fiberglass door enclosures for sr6500's??

IrishChamp

I was thinking about doing fiberglass door enclosures for my upcoming sr6500 install instead of sealing the entire door. has anyone done this, would I still have to use sound deadening on the door, how would they sound compared simply being installed in a nicely sealed door? I'm thinking around .4 to .6 cubic ft but I think I could even go a little bigger if I'm creative with the shape and if it wold be beneficial. I like the idea of not having to use layer upon layer of sound deadening on the door it self.
I'm also going to look into making custom kicks but I think I might be able to fit a bigger enclosure in the doors rather than the kicks, also I would not take up foot room. I might just put the tweeters in the kicks, either that or up high in a custom fiberglass piece on the doors next to the a pillars.

only126db

Fiberglass door panels are alot of work....

There can be a huge benefit from them depending on your original door panels layout, but minimal also depending on layout.

Your door should have alot more internal volume than .6cu ft so you would get more lower bass freq, but from a sealed panel it would be possible to get a more accurate sound....

There are so many things to take into consideration it's not a simple yes or no answer.

You will have to calculate volume required for the driver through TS specs and determine from there what size enclosure you need and see what size differences would do what to the freq. response.

Then determine how your drivers work on axis off axis, at what degree off axis is good for them, check your panels to see where you are at now and decide what the new panels would require, determine if you could just add on to the current panels or build full new panels...

This is only part of what you have to take into consideration......

IrishChamp

thanks for all your input, there is indeed a lot to think about. so far I think I will simply be able to build an enclosure under the current door panel, I'm going to get some Styrofoam and play around a little on what would work.
from reading other posts on this site I believe that the 6500's like around that .4 to .6 sq ft mark but I have not plugged everything into a box size calculator as I don't have one, I'm sure I can find one with some Google searching though.

only126db wrote: »

Fiberglass door panels are alot of work....

There can be a huge benefit from them depending on your original door panels layout, but minimal also depending on layout.

Your door should have alot more internal volume than .6cu ft so you would get more lower bass freq, but from a sealed panel it would be possible to get a more accurate sound....

There are so many things to take into consideration it's not a simple yes or no answer.

You will have to calculate volume required for the driver through TS specs and determine from there what size enclosure you need and see what size differences would do what to the freq. response.

Then determine how your drivers work on axis off axis, at what degree off axis is good for them, check your panels to see where you are at now and decide what the new panels would require, determine if you could just add on to the current panels or build full new panels...

This is only part of what you have to take into consideration......

only126db

IrishChamp wrote: »

thanks for all your input, there is indeed a lot to think about. so far I think I will simply be able to build an enclosure under the current door panel, I'm going to get some Styrofoam and play around a little on what would work.
from reading other posts on this site I believe that the 6500's like around that .4 to .6 sq ft mark but I have not plugged everything into a box size calculator as I don't have one, I'm sure I can find one with some Google searching though.

Good luck, it took me months to figure what speakers to run in my doors, but that was due to wanting to be able to play low and using multiple drivers...

Let us know how it goes...post some pics too.

MacLeod

I suggest NOT enclosing them but rather letting them run free air. They are designed to work IB and they do it very well. Trust me, I have no problem with low frequency extension with mine running in the doors. Youre better served fortifying the **** out of your door panels.

tk421

MacLeod wrote: »

I suggest NOT enclosing them but rather letting them run free air. They are designed to work IB and they do it very well. Trust me, I have no problem with low frequency extension with mine running in the doors. Youre better served fortifying the **** out of your door panels.

sorry i came in late. ^^^ mac is right. i did it both ways to test.

i didnt do sealed pods cause six inch speakers have a high vas. i did pods which were vented into the doors via a 3 inch hole. the freq response sucked!

i then deadened the doors with four layers of dampening and mounted the SRs to the door metal. (on mdf rings and isolated from the mdf with damping and closed cell.)

they now sound great on the midbass but suffer in the mid range... as mac said in another post, off axis response needs a lot of tuning.

i eventually plan to angle the speakers using an mdf/fiberglass pod. nothing to extreme. needs to look stock. you may want to start here. save yourself the time and trouble that we went tru.

IrishChamp

good to know, thanks. So, I should just deaden every surface of the door and seal the front wave from the back wave? another thing I was worried about is water, I know that water can get into the doors and I thought sealing them in an enclosure would eliminate that problem.
thanks again!

MacLeod wrote: »

I suggest NOT enclosing them but rather letting them run free air. They are designed to work IB and they do it very well. Trust me, I have no problem with low frequency extension with mine running in the doors. Youre better served fortifying the **** out of your door panels.

IrishChamp

so are you saying that the 6.5 inch speakers don't play as well off axis? I knew the tweeters liked to be on axis but I had no idea about the mids.
I have a good amount of room in my doors behind the stock speaker covers so I should be able to direct them up a bit, I can probably fit the tweeters and mids right next to each other using the 6x9 adapter on a custom mdf angled ring right on axis with person opposite them (drivers speaker on axis with passenger and vise versa).
think that will work out well? its ok if the tweeters and mid's share the same rear air space right?
thanks

tk421 wrote: »

sorry i came in late. ^^^ mac is right. i did it both ways to test.

i didnt do sealed pods cause six inch speakers have a high vas. i did pods which were vented into the doors via a 3 inch hole. the freq response sucked!

i then deadened the doors with four layers of dampening and mounted the SRs to the door metal. (on mdf rings and isolated from the mdf with damping and closed cell.)

they now sound great on the midbass but suffer in the mid range... as mac said in another post, off axis response needs a lot of tuning.

i eventually plan to angle the speakers using an mdf/fiberglass pod. nothing to extreme. needs to look stock. you may want to start here. save yourself the time and trouble that we went tru.

only126db

Mids and tweets have a narrow soundwave which makes them more directional (on axis).

tk421

IrishChamp wrote: »

so are you saying that the 6.5 inch speakers don't play as well off axis? I knew the tweeters liked to be on axis but I had no idea about the mids.
I have a good amount of room in my doors behind the stock speaker covers so I should be able to direct them up a bit, I can probably fit the tweeters and mids right next to each other using the 6x9 adapter on a custom mdf angled ring right on axis with person opposite them (drivers speaker on axis with passenger and vise versa).
think that will work out well? its ok if the tweeters and mid's share the same rear air space right?
thanks

front stage is judged by tonality and 'imaging and staging'. the SR6500s are ok in the tonality region. they are not too great on imaging and staging.

BUT YOU WILL GET THIS WITH A LOT OF SPEAKERS! so it is not a fault of the SR65000 per say.

i wish polk did a three way.

IrishChamp

If I ever go active I would consider getting my hands on a sr5250 woofer and making a 3 way system with the sr5250 woofers in the kicks with the tweeter and the 6500 woofers in the doors. Think it would work out well?

tk421 wrote: »

front stage is judged by tonality and 'imaging and staging'. the SR6500s are ok in the tonality region. they are not too great on imaging and staging.

BUT YOU WILL GET THIS WITH A LOT OF SPEAKERS! so it is not a fault of the SR65000 per say.

i wish polk did a three way.

tk421

IrishChamp wrote: »

If I ever go active I would consider getting my hands on a sr5250 woofer and making a 3 way system with the sr5250 woofers in the kicks with the tweeter and the 6500 woofers in the doors. Think it would work out well?

it would work VERY well.. but get the entire setup... use the second set of tweets on the a-pillars (attenuated and crossed higher up.. like 7k)

why? - imaging cues above that range are negligible. above 7,8K u get the height cues coming into play. so use the main tweets in your kicks mounted on the sr5250 ... use the 6500 woofer in the doors with no tweets and use the tweet from that set on the a-pillar

just my 2cents. everyone is different.

dirthog

IrishChamp wrote: »

If I ever go active I would consider getting my hands on a sr5250 woofer and making a 3 way system with the sr5250 woofers in the kicks with the tweeter and the 6500 woofers in the doors. Think it would work out well?

tk421 wrote: »

it would work VERY well.. but get the entire setup... use the second set of tweets on the a-pillars (attenuated and crossed higher up.. like 7k)

why? - imaging cues above that range are negligible. above 7,8K u get the height cues coming into play. so use the main tweets in your kicks mounted on the sr5250 ... use the 6500 woofer in the doors with no tweets and use the tweet from that set on the a-pillar

just my 2cents. everyone is different.

I wouldn't suggest turning them into a three way. It hard enough to tune a two way let alone a three way. The SR6500 or the 5250 are capable of running those duties on their own.

If you truly want to do a three way run a set of 5250 and put a bigger driver in your doors. Something like an 8in that will play lower, but I don't think this is needed, MacLaod ran his 6500 down to 40Hz.

I run my tweeters right next to the mids in my doors and I have no issues with stage height.

Like you said everyone is different and you never know what will sound the best until you try it.

IrishChamp

If I had ended up with the 5250's I would almost for sure be putting them in the kicks and a 7 or 8 in the doors but I ended up with the 6500's and I don't think they will fit in the kicks very well. Oh well , I'm sure I will be very happy with these in their 2 way setup!

dirthog wrote: »

I wouldn't suggest turning them into a three way. It hard enough to tune a two way let alone a three way. The SR6500 or the 5250 are capable of running those duties on their own.

If you truly want to do a three way run a set of 5250 and put a bigger driver in your doors. Something like an 8in that will play lower, but I don't think this is needed, MacLaod ran his 6500 down to 40Hz.

I run my tweeters right next to the mids in my doors and I have no issues with stage height.

Like you said everyone is different and you never know what will sound the best until you try it.

IrishChamp

I like the idea of two sets of SR's up front!

tk421 wrote: »

it would work VERY well.. but get the entire setup... use the second set of tweets on the a-pillars (attenuated and crossed higher up.. like 7k)

why? - imaging cues above that range are negligible. above 7,8K u get the height cues coming into play. so use the main tweets in your kicks mounted on the sr5250 ... use the 6500 woofer in the doors with no tweets and use the tweet from that set on the a-pillar

just my 2cents. everyone is different.

tk421

yeah. the SRs are clean but not loud. you can push a little more power to the 5" than normal if u cross them properly.

but what the other guys said: a different approach (with a larger woofer in the doors) is better. i started for SQ now i want SQ and Loudness... i think a louder midrange is needed and a separate midbass woofer.

read the articles in CA&E about 'the sound system nobody would build'. it's pure science and art. he used 8" woofers in the doors (fibreglass enclosures) and 3" mids with tweets up high.

MacLeod

8's in the doors??? I dunno man, thats an awful lot of midbass energy and that door panel is going to buzz, resonate and sing louder than the speakers! LOL

The best place for midbass speakers assuming you can build anything, is to mount the midbass in the corners of the floor firing up, on axis. This gives a great sense of depth, you dont have to worry about any buzzing door panels.

Personally I prefer 2 way systems. You do give up a slight bit of midbass but its much easier to tune and there are a lot less things to screw up the sound. Im a firm believer in the less speakers youve got, the better the sound.

IrishChamp

I've almost finished my fiberglass box for the sr124DVC, it was my first attempt, I had some trouble with bubbles but got rid of of 90% of them.
Anyway, I'm a little worried about the size, I just didn't plan it as well as I should have and had to make a few minor changes as it went along, it’s an odd shape so I can't really get an accurate measurement. I think it has at least an internal volume without the sub of 1 maybe 1.15 cubic ft.
So, will this be ok and how can I get an accurate measurement, should I fill it with packaging popcorn and measure how many liters?
I've read that per polk 1.02 is the minimum gross box volume but I've also read that 1.4 is a must for sound quality applications.

IrishChamp

I used boxing popcorn and measured 35.5 liters, which equates to 1.25 cubic ft, if I add two extra speaker rings which I might do to raise the level of the sub face to that of the amp tops it would increase the box space to 1.35 cubic ft. I'm pretty happy with these #'s, I hope they will be good for a nice SQ setup.