (hoepfully, thought-provoking) for each :

1. My ears are not at my ankles, why put speakers down there?

Several comments against this common objection:

- The objection fails by logical extension. If we only put speakers "where our ears are", we would all be listening to headphones only. In home audio, speakers are often placed (largely) in front of us ... and my ears are on the sides of my head, not the front.

- One may say, as a corollary to the objection ... "well, moving the speakers UP at least gets them closer to your ears." Agreed ... but the problem is, moving speakers closer to your ears is not, by any means, always a smart thing to do. In fact, maximizing pathlengths in the car (while minimizing pathlength differences) is almost always a good thing ... if you care about accurate spatial reproduction.

- The objection fails to recognize how we locate sound sources, and what location cues can ... and can't ... be fixed by aiming and electronic equalization (covered earlier).

2. I don't place speakers on the floor in home audio.

- No, you probably don't. But if you care about accurate spatial reproduction, you most likely maximize pathlengths while minimizing pathlength differences. And it just so happens, that optimizing these constraints ... in a car ... means kickpanel locations (in most vehicles).

- I listen (sometimes) to my beloved Martin Logan Electrostats at home. Does it make me a hypocrite if I don't listen to them in a car? Or ... just perhaps ... are the constraints in a vehicle sometimes a bit different than those in a home?

3. Legs get in the way of the sound.

- Yes they can ... depending on wavelengths, of course ... think diffraction. Remember ... no one is suggesting that all drivers necessarily belong in the kicks :) But the tradeoff in moving drivers up higher is introducing more nasty reflections ... under-dash areas can be treated more readily, to help tame reflections, than glass you must see through.

I think the real mesage of this thread (if i may ... hey i am the one who started it, ya know ;) ) is that car audio is all about compromise. There's no single best way to do anything. Optimization in the face of several variables ... often conflicting ... means compromise. The educated are better positioned to sort through the compromises than the opinionated. ;)

[demon2091tb]

Definentnly agree with compromises, on every level.

I'm still trying to get my 2-5khz area cleaned up, some music hurts, and others just seems to be highly lacking, i can't get it right.

But my image is very high, yet i can't even with EQ seem to figure out whats happening, and ways of correcting it, as EQ cuts only come back to bother me in later songs or instances......Especially upper electric guitar solo's and riffs.....

Just can't seem to chase it down, tweets in pillars offaxis, midranges in kicks offaxis.....just can't get it right.

[raamaudio]

Well said mister big bad wolfman!!! I could not agree more.

----------------

I recommend and have done a number of installs with pillar tweets and mids in the doors due to the compromises of budget constraints, time alloted, room to work with, etc, etc... and been happy with the somewhat limited results. BUT, if I had mids in the kicks, I would have tweeters there as well, as I do in my Tacoma which has a very small cabin and very short pathlenghts but I made it work wonderfully and without using TA(major band aid I always try to avoid by doing the best physical location I can first)

I have had full size tweeters and 7" midbasses in kicks in my Taco since 1989 or so, it can be done;)
-----------------

Rick

[legend94]

Case-in-point : consider that vertical cues don't begin until maybe 1~2kHz. How can the ear possibly localize a dedicated midbass driver (up to ~200Hz, for example), in the vertical plane? Simple answer : it can't. There's a "circle of confusion" regarding the midbass ... as long as a midbass driver is generating the same ITD's to your ears, one location can't be localized, or differentiated, from another. So why would a dedicated midbass need to be physically located in close proximity to a tweet? Perhaps to satisfy your eyes ... because your ears certainly can't tell.



This helped me more than anything on getting my sound stage the way I want it.(its not perfect, but the best its ever been)
I did some reading on this and other things you have written, and I must say its great.
In my two previous cars, I had very modified Q-Logics.......I was going to make custom kicks for the car I have now, but decided against it after reading some of your threads.
I went with 6 inch mids in the doors(which are all the way at the front bottom of the door) and .8 inch dome tweets in the A-pillar(3 inches above the highest point of the dash via suggestions from Rick ;) )
I have yet to do any eq work....just did a -6db gain control and it blends better than I could have hoped. Im sure it will only get better when I work with it more.

So big thanks to Werewolf and Raamaudio :)

[bdubs767]

thats my debate right now, I can't make up my mind wheter to re do my kicks with the hiqophon 0w1-fs and try soem new angles for more height or jsut add the second tweet...

argghhhh

[werewolf]

... by the way, almost exactly none of this originated with me, of course. I've learned a lot from some of the world's best car audio minds :) A great reference is, of course, the AutoSound2000 Tech Briefs (I think that's the official name) from Clark/Navone ... where kickpanel locations were discussed in great detail, over a decade ago.

[legend94]

... by the way, almost exactly none of this originated with me, of course. I've learned a lot from some of the world's best car audio minds :) A great reference is, of course, the AutoSound2000 Tech Briefs (I think that's the official name) from Clark/Navone ... where kickpanel locations were discussed in great detail, over a decade ago.

but you know how to get everyone to understand the facts and theories :) I personally think that is genius!
can these articles and briefs still be found online anywhere?

[legend94]

thats my debate right now, I can't make up my mind wheter to re do my kicks with the hiqophon 0w1-fs and try soem new angles for more height or jsut add the second tweet...

argghhhh


is there anyway you could put one there to test it out before the full install?

[bdubs767]

is there anyway you could put one there to test it out before the full install?


yes nto the scan but another tweeter...but Im lazy lol and really want the ow1 lol

well see what wins lazy or wantign a good install

see car audio is all abotu give and take :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[werewolf]

but you know how to get everyone to understand the facts and theories :) I personally think that is genius!
can these articles and briefs still be found online anywhere?
http://www.autosound2000.com/

[jearhart]

http://www.autosound2000.com/
great more stuff i need to buy. even though i probably wouldnt understand it if i do buy it

[vactor]

not at all. the AS2K stuff is pretty well written and easy to understand. i am not an engineer at all, but see audio very much as a hobby and as a way to get more insight into the world i live in. the tech briefs are invaluable and are a great read for even a complete novice. all you need is a tiny bit of patience and an open mind and they will help a lot in getting some grounding on what makes this stuff work. i still have all of mine from my original subscription more than 10 years later. good stuff! too bad they stopped publishing.

[slow2.2sonoma]

yeh, i am switching to 4.5" revelators since my 7" ES-07's are way to big for kicks lol

[jearhart]

i am not an engineer at all, but see audio very much as a hobby and as a way to get more insight into the world i live in.
funny that you say that cause i am going to school to be an engineer. though with school, my job, and trying to finish my never ending install i dont think i would have time to read it :(

[quality_sound]

i know it's been a loooong time but i just did something like this last weekend and then I saw this thread. i have a set of Dyn 340s with the mid and tweeter in the kicks and I've NEVER been happy with the top end. it had no sparkle unless i turned the tweets WAY up and then it was just poop. well i had a tweet go out and i'm waiting for the replacement. i've has a set of .75" CDT metal domes (more on those later) in the OEM sail panel positions in my Passat that i was going to use as accents to bring the stage up already in place but not wired so i disconnected the other good MD100 and wired the CDTs to the Dyn XO. WOW! I've always thought I didn't like metal domes but these kick the snot out of the MD100s in the kicks. other than them being to bright which I tamed a bit on the XO and turning the mid up (which was a mistake) and then using a shelving filter on the PPI DCX-730 i'm very happy with them. seriously, i'm almost tempted not to reconnect the MD100s. if i do reconnect them i know this, it won't be in the kicks. hell, i'm even tempted to lose the MD140/2s as well and just do a 2-way with the MW160s and one of the tweeter sets.

[chad]

I fully agree on the original post, I have kicks in my Dakota, the arrangement in the civic with the dead pedal and me wanting to keep a stockish look pushed me to doors and sail panels. I like both, yea, they sound different. I LOVE the stage height of having the tweets higher and I DO use TA and it makes a TON of difference on and off. Regrdless of what EQing I used in the truck I could never fake my ears inbto the right stage height, even temporarily using 10 BANDS PER CHANNEL of Orban FULLY PARAMETRIC EQ, that's over $5K of broadcast EQ folks! It still sounds great but the height is not there. My Caddy had kicks and it sounded great, stage height was fine, a little low but fine, and the localization was AMAZING, BIG car though! I'm happy with the Civic, Kicks would hinder my driving expierience WAY too much. But as the OP said, there IS SOOOOOO MUCH to equalizing pathlengths that one should NEVER overlook kick panels as a option.

Chad (Bet that one has a bunch of typos!)

[raamaudio]

I had my time with dyn dome mids and finally gave up on them after getting things right, it took a second set of tweeters in the A pillars to get the height and center image right. I thought the tweets were great on their own but now I know there are far better choices. I am to swamped to go into great detail here but those where the last dome mids I have played with and have no desire to try any others, ever;)

It is so easy to build great imaging kick panels and if to much effort then just going with pillar tweets and door midbasses can do wonders if done right, very very easy to do!

I will never run passives in a car again, I have gotten lucky and had good results but so easy to tune an active setup and cost effective if done right(DIY drivers all the way!)

Rick

[Soundsaround]

10 BANDS PER CHANNEL of Orban FULLY PARAMETRIC EQ

Was it a baby blue 2 rackspace model...#622 maybe? If so, that's a hoot that you ran that in your car! We had one in school, and I remember getting some good electric guitar sounds from it.

[didlybopper]

First of all, let me say that I am very appreciative of the intelligence that you bring to this sport Werewolf. I am also appreciative of how you share that intelligence with the rest of us.

My question, for my own shelfish purposes is, do you prefer kicks or not? I have always had tweet mounted kicks in 2-ways and tweet and mid mounted kicks in three ways. I am currently looking to build kicks for my mids and tweets. I have read this post a couple of times and though many, less knowledgeable than you have strong opinions based on limited information, you don't seem to express a preference that I can see? Care to share?

[werewolf]

see that ... it was my (self-assumed) responsibility to present the pros & cons without expressing my personal preference :)

But here it is. First, the qualification that i have NOT heard the best kickpanel incarnations out there. But I have heard many, and my simple conclusion is this : mid-bass drivers in doors, mids in kicks and tweets up high represent the best compromise for my personal taste :) Tweets down low cause a low stage in my experience, that the best tuning i've heard can't completely eliminate. My attention is simply drawn downward by low-mounted tweeters.

Midrange drivers in kicks makes sense ... logically and sonically, based on how we hear and what localization cues exist in the midrange. All the ITD info discussed in this thread regarding L/R and phantom center cues, for both front seat passengers, is best realized by maximizing pathlengths while minimizing pathlength differences. And when you realize the height insensitivity of our hearing in the midrange, kicks is where the midrange belongs. And in my limited experience, you just can't get stage depth unless you get those drivers in front of you ... as far in front of you as the car allows ... and put them where midrange reflections are best tamed. In other words, not only are L/R ITD cues sub-optimal with mids up high, but the nasty glass reflections also conspire to really limit stage depth.

Physical separation of midrange drivers and tweeters is a great concern to many ... but i think it's mispalced. First, it simply ignores the huge difference between lateral and vertical separation. Second, it ignores vertical insensitivity until treble frequencies (your ear has a real tough time telling where a midrange driver is in the vertical plane, simply because there's no hearing mechanism to locate it vertically ... and if your ears can't tell, who cares what your eyes think). Finally, it does not recognize the issue of understanding the acoustic signal that arrives at your eardrums as being more fundamentally important than how or where it originates. There is simply no direct comparison to home audio, because (as we've explored), there has been no compelling reason to explore ... and exploit ... these relationships in home audio. In short ... why does it matter if the mid and tweet are separated by many xover wavelengths, if the the signal that arrives at your eardrums (and all associated localization cues, horizontally and vertically) can't tell?

So there you have it, in a nutshell. What i've heard agrees with what acoustic principles tell me ... it's all a compromise (taming reflections with tweets up high, for example), but mids in kicks (paying most attention to L/R ITD and stage depth) and tweets up high (where the vertical cues are) is the best compromise I've heard :)

[chad]

Was it a baby blue 2 rackspace model...#622 maybe? If so, that's a hoot that you ran that in your car! We had one in school, and I remember getting some good electric guitar sounds from it.

642B (has the balanced I/O module)

Top blue one...
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Toys/th_100_0169.jpg (http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Toys/100_0169.jpg)

I have another sitting on a shelf ;)

Chad

[MarkZ]

Midrange drivers in kicks makes sense ... logically and sonically, based on how we hear and what localization cues exist in the midrange. All the ITD info discussed in this thread regarding L/R and phantom center cues, for both front seat passengers, is best realized by maximizing pathlengths while minimizing pathlength differences.

Can you explain the first of those two goals? Minimizing pathlength differences is fairly straightforward, but why is maximizing pathlengths important?

[werewolf]

Here's how I look at it Mark ...

Let's first assume that we agree with the premise that we care about both front seat passengers at the same time (that's far from universal, i might add, but it is important to some).

By "pathlength differences", we typically mean the pathlengths measured from a left speaker to a listener, compared to the right speaker to that same listener. Let's say that all we cared about was minimizing pathlength differences ... that's our only criterion for optimization. Well, that might lead to putting a left speaker on the far left corner of the dash, and a right speaker on the center of the dash. Know what I mean? Pathlength differences are minimized ... in fact, PLD's can be made zero :) Optimization satisfied.

But alas, we would have two problems (at least) with such an optimization that seeks to only minimize PLD's. First, the stage will not be as "expansive" as it could be, for even our single listener. Second, the stage will be horrible for our other front seat listener, because minimizing PLD's for a single listener really created a sub-optimal situation for the other listener up front.

So ... minimizing PLD's itself does not, in my opinion, capture all of what we are trying to do. Only in conjunction with the other criterion ... namely, maximizing pathlengths ... do we maximize stage expansion, and tend towards an optimum configuration for both front seat passengers.

Make sense?

[Mr Marv]

Here's how I look at it Mark ...

Let's first assume that we agree with the premise that we care about both front seat passengers at the same time (that's far from universal, i might add, but it is important to some).

By "pathlength differences", we typically mean the pathlengths measured from a left speaker to a listener, compared to the right speaker to that same listener. Let's say that all we cared about was minimizing pathlength differences ... that's our only criterion for optimization. Well, that might lead to putting a left speaker on the far left corner of the dash, and a right speaker on the center of the dash. Know what I mean? Pathlength differences are minimized ... in fact, PLD's can be made zero :) Optimization satisfied.

But alas, we would have two problems (at least) with such an optimization that seeks to only minimize PLD's. First, the stage will not be as "expansive" as it could be, for even our single listener. Second, the stage will be horrible for our other front seat listener, because minimizing PLD's for a single listener really created a sub-optimal situation for the other listener up front.

So ... minimizing PLD's itself does not, in my opinion, capture all of what we are trying to do. Only in conjunction with the other criterion ... namely, maximizing pathlengths ... do we maximize stage expansion, and tend towards an optimum configuration for both front seat passengers.

Make sense?

If I may paraphrase a bit of that for us ADD type readers :D -the farther forward you can put the drivers the better, correct?

[Whiterabbit]

as long as one is able to cope with kickpanel reflections :(

[MarkZ]

Here's how I look at it Mark ...

Let's first assume that we agree with the premise that we care about both front seat passengers at the same time (that's far from universal, i might add, but it is important to some).

By "pathlength differences", we typically mean the pathlengths measured from a left speaker to a listener, compared to the right speaker to that same listener. Let's say that all we cared about was minimizing pathlength differences ... that's our only criterion for optimization. Well, that might lead to putting a left speaker on the far left corner of the dash, and a right speaker on the center of the dash. Know what I mean? Pathlength differences are minimized ... in fact, PLD's can be made zero :) Optimization satisfied.

But alas, we would have two problems (at least) with such an optimization that seeks to only minimize PLD's. First, the stage will not be as "expansive" as it could be, for even our single listener. Second, the stage will be horrible for our other front seat listener, because minimizing PLD's for a single listener really created a sub-optimal situation for the other listener up front.

So ... minimizing PLD's itself does not, in my opinion, capture all of what we are trying to do. Only in conjunction with the other criterion ... namely, maximizing pathlengths ... do we maximize stage expansion, and tend towards an optimum configuration for both front seat passengers.

Make sense?

Sure. But let's assume for a moment that we don't give a rat's ass about the passenger. ;) When that's the case, is it beneficial to maximize pathlengths? Also, would TA sufficiently take care of PLDs if we don't care about the passengers? I can't think of why it wouldn't, except perhaps if the pathlength difference also carried with it a big difference in reflections and dispersion between the two speakers.

[npdang]

I believe that longer pathlengths in a car may create a situation where the intensity of direct sound vs. reflected sound is less severe. That tends to give the impression of more space.

I don't think pathlength differences are all that important, especially with time alignment so readily available. However, having equal pathlengths does help mitigate alot of problems besides time arrival, such as intensity, and ratio of direct to reflected sound at the listening position provided the drivers are aimed similarly toward one position. Which is one of the reasons why I don't like kickpanel installs where the drivers are aimed in a crossfiring manner in an attempt to create a stage for both passengers... in many cases you will have the passenger side speaker aimed nearly at the driver, but the driver side speaker about 45 degrees off-axis from the driver which I don't think creates an optimal listening environment for the driver.

[Whiterabbit]

I think thats what also drives the use of smaller speakers for kickpanel locations.

The crossover points we tend to use combined with smaller drivers let us use aiming positions that can get pretty radical without affecting the *anechoic* frequency response on each side!

much less when both sides are slightly toed in, minimizing the angle/aiming differences per side.

[werewolf]

I agree with everything you guys have just said, with the one caveat being ... if you care about both front seat passengers at the same time, you'll have a sub-optimal solution (stage-wise) if you don't maximize pathlengths and minimize PLD's.

In the extreme (engineers tend to think in limits, ya know) ... minimizng PLD's for a single passenger, without regard to maximizing pathlengths, leads to ... headphones! I know, not exactly ... but you guys know what I mean.

The point about direct vs. reflected energy is a very important one too, i think. And i strongly suspect that's why you will never realize the full potential of stage depth in a car without maximizing pathlengths.

[MarkZ]

I don't understand why the reflected sound would be more exaggerated in the short-pathlength situation. In fact, I would have thought the opposite to be true. If the speaker's closer, it's louder. The reflecting surfaces, on the other hand, may or may not be closer or in general more apt to cause reflections. An example using limits (although not quite as severe as werewolf's example) would be putting your ear right up to the speaker. You'd expect reflections to play less of a role in that case.

Again, I'm not seeing how pathlengths make any difference to a time-aligned level-adjusted system. Reflections should certainly be affected, but it's not clear to me that it's for the worst if the speaker is brought closer to the listener.

[DS-21]

I think thats what also drives the use of smaller speakers for kickpanel locations.

The crossover points we tend to use combined with smaller drivers let us use aiming positions that can get pretty radical without affecting the *anechoic* frequency response on each side!

much less when both sides are slightly toed in, minimizing the angle/aiming differences per side.

In other words, a Bose 901-like ratio of direct to bounced sound. Sounds bloody wonderful to me...

[werewolf]

admittedly, i've confused a couple points ...

As we've explored, one of the downsides of mounting drivers "up high" is that, in a car, "up high" means a more reflective local environment ... more glass up high, no way around it. Whereas kickpanel mounting allows for the possibility of some (perhaps limited, given midrange wavelengths, but not altogether uneffective) treatments of local reflecting surfaces ... under dash, floor, kicks, etc.

So I would say that mounting drivers in the kicks has a better chance of controlling short-time, local reflections. In this regard, kicks minimize PLD's, maximize pathlengths and allow for some amount of reflection control ... all leading to optimized stage width and depth cues. To be sure, the reflection control is more effective for tweets in the kicks, but if you put the tweets up high, while reflections are still something to certainly deal with in the treble, at least you've got the drivers important to vertical localization where you need them.

If anyone has additional info on maximizing pathlengths to help minimize reflected energy (or maximize the ratio of direct-to-reflected), please feel free to post away :)

Yes ... a compromise to be sure. But all factors considered, it's pretty much my favorite :) At least for conventional drivers ... horn-loaded compression drivers is a whole 'nother story, perhaps for another thread. Somebody else can take the ball on that one ... :p

[raamaudio]

Many moons ago I posted the technique on this thread that I learned from some of the grand masters of car audio where you use instead of fight the side glass of the vehicle. It is exceedingly effective it done properly and not hard to do at all. If you have not tried it then do so please, save yourselves some headaches and uncounted hours of rebuilding of living with crap:)

I recieved a set of Rainbow Refs on a Friday afternoon, using the techniques outlined I had a new set of kickpanels done, not fully tuned, and entered a comp on Sunday, I barely slept and did not at all Saturday night.

The owner of a very high end shop, whom I beat soundly just a few weeks earlier at another comp, showed up with a brand new rig, he came out to beat me, I won again and was not even fully tuned. He happend to be a prior world champ back in the prime time of car audio comps, not an easy thing to do. The judge at the comps was a former IASCA president and did know how to judge well enough.

Morel of this story, I did it in my one year of competition, you can too, it works!

Rick

[didlybopper]

OK, what about this. (BTW, I am about to install a 6-1/2" 2-way set.) After reading everything here with all of the pros and cons, it seems like the best solution is to mount my mids and tweets in the kicks as far forward and as wide as I can get them. Then using some sort of audio alchemy that I don't yet know (like delay or phase), mount a second set of supertweeters in the dash facing upwards into the glass, attenuated, and crossed over high (like 8-12khz). Or I could even use the space on my dash where a center goes, again up into the glass. Goal here would be to get all the good things you can get from kicks. And I will add that there has to be something said for having the two speaks right next to each other. I give up the stage height that werewolf talks about and take it right back using the second set of supertweeters, though I take them out of phase to create some air in the process.

Right???? :blush: :(

[MarkZ]

OK, what about this. (BTW, I am about to install a 6-1/2" 2-way set.) After reading everything here with all of the pros and cons, it seems like the best solution is to mount my mids and tweets in the kicks as far forward and as wide as I can get them. Then using some sort of audio alchemy that I don't yet know (like delay or phase), mount a second set of supertweeters in the dash facing upwards into the glass, attenuated, and crossed over high (like 8-12khz). Or I could even use the space on my dash where a center goes, again up into the glass. Goal here would be to get all the good things you can get from kicks. And I will add that there has to be something said for having the two speaks right next to each other. I give up the stage height that werewolf talks about and take it right back using the second set of supertweeters, though I take them out of phase to create some air in the process.

Right???? :blush: :(

Problem is that you have vertical localization cues coming from both up high and down low because your "supertweeter" xover point is pretty high. That's not to say it hasn't been done with success though. A supertweeter can often be used to drag the height upwards. I've done it many moons ago, and kinda liked it. A little.

Also, if you want to go the supertweeter route, you'd be better off IMO using a dome mid or even a widebander instead of the regular tweeter -- but then you've just made it a traditional three-way. :)

[raamaudio]

I had to resort to using a second set of tweets up high when I ran Dyn dome mids and tweets in tiny kicks because I just could not get the height up and center image right with those domes not matter what I tried and I tried many many things.

I did not set this up as a supertweeter and do not think that is really needed but I do believe you need to use the same as down below and let the lower one play it's normal full range.

I personally have not had much luck with mids in the kicks and tweets in the pillars, if I go with kicks I like them together better but I have to say I have not experimented with that much so maybe I will again someday. If I do go with kickpanel mids/tweets, then I prefer to also use the doors for midbass and to keep the crossover freq from mid to midbass around 150hz, much higher and it starts to bring down the height but can widen the stage(I spent many hours tweaking my installs in that area, slope and freq are critical for all drivers in a system)

I used the same tweets, same amp brand(McIntosh at the time), same processor brand(Zapco) and they worked best at 5kHz and up but at a very low output level, crossfiring in the A pillar.

This worked well enough to score significantly higher at one of comps mentioned in my last post(11 higher in SQ over a prior world champ)

MAJOR POINT: I may have overlooked it posted here so I want to make sure this is at least tried by everyone with problems and even those that think they do not have any issues.

DASH Mats do wonders in every install I have ever tried one in. Once you get things to start working pretty well(in some cases before you reach that point may be required) lay out some towels, smoothly, on the dash and take a good listen. After that you will most likely want a dash mat even though you may not like the way it looks. Another alternative is to upholster the dash which can be a major pain in the arse but done right can look great.

Mentioned before but for those that may not read every post etc, I consider TA a bandaid to be used very sparingly if at all. Do all you can to get the system setup physically and tuned properly first, then a tiny bit of TA can be tried. I have not heard a single system with much TA used that I cared for, sure you can correct arrival times, get better imaging, etc, but to my ears it sacrifices far to much of the overall musicality of the system, loses it's life, just not worth the trade off.



Rick

[didlybopper]

I appreciate the tip on the dash mat. I have been thinking as I look at a lot of new cars, they are puttiing some cool looking diffraction materials on the dashes, particularly on the part that goes over the instrument cluster.

I have a hard time wrapping my mind around TA being a bad thing. I understand that, used in lieu of proper installation techhniques, it would be less than desirable. But I can't see how it is bad for the sound not to arrive at the proper time?

[Whiterabbit]

its bad for a two seat car, no way to argue against that. you fix arrival cues for the driver, and the passenger gets his sound to the far right. ver, very annoying, very fatiguing. You end up turning the music up to show off the stereo and your passenger is more than unimpressed, he asks you to turn it down because it sounds bad and is uncomfortable.

less obvious is how it can damage sound for the driver. But TA changes your phase response, and getting the arrival times right can mess with driver phase, knocking sections of the response out of center just as you are centering others!

[tankertoad]

Back to the question from the last page. What if all you're working with is a two-way comp set? If the midbass is best in the door (there's little volume low end extension in a kick panel) and the tweet in the A-pillar for staging, does that preclude the use of kicks unless you're running a 2.5-5" mid as part of a three way set? This is generalized of course, as some vehicles' interior acoustics are not as suitable for kicks.

For example, I'm deciding which way to go for a Porsche 911 install. The stock locations are shown in the attached photo. I'll likely have a four channel amp. I may have access to some inexpensive custom kicks so fab cost is not an issue. So, I can either run a 6.5/tweet in the stock door locations active and bi-amped with the help in EQ/xover/TA as required. Or spring for a three way set (a couple hundred dollars more), put the dome mid in the kicks and the tweet/midbass in the stock door spots but use the included passive crossover. A-pillar is too thin and don't want to touch it.

Which is the better bet? Disregard the door speaker pod and large cone mid in second photo (just check out where the kicks would be in relation to everything else).

[chuyler1]

The 911 is a driver's car. I would hesitate to put anything near my feet in one of those. Modifying the interior, even if it is an improvement usually hurts the resale value on such a car. Be careful what you do and try to make it reversible if possible. I think a mid and tweet in the door would be fine. The amount of effort it will take to put a midrange in the kickpod won't really be worth it...after all, the real music comes from behind you.

[Whiterabbit]

Id say experimentation is key. If you decide for the 2 way set, I'd probably try the tweeter in the kickpanel to see if you can improve the stage versus a door location. Never can tell though, maybe door is the place to be!

But to generalize, I'd say proper excecution will trump equipment choice, and if you had the option to install the 2 way set well or kinda cram in the three way set, youd be better off well installing the 2 way set. Or vice versa. what you can do, do well, and use electrical compensation to get you the last bit.

[Whiterabbit]

on an unrelated note, it looks like the 911 door can fit a large format tweeter.

[npdang]

its bad for a two seat car, no way to argue against that. you fix arrival cues for the driver, and the passenger gets his sound to the far right. ver, very annoying, very fatiguing. You end up turning the music up to show off the stereo and your passenger is more than unimpressed, he asks you to turn it down because it sounds bad and is uncomfortable.

less obvious is how it can damage sound for the driver. But TA changes your phase response, and getting the arrival times right can mess with driver phase, knocking sections of the response out of center just as you are centering others!
I think that's a bit exaggerated. No worse Imho than saying creating a center image for both seats makes it impossible to achieve good presentation in either one.

I don't see how all things being equal time alignment is any different than having equidistant drivers, with respect to phase.

[Whiterabbit]

I fear saying it that way will fool some folks into thinking they can put the drivers anywhere without any regard to alternate factors such as reflection and other environmental control and merely compensate by using time alignment to achieve pleasing sonic results.

[60ndown]

good reading ...thanks

[ArcL100]

you fix arrival cues for the driver, and the passenger gets his sound to the far right. ver, very annoying, very fatiguing. You end up turning the music up to show off the stereo and your passenger is more than unimpressed, he asks you to turn it down because it sounds bad and is uncomfortable.

You must be talkin' some pretty serious TA. Also, sounds like the effects of poor xover/eq tuning then just ta. Maybe if you put speakers in oem spots or somewhere with zero regard to soundstage/imaging. IME I had to explicitly inform my passengers as to what to listen for and what was going on with the slight TA I run. Really, it doesn't sound much worse then how right/left side biased oem comes. I guess YRMV.

-aaron

[60ndown]

I think that's a bit exaggerated. No worse Imho than saying creating a center image for both seats makes it impossible to achieve good presentation in either one.

I don't see how all things being equal time alignment is any different than having equidistant drivers, with respect to phase.


surely the acoustics/performance will change completely if there is a passenger in the passenger seat or not?

we either have to tune for someone there or someone not there?

[Whiterabbit]

surely the acoustics/performance will change completely if there is a passenger in the passenger seat or not?

we either have to tune for someone there or someone not there?

Thats tough. One of the local guys says his stage shifts every time he clutches his car. Mine doesnt do that. Not sure what the differences are (my kick drivers are filtered very high too) between our cars, but we both have kickpanels.

so my car doesnt change drastically with passengers or with leg position within reason. another design or car might be more prone to such issues.

[fuscobal]

[QUOTE=werewolf;53852]Case-in-point : consider that vertical cues don't begin until maybe 1~2kHz. How can the ear possibly localize a dedicated midbass driver (up to ~200Hz, for example), in the vertical plane? Simple answer : it can't. There's a "circle of confusion" regarding the midbass ... as long as a midbass driver is generating the same ITD's to your ears, one location can't be localized, or differentiated, from another. So why would a dedicated midbass need to be physically located in close proximity to a tweet? Perhaps to satisfy your eyes ... because your ears certainly can't tell.QUOTE]

Then how come sometimes I hear notes playing from my midbass drivers monted in the doors and angled to the opposite lateral windows ? Tweets are on the mirror's side, midranges on the dash firing up. The midbasses LPF is
250Hz@18db/oct. They are perfectly time aligned in the center of the windshield like the others with pink noise so on 90% of the tracks they cannot be localized, exactly as you say. Still on some notes ( lower piano for example) they separate from mids and tweets and i can feel them coming from down, but not down on a vertical plane. They are mostly coming from the left midbass wich is closer ! I must mention that I damped the door with about 5 dynamat extreme layers, 0.5" closed cell foam on outer panel, dynaxorb in the back of the drivers, brax x-vibration on plastic faces of the doors and some mineral wool between plastic face and inner metal skin. Could I still hear the backwaves inside the enclosure ? What's to be done ? Is there any other material to better absorb frequencies lower than 250Hz and resist water ?

[werewolf]

Let's review : for midbass frequencies, up to 250Hz, the ear localizes by inter-aural time differences only (ITD). The wavelengths are way larger than our outer ears (meaning that there's no outer-ear cues to help), and even larger than our heads (meaning that there's no head-shadowing to help). So sound sources that are located in a way to create the same ITD to our ears cannot be distinguished. The simple geometry of this conclusion drives what I've called the "circle of confusion" ... a circle centered on the axis of our ears. Any midbass on this circle will generate the same ITD as any other ... hence, localization/differentiation on this circle is physically impossible. A sad disappointment, I'm sure, to those with a romantic fascination with point-source drivers operating from the lower midbass through the upper treble ;)

What can ruin the "illusion"? The simple answer is : if your driver is playing or creating higher frequencies than intended, the driver may be easily localized. Here's the common culprits :

- xover not steep enough (looks like you've got that one covered)
- harmonic distortion from the driver
- panel or enclosure vibrations

My advice is this : turn off all other drivers in your system, except the midbass in question. Play pink noise (or maybe even sinewave sweep) at a reasonably high volume. Get some type of spectrum analyzer (beg, borrow or steal), and look for frequencies higher than expected. Solve those problems first, then report back.

[jearhart]

if you can feel the midbass on your leg it will ruin your stage. you are forgeting that we have other senses that can trick our brain, or keep it from being tricked.

if you can see where your speakers are it can be harder for you to trust your ears instead of your eyes. same with feeling the vibrations on you leg. if your eyes and your leg are telling you that the midbass is coming from the door. it is impossible for your ears to override that.

[werewolf]

^^^ fair point

[fuscobal]

I totally agree with you jearhart but my ears are pretty well trained. Seeing the drivers at my feet certainly won't influence my ears. Regarding the vibrations, i cannot feel them on my legs at all so this isn't the case either. It must be what werewolf said, either vibrations of the panels/resonances inside the enclosure, either harmonic distortion of the driver. I already damped the doors pretty well and when I had 2-ways and the midbass was playing 60-2500 I felt an obvious improvement of the midrange. Still, the closed cell foam might not be efficient anymore under 250Hz. As the different studies show for low frequencies mineral wool and wood are better but they are not water proof so what can i use inside my doors ? I will also soon try what werewolf said and disconnect tweeters and midranges to measure the response of only the midbass drivers !

[Whiterabbit]

As the different studies show for low frequencies mineral wool and wood are better but they are not water proof so what can i use inside my doors ?

Metal and glass and fiberglass. The "constraining" layers used in deadeners.

And tactile vibrations drive me insane in a car. Just nuts. I think its just as important to eliminate those vibrations along with all other acoustic upgrades. And I think thats important with kicks just as it is with doorspeakers.

[fuscobal]

Metal and glass and fiberglass. The "constraining" layers used in deadeners.

And tactile vibrations drive me insane in a car. Just nuts. I think its just as important to eliminate those vibrations along with all other acoustic upgrades. And I think thats important with kicks just as it is with doorspeakers.

Can u explain the methodology in depth please ? How would u use metal, glass and fiberglass inside the door ?

[azngotskills]

Thanks for all the information guys and I have learned quite alot...BTW i think i saw pics of tweet and mid install by werewolf so i think i know where he stands :) I have a few questions:

1) Does a tweeter have certain characteristics/specs that are indicative of better performance in kicks vs a-pillar or is it mostly vehicle specific?
2) When aiming the kicks, should they be symmetrical to the center or bias to favor the driver?
3) Is there a general rule to whether large or small format tweeters are better suited for the kicks?

[werewolf]

Thanks for all the information guys and I have learned quite alot...BTW i think i saw pics of tweet and mid install by werewolf so i think i know where he stands :) I have a few questions:

1) Does a tweeter have certain characteristics/specs that are indicative of better performance in kicks vs a-pillar or is it mostly vehicle specific?
2) When aiming the kicks, should they be symmetrical to the center or bias to favor the driver?
3) Is there a general rule to whether large or small format tweeters are better suited for the kicks?
these are great questions, no easy answers as far as i know.

I've always maintained that limited off-axis response for tweets in A-Pillars makes sense, for these two fundamental reasons:

1. In the treble, the ear localizes only by IID (Inter-Aural Intensity Differences) only (of course, the monaural height cues are in the treble as well, based on our symmteric ... hence, monaural ... outer ear shapes). This is true because wavelengths are simply too short compared to the distance between our ears, so phase/time differences between the ears are confusing. Fortunately, head shadowing plays a strong role to introduce IID in the absence of ITD. What this means is that attenuation of the near-side driver is expected to be a good thing for accurate stage reproduction, when the listener is not centrally located. And limited off-axis response will provide just that, for A-Pillar tweets.

2. Windshield reflections ... expected to be a terrible thing in the treble, where comb nulls from relfections will be very apparent. Again, limited off-axis response should be a good thing to help this fundamental issue.

So I've always thought that limited off-axis response is a good thing for A-Pillar tweets ... to help combat both side bias and windshield reflections. And indeed, some good examples of successful implementations exist : the Focal TLR comes to mind, as a tweet designed specifically for A-Pillar mounting, with those phase plug thingies :) But it seems that there are several good examples of A-Pillar installations that don't quite obey these rules ... so experimentation is definitely in order.

Just remember that off-axis response of any driver is a strong function of driver diameter, a weak function of driver shape, and a non-function of just about everything else (unless some physical mechanisms are introduced ... that would be effective at the appropriate wavelengths, of course, and not just marketing gimmix). So I wouldn't hesistate to suggest that most 1" dome tweets will have similar polar responses, and be more limited or attenuated than most 3/4" dome tweets. In other words, if you want wide dispersion in your tweet (not necessarily a good thing for A-Pillar mounting), think smaller diameter. Of course, smaller diameter typically means it won't play as low ... it's all a compromise :) Have i mentioned that before?

[AcuraCl1]

Ok, so lets say I am using a 3 way set. 6 1/2 more like 7" midbass in the door, and for midrange in kicks, and tweets in pillars, would that work just fine as the frequencys would be:

Midbass 30/50hz to around 150/250 hz,
Midrange around 150/250 hz up to 5khz
Tweeter 5khz and up
Sub around 50hz and down

or would I better off putting the tweeters down in the kicks with the midrange. Only problem is that I do drive a 6 speed.

[werewolf]

Ok, so lets say I am using a 3 way set. 6 1/2 more like 7" midbass in the door, and for midrange in kicks, and tweets in pillars, would that work just fine as the frequencys would be:

Midbass 30/50hz to around 150/250 hz,
Midrange around 150/250 hz up to 5khz
Tweeter 5khz and up
Sub around 50hz and down

or would I better off putting the tweeters down in the kicks with the midrange. Only problem is that I do drive a 6 speed.
my advice is to keep these general points in mind :

- you can probably get by with a ~4" midrange, if the low bandpass point is in the neighborhood of ~200Hz or higher. And that ~4" midrange probably has decent off-axis response (remember ... great off-axis response is not necessarily what you want, to combat the side-bias of a non-centrally located listener) ... well, up to 3 or 4kHz anyway, maybe not 5kHz. Bottom line : a kick panel mounting can be pretty darn un-obtrusive, with a small midrange where aiming may not be that critical.

- experimentation is your best friend ... especially with tweeter placement!

[AcuraCl1]

Thanks, I am using the Hybrid Audio Legatia 3 way set. The 3" will go as low as 140hz, but likes to be higher around the 250 range and can go up to 10 khz, where the new 4" midrange, can go as low as 100hz and all the way up to 17khz. I am hoping the new 4" midrange is available in a few weeks.

[MarkZ]

Ok, so lets say I am using a 3 way set. 6 1/2 more like 7" midbass in the door, and for midrange in kicks, and tweets in pillars, would that work just fine as the frequencys would be:

Midbass 30/50hz to around 150/250 hz,
Midrange around 150/250 hz up to 5khz
Tweeter 5khz and up
Sub around 50hz and down

or would I better off putting the tweeters down in the kicks with the midrange. Only problem is that I do drive a 6 speed.

There's more to consider than just imaging, though. I see two potential difficulties with your setup that aren't addressed with this thread. First of all, if your midbass driver is starting at 30-50Hz, it'd best be characterized as a general bass driver. There's really not much power content below 30-50Hz. It's really tough to even out a 7" driver in the really low region (30-50Hz) while at the same time minimizing peaks up above 100Hz, IMO. So it's a tough proposition without some heavy EQing. I'd suggest bumping up that xover point at least half an octave.

Second, good luck finding a good midrange driver that can handle between 150Hz and 5kHz. That's too wide a band for a speaker to be able to reproduce ideally. So if you're going to the trouble of using a 3-way, and the further trouble of making custom kicks or whatever, you should probably rethink your xover points to fully take advantage of such a setup. But as werewolf said, experimentation is your friend.

[AcuraCl1]

Thanks, I will have to experiment like werewolf said. My midranges are wide band drivers.

[fuscobal]

Another interesting question around trebles would be based on the 2 options we have for setting a good focus and stage :

1) Setting the driver's side tweeter a little more off-axis than the other one
2) Setting a lower level to the closer tweeter from the driver's side

Now. Let's say we have 2 identical tweeters that play from 2Khz to 20Khz. Let's say their dispersion starts at 5Khz. Then, the difference between the 2 options would be :

1) The driver's side tweeter starts to roll off steeper than the other one from 5Khz up
2) The driver's side tweeter will have the same frequency response curve but X db lower

What's the correct way of using the 2 options in order to have the best soundstage possible ?

[azngotskills]

I dont know if this is ok but i thought that it would be a nice read in addition to this thread....If not please PM me and i will edit the post :)

http://forum.elitecaraudio.com/showthread.php?threadid=142151&pagenumber=1

[iyamwutiam]

Yes- very nice thread.
A few questions for the guru's - if they may be so kind to answer:
1. In my car the difference between kick panel and stock is not huge. stock/possible kick (for midranges)(driver's side)
45/48 and 52/59. So I guess (I know people say 10" or more is an issue - what would be the MAJOR difference given we are talking like a foot for something that moves 1100ft/sec.??

2. Gary Biggs Regal write up -kind of violates a lot rules. Yes -he is in kicks - but he is very dependent on using reflections (which I though wa a bad thing?)

3. If what you are saying is correct - then it is entirely possible to put midbasses in the rear deck?

Thanks for the input

[thehatedguy]

Yeah Jeff, what's up with the rear deck mounted midbasses :D :) :p ?

[Fozz]

You can mount midbass in the back with good rusults. The problem putting anything behind you is generally resonance and frequency response. The higher the frequency the easier it will be to locate, and if there are ANY resosances in the rear of the car your brain will automatically assume the sound is generated from behind you. I suggest very heavy slopes on your subs. A 50Hz crossover point sint much good at 12db per octave. You will still be getting lots of information above that frequency.

Reflections are not a bad thing. The trick is to use them properly.

My view on Kicks is that in most car the PL will be closer so your car should sound better

"iyamwutiam"
If you PL are as good as you say (10" or less is very good), you should have no trouble getting decent staging in your car. I've found that most cars have trouble getting within 12"PL difference. I've worked extremely hard to get my car where it is today, and there is still a 6" difference from one side to the other. You are correct in that sound moves pretty fast. But any sound waves that are smaller then the width of your head will be seriously affected by PL differences. Just take your home system and sit perfectly between the speakers. Then start to move to one side a bit at a time. You will see the change right away. Also try simply adjusting the right/left balance control, but still sit in the center. Amplitude is also a very important part of proper staging.

[LiquidClen]

tag

[Levi]

Hi all,

I am new to the forum. I have a 3-way 165V3 Focal speakers installed on my 2003 Honda Accord EX 4dr. I have a 6.5" woofer installed in the door, a 6.5" mid on the kick panels via Q-logic q-pods and tweeters on the the dashboard. I tried various tweeter placement including the a-pilars and by-far, I like the the sound from the dashboard.

Cheers,
Levi


Let's say you are installing a system in Honda Accord 2003 EX 4 dr- where would you put the speakers?
I choose this car because I have seen both kick and doors done.

[drake78]

Tweet frequencies are very directional. This is an awesome thread. I am glad it resurfaced again.

[GlasSman]

Me too.:D

[Rockin'Z28]

All of the successful renditions of tweeter kicks I have heard were in show-vehicles that had the seats pushed back so far you couldn't drive the car. ...

And since you can't utilize the lower range of a 6.5" driver mounted in a kick, you might as well stick to 3", 4", and 5.25" drivers which fit better anyway.

For some of us, you can't push the seat back far enough. I don't think I've ever driven a car with the seat anywhere but all the way back. Of course, being 2 meters tall helps.:)

I wish I would have read this before I spent all my time cramming 6 1/2" mids in my kicks. They did seem pretty large, now I hope I can get them to sound good.:(

[Thumper26]

at the worst, you'll have to cut a hole in the back to vent it, maybe get a couple of membranes and put in there.

the biggest gripe i have with tweeters in the kicks is that your leg covers them up a bit.

personally, if i was going to do what you did, i'd just buy a set of Q-Forms and deaden the hell out of them...but then again, i'm lazy. :p ;)

[SQ_Bronco]

the biggest gripe i have with tweeters in the kicks is that your leg covers them up a bit.

the biggest drawback to kick panel tweeter installations, imho (and no, that's not an intentionally inverted dome):

Sad thing is, I have no idea when I did it and have no one to blame but myself (usually happens on the passenger side). At the very least it makes a good argument for using silk domes in kicks...

[azngotskills]

ouch :(...grills are definitely part of my install

[Rockin'Z28]

at the worst, you'll have to cut a hole in the back to vent it, maybe get a couple of membranes and put in there.

the biggest gripe i have with tweeters in the kicks is that your leg covers them up a bit.

personally, if i was going to do what you did, i'd just buy a set of Q-Forms and deaden the hell out of them...but then again, i'm lazy. :p ;)

I actually considerd using Q-Forms, but after reading all the stuff in this forum I just had to try something myself. I've learned a ton of stuff, including a lot of stuff not to do.

I think I'll drill a big hole in the underside and let it vent into the carpet (like, 3/4") I also figured to stuff them with polyfill.

What did you mean by putting a couple of membranes in?? I've not heard of that before.

[azngotskills]

I dont think a hole 3/4" would really be big enough to make a notice difference...maybe 2-3" would be better. The membranes he is referring to are used for aperiodic enclosure, read the tutorial by audionutz on ECA :)

[SQ_Bronco]

I dont think a hole 3/4" would really be big enough to make a notice difference...maybe 2-3" would be better. The membranes he is referring to are used for aperiodic enclosure, read the tutorial by audionutz on ECA :)

To help some, ECA == elitecaraudio.com. Here's a link to the tutorial:

http://www.elitecaraudio.com/article.php?sid=18

Here is a better tutorial on how to tune an AP enclosure:

http://www.subwoofertools.com/portal.asp?CategoryID=13&ContentID=5

Note that I don't necessarily agree with chuyler1's comment- it's very driver dependent, and you can do a lot with EQ (or if you are really ambitious, linkwitz transforms (http://sound.westhost.com/linkwitz-transform.htm)).

[Rockin'Z28]

To help some, ECA == elitecaraudio.com. Here's a link to the tutorial:

http://www.elitecaraudio.com/article.php?sid=18

Here is a better tutorial on how to tune an AP enclosure:

http://www.subwoofertools.com/portal.asp?CategoryID=13&ContentID=5

Note that I don't necessarily agree with chuyler1's comment- it's very driver dependent, and you can do a lot with EQ (or if you are really ambitious, linkwitz transforms).

That was an interesting article. It doesn't seem that I can use an AP enclosure, he is very clear that it must vent into a different chamber than the listening area. Since these are in the kicks, I don't think I can create a clear path to the outside without compromising the vehicle structure. But it looks like a fun project to try.:)

My enclosure for the 6 1/2's is a tube of speaker rings (8" OD/6" ID) that is 2 1/4" long. I don't want to put a single 2" hole through the wall, but it seems that multiple smaller holes might work. I think I'll wire them up and leave 'em installed temporarily. That way I can try some different things.

My HU has a 7-band parametric equalizer built in, so I'll play with that. The amp is an older PPI, and doesn't have much EQ built in.

Ok, I don't want to steal this thread, so I'm done. Thanks for the advice. I'm looking forward to trying some of these ideas.

[Levi]

I must agree, AP enclosure article is an interesting one. Unfortunately, it is not practical for me to externally install an AP enclosure. I may just have to stuff the Q-panel.

[pwnt by pat]

I talked to someone (audioholic I think? - a respected competitor nonetheless) who was of the opinion that the chamber being vented into was not size dependant as long as it was bigger than the drivers chamber. That means that if you make an AP kick, as long as you're isolating the back wave, you're golden.

[dftnz7]

So to just vent can you just make a hole in the pod, or do you need to cut thru the metal? And if so, can it just be into the A pillar or does it actually have to vent outside? I am NOT cutting a hole all the way through the body...

[azngotskills]

Well it depends on your car and how far you want to go or need to go. You could vent into the carpet, you can vent into the open body panel, or you can vent all the way to the outside.

[dftnz7]

Can an AP into an open A pillar, which is effectively a larger and separate compartment from the pod/cabin work okay?