New Front Stage

[Karatekid 0]

Hey there guys im hoping u can give me some advice.

Im in the need for a new front stage and im at a crossroads?

The two im looking at right now are the Alpine pro series or Rainbow soundline SLCkickers. But open to other ideas.

Im willing to spend about 350 on the comps. The doors are 6.5's

SYSTEM:

... A Fi 12SSD sub in a sealed box with an AQ1200D Amp wired at 2ohms. Giving it 870watts to the sub.

as of right now i have a RF punch 360.2 amp powering the comps. giving them about 150 Watts. But going to get the AQ4x90 when it comes out in six weeks, and have it bridged to 2 Channels give the comps about 240 watts.

Thanks for the help in advance.

***Watts given are what the manufacter says but u know they are going to do more***

[///M5 2,833]

I'd get the ones that sound better to your ears, either set can sound just fine as long as you don't chince on the install. If you do, expect them both to be underwhelming.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Maybe check out the Hi-Vi components. But if you are getting a 4 channel consider going active.

[MKader17 332]

But if you are getting a 4 channel consider going active.

That would make the 4 channel mad if you didn't

[Karatekid 0]

I have made up my mind on what comps i am getting, there gonna be the CDT ES610. These speakers RMS is at 150.

Going active now would mean that i would be under powering the speakers. Right?

Cause i would rather have an amp that has more power than the speakers cause i dont want to have the amp at full tilt and not pushing the speakers to their protential.

Edited August 19, 2008 by Karatekid

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Where your signal is crossed over has nothing to do with the power going to them. By active, we mean having the front channels powering the tweeters, and the rear channels powering the mids. This way you can ditch the passive crossover if you buy passive components. As many have seen here, the end result in sound is superior and the cost is lower if you do a do-it-yourself component set. Meaning pick a mid bass that will fit your needs and pick a tweeter that will work well with that mid bass.

[1sashenka 0]

If you go active with that amp, your system will not be loud enough for LSQ purposes for example. SQ guys love active set ups, but I like power, so unless you got at least 150 watts going to those mids, it will be pretty quiet system. I have gone back and forth with passive and active, so now I know I need power. 90w is not too good, man. I would go passive with double the power, and the system will be loud and clean. Also, I am not a big fan of bridging 4 channels into two, cause you never know how that amp will behave in bridged mode. If your preouts dont have equally balanced voltage levels, you are looking at increased distortion issues, which is the case with pretty much all amps out there. Some are worse some are better, but all have these issues. Physics to blame. You can google that. Go ahead and try it, you may not notice anything, it's just me and some other people may be anal about such details.

Oh and, I am not intending to get into arguements on how passives are adding resitance, losing 3db, etc, etc. I know all about the benefits of going active. All I am saying in this case I will choose more power over everything else active set-up has to offer, unless he gets a bigger amp. I feel, 150w/side is where it starts to sound good, and anything over 200w/side becomes overkill.

Edited August 19, 2008 by 1sashenka

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

You should hear how loud my car can get with 50-60 watts going to each mid and tweet.

[Karatekid 0]

Ok so is it better to get a 4 channel amp with more power and go active or get a 2 channel amp and use the crossovers.

I want my system to be loud but i care more about the sound quality.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Part of the problem is, everyone's definition of loud is a little different. I would also budget for some sound deadening to help with keeping a clean sound and reduce vibration and exterior road noise.

[1sashenka 0]

Part of the problem is, everyone's definition of loud is a little different. I would also budget for some sound deadening to help with keeping a clean sound and reduce vibration and exterior road noise.

Agreed and agreed.

[1sashenka 0]

It's about balance too. My standards are very high, when it comes to tuning, and I found it very difficult to tune an active front stage with having to feed lets say 75w to each speaker. No matter how much you play with the gains, the results are not good enough in most cases. The tweeter is just so efficient, that it is too loud in this case. This might be ok, if you play the music at moderate levels, but once you start blaring it, it shows the tweeter is overwhelming. I always liked the idea of feeding the tweets like half the power from the mids 75/150. That could be done with two separate amps, or amps already designed with this in mind like JL 450/4 with rear channels half the power, or the new Audison Lrx 5.1k, etc. The other alternative is to get a processor like AudioControl or Alpine 701, etc, so you can adjust the output levels.

So, I hope you can see what I mean, and in this here case, it does not look if any of these things are happening. So given the equipment at hand, I choose a passive set-up hands down. Plus, the passives probably have attenuation settings you can play with.

Edited August 19, 2008 by 1sashenka

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Much of that ^^ can be addressed with an active ready head unit, or outboard processor, but then it can get pricey.

[Karatekid 0]

Part of the problem is, everyone's definition of loud is a little different. I would also budget for some sound deadening to help with keeping a clean sound and reduce vibration and exterior road noise.

I orignally was going to deaden the doors. How many watts would u give ur fronts to keep up with about 900 watts of bass?

Also Would a 2 channel amp w/crossover be better than a 4 channel amp active?

Looking for sound quality

[1sashenka 0]

Well, to me, it seems you're lacking processing capabilities to do a great job at this point, so active is out IMO. I hope what I wrote above clears up a few things, cause you may want to do it right if you go active, or not do it at all. That CDT passive set sounds pretty incredible, and I bet you are getting it for a very good price, as they are on sale these days. You can get a two channel amp, or a four channel and bridge it, if you really want to got that way. I am just saying that guys that are picky about SQ, would not do any bridging on the front stage, as distortion is more audible on higher freqs.

[Karatekid 0]

Ok what would i need to make it possible to do an active set up?

Also could u give some sites to..

[1sashenka 0]

It was covered already. You pretty much need ahead unit like Alpine 9887, which is ideal for active set-ups, or an outboard processor, or get a 4-channel amp with different power on fronts and rears. Plus, is that AQ amp for SPL, and not known for it's SQ. I am sure there are cleaner amps out there to feed your front stage. I would look into Audison Lrx or Vrx, Zapco Ref or C2K, Arc Audio XXK or FD or SE, or if cheaper - Sundown. There is a 2500XXK on Ebay right now for a passive set-up, and also a 6-channel Arc KS for active, in which case you could use the 2 channels for your tweeters, and bridge the other 4 to 2 for your mids.

Edited August 19, 2008 by 1sashenka

[1sashenka 0]

Actually that KS900.6 does not seem to have a freq x10 multiplyer, so you still need a processor, so I guess it is out. Hope all this helps... In your case, if you're set on AQ amp, I would not go active. You may be very happy with bridged 4-channel. Back to square one

You could theoratically go active with AQ amp, but I am not sure if you will be pleased with the results. Also I have tried working with several CDT tweeters. None of them liked active for whatever reason. I always felt CDT mids were incredible, but tweeters always left me wanting more, and I think CDT makes them work rather well with their passives. Not sure if there are any people out there running CDT tweeters active and are happy. They just hate being crossed low, and I am saying they are happier in a 3-way active set-up, where they are crossed over 5-6khz. Just like LPG NA's, they are perfect for 3-ways, but become pretty screamish at low freqs, but somewhow CDT makes it work at 3.7khz with passives, if you attenuate the tweeter like 3db lower. And having CDT mids going as high as 5-6khz may be streching it. Not a lot of 2-way design mids are happy going that high.

I think CDT's are happier in passive mode.

Edited August 19, 2008 by 1sashenka

[1sashenka 0]

Also, it is important to know if you're getting DRT-25 tweeter, which is around 90db sensitivity with 480 xover, or DRT-26 with around 92db, cause the mid is around 89-90db. So, actually DRT-25 is a better match, and DRT-26 is not a better tweeter in reality, just freaking louder, which is unnecessary. 480 xover has tweeter attenuation, which is good, but has a dreaded tweeter protection, 560 does not have the protection(good), but if you want to lower the tweeter output, you have to use "image" input instead, which is 3db lower. I would actually be happier with regular ES mid, DRT-25 tweeter, and 560 xover - if at all possible. Upgrading to DRT-26 is pointless as it is not better, plus it is a bad idea as it is too efficient for this set. All is good, even 480 xover, just away from the DRT-26 if you can.

Also, CDT silks are better than Aluminums or Titaniums. Silks are bright enough, but CDT metal will break your ears at loud volume levels.

Edited August 19, 2008 by 1sashenka

[Karatekid 0]

ok u seem like u know alot. So what front stage would u choose? Willing to spend about 500 on speakers and amp.

[///M5 2,833]

Well, to me, it seems you're lacking processing capabilities to do a great job at this point, so active is out IMO. I hope what I wrote above clears up a few things, cause you may want to do it right if you go active, or not do it at all. That CDT passive set sounds pretty incredible, and I bet you are getting it for a very good price, as they are on sale these days. You can get a two channel amp, or a four channel and bridge it, if you really want to got that way. I am just saying that guys that are picky about SQ, would not do any bridging on the front stage, as distortion is more audible on higher freqs.

What you are just saying makes no sense at all. How does bridging have anything to do with distortion at high frequencies. More headroom is ALWAYS better.

[///M5 2,833]

Oh, one other thing, I'd run like hell from the AQ amps.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Oh, one other thing, I'd run like hell from the AQ amps.

[1sashenka 0]

Well, to me, it seems you're lacking processing capabilities to do a great job at this point, so active is out IMO. I hope what I wrote above clears up a few things, cause you may want to do it right if you go active, or not do it at all. That CDT passive set sounds pretty incredible, and I bet you are getting it for a very good price, as they are on sale these days. You can get a two channel amp, or a four channel and bridge it, if you really want to got that way. I am just saying that guys that are picky about SQ, would not do any bridging on the front stage, as distortion is more audible on higher freqs.

What you are just saying makes no sense at all. How does bridging have anything to do with distortion at high frequencies. More headroom is ALWAYS better.

You probably misunderstood what I was saying. It has nothing to do with power/headroom. I am all for overkill, and running over 250w/side on my fronts. Here is a quote from Arc Audio SE manual. And you can also google the details, if necessary for the facts on this matter.

"All Arc Audio amplifiers include an input mode switch. This switch controls the signal being sent to the amplifier sections. Most 2-channel amplifiers can be bridged into a single channel however if the signal to the channels is not exactly the distortion will increase significantly. The mode switch solves this problem by offering 3 modes of operation."

So you see, it's about the differences in signal strength. And like I was sayng earlier, some amps behave better some worse in bridged modes for high pass components, low pass equipment like subs are not affected as much due to lower audibility. It is also about dampening. You can look at dampaning figures on a manual, and argue till you're blue in a face, that according to calculations, and such high dampning factor of a certain amp, that for example anything over 25 is inaudible, but in reality most people will hear the difference between 25 and 200 final dampening on certain impedance load on the front stage. Subs again, not so much. I for one have little faith in damping factor rating. For front stage, you CAN hear the speaker control differences at different impedances. I've heard amps with lower dampening rating sound better than the ones rated higher, but it's not only about dampening. This is another can of worms. Hey, if bridging a 4-channel into a 2-channel did not have it's shortcomings, that everyone would be doing it, as it makes perfect sense to spend less money to get more power out of the amps.

Edited August 25, 2008 by 1sashenka

[Lord Baccus 1]

Maybe check out the Hi-Vi components. But if you are getting a 4 channel consider going active.

i know this has come up before but i wish someone would do a "HOW to" DIY with pics... or a sticky ....

i wanna go active but i know ill F-it up...

i have NO CULE how to manage any Freq above 120Hz