Just installed my MB Quart QSC 216's...REVIEW

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

Steeeerike three //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

Alright, to both you guys..if you read what I just wrote, I said im going to maxxsonics on friday to get everything checked out, so what are you talking about I wont listen...

anyways...for those of you helping out...I just found out something interesting. I just went to my buddy's shop..who used to work at ABT here in my area. He has experience with the MB Quart Q-line. I showed him my crossover, and he said they are not bi-ampable...there is no piece to move from regular to bi mode. So im hoping that I somehow (would be just my luck) got the wrong crossovers or something...but this is messed up... even the guys at maxxsonics said there should be another input for bi-mode so...... Im gonna post some pics...if any of you have the Premium line, and these look like your crossovers, please let me know.





since they are upside down...the blue wires are the tweeters...left (blue) wire is the - I believe...right one is on -3...from left to right they go 0, -3, -6 in the manual it shows a circle JUST to the left of the MB quart symbol (where that grey piece is) where the bi-mode piece should be....

I did adjust the gains...turned the gain on my bxi2006D down a little bit, and turned the gain on the alpine to i believe 1.2 now, and the max on my head unit is now 30/35 instead of 25/35...sounds a little better I guess. But then again i didnt use a meter, so I dont know if the bass is as loud as it was....to the ear it is though.

 

[headless 10+ year member]

Do the wire inputs/outputs have labels engraved on the x-overs?

Looking at MBQ's PDF file from:

http://www.mbquart.com/all/downloads/datenblaetter/qsc_216.pdf

That crossover looks like the QSC-213, not 216..? The 216 x-over has less white components in it. Strange.

I don't see anywhere the ability to biamp in their documentation; it appears those extra output terminals function as your tweet attenuation. Do you have a manual for these? According to mbq.com, the q216 Signature's are the only biampable qlines other than the QSD which are of course more expensive than the QSC's which you bought...

If you want them louder, bridging your 4ch amp to 2channels could still be an option if it's able to do so. According to a quick google search, the 545 can do 4 or 3 OR 2 channel operation. Bridge it to 2 channels and adjust gains (carefully), see what you get. Either the speakers won't handle that much power (distortion awaits), or they'll get really loud. Ta-da.

Oh wait a second.

According to the first desc of that alpine i found:

Description: 75 watts RMS x 4 at 4 ohms, 500 watts RMS x 1 (When channels 3/4 are briged) + 125 watts RMS x 1 (When channels 1/2 are bridged)

If you're only using 2 channels, according to these specs you're giving your set 75w per side, not 165w per side. it appears the 3/4 channel is meant for subwoofer output or some crazyness and the 1/2 are only good for 125w when bridged. Man that amp just sucks for use powering a set of components if these specs are accurate.

edit: alpine's site gives it 100wx4 into 4ohms w/ a SNA of 73dBa (heh)

 

[FoxPro5 5,000+ posts]

I can't tell from the pics, but the crossover should say QXC 216. All I see is XC 216. And no, we must appologize, the QSC's are NOT biampable. If they were there would be seperate inputs for both the tweeter and woofer. According to the manual there is just the one INPUT: http://www.mbquart.com/all/downloads/einbauanleitungen/qsc_216.pdf

The other two terminals are for -3 and -6db tweeter attuation wiring...which you obviously have found out.

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

I can't tell from the pics, but the crossover should say QXC 216. All I see is XC 216. And no, we must appologize, the QSC's are NOT biampable. If they were there would be seperate inputs for both the tweeter and woofer. According to the manual there is just the one INPUT: http://www.mbquart.com/all/downloads/einbauanleitungen/qsc_216.pdf
The other two terminals are for -3 and -6db tweeter attuation wiring...which you obviously have found out.

correct, BUT...if you look at step 6...you will see that circle I was talking about next to the MB symbol...that is a piece you are supposed to have to move from normal to by mode... and again, when I called, they said that they are bi-ampable, and should be another input.

and about the amp... CEA-2006 Power Rating

• CEA-2006 Power Rating (4Ohm@14.4V = 1%THD+N), S/N 73dBA (Ref. 1W into 4Ohm): 125W x 4

http://www.alpine-usa.com/en/products/product.php?model=MRV-F545&lang=en&tab=F

I dunno...I think something is fishy with the xovers here...and the pics DEFINITELY look different than what was posted.

 

[headless 10+ year member]

correct, BUT...if you look at step 6...you will see that circle I was talking about next to the MB symbol...that is a piece you are supposed to have to move from normal to by mode... and again, when I called, they said that they are bi-ampable, and should be another input.
and about the amp... CEA-2006 Power Rating

• CEA-2006 Power Rating (4Ohm@14.4V = 1%THD+N), S/N 73dBA (Ref. 1W into 4Ohm): 125W x 4

http://www.alpine-usa.com/en/products/product.php?model=MRV-F545&lang=en&tab=F

I dunno...I think something is fishy with the xovers here...and the pics DEFINITELY look different than what was posted.

@12V you'd be seeing under 100w RMS figures if they are supposed to push 125w @ 14.4v. Don't bother buying bostons until you get an amp that really can push the wattage. If you do buy an amp that can push some wattage, try it on the mbq's first. You will absolutely not get an improvement in output from those bostons unless you can amplify them properly. That 545 seems better suited to running some subwoofers than a component set...or for running a low wattage component set and a 300w subwoofer...or for powering one half of the component set and one sub...another of the same amps for the other component half and the other sub. if i were you, i'd sell it and buy a good 2 channel ARC or zapco that really can push 2x200w+. Just imo //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Whatever you were told, the QSC's don't have inputs for biamping. Did you mean step 5? There's no circle in step 6. The circle in step 5 is labelled 'highpass mode' and is probably x-over adjustment and it appears to only apply to the model listed, (it says ONLY QXC210 right next to it...), not the qsc216's.

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

well its 300 bridged at 4 ohms, so i should have enough at 3 ohms for the bostons right....im actually running 13.8V right now, so thats pretty good

 

[headless 10+ year member]

well its 300 bridged at 4 ohms, so i should have enough at 3 ohms for the bostons right....im actually running 13.8V right now, so thats pretty good

300 BRIDGED at 4ohms ON CHANNELS 3+4 would mean you bridge those channels to ONE channel, then you get 1x300w. That would give you ONE of your x-overs power....That's not what you're doing; you're using channels one and two separately which results in 2x100w or so. Your 3/4 are unused. They're not bridged and they're not outputting any power. They're sitting there while 1 + 2 try to power your speakers.

You COULD bridge 3+4 and run both x-overs off of that one channel that you gained by bridging 3+4, getting 500watts @ ohms (in theory), but then you'd lose stereo audio (**** that). The lack of power to these speakers would explain your lack of midbass, as that is what needs the power (tweets get loud on almost nothing)

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

ahhh i got ya..... but also, for what I have now...the birthsheet read 165x4, so I should be getting a solid 125 at 13.8 volts. .....this sucks.

 

[headless 10+ year member]

I'm skeptical of the birthsheet; does the birthsheet say what ohm load it was tested at? is there a graph listed so you can see where the dropoff in distortion starts? Maybe they rated it at 2ohms... i can't imagine them selling this as a 4x100 @ 14.4v and producing 165x4 @ 13.8v....they could sell it as a 4x150 in that case and charge way more. Grasping at straws at this point; let us know how the local guy does with it. Wish i could fiddle some //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

its at 4 ohms...

as far as more power to the mids...i feel like if I add more power...the tweets will explode...they are blarin now, dont need any louder....unless I could bi-amp them so I could control the power to each seperately.

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

im being told that I should try running active xover...?? Is this safe...and when you buy an expensive set of comps...arent a lot of what your paying for is the xover??

 

[squeak12 10+ year member]

Theres nothing unsafe about running active. It just costs more and takes more time to set up.

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

they are expensive ey

you know which ones here I would need?

http://www.mobileaudiocontrol.com/dept.asp?d_id=5251&l1=5251

to run 1 set of comps.

 

[MadAudio 10+ year member]

hold on man sheesh your trying to throw money at a problem that can be solved with tuning. first thing i would do is TURN THE BASS OFF! then reset hu ( flatten everything) turn all processing off. then reset the xovers on amp and hu pop a cd in with some nice vocals on it and start adjusting you hpf( both on amp and hu) for the comps till they sound as good as you can get them with the xovers . then do the same thing with the subs. but make sure your amps gains are set properly first !

then simply play with eq on deck till you got the best sound you can get. sounds to me like your tuning is just way off .

 

[FoxPro5 5,000+ posts]

i can't imagine them selling this as a 4x100 @ 14.4v and producing 165x4 @ 13.8v....they could sell it as a 4x150 in that case and charge way more. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

He has the MRV-f545 which is rated at 125w x 4 @ 4ohms CEA-2006 Power Rating (4Ohm@14.4V = 1%THD+N), S/N 73dBA (Ref. 1W into 4Ohm). You're thinking of the MRV-f345 which is rated at 75w x 4 @ 4ohms. I had a 345 and the birth sheet read 104w (14.4v into a 4 ohm load).