Yaris Sedan Deadening and Sound system upgrade

[sqcomp]

IIRC, Scott is releasing the I10SW on December 15th.

[derickveliz2]

I had to do the inspection sticker...
I heard one of the guys... "it won't pass... tinted windows, too low"... and some thing else?

VIDEO LINK

...

[sqcomp]

^ What's up with that?

What kind of inspection are these yahoos doing? I know out here the only inspection we have is a air quality inpection of the ECU. My blood pressure rises when I hear about government telling me I can't customize my vehicle...

Also, I've got the kick pods roughed in. I'm actually thinking about finishing them well enough to be painted the OEM color of the car. I have pics BUT I still want to get farther down the road before I post.

[derickveliz2]

Originally Posted by sqcomp

^ What's up with that?

What kind of inspection are these yahoos doing? I know out here the only inspection we have is a air quality inpection of the ECU. My blood pressure rises when I hear about government telling me I can't customize my vehicle...

The usual stuff, 35% tinted windows, 4 inches off the ground, and all the safety and operation of your vehicle, besides that some places just want to give a hard time more than others, but Toyota's reputation it's easy to pass.

D.

[derickveliz2]

Originally Posted by sqcomp

Also, I've got the kick pods roughed in. I'm actually thinking about finishing them well enough to be painted the OEM color of the car. I have pics BUT I still want to get farther down the road before I post.

I got a little over 2,000 miles testing the MIDs in the kick area...

1.- AWESOME much better than the MIDs on the a-pillars (will expand on this later)
2.- The image is rock solid in the center and above the dashboard
3.- Stage is high 4-6 inches above HU and pushed forward about 6-8 inches
4.- Stage is wide, love it!

It's time to start playing with 15 degrees up and towards listener.

Even though we spent so much time and effort doing our mids in the a-pillars the experience it's worth what we learn here.

I never even imagine that the MIDS down there in the Kick area would make my system so much better; I guess PLDs are some thing SQ enthusiasts need to put more attention and make it part of the equation for a great system.

D.

[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]

Originally Posted by derickveliz2

I got a little over 2,000 miles testing the MIDs in the kick area...

1.- AWESOME much better than the MIDs on the a-pillars (will expand on this later)


D.

Originally Posted by derickveliz

"Symmetric Dashboard"

That is the only reason why I'm trying my MIDS on the a-pillars and take advantage of the cavernous dash/windshield of the Yaris's symmetrical dashboard, other wise the MIDS would go down in the kick area for my SQ install.

If I had to start all over, I would go with a 4" MID in the kick panels with a tweeter on the a-pillars for SQ install.

NO MORE MIDs TO SHOW OFF IN THE A-PILLARS:

OK, so after many hours of testing I can't show-off my MIDS in the a-pillars any more, in the name of SQ and trying to improve my audio system

"my MIDs are now in the a-frame, down in the kick area..." why?

PLDs is the answer, now my stage is wider, deeper and as high as with the MIDs in a-pillars, my image is solid, every thing is way much better, T/A was much easier to nail in too. At least in my Yaris works that way because the distance between my my ears to the apillars is shorter than the distance between my ears to the a-frame (kick area). see image below...

I know, it's hard to believe. Before I swear for the MIDs in the a-pillars, and I just didn't believe the MIDs would play so good in the kick area. Some one told me, some one else suggested mi the MIDs in the a-frame and I didn't listen, now I know by trail and error what sounds better for me in the name of SQ.






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]

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[TOLMACH]

the graph above looks a bit scary between 200 and 3000 Hz

[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*