DiyMobileAudio.com Car Stereo Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I recently helped a friend complete an install using an 880prs and a set of focal comps. My friend listens to a lot of punk and rock which is definitely not working out well.

During tuning, I found that the Focal mids do not extend very high at all. 2000hz @ 12db is the highest I can possibly go. Even that is pushing it. After that, things start sounding very harsh.

The tweeters are also very harsh, I have them at 4000hz with 18db slope, and everything short of a perfect recording sounds really harsh. I've had to eq the crap out of it to get it to be acceptable with a good rock recording, let alone something that isn't recorded very well.

I feel that the huge underlap between the mid and the tweeter is making the sound a bit "bose-ish", and was looking @ swapping out either the mid or the tweeter.

I'm trying to determine whether I should reccomend swapping out the mid or the tweeter. I feel that if I reccomend a wider band mid, then the tweeter still may be harsh, but I am afraid that anything short of a large format tweeter will not be able to extend low enough.

I have some experience with the Seas neo's, and found that they start getting harsh at ~ 3khz with some "rough" recordings. Are those still my best bet if I can't convince my friend to go with a large format tweeter?

Any help would be much appreciated.

Here are the spec sheets for the Polyglass comps if it helps.
http://www.focal-america.com/extras/specs/polyglass/TNB_spec.pdf (2nd rev. Friend has 1st rev)
http://www.focal-america.com/extras/specs/polyglass/165V1x.pdf
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,357 Posts
I had the same sort of listening experience with those, and did not have the detail that you provided.

Had the same problem with some Infinity comps in 1990. Could not get them to meet no matter what I did. Got me off the Infinity train.

I have used those SEAS but not in that application - low power, first order. Not sure they would like it.

If you have depth, I would consider something chambered, but I suspect you don't. Where is it mounted?

If you want to go all the way to 2K, my experience is doing that with unchambered tweets is with Dyne, Morel MT23 and above, DLS UP1C, and the old a/d/s/.

I think that Focal has some high-end tweeters that play down that low, but I've never used them. Any chance of getting a set of those? Might fit the same HW, as a bonus.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
VP - Thanks for the response, it's very appreciated.

The tweeters are in the sail panels by the pillars. They're shooting across at each other at a slight angle.

I do have a bit of depth, what kind of chambered tweeters can you sugguest? I was looking at the Morel MT23's, but I'd like to keep it under 100 dollars per.

It seems to me that you agree that finding a tweeter that extends lower will do more to resolve my issues than finding a mid that extends higher?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,357 Posts
I do have a bit of depth, what kind of chambered tweeters can you sugguest? I was looking at the Morel MT23's, but I'd like to keep it under 100 dollars per.
I think well of the DLS UP1C (comes with the UP5 and 6 and is available seperately). Not sealed-chambered but has an aperiodic loaded deal on the back. Price I don't know OTTOMH.

What do the Hertz Space tweeters run? They have two different size chambers depending on install requirements... I haven't listened to them critically - any one have any ideas?

It seems to me that you agree that finding a tweeter that extends lower will do more to resolve my issues than finding a mid that extends higher?
There are multiple schools of thought here.

If this guy cranks it - and from your description of his musical tastes, I think it's a safe assumption - a tweeter that plays lower has some significant drawbacks as well as some advantages.

The advantages I like are elevated soundstage (esp. vocals) and less "hunting" back and forth across the crossover point in the treble. In my experience, the guitars stay rooted rather than floating up and down, and the female vocals retain a higher position.


The disadvantages include problems at the higher listening levels. Tweeters have lower excursion-limited power handling, the lower the xover point you use. Also, if the HF amp gets clipped, *I think* that the tweeter might be at greater risk - but this is an unsubstantiated suspicion.

So there are some risks.

But my experience with mids that have GOOD off-axis response to 4K in a lower-door location is poor - I haven't needed many, and I haven't found any that I can remember. Most of my systems the last few years have been using OEM locations and doing the best I could within that restriction - so I haven't needed this solution (having gone the other route).

As has been pointed out by others, the bigger the driver diameter, the more beaming occurs at higher frequencies, like the ones you are looking for.

That said, it is entirely possible that someone here can suggest a 165mm driver with better, smoother output in the band you want, with less objectionable breakup modes, than that one. (It's just not me - 'cause I don't know :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I think well of the DLS UP1C (comes with the UP5 and 6 and is available seperately). Not sealed-chambered but has an aperiodic loaded deal on the back. Price I don't know OTTOMH.
Thanks, I'll take a peek into these guys.

The advantages I like are elevated soundstage (esp. vocals) and less "hunting" back and forth across the crossover point in the treble. In my experience, the guitars stay rooted rather than floating up and down, and the female vocals retain a higher position.
I couldn't agree more. I think that this is a HUGE advantage to going with a large format. I've done a few installs with the Dayton RS28A's, and the imaging is excellent. All vocals remain centered. I totally agree with you that with smaller format tweeters with bad extension, the vocals tend to wander around depending on the pitch of the voice. You've given me some good things to think about. Thanks very much.

Anyone tried any of the cheaper Morels? MDT-22 comes to mind. Specs show some good lower extension.
Parts Express:Morel MDT-22 1" Neodymium Tweeter
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Azngotskillz just some morel mdt-39s up for sale. Picked them up. Guess we'll see how they do.

Seems that not many ppl have experience with the morels on here. Seas neos seem to be everywhere though :) Got my fingers crossed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
I have Focal Polyglass myself, and yes, they are kinda sharp on a neutral HU, and especially if you play a lot of electronic music, like I do.

I keep going back to this old Pioneer HU, and I just switched back today. The reason why I like it, is because it softens the high frequences in a very "silky", elegant way, which combined with the Focals strong tweeters makes a round, but still very detailed, sound!

The Pioneer HU has one of those oldschool CD lowpass filters which is used to slightly silence (not filter out!) the top frequencies "digital noise" of digital audio, without ruining the sound or drowning the top completely. I think it is an analog filter rather than a digital one. This is perfect for the Focals. Cymbals now sound like cymbals in stead of metal shrapnel, et cetera. The top gets a very elegant, silky texture, and details still get through because the Focals are so responsive on high frequencies.

In other words, Focal tweeters are not poor quality imo, but they need some work. Get yourself a HU that allows you to tweak the top - and find the perfect slope, the perfect frequency, and the perfect amount of dampening, and you will have a very nice setup, I think.

If you do something similar via the crossovers, you may get other problems, as mentioned above, but it could also be worth a try.


On another note: I am buying a Clarion DXZ785 now, and if it doesn't let me do what my Pioneer does above, I will probably either replace the tweeters, like you are considering, or go back to the Pioneer deck - again. I totally agree - unprocessed, they are too harsh. Very tiring for the ears.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks for the response Partysnatcher, good to know that I don't have defective ears.

the 880 does have a decent EQ, and I've tried EQing out the harshness in many ways. Often times when I do, I end up with a more empty or muffled sort of sound. I think a lot of the harshness comes from the point of overlap or lackthereof between the mid and tweeter's capabilities.

The filter system you have sounds really nice. What model pioneer is it?

I'll be sure and let you know how the morels work out. I have some high hopes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Thanks for the response Partysnatcher, good to know that I don't have defective ears.

the 880 does have a decent EQ, and I've tried EQing out the harshness in many ways. Often times when I do, I end up with a more empty or muffled sort of sound. I think a lot of the harshness comes from the point of overlap or lackthereof between the mid and tweeter's capabilities.

The filter system you have sounds really nice. What model pioneer is it?
Agreed, that's what I get when I use "normal" (digital) EQ on the highs too; an unsatisfying muffling effect that maybe makes the harshness less annoying, but you definitely feel you are losing something.

Hard to describe what this does, but the clarity and "finesse" in the high area is still there, while the harshness is gone. It's like they carefully softened the areas that make the sound harsh and tiring (which according to a friend is the frequencies close to the Focal tweeter crossover frequency).

The Pioneer model is DEH-P7600MP, and the filter effect is not a "feature", it is part of the stock sound. I'm guessing it's probably one of those analogue DAC filters they used to make CDs sound less harsh, when CDs first came out with sucky DACs. The effect just happens to fit the Focal tweeters! :D I think it would be too dull with less powerful tweeters.

The HU is not really perfect, outside that, and I've been looking for a replacement. ;( I reinstalled the Pioneer yesterday after selling the Kenwood unit I've been using in stead, and the allround sound of this Pioneer has surprised me by making me enthusiastic about many of my songs again.

I'll be sure and let you know how the morels work out. I have some high hopes.
ok! that will be interesting to follow. :) I'm really curious about Morels in general.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
ok! that will be interesting to follow. :) I'm really curious about Morels in general.

Got the Morels in there last week. Sound really really nice. I have them playing down to 2.5khz at a 12db polarity flipped, and the polyglass mids at 2.0khz at 12db. They seem to mate very well, and really eliminated some of the harsh ringing that I was experiencing with the Focal tweets. I also noticed that vocals stay much more steady instead of hunting back and forth since I am able to cross over lower and have the tweets play a bit more detail, keeping the stage higher.

Very happy with them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Got the Morels in there last week. Sound really really nice. I have them playing down to 2.5khz at a 12db polarity flipped, and the polyglass mids at 2.0khz at 12db. They seem to mate very well, and really eliminated some of the harsh ringing that I was experiencing with the Focal tweets. I also noticed that vocals stay much more steady instead of hunting back and forth since I am able to cross over lower and have the tweets play a bit more detail, keeping the stage higher.

Very happy with them.
Are you running active or passive? If passive, are you running the Morels through the standard focal crossover?
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top