Yaris Sedan Deadening and Sound system upgrade

[sqcomp]

There's something you touched on though...

"Stage is high 4-6 inches above HU"

Thats in the cluster. The stage "needs" to be above the cluster. This is where the mids in the pillars shined...physical location gave spectacular height (at least in my application). What you're going to find is the give and take of physics. Now, I sincerely think we can raise the stage with angling speakers AND crossover slopes, points, phasing, and amplitude adjustments.

The downside of the pillars is the width, like you mentioned.

Remember, the goal is to get the stage ALL in front of you on the dash or even farther out onto the hood.

bad teaser pics:

[derickveliz2]

Originally Posted by sqcomp

There's something you touched on though...

"Stage is high 4-6 inches above HU"

Thats in the cluster. The stage "needs" to be above the cluster. This is where the mids in the pillars shined...physical location gave spectacular height (at least in my application). What you're going to find is the give and take of physics.

Remember, the goal is to get the stage ALL in front of you on the dash or even farther out onto the hood.

bad teaser pics:

Ok, maybe I'm using the wrong terms, when I say Stage is 4-6 inches above HU, what I mean is that in a song the singer is right there.

Yes the stage is ALL in front of me, it's fantastic and some times unreal (what I mean is that sounds so good 3D-dimensional speaking) Some songs shine better than others bringing the stage farther out on the hood, some of the tracks from FOCAL JMLab Tools CD - 01 - Technical Tracks play just FANTASTIC!

From your pictures, aren't you making the stage "not as wide" by placing the MIDs in this position? See my graph Option 2, and Option 1 where by sinking the MIDs in the A-frame you gain a little bit more width!

I know it's a trade in, a give and take like you said; so far I've been testing my MIDs like Option 1 and it's pretty good, I'm going to angle them a little bit and test some more, but I don't feel like it's going to be as much like you have...








D.

[sqcomp]

Not as wide? Meh...physically yes, by a couple inches. What I'm gaining is frequency response by being more on axis.

I feel that in my listening tests I was able to be deep and to the mirrors which is my goal. That was without ANY EQ/amplitude tweaks. I feel that we're both on the right track. I don't want to cut into the metal (it's just a peeve of mine). We simply have slight differences with similar layouts.

I am excited to get the tweeters up in the deep end of the pillars!

[derickveliz2]

Originally Posted by sqcomp

Not as wide? Meh...physically yes, by a couple inches. What I'm gaining is frequency response by being more on axis.

I feel that in my listening tests I was able to be deep and to the mirrors which is my goal. That was without ANY EQ/amplitude tweaks. I feel that we're both on the right track. I don't want to cut into the metal (it's just a peeve of mine). We simply have slight differences with similar layouts.

I am excited to get the tweeters up in the deep end of the pillars!

I agree, we are on the right track! for sure.

Cutting the a-frame was a piece of cake with my old dremel. but good enough for a 3 inch speaker, L4 SE's mmm it would be hard.



After reading your previous posts, I went back with a ruler and some tuning in mind...

Ok, the Image is 2-3 inches above the cluster. almost hitting the windshield;
I put a little toy up there and it feels like they toy is singing to me! jeje you know my analogies are from the kid that lives inside of me.

I was thinking about the tweeters too, sounds like a lot of work, but it may be worth the dust and sanding involved.

D.

[derickveliz2]

I really need to go out and Fly a Plane...

LINK


D.

[sqcomp]

I'm working with the Dremel as well...

...still can't bring myself to cut into metal...

What are you thinking about the tweeters? I'm sinking mine in real deep into the pillars aiming up towards the rear view mirror.

[derickveliz2]

Originally Posted by sqcomp

What are you thinking about the tweeters? I'm sinking mine in real deep into the pillars aiming up towards the rear view mirror.

I have some crazy ideas but still have plenty of time to think about them!

My to do list goes like this:

-Finish MIDs in kick area

-Finish HAT L6s in doors

-Do some more deadening

-TWEETERS....

-Play with a 3rd amp and have the IDQ12 in IB configuration in the trunk, working at very very low freq.

-ETC, ETC, ETC...


D.

[derickveliz2]

Ok, some crazy thoughs here...

So after a few Kmiles I started to change the angle of the MIDs a little bit (in the kick area)
Long story short: I'm only aiming the Pilot's driver about 15 degrees up and towards listener... why?

If speakers perform different on-off axis, why have one of each, instead try to have both at the same angle towards listener! that way the speaker's performance will be the same.

In other words if I look at each driver from Pilot's seat what I see it's a mirror image of each speaker, same angles (yes one is further away).

Please tell me I'm wrong, but my ears feel like in heaven, I'll test for another Kmiles and feed back with my thoughts...

D.

[sickpuppy1]

I wondered about the bottom end of that 6".... I know your dealing with a different class of speaker than me, but my 8" cant reach the bottom end with any authority.

[derickveliz2]

Originally Posted by sickpuppy1

I wondered about the bottom end of that 6".... I know your dealing with a different class of speaker than me, but my 8" cant reach the bottom end with any authority.

Don't get me wrong, the little I6SW performs really good for SQ (I'm very pleased with the results), but once you get out of the car the magic is gone, in other words from the outside sounds like a guy inside his car playing loud music, "not realizing how good sounds inside", and just for fun some times the kid inside of me want's to sound BOOM BOOM for a couple of minutes jeje.

This is an idea I got at DIYMA website, and I just for fun I would like to try it out, I have an amp and a woofer sitting in the closet.

and I forgot about the:

- SubFloor for the amps, got to finish that as well


D.

[sqcomp]

There are several things to talk about here:

axial response is the predominant topic. Look at the response graph to the L4se for example:




The response is NOT the only thing you must be concerned with when dealing with placement of speakers, especially the vital mid range which is what we hear most predominantly. The axis and height of the physical speaker placement has phasing issues to consider when listening. This is where crossover points, amplitude, and time alignment come into play. I completely agree that completely on axis performance is ideal in a perfect environment. No argument...at least in home audio. What we as car audio enthusiasts have to deal with is pathlength differences, height differences, angle, and positioning differences with our speakers given our environment (in a vehicle). As my oh so well spoke friend from another topic insinuated, cars are possibly the worst environment to try to get good sound out of. Yup! Completely agree, but when you do get great sound, it makes all the home audio "genius" and stuffiness just a bunch of hot air. "cause when you do it well in car audio, it's an easy step down to the challenge of a home.

In my listening, I've found that the PLDs, axial positioning, and height have almost everything to do with the performance of the speaker. IF...it's a big if...we could have equal spacing AND equal axial differences between all speakers we'd be fine. Then we probably wouldn't need much time alignment. You'd still need some EQ given the response variables from the speaker itself and the cabin gains. But what is an EQ? It's an amplitude modulator at given frequencies. This is where the tuning methods are so vital.

What's our reference for great sound?

Lot's more questions to ask.

[derickveliz2]

Originally Posted by sqcomp

There are several things to talk about here:

axial response is the predominant topic.

The response is NOT the only thing you must be concerned with when dealing with placement of speakers, especially the vital mid range which is what we hear most predominantly. The axis and height of the physical speaker placement has phasing issues to consider when listening. This is where crossover points, amplitude, and time alignment come into play.

In my listening, I've found that the PLDs, axial positioning, and height have almost everything to do with the performance of the speaker.

What's our reference for great sound?

Lot's more questions to ask.

So what do you think about my theory, have you seen this topic at a pro level?

Our reference for great sound is "LIVE music"




D.

[sqcomp]

^This is where the DIYMA-type keyboard commandos who don't have true listening experience with those speakers say, it must sound like crap.

I'm not saying you're one TOLM, but that is where a lot of us get too hung up. OMGawd! The graph says this so those speakers can't sound right. Let your ears hear them (in my car for example) and you'll think differently.

Take this(same speaker, different tester):



I'm here to tell you that these mid ranges are some of the best out there today. A whole host of world championship competitors use them. I've used them with great success in the Canadian Western regionals for IASCA. This year...MWAHAHAHA...is going to be a whole new year of pain and suffering for my competitors! *wringing hands*

[sqcomp]

That illustration is sort of the same thing I'm doing. You've seen the pics of my kicks. The angle of the passenger's kick is more on axis BUT farther away. The driver's side kick is closer and a little less on axis. The thing is that they're taking a mean point between both axial response and PLDs. So yes, by that mode of thinking this should be successful.

Also, I can reference the pro level...for instance, Bill Pleasant's Altima. His mid range speakers are 90 degrees in the driver's kick and 75 degrees on the passenger's kick. They aren't angled up at all. He's got the tweeters in the pillars at the same angles. World champion vehicle in USACi. Do we theoretically have better setups going? Yes. There are more factors going into the sound (even down to barometric pressure) but we're doing fine where we are heading.

Thoughts?

[derickveliz2]

That is so cool, it makes sense.

I always asked my self... "Why would you aim both drivers symmetrically when the listener is not in the center?"

Just for the record, some "so-so" songs sound great now. Even if I don't like them.

I'm adjusting T/A using "pink noise" in different frequencies from 200Hz up to 2kHz, where should I put more attention? 500Hz? or 800Hz? or?...

Works pretty well but some times the center image shifts right or left a little bit depending on what frequency I used last. I wish there was a track like the one in IASCA CD (12 Staging #4 Technical Track Left, Center, Right Narratives) but rather than having all 3 voices going on and off, have a Center that would play continuously all the time, any body? If you don't know what I'm talking about PM me and I'll send you a copy of the track, even if you are just curious about what we are talking.

Now it's harder to work on my car, every day it's colder, but at the same time even everything is sort of temporary install sounds so good that I don't want to work on it and not having the car ready for next day because I don't want to miss a day of music on the road.

Any way... going downstairs to do some carpet/MLV/CCFoam and what ever it takes to finish the right side kick area.

D.

[sqcomp]

Why not put the phasing narrative on the IASCA disc? Just put your P-99 on track repeat...

Put the speakers symmetrically to the listener. This gets much harder to do with a two seat tune.

[derickveliz2]

Originally Posted by sqcomp

phasing narrative on the IASCA disc? Just put your P-99 on track repeat...

Put the speakers symmetrically to the listener. This gets much harder to do with a two seat tune.

Good idea, I'll try that tonight!

Why symmetrically?

I don't have my MIDs like that, mine set up it's more a one seat tune.

D.

[sqcomp]

I'm thinking that we have a translation issue. I'm agreeing with you.

Recall your goal of equal PLDs? Symmetry. We're trying to get those speakers as far away at equal distances from us on the same plane.

That's all I was saying.