Advantage of kicks?

[kuijo 0]

I've learned the advantage of kicks are the ability to even the amount of space between your ears and the speaker, help with midbass response from being sealed, and help with aiming and imaging.

But i've heard that most speakers were made for IB use and some companys like rainbow don't reccommend sealed enclosures. And could a headunit with time alignment solve the problem of the driver distance?

The reason i ask is because i want to put some woofers into my door to cover from 80hz~800hz and want to know would it be a GREAT advantage to put them in kicks if i got a pair with good off axis response, and had time alignment. Would i still get a lot more midbass from a sealed enclosure?

[dave_Edwards 1]

I have never used kicks or will I----time alignment is all you need( and proper use of an EQ).

Even with the use of kicks it is more hassle and work than some people want to put into their system.

In the Magnum I am running RE 6.5's in the doors(well deadened) and the Alpine tweets in the factory dash spots

when I get my P9 set-up it sound be easy to change "seating postions" and the soundstage can be changed with small changes instead of have kicks to deal with time alignment is where I am going.

hope this helps,

Dave

[kuijo 0]

Thanks it did help, good to know someone is already satisfied with something i'm planning on doing. May i ask what comps you are using or have used?

[Tirefryr 1,742]

With the amount of processing available today it seems that most are going with the drop-in route. I myself am not really even concerned with imaging and soundstage too much in the vehicle. It's just a poor environment to begin with, and I don't really much care whether I "feel" like I'm at a concert in my vehicle. Just pointless to me.

However, if I were to actually build something as far as competition is concerned, I would focus most of my energy on component placement first, before using any time alignment or EQ. The processing is a bandaid and not the cure-all. While it may compensate for a majority of the problems, you're still better off starting with a firm foundation.

[dave_Edwards 1]

I am using RE 6.5 midbasses and Alpine Type X tweets(along w/ the Alpine crossovers.)

[ANeonRider 3]

The Type X crossovers are wonderful pieces. I love the adjustability that they provide for the different install possibilities.

[mrray13 30]

With the amount of processing available today it seems that most are going with the drop-in route.  I myself am not really even concerned with imaging and soundstage too much in the vehicle.  It's just a poor environment to begin with, and I don't really much care whether I "feel" like I'm at a concert in my vehicle.  Just pointless to me.

However, if I were to actually build something as far as competition is concerned, I would focus most of my energy on component placement first, before using any time alignment or EQ.    The processing is a bandaid and not the cure-all.  While it may compensate for a majority of the problems, you're still better off  starting with a firm foundation.

x2..

while the time alignment is sweet, it isn't the best route if going for all out sq...time alignment is kinda like a capacitor. it doesn't solve the problem, and it's no true replacement for the problem.

placement is the key, followed by proper eq'ing. that being said, if ur not after all out competeing, then time alignment will probably work, with proper eq'ing. but it's the cheap way out, IMO....nothing aginst anyone using it (hell, i don't have proper staging, but nor do i care)

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee