Calling all SR subwoofer owners (or people that have experience with them)

monologuist

I've installed a set of SR-6500 components in the frontstage of my Saab 9-3 hatchback powered by an Alpine PDX-4.100 amp. I'm trying to settle on a subwoofer that will blend seamlessly with this set, provide subsonic frequency extension while having enough quickness to handle fast transient,bass drum heavy electronic music, and maintain as linear a response as possible. Due to the car being a hatchback, high SPL's are not really necessary, nor will I be playing music at anything much above 120db or so on rare occasion (mostly 95-105db). In fact, I do not want to overwhelm the SR-6500's and want the combination of all the speakers to sound full and punchy even at medium SPL's. I will be powering the sub with either an Alpine PDX-600.1 or PDX-1000.1 (600w and 1000w).

Upon doing some research, I had settled on either a TC Sounds TC-1000 d4 12", a Soundsplinter RL-P12, or a FI Audio SSD 12"....but I realized I was overlooking the obvious choice, which would be the Polk SR-124.

Just wondering if anyone could shed some light on this sub, particularly in its ability to blend with the SR components, its sweetspot in terms of power, and what SPL's it sounds best and most linear at. It looks good on paper, but I am actually hesitant b/c I'm wondering if it may actually be too much sub for my car (since it is a hatchback).

I'd also love to hear recommendations for enclosure design, and optimal amplification feeding it.

It seems that many subwoofer fanatics write off Polk completely in favor of some of the more esoteric sub-specialty companies, perhaps more out of bias against mainstream brands, but I'm wondering if Polk may actually have everyone fooled once again (like with the SR-6500's).

Toxis

I own the SR6500's and an SR124DVC... how do I like them? Dunno... too lazy to get them put in. lol

vinkalmann

...........

killerb

i own sr6500's and 2 sr124-dvc's. the subs are powered by a massive audio p-1500 making 1500watts @1 ohm. they blend very well together in my hatchback. i highly reccomend them. they are very detailed subs that hit hard.

monologuist

OK...for 1 SR124 dvc, would an Alpine PDX-1.600 (600watts @ 2ohm) be sufficient? Or should I move up to the 1.1000? The guy I am buying the sub from had it amped by a 1.1000 and said he had the gain set at halfway, and much higher, it sounded like the sub might begin to distort. He recommended that I go for the 1.600 instead and that it would be sufficient (I think he said the 1.600 is a little underrated and might be up near 650-700w). There is a pretty big difference in price between the two (2-300$), so I wouldn't want to overspend if I don't really have to.

There is a slight possibility that I may move to 2 sr124's in the future, but I kind of doubt it, based on the output that I'm hearing that these things are capable of alone.

Alternatively, I could save my money and just use "only" my Boston Acoustic GT-22 2-channel amp bridged at around 500w@2ohm (14v)....if that is sufficient, I could save myself quite a bit of cash!

monologuist

oh yes...also, regarding enclosure size. Do I understand correctly that 1.2 ft. cubed is considered absolutely optimal for 1 SR124 in a sealed box? The manual says .88 which must be a misprint, the white paper says anywhere between 1-1.5, and the "box designs" web page says 1.2. I'm thinking of ordering a custom specified box from Fishercustoms.

MacLeod

1.25 is optiamal for the flattest, most accurate response curve. If youre wanting a little bump in the response then a smaller box would be in order. Personally, Id take the larger box.

monologuist

MacLeod wrote: »

1.25 is optiamal for the flattest, most accurate response curve. If youre wanting a little bump in the response then a smaller box would be in order. Personally, Id take the larger box.

wow...that's what I like to see..precision...1.25 huh? not 1.20? OK. Flat is what I'm after. 1.25 it will be (1.25 net volume I'm assuming). I am going to order a custom box from Fishercustoms that is 1.25 ft. cubed with a slanted back that will be tucked against the back of my rear seats firing backwards in the hatch/trunk. How's that sound?

BTW, I already posted this, but I have been a little disappointed with my SR-6500's (I just installed them). I understand that it is not uncommon for people to be disappointed at first, but after break-in, there is a dramatic difference? Thing is, I hear this most often in reference to the midbass response of the woofers, but I'm actually more disappointed with the tweeters. They are sounding quite harsh and glassy to me. Do they take just as long to break in?

Greg Peters

monologuist wrote: »

BTW, I already posted this, but I have been a little disappointed with my SR-6500's (I just installed them). I understand that it is not uncommon for people to be disappointed at first, but after break-in, there is a dramatic difference? Thing is, I hear this most often in reference to the midbass response of the woofers, but I'm actually more disappointed with the tweeters. They are sounding quite harsh and glassy to me. Do they take just as long to break in?

When I was breaking in my SR5250s (with smaller mids and slightly different attenuation levels on the xovers than the SR6500s), I played them with as little EQ as possible right out of the box. Initially the tweeter was the dominant part of the set, and after break in I used the +3db setting rather than 0 on the crossovers. I found the tweeters took a few days to "come alive" with the majority of music, and then they started to smooth out and display some very nice detail. After a few more days, I was surprised at the performance of the mids and the overall balance of the component set was much nicer.

If you are starting with a system tune that you used on your previous speakers to judge the SRs, it may not even be close to what you'll end up using after the SRs are broken in. It's a little frustrating trying to dial in a new set of speakers as far as EQ and attenuation until they have fully broken in, because the frequency response and balance will keep changing. I'd suggest playing them "flat" for a week before trying to get everything tuned, as the changes due to break-in will be less noticeable after a week of playing time.

When you are ready to tune everything, use the best quality source you can get (as in...no downloaded mp3 tracks that can have funny artifacts from compression) and well-recorded tracks. With the right tracks, the Signature Reference performance is simply outstanding- try out Dire Straits, "Your Latest Trick"...a great track for setting speakers up and getting the levels dialled in. Try not to do marathon tuning sessions trying to get things right- as the ears fatigue, psychoacoustics come into play and EQ "improvements" might not really be improvements when heard with fresh ears.

I've had my SRs for over a year, and have found a few tracks in my inventory that sound like garbage regardless of any adjustments I've made to the EQ, but that's a lot more to do with how well the tracks were recorded and engineered. Playing the same music on a stock system might not show up the poor quality of the recording to the same degree, as the speakers are not as revealing. Higher-end speakers can be a double edged sword- the best recorded tracks sound incredible, while the same speakers can reveal flaws in poorly recorded tracks not apparent when played on lesser speakers .

MacLeod

It can be done. My tweeters are firing right into the windshield and I have no problem with harshness at all out of them. And Im running them very low - 2.5 KHz (that did wonders for pulling my stage up and focusing my image).

So it is possible to get them right but it does take some work. But thats the case with any speakers ESPECIALLY when theyre firing straight up into the windshield.

monologuist

so what do you guys think of amp choices? Alpine PDX-1.600 (around 650-700w@2ohms,14.4v) or 1.1000 (around 1100w@2ohms, 14.4v)? Or just stick with the Boston amp (around 500w bridged@2ohms, 14.4v)? Obviously extra power is probably always better than under-power, but in this case, there is a pretty big price jump from 1.600 to 1.1000 (2-300$).

It dawned on me that I might be getting some distortion in my sr-6500's, b/c I'm playing them at full frequency, no crossovers except the stock passive ones with 100w(actually more like 130w) feeding them from the PDX-4.100. But when I put in the SR124, I'll be able to high pass the 6500's a little, so those 130w will be a bit cleaner w/out having to carry so much bass load. For those who have both SR front and sub, what are you using for crossover points for each?

MacLeod

The SR6500 mids can get plenty low but I found them to get a little boomy at around 63 Hz. I wouldnt go below 50 myself.

As for the sub, usually no reason to go any higher than 80.

monologuist

what about pdx-1.600 (650-700w) vs. 1.1000 (1100w) (or sticking with bridged Boston gt-22: 500w)?

MacLeod

A friend of mine wisely said get as much power as you can afford. If you can swing the 1100 watt amp, get it. Its better to have plenty of power in reserve for headroom than to not have enough.

monologuist

MacLeod wrote: »

A friend of mine wisely said get as much power as you can afford. If you can swing the 1100 watt amp, get it. Its better to have plenty of power in reserve for headroom than to not have enough.

right...I agree, but I'm just wondering if anyone with real-world experience with the SR124 could tell me whether 700 true watts would pretty much do all that I'd ever need...(actually today I read somewhere that someone's 1.600 benched at 750watts!)

MacLeod

700 watts would work well and if thats what you can afford it will be fine. It would just be nice to have the headroom.

Think of it like horsepower. Your car may have enough horsepower to work just fine, but wouldnt you like to have an extra 100 just for when you need it?

monologuist

just posted this in my SR-6500 tweeter thread too:

crap...something just went awry with my system. I was listening to Kraftwerk (their most recent release), a record with a ton of sub-bass and highs but not too much in the mids, trying to break in the SR-6500's. I had my Alpine PDX-4.100 (channels 1 and 2) set at about 2 o'clock gain( I think that is 0.5v?) and my Pioneer p6900ub head unit with all settings flat and volume at 45-50 out of 62. There seemed to be no obvious clipping even with the midbass drivers working hard to pump out the electronic kick drums (it almost sounded like I had a sub!).

THen all of a sudden there was a very loud POP....and a pretty loud buzzing noise ensued. I turned everything off for a couple hours, and started the system again at low volume. The buzzing sound commenced as soon as the head unit powered on and only went away after turning it off. I tried turning the volume up slowly to see if the speakers were blown....but there seemed to be pretty much a full range signal coming through both tweeters and drivers...except the buzzing was actually as loud or louder, so I could not turn the volume up too high before the buzzing was unbearable. Then the popping sound hit again, so I quickly turned the head unit off again.

What the hell is going on?! I will begin troubleshooting tomorrow, but if this scenario sounds familiar to anyone, please fill me in! If I had blown a fuse either in my power chain or on the Alpine amp, there wouldn't have been any signal at all right? And if I had blown a tweeter or driver, there would be either no sound or very distorted sound right? So I'm thinking it might be either somethin to do with the head unit or the SR-6500 crossovers.

I rad that the crossovers' tweeter protection circuit causes a popping sound when it kicks in....is it a very loud one? Also, after it pops off, how long does it take for the tweeter to run normally? I hadn't read anything about buzzing though, relating to the protection circuit.

Can anyone shed some light on this before I go ripping my car apart for the umpteenth time searching for the problem?