Hertz mpk 6.5 components not sounding like I want

[Androidaaron36]

Could really use a reference point for tuning these 500$ speakers that arent clarifying like my 150$ skars did they're clear but just the vocals aren't as loud or lively as I hoped for tweets seem to throw out more then the drivers..

Did my best on my pioneer Nex 13 band head unit

Left the soundstream tn4.900 on full pass .

I don't know if it's time alignment or crossover settings somethings off

Where's a sweet point to start of with between my amp and pioneer head unit..

Will admit I'm not an expert with understanding crossover adjustments but I know how to build and install .

Click to read more...

 

[Boomin_tahoe 5,000+ posts]

Def HU settings... @Jeffdachef is very knowledgaeable in that region.

 

[Jeffdachef 5,000+ posts]

Could really use a reference point for tuning these 500$ speakers that arent clarifying like my 150$ skars did they're clear but just the vocals aren't as loud or lively as I hoped for tweets seem to throw out more then the drivers..Did my best on my pioneer Nex 13 band head unit

Left the soundstream tn4.900 on full pass .

I don't know if it's time alignment or crossover settings somethings off

Where's a sweet point to start of with between my amp and pioneer head unit..

Will admit I'm not an expert with understanding crossover adjustments but I know how to build and install .

step one, leave any rear speaker on head unit power,

Then either:

Bridge the 900.4 to 2 channel mode and lower the 5khz to 8khz EQ region a few levels. or

ditch the passive crossovers and run active.

You dont have any proper network mode crossovers on your NEX head unit, unless its a 2018 model, all the older NEX head units have zero network mode capability so you fked. You only have standard crossovers and literally those do jack sh*t for your sound. Time alignment mainly affects sound stage, it has very little effect on how clear and vibrant the mids and highs sound.

This is why i keep telling people to stay the fk away from components and go raw drivers.

You are literally playing a fking lottery when it comes to passive component sets because it MAY OR MAY NOT work with your car acoustics. You are literally stuck with a sh*tty crossover point that wont work well with your car acoustics and you cant do sh*t about it. You cant even adjust the mid or tweeter volume levels to have a proper blend either.

While network mode, you can literally make ANY mid work with any tweet and have good results no matter what as long as you have a good tune.

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

The crossover networks are designed with two things in mind. A protecting the drivers and B phasing between the drivers. a properly designed passive network is perfectly fine. its the phasing issues when drivers are on different axis distances and elevations.

Even with a DSP some corrections are just out of reach. i always highly recommend that the tweeters be on the same axis in respect to your ears. distance isn't a big deal.. if one of them in 90 degrees out of phase make sure both of them are. or build a angle bracket to compensate(which i recommend)

using DSP and just any slope could cause some nasty comb filtering and phase issues that cause delay/distortion around the xover points. thats the tricky part about raw drivers and mounting locations

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

sell that POS NEX and grab you a JVC 830 or 840. better deck over all and has just about all the processing you could ask for

 

[Jeffdachef 5,000+ posts]

thats nice and all but doesnt change the fact that he has zero control over mid and tweet nor the crossover points. ITS GARBAGE compared to active. No self respecting modern SQ enthusiasts run passive crossovers competitively nowadays.

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

thats nice and all but doesnt change the fact that he has zero control over mid and tweet nor the crossover points. ITS GARBAGE compared to active. No self respecting modern SQ enthusiasts run passive crossovers competitively nowadays.

because DSP is convenient not because it sounds better. its painstaking to test 4 or 5 xover points. the more signal processing you need the more you change hte orginal recording. you try o match levels with the EQ from hte refraction/reflections from the cabin but your playing with the phase and introducing IMD with too much. if you can cut its best to cut. boosting is almost never good thing.

 

[Jeffdachef 5,000+ posts]

because DSP is convenient not because it sounds better. its painstaking to test 4 or 5 xover points. the more signal processing you need the more you change hte orginal recording. you try o match levels with the EQ from hte refraction/reflections from the cabin but your playing with the phase and introducing IMD with too much. if you can cut its best to cut. boosting is almost never good thing.

cutting EQ alone to tame harsh peaks is garbage compared to a natural cut with a crossover gap with proper slope. There's literally no argument here, Active setups are the setups to beat in every competition everywhere. You dont get perfect results with passives man.

 

[Boomin_tahoe 5,000+ posts]

I'm good friends with an IASCA judge. He's told me the same thing....go active, esp if your competing, or just want a loud system.

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

cutting EQ alone to tame harsh peaks is garbage compared to a natural cut with a crossover gap with proper slope. There's literally no argument here, Active setups are the setups to beat in every competition everywhere. You dont get perfect results with passives man.

bullshit. crossover present more phase issues than EQ. you gonna use 3 crossovers to tame reflection at 8k 11k and 2500?

Phase, Time and Distortion in Loudspeakers