Lanson

It has 31 bands of EQ (on primary channels) which is just enough. You NEED EQ when you consider that a car environment is disruptive to a smooth response, a desirable trait that makes a system listenable and enjoyable. There are dips and peaks in a typical car cabin that sometimes look like the grand canyon's profile! Nevermind the ability of an EQ to correct what errors a head unit creates in the signal path.

More important than EQ in my opinion is the ability to active-cross, and time-align each speaker. This is where having a processor truly pays off. Without time alignment, for instance, speakers closer to you will dominate the sound stage and will pull all attention towards that side.

being able to active control the time delay of every speaker in the front of the car is paramount to proper imaging IF EQUAL PATHLENGTHS ARE IMPOSSIBLE, which is exactly what we deal with in a car.


The hiss is a minor concern provided you have a few things:

a. Plenty of output voltage from the processor to the amps. The RF3sixty.2 puts out ~5vRMS which isn't bad. A line driver connected just after the processor may help things out if the amp wants more than 5v, like older PG amps, and some other models.

b. An amp that doesn't introduce a ton of hiss on its own. This can be checked by running say an iPod to the RCA's of the amp, and see if it has hiss even without the head unit or processor.

c. The amp gains should be set low so signal strength is high and the hiss noise is low. Especially on the tweeter amp.

d. Set the internal volume gains in the processor software high as necessary, as low as possible, similar to the amp's gain structure.

e. The head unit must output a non-distorted signal at the volume you need. You can judge this by the clipping lights on the processor. Once into clipping, you've got a garbage-in, garbage-out situation. Simple.

Lanson

I think I should add, there are only a few decent processors currently on-market, and a couple coming out soon that will do very well I think.

Currently available:
Audison BitOne.1, better in every way but it has gone through teething problems much like the RF processor has.

Coming soon (and on my to-buy list):
JBL MS-8.

GS4_Fiend

iTrader: (22)

Very nice review! I heard good things about the jbl m8 but they are so expensive!

Lanson

Consider that the JBL MS-8 will do 8ch processing (vs. 6ch currently being discussed), it will have a clean 20W per channel onboard for things like tweeters or basic rear speakers, or center channels...or all of that. It will have logic processing and microphone-based EQ that sets up the sound field automatically.

I'm ready to buy one now, the money is already set aside and ready. Because:

one pair of channels for front tweeters
one pair of channels for front midrange 3-4" drivers
one pair of channels for front midbass 7-8" drivers
a center channel (if needed, based on vehicle)
a sub channel
Amplification for the front tweeters and center if applicable
Better noise and hiss rejection
microphone-based tuning
included control panel without having to resort to a laptop for everything
Logic7 digital audio processing, for real-time surround sound from 2ch of input

Plus Andy W. of Harmon Intl has been working on it and he knows his stuff.


At ~$600-700 it will be an outright bargain.

GS4_Fiend

iTrader: (22)

Wow. Is that just labor?

Lanson

The machine should run around 6-700 bucks-ish. Still not out yet so that's a maybe.

There is no such thing as labor...always DIY baby.

Big Mack

iTrader: (1)

You could also use an AudioControl DQL-8. Internal summing for up to 8 channels, 6 outputs (F/R/S), and digital controls. Can also add the DDC and a bass ****. 31 bands per channel, and 24 dB Linkwitz Riley crossovers would be a very nice option, IMO.

Big Mack

ryan78

iTrader: (2)

i currently have the ML system in my 3gs. i would like to upgrade to my on-hand boston pro's and g5-12 dvc's powered by kenwood excelon 25th annv. amps - 125x4 and roughly 1200x1 at 1ohm. i am pretty well versed in installing, but i have had no experience with active crossovers or processors given past setups. it almost sounds like the rf would be overkill for me, though i do know i will need a processor to integrate the aftermarket amps properly and to get the highest quality sound. fourthmeal, in your opinion, will this setup work? i plan on retaining the 'surroun/fill' speakers in the dash and doors, and leave the bostons as a co-ax instead of separating the components (they have both options available), powering only the bostons with the kenwoods and using the stock amps to power the stock speakers - the processor would be inline before the stock amps allowing this. it sounds like the processor will allow me to power all the speakers as long as the power is there to push them, so that is also an option? a little long winded, i know, but how do you think the best way to go about this would be? thanks for any input.

GS4_Fiend

iTrader: (22)

I want to know how u going to do it too.

Lanson

Leaving the speaker in a point-source configuration means you don't need to worry much about separate time alignment between the woofer and tweeter, and you can keep the whole setup in a passive configuration this way. You see, the clear cut advantage to going active is precise time delay and crossover adjustment to suit a unique install situation. When the speaker is point-source (or coaxial), the woofer and tweeter have the same distance to travel to your ear thus they remain coherent without any outside processing. The difficulty with point-source arrangements is that the tweeter will often be placed low, and since high frequencies reflect and absorb rather easily we must decide if the simplicity of a point-source installation offsets the performance potential of having the tweeters up and out of the way of our legs, dashboard, floor area, etc. For most inexperienced or non-caring customers, they just buy a set of "comps" and throw the tweeter somewhere near the front of the car (say in the front door sill by the door handle), and the woofers in the door. This is all well and good but it only works if the pathlengths between the woofer and your ear and the tweeter and your ear are pretty close to the same. Going active means you need more amp channels and processing power, but you get the benefit of fine control to fix the maladies that separating the woofer and tweeter create.

Notice a home speaker. The position of the woofer vs. the tweeter and even the height of the speaker play a VERY important role in the final result that makes it to your ear.

Something to keep in mind during system planning:

There is no such thing as overkill. A home system is allowed to be very simple and very basic because we can get close to ideal sound just by building quality cabinets with quality drivers and quality crossovers, all with attention to details. A car system starts with a horrible room, terrible speaker location, and awkward mounting points. I've long said that the only car really suited to a car audio environment is the F1 McLaren, for obvious center-seat reasons. The reason there is no such thing as overkill is that in order to compensate for all these problems, you need a LOT of processing power and you also need to pay critical attention to the details. For instance, when you install a woofer in the door, the door panel skin itself should be gasketed from the speaker so errant sound waves don't bounce around inside the door. Not doing just this one thing will KILL the sound quality.

The 25th Anniv. amps are these, right?
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-RD6ljXA...y-XXV-03A.html
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-jylhAUe...tab=morephotos

These look like decent amps, shouldn't be a problem.

Your speakers sound like the Boston Pro Z convertible components. Their crossovers are high quality and should be run passive unless you are separating the woofer and tweeter (and then we're back to active, right?)

However, I hear some things that I'm not too happy with and I think you won't be either. There is no such thing as surround or fill in the front. If you want to use locations up front, consider using them for midrange or mid-bass even. You can also follow the "less is more" principle and de-activate the speakers.

IMO, the only speakers that should be considered OK for stock system use in an aftermarket system build is the rear set. They should be attenuated heavily, say 20dB below reference OR MORE, and if possible consider disabling the tweeter. Your sound stage should remain front and center and these rear speakers will drag the stage towards the back if you don't attenuate them. Most competition systems contain no rear fill.

One of the secrets to getting a system to sound amazingly real is to get all the frequencies coherent relative to your ears, and to get them all to acoustically sound like they come from the front of you. Bass localization is an important topic here. If you have resonances due to poor deadening / sealing, you can't "hide the bass", so to speak. However if the car is dead enough, you can install your subwoofers in the trunk area, and midbass in the front. On a car like yours, consider how great it would be to have midbass in place of your front dash, for instance.

ryan78

iTrader: (2)

fourth - thanks for the reply. you definitely are more knowledgeable as to this than i am. lol. first, yes, those are my amps. second, i want to keep the car as stock as possible as far as extreme modification. as well, i don't want to dump a lot more money into something when i already have some decent equiptment, hence trying to retain some of the existing speakers. i know that the Mark Levinson will not voice match up with the Bostons, but i'm ok with that. i'm looking for something with good sound quality - imo the bostons are actually better than the ML as they are 'sterile' to the ML's 'warm' tones - with much more volume than the stock ML setup. i was referencing the ML speakers as my surrounds/fill speakers. i have plates in all four corners of the car, as well as a center channel and a tweet in each rear door. i don't think i explained myself well in that aspect in the previous post. so, the bottom line is to get the processor, and run the 'surrounds' off of that signal unamplilfied, while amplifying the 'coaxial' speakers and subs? i will still have the staging of highs in the right locations, as well as added highs at a lower plateau. or, i could just f it all and amplify the ML speakers a little bit more with the kenwood and add the subs. lol maybe i'm just confusing myself by overthinking a bit too much. heheh.

Lanson

I have to step away from acknowledging that I'm an expert on this one because I lack the knowledge of the vehicle's specific system details. I can only give you knowledge pertinent to any system build and we can try to go from there.

However, I will leave you with a few things to think about. If the stock stuff and the aftermarket stuff play together, then you have to deal with coherence. You are adding more speakers but without correct time arrival you will end up with more interference and less coherence. A center channel only serves in this case to make it more difficult. You have no way to time align the factory gear unless you step in the signal path with your processors and your amplifiers. So, if the stock speaker you intend to keep as stock is close to you (like front speakers), you have no way to delay the output of that speaker and now sounds from it will arrive early compared with your other equipment. Ergo, lack of coherence (almost a quick muddy echo.) BTW, you have to understand that I have only experience in things I've worked on. Because I have never worked on this car's system I may be missing important information about how a 2ch audio input (CD, mp3, etc.) gets turned into a 5ch surround system environment. There are logic processors out there that do this, some better than others. Even the 3sixty.2 has one built in when you use a center channel (which it can do.)

At any rate, if you lack the ability to control a certain speaker's timing and crossover points (meaning, you are leaving it stock), you should heavily consider either shutting it down or attenuating it aggressively. Because it will take away from the sound stage presented. IMO, I don't know what you should do because you are in "no-man's land" in car audio. Fooling with stock stuff and aftermarket stuff, with no end in sight of a clear-cut solution that actually makes sense.

Putting speakers with dramatically different timbre will not be a problem if you use a processor because you can EQ each speaker to get close to the stock stuff. That of course removes whatever improvements you felt you gained from the Boston gear and their timbre. Without EQ this is an exercise in futility, and with EQ it is an exercise in patience.

To put this all into prospective... if the stock speakers, amp, and tuning are all excellent, consider working on the install. Yes, that's right, just the install. The Factory, even Lexus, has to consolidate their costs in places and audio is one of the first. Sound deadening, barrier work, sealing, etc. all get forgotten and your system suffers. Amplifier power comes next, and then actual speaker quality thereafter.


To complete the post and give you something to ponder, consider not touching a single piece of the factory radio until you optimize the install to give those speakers and equipment a fighting chance. This involves using a technique that www.sounddeadenershowdown.com explains in great detail. Also www.secondskin.com , pay particular attention to how all three items of a barrier, a decoupler, and a damper tile are used here. In a smart deadening install, we don't just slather tons of "Dynamat" onto the vehicle, as this only handles part of the problem. With a 3-tiered solution one can expect great results, and it can be done all DIY as long as you take your time and do your homework.

Then after the whole car has received proper attention to deadening, you can focus on how each speaker is installed and how it plays to the cabin area. You can use materials to gasket the speaker's front waves out and into the cabin, and avoid the interference patterns and noise created when a speaker plays into a door panel's inside parts. You could also consider adding polyfill to the backside of the tweeter locations, and change the tweeter positioning a few degrees with shims if it needs it. For the low-end of the audio spectrum, perhaps a better subwoofer enclosure would help, for example.


The best part about doing all these things and having an eye with attention to detail...if and when you decide that you still need to upgrade to better equipment, the install itself will already be prepared for said upgrades. You could then take the incoming signal from the head unit, intercept it and amplify it with better, stronger amps (and yours are probably not as good as the ML amps if we are talking true ML equipment and not just "branded" items), and you could then consider upgrading the speakers as a system and not just one "comp" at a time. Since the system is a full surround setup, you have to consider it one large item and not just individual speakers. The timbre-match issue will once again cause incoherence and you're back to square one otherwise.

GS4_Fiend

iTrader: (22)

Something to share... Just got this today from a local audio shop...
http://www.dealercostcaraudio.com/reaudiosr10.aspx

Since this is a dual coil. Should I go parallel @ 2 ohms or series @ 4 ohms?

ryan78

iTrader: (2)

fourth - thanks again. i will definitely look at those websites and seriously consider what it is i want to do, and how to properly go about it. too bad i'm not in nevada - i'd just bring it to your shop. lol. appreciate the help.

Lanson

It would be parallel @ 1ohm, or series @ 4ohm btw, assuming you have just one of these subs.

For a second there I thought you purchased it from that website. I was about to tell you that they screwed me over at one point on a backorder and to not use them. But you said you bought from a local shop so that's not the case.


Anyway, 1ohm stable amps aren't cheap if they are good, but they will likely be powerful. These particular subs are pretty efficient, so perhaps you won't need a monster power amp. A 4ohm load is extremely common for 2ch amp in bridged mode. Getting 300W out of a 2ch amp bridged is pretty easy, and it should sound better too given the damping factor of a 1ohm load vs. a 4ohm load.

If you are using your 25th anniversary amp as you previously described, I would run it in 4ohm load mode. The power will be FAR less than what the amp can do, however it will still be close to double what this single sub can do. That means that you'll be running that amp nice and cool, with plenty of musical control, and still be able to drive the sub to full excursion. Win-Win.



BTW I don't have a shop. I'm just a guy with a regular job that likes car audio and does stuff in his garage. But thanks for the compliment all the same.