SR vs. MM voicing

Jstas

OK, new ride, contemplating a stereo swap.

Only problem is, the stock stereo is 5.1 surround sound with "THX Certification". Yeah, whoop-tee-doo. Well, that's all snazzy and stuff but the biggest issue is that it's integrated in to everything else. So, a swap with an aftermarket unit seriously hobbles functionality to the point where it needs serious consideration.

So my options are basically external processors. All of which are snazzy but the only one that will handle 5.1 sound is the RF 3Sixty.2 unit. So that's the one imma gonna get when I do this.

However, since it's an MKX, space is tight. I'm going to use the stock locations because everything seems to be set up for the surround sound processing. The stock imaging is good and the head unit has all of these DSP effects. The speakers though...yeah, not so hot.

So, my plan was to retain the stock head unit and add the RF 3Sixty.2. I'll add amplification, probably an Alpine PDX 5 channel because they are small but powerful and clean. I'd get the big pig Polk PA 5 channel but I'm finding it difficult to find a place to hide such a large amp. I'll replace the stock speakers with the Polk SR5250's and use the 6x8" plates to fill the holes and mount the tweeters where the stock locations are. That will preserve the surround sound effect and processing capabilities but upgrade the speakers while retaining the stock look and hiding the high dollar gear.

Problem is, the sub, in the back, is small and the space is equally as small. JL Audio has a Stealthbox with a W10.3v3 in it. I don't want the JL sub 'cause, well, it's a V3. But the SR sub is way too deep for the spot. The MM is perfectly suited. I would rather not go through the effort of glassing a box to fit the pocket if JL has already gone through the hassle. So I'll drop the coin on the JL Stealthbox, maybe get one off of eBay, yank the **** JL sub and shove a Polk sub in since all I want is the hassle-free enclosure.

So, with all the thoughts above, my question is, how far off in voicing is the MM sub from the SR components? Sub usually aren't a big deal but I don't want a farty mess either.

MacLeod

I'm running the MM10 right now and its working great. Not sure what "voicing" is but this thing is very musical and clean and has no problem hitting the 18 Hz note on the IASCA disc. I had no problem tuning it after coming from a SR12.

It's nice and flat too so it'll give you a lot more installation flexibility.

Jstas

MacLeod wrote: »

Not sure what "voicing" is...

How to explain voicing...hmmm...

Well, it's one of those "fuzzy areas" in the audio world.

Here, read this article about John Dunlavy: http://www.stereophile.com/interviews/163/


Now the idea of voicing is that similar drivers have similar properties that give them a distinct sound. You don't necessarily walk up to a pair of Polk Audio DB6501's and say "Hey! That's a set of SR's!" Especially after you've been competing with them for 5 years. You know what the SRs sound like and the DBs, while not junk by any means, are noticeably different but not necessarily lacking provided all other factors, including listening environment, are similar.

That difference is attributable to the design of the speaker and it's crossover network as well as the materials used in the construction of the speaker and every other component. They all have properties that change the response of the loudspeaker system. This changes how it sounds to your ear. It's not readily apparent to you unless you hear something drastically different.

Alot of people say it doesn't exist because it's one of those things like the cable debate and you're either a believer or not. Thing is though, unlike alot of the claims made in other arguments, these "voicing" ideas can actually be measured and explained in many cases.

For instance, take one of the aluminum subs from Eclipse and compare it to, say, a JBL GTO Series. They both do the same thing but they sound different. The aluminum sub has been explained as "metallic" for lack of a better term while JBL subs have been described as "bright". Some say the aluminum subs "ring" because the cone is aluminum. Maybe, maybe not, I'm not sure, I'm not that familiar with the subs. But the JBL subs are very sensitive and that sensitivity can lead to "brightness" that people try to describe but can't do it effectively.

So when you're looking for voicing on speakers, you're trying to find speakers that have similar properties so that those tonal qualities of like the sub driver are not so different from the rest of the drivers in the system that the sub ends up fighting them instead of complimenting them.

Like I said though, it's not as apparent with subs vs. full-range but it can be. Wanna see it where it's painfully apparent? Put SR tweeters with DB woofers. use either crossover. Not only will the crossover points be way off for the driver compliment but they will likely sound very bright and harsh. The opposite would be true for SR woofers with DB tweeters. There would likely be a large gap in frequency response in the mid range and the DB tweeters would sound tinny and screechy because of it. You get the all highs/all lows like the boomboxes of the 80's and 90's with the equalizer aligned in a V shape.

Did that make sense?

kawizx9r

How's Fry's return policy?

I'd grab an MM sub and try it out up until the last day in an attempt to break it in and see how they blend with the SR's.

I've got a pair of SR6500's and want to upgrade my sub as well to either an SR12 or 1 or 2 MM subs. Still undecided, so I'll read up further on this thread to see how the 2 compare more in depth.

docjl

+1 on the SR being absolutely amazing and bulletproof!

I've got an SR124 in my trunk, and sometimes (I almost hate to admit it, lol) I'll go out to my garage and sit in my car to listen to music.
It sounds THAT da*n good.

due to space limitations in my other cars' trunk, I was only able to fit 2 MM840 8" subs in sealed boxes (otherwise I would have had zero trunk space). they sound good, but dang I wish polk made the SR sub in 8". I also used to have a single MM1040 in my last car in a sealed box inside the car, it also sounded very good, I thought incredible at the time, UNTIL I heard my SR124!

kawizx9r

DSkip wrote: »

kawiz, I don't understand buying two lesser subs instead of one stellar sub, given all things equal. My idea would be get the best that you can get with the money and go from there. I have yet to really listen to the MM subs (even though I've had chances to), but after holding each one and looking them over, I'd get the SR over two MM's any day. While the MM is a nice looking sub and well built, the SR feels indestructible and sounds incredible. Even though the tinsel leads have issues, the SR feels like a sub that would endure much longer than a MM would.

I've pretty much narrowed it down to getting a single 12 SR but I like the thought of dual 10" MM's.

Just curious what the OP will go with, love seeing new installs. PICS once you decide what you go with!

MacLeod

I say go for the MM John if space is tight. I've got a lot of hours logged tuning a SR sub and then this year with the MM sub. I've had no problem getting the MM to mesh well with my SR mids so I think it would work well in you setup.

exalted512

I've heard another great way to reduce space with a sub set up is build the box with only 4 sides.

Otherwise, I have nothing to add. I havent heard the new MM's
-Cody

arun1963

^^reported^^.......for flaming

Jstas

^^reported^^....for being a colossal ****.

kawizx9r

^Lol?

Hey Jstas, so you going with MM's?

audiobliss

exalted512 wrote: »

I've heard another great way to reduce space with a sub set up is build the box with only 4 sides.

Otherwise, I have nothing to add. I havent heard the new MM's
-Cody

LOL!!!

arun1963

hey John,

Congrats on the new ride. It sure comes loaded with a lot of features. From the interior pics there seems to be some space at the back to fit a small box with a shallow mount sub like the MM.

Voicing on the sub?? You been hanging with them 2ch boys for too long . For a driver thats only going to play like 1.5 octaves at most, that to at the very bottom end, all you need is a good blend with the mid bass from your mid driver.

Does the stock THX unit give you pre outs or line level outputs to the proposed 360.2? I may be wrong here, but I'd worry more about the 0.4mv signal vs a healthy 4v signal from the source than the voicing on a sub.

Pic's once you get the project underway. BTW which colour did you choose?

Jstas

arun1963 wrote: »

hey John,

Congrats on the new ride. It sure comes loaded with a lot of features. From the interior pics there seems to be some space at the back to fit a small box with a shallow mount sub like the MM.

Voicing on the sub?? You been hanging with them 2ch boys for too long . For a driver thats only going to play like 1.5 octaves at most, that to at the very bottom end, all you need is a good blend with the mid bass from your mid driver.

Does the stock THX unit give you pre outs or line level outputs to the proposed 360.2? I may be wrong here, but I'd worry more about the 0.4mv signal vs a healthy 4v signal from the source than the voicing on a sub.

Pic's once you get the project underway. BTW which colour did you choose?

I haven't decided on anything, I have to BAHF. And no, I'm not going to put a box in the cargo area. That's not my style. There is a compartment on the passenger side in the rear with a grille over it. The current sub is there as well as the stock THX amp. I will be stuffing the subwoofer in there, out of sight, out of mind. If I was going to compete in the DB Drag lanes again, that'd be a different but this is a ride I have to live with day-to-day and the less stuff I stick in the way of normal use, the less headaches I have in the future.

Voicing matters. Matching components matters. If the timbre of the speaker is off and you are trying to match a crossover point, a sub that is not supposed to be localized can very quickly become apparent and localized because the tone, timbre and sensitivity of the driver are so mismatched to other drivers in the system. It's nothing to do with 2 channel.Then again, I don't know how it is in your neck of the woods but 99% of all car stereos are, just that, stereo which is 2 channel. So yeah, I guess I "have been hanging around 2 channel guys". I've been matching subs for years, even when I competed and I always scored high points for tuning categories and "synergy" and other BS like that because of those efforts.

Don't need to care about the stock THX systems lack of pre-amp outputs or the voltage level of the speaker leads if I'm using an RF 3sixty.2. Look it up. You can find out all the info you want at http://www.crutchfield.com

Nice thought about the pictures but I probably won't take the time to take any. Sorry. And I didn't chose any color. I got it used. I picked the color that was on it when I saw it on the lot.

Jstas

MacLeod wrote: »

I say go for the MM John if space is tight. I've got a lot of hours logged tuning a SR sub and then this year with the MM sub. I've had no problem getting the MM to mesh well with my SR mids so I think it would work well in you setup.

I think I'm going to end up doing that. The sub that is there is a 10" sub already but I do believe that the THX amp is also the control unit so I have to retain it. The MM sub is shallower than the stock sub so I might actually be able to use the enclosure that the stock sub is in so that I can retain the THX amp unit in the stock location and hidden.

I can mount amps else where. If I go with small amps like Alpine's PDX stuff, I can squeeze those little guys anywhere, even inside a door panel if I have to.

However, I am not really sure how I'm going to power 5.1 channels. All 5 channel amps are 4.1, 2 pairs of stereo, one sub. The only thing I found that will work for 5 full range channels is JL Audio's 6 channel jobbies. I can also use a real small stereo A/B amp and bridge to a single channel for the center but there isn't much in the "mighty mite" category anymore. The only one still making anything like that is Kicker. Everything else is big power. Sometimes I really miss classic Phoenix Gold and Hifonirs and RF. But if I go with that 6 channel, I either have to bridge a pair of channels for the center, power a single channel or bi-amp a driver set with like a single tweeter and a pair of woofers or something. I might have to custom rig a 3-way crossover.

Stupid THX system. BE MORE FUN! :mad:

arun1963

Jstas wrote: »

I haven't decided on anything, I have to BAHF. And no, I'm not going to put a box in the cargo area. That's not my style. There is a compartment on the passenger side in the rear with a grille over it. The current sub is there as well as the stock THX amp. I will be stuffing the subwoofer in there, out of sight, out of mind. If I was going to compete in the DB Drag lanes again, that'd be a different but this is a ride I have to live with day-to-day and the less stuff I stick in the way of normal use, the less headaches I have in the future..

So far so good.......

Jstas wrote: »

Voicing matters. Matching components matters...

Agreed, if you are talking about matching the mids and tweets. But a sub? You're only looking for presence here. Does a 20hz organ note have a timbre? Sure it does, but what you're talking about is how the 20-50hz from the sub affects the timbre of your mid-bass and midrange. THAT is derived from blending the sub and the mid more than just the characteristics of the sub. I think thats what Mac was saying as well. Try hearing only a sub playing the 20-50hz range, then swap subs to see if you hear a difference in tone, timbre etc. It's about how the sub blends with the mids. Sure there are some subs that will be crap. But then crap is crap. We are not talking about that here.

Jstas wrote: »

Then again, I don't know how it is in your neck of the woods but 99% of all car stereos are, just that, stereo which is 2 channel. So yeah, I guess I "have been hanging around 2 channel guys"....

Sorry, forgot that a sense of humour continues to elude you.

Jstas wrote: »

Don't need to care about the stock THX systems lack of pre-amp outputs or the voltage level of the speaker leads if I'm using an RF 3sixty.2. Look it up. You can find out all the info you want at http://www.crutchfield.com[/url

So u're saying its more important to worry about the voicing on a sub rather than the strength of the source signal? ok. Sure the 3sixty.2 will take care of a low voltage signal, I was just pointing out that in real world terms this is a slightly bigger issue that the subs voicing.

Jstas wrote: »

And I didn't chose any color. I got it used. I picked the color that was on it when I saw it on the lot.

I just thought you were buying new. My bad. I don't think you mentioned otherwise anywhere in the thread......

Jstas wrote: »

So, with all the thoughts above, my question is, how far off in voicing is the MM sub from the SR components? Sub usually aren't a big deal but I don't want a farty mess either..

BTW this is from your first post. The best sub can be made to sound farty with an improper xover point and poor blending with the mids.

Jstas

arun1963 wrote: »

Agreed, if you are talking about matching the mids and tweets. But a sub? You're only looking for presence here. Does a 20hz organ note have a timbre? Sure it does, but what you're talking about is how the 20-50hz from the sub affects the timbre of your mid-bass and midrange. THAT is derived from blending the sub and the mid more than just the characteristics of the sub. I think thats what Mac was saying as well. Try hearing only a sub playing the 20-50hz range, then swap subs to see if you hear a difference in tone, timbre etc. It's about how the sub blends with the mids. Sure there are some subs that will be crap. But then crap is crap. We are not talking about that here.

Look, I know what you are trying to say and do but I don't need an education. I get the feeling you are preaching at me. I've been assembling, installing and even competing with car stereos since I was 15 (33 now) and learned how to solder. I have been wildly successful with the methods I use. You can tell me they don't matter but I will tell you my experience says you're full of crap. You're not going to change my mind. Especially if every argument you pose against is a question that questions my reasoning instead of offering any kind of proof to dissuade my opinion. The fact of the matter is, the stuff I am talking about can actually be measured. On top of that, this is an open wagon design. In a trunk, it wouldn't matter because you don't get direct sound anyway. In an SUV, you get direct sound as well as reflections. It's not just the sub that matters but reflections off of hard plastic, glass and metal surfaces. Reflections do not move as much air so the lower frequencies in the reflections fall off but the higher frequencies as well as harmonics do come through and they will expose a mismatch between say, an SR midrange and a DB sub.

arun1963 wrote: »

So u're saying its more important to worry about the voicing on a sub rather than the strength of the source signal? ok. Sure the 3sixty.2 will take care of a low voltage signal, I was just pointing out that in real world terms this is a slightly bigger issue that the subs voicing.

No, I am not. Don't put words in my mouth. What I am saying is that the 3Sixty.2 takes low voltage or high voltage signals, cleans them up and removes the lame bass reduction many stock stereos have and turns around and puts out a full-range 5 volt signal to 6 pre-amp outputs (front pair, rear pair, center and subwoofer). Your argument is moot because the entire purpose of the 3Sixty.2 is to solve the low voltage, high level signal input from a stock stereo.

Since you obviously did not look it up, here, check it out: http://www.crutchfield.com/s_5753SIXTY2/Rockford-Fosgate-3SIXTY-2.html?search=3sixty

Seriously, back-off. I didn't ask for a flawed dissertation in the workings of crossover networks and frequency response curves. I asked how the MM sub would match up with SR components. I've gotten a reasonable answer from several people already and I'm fine with it. I am trying not to be my usual pleasant self to people who try to educate me on something I have posted novels about in this forum in years past. Take the hint and let it be.

MacLeod

exalted512 wrote: »

I've heard another great way to reduce space with a sub set up is build the box with only 4 sides.

Go ahead, I understand. If I were only 5' tall and had to go to A&M, I'd be wanting to make fun of somebody too.

Jstas

MacLeod wrote: »

Go ahead, I understand. If I were only 5' tall and had to go to A&M, I'd be wanting to make fun of somebody too.

That was cold, man.

arun1963

DAMNIT this is the third time I'm typing this post cause my computer keeps going into reboot mode......:mad:

Jstas wrote: »

I get the feeling you are preaching at me. I've been assembling, installing and even competing with car stereos since I was 15 (33 now) and learned how to solder. I have been wildly successful with the methods I use.

I wasn't being preachy. The post was from the standpoint, 'In this hobby its very easy to get obsessive about something that may not be so important.' That message was couched in the joke about the 2ch.....i can't do any of that stuff you mentioned. I'm 10 thumbs. Sure i respect you for that, I wish I could do half that stuff, but i can't.

Jstas wrote: »

You can tell me they don't matter but I will tell you my experience says you're full of crap.

You seriously think i said or even implied that? C'mon John.

Jstas wrote: »

In a trunk, it wouldn't matter because you don't get direct sound anyway. In an SUV, you get direct sound as well as reflections. It's not just the sub that matters but reflections off of hard plastic, glass and metal surfaces. Reflections do not move as much air so the lower frequencies in the reflections fall off but the higher frequencies as well as harmonics do come through and they will expose a mismatch between say, an SR midrange and a DB sub.

For now i'm running the SR's with the momo sub and its fine. I'll swap the sub when I upgrade the sub stage, for now though there are bigger issues like getting a processor in the chain for better control on the drivers. Even in trunk there will be a back wave from the box and another from the front of the cone which will be reflected off the trunk.

Jstas wrote: »

What I am saying is that the 3Sixty.2 takes low voltage or high voltage signals, cleans them up and removes the lame bass reduction many stock stereos have and turns around and puts out a full-range 5 volt signal to 6 pre-amp outputs (front pair, rear pair, center and subwoofer). Your argument is moot because the entire purpose of the 3Sixty.2 is to solve the low voltage, high level signal input from a stock stereo.

Trust me I know what the 3sixty does. Have spent the last 6 months reading and researching the h-701, 3sixty and the bit-1. Remember the bit about being obsessed with some issue I mentioned earlier? Well this is one of mine. I'd rather have a 5v at source than have the processor bump up a low signal. However in your case thats not possible.

Jstas wrote: »

Seriously, back-off. Take the hint and let it be.

OK, will let you have the last word if you want.

MacLeod

Jstas wrote: »

That was cold, man.