Stereo Information (Wiring, Upgrades, etc...)

Cathul

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
733
Reaction score
305
Location
Germany
First Name
Peter
Vehicle(s)
Ford Mustang GT
With passive crossovers you cannot do time alignment of individual speakers, nor can you EQ individual speakers.
Time alignment is important, but above 1-2kHz you locate sound sources more via volume of the source and less via the phase difference due to timing mismatch. That's the reason people argue you can get away with no time alignment between midrange and tweeters, especially if they are crossed around 3k Hz or higher and the distance to the drivers ear is within a reasonable amount.
With EQ... well, if you got 30 bands of parametric EQ it should be enought to cover both midrange and tweeter.

That said i would always cross midbass to midrange/highs active and not via passive crossover as time alignment in this area is crucial for proper staging and imaging. Even moreso between subwoofer and midbass.
So for a 3-way front you could get away with a 4 channel amp and 6-channel DSP and run both midbass drivers active on channel 1+2 on the amp, midrange/tweeters on channel 3+4 with passive crossover and sub on a monoblock (or 5 channel amp) from channel 5(+6) (channels correspond with channels on the DSP).
 

djcwardog

V8 Driver
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Threads
2
Messages
94
Reaction score
29
Location
Central KY
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT Base with PP
[Re: JBL DSP4086] That is a pretty impressive DSP for what it is. Only thing I think it is missing is an RTA.
I’ve got everything in and powered up. So far I’ve been unable to get my laptop to “connect” to the DSP4086. Disabled firewall for the program, used JBL’s USB cable, installed driver before program, etc. Still no joy. JBL tech has an open case for me to help solve. Until then, my Alpine ILX-407 has its own built-in suite of signal adjustments. Using those for now I’ve got a listenable system. Until I can get it to “connect”, my JBL DSP4086 is serving as a basic 4-ch amp I guess out of the box.
 

S550_Newbie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
7
Messages
408
Reaction score
452
Location
North Georgia Mountains
First Name
Kelly
Vehicle(s)
2020 GT PP1
With passive crossovers you cannot do time alignment of individual speakers, nor can you EQ individual speakers.
Time alignment is important, but above 1-2kHz you locate sound sources more via volume of the source and less via the phase difference due to timing mismatch. That's the reason people argue you can get away with no time alignment between midrange and tweeters, especially if they are crossed around 3k Hz or higher and the distance to the drivers ear is within a reasonable amount.
With EQ... well, if you got 30 bands of parametric EQ it should be enought to cover both midrange and tweeter.

That said i would always cross midbass to midrange/highs active and not via passive crossover as time alignment in this area is crucial for proper staging and imaging. Even moreso between subwoofer and midbass.
So for a 3-way front you could get away with a 4 channel amp and 6-channel DSP and run both midbass drivers active on channel 1+2 on the amp, midrange/tweeters on channel 3+4 with passive crossover and sub on a monoblock (or 5 channel amp) from channel 5(+6) (channels correspond with channels on the DSP).
I’ve got everything in and powered up. So far I’ve been unable to get my laptop to “connect” to the DSP4086. Disabled firewall for the program, used JBL’s USB cable, installed driver before program, etc. Still no joy. JBL tech has an open case for me to help solve. Until then, my Alpine ILX-407 has its own built-in suite of signal adjustments. Using those for now I’ve got a listenable system. Until I can get it to “connect”, my JBL DSP4086 is serving as a basic 4-ch amp I guess out of the box.
I had the same issue with my D6.1200, it turned out to be a bad USB cable. There are some oddities where I had to manually install the drivers for it as well. These are amplifier / audio companies after all, not computer technology.
 

djcwardog

V8 Driver
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Threads
2
Messages
94
Reaction score
29
Location
Central KY
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT Base with PP
I did not. Just would not connect to my laptop. Sent it back and installed a JL Audio VX800/8i in its place. Wow! This one DOES work!

So… I also swapped in the factory 8” system with Nav and set it to output flat (unequalized) speaker level outputs to the new JL DSP amp. The ILX-407 is now in my 1997 F-250 HD pickup. Serious upgrade there for the farm truck! A few photos attached to show what we can do in any vehicle along with these cool Mustangs. I pried off the grilles of the blown factory door speakers in the truck to do a three-way Morel component set in each door. The old-school Metra dash kit makes the new-school Alpine ILX-407 look right at home. Good sound here for the farm/shop truck!

8AD7E004-882D-409B-856F-D03BE3873561.jpeg


AACF7328-1A5C-473F-94F7-90EF8A1950D9.jpeg


F67C74D6-0B3B-4BC0-AEB1-269ACDCCFAE7.jpeg


099F4FAB-B7F8-4BC9-A6E1-21AA07FA6B8F.jpeg


1A4A7CF9-42E4-4870-A925-3CC060DF39CC.jpeg


88950F5C-F831-4300-BED5-ADDB2AD57C3D.jpeg
 
Last edited:


bitterXend

Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
Location
Hamburg, Germany
First Name
Dave
Vehicle(s)
2015 GT Coupé, US model
Now that I have my speakers, DSP and Amp figured out, I only need to do something about the Subwoofer.

I have the stock 8" Subwoofer in the trunk. I am now considering to build a new front plate for the enclosure that would fit a 10", eventually even get it a bit bigger for a bit more volume in the enclosure. But keeping it where it is, to not lose too much space in the trunk.

Does it make sense to go for a 8" to 10" upgrade, with the limited volume the enclosure offers, or would a better 8" in the same enclosure sound better?
 
Last edited:

S550_Newbie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
7
Messages
408
Reaction score
452
Location
North Georgia Mountains
First Name
Kelly
Vehicle(s)
2020 GT PP1
How much airspace is inside the stock enclosure? I assume it's a sealed enclosure?
 

bitterXend

Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
Location
Hamburg, Germany
First Name
Dave
Vehicle(s)
2015 GT Coupé, US model
20210819_150747589_iOS.jpg



I mean, how much does it hold. 13 liters eventually? I would eventually try to pull it out until that cover in front of it to win that space.
 

S550_Newbie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
7
Messages
408
Reaction score
452
Location
North Georgia Mountains
First Name
Kelly
Vehicle(s)
2020 GT PP1
20210819_150747589_iOS.jpg



I mean, how much does it hold. 13 liters eventually? I would eventually try to pull it out until that cover in front of it to win that space.
So if that is an 8" there is likely less than .5 cu ft in there. Guessing of course. Sealed enclosures can sound good however generally speaking you need a lot more power to push the driver since it has so much air resistance working against the motor. Personally I would get rid of it and build an enclosure for a single high end 8" or 10" woofer. You can build a pretty small enclosure that is ported which will make a huge difference.
 

Cathul

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
733
Reaction score
305
Location
Germany
First Name
Peter
Vehicle(s)
Ford Mustang GT
Just an information for all the people doing the ForScan mod to disable EQ on their systems.
My system was a 12-speaker Shaker system.
That means variable line level from ACM to DSP-amplifier in drivers kickpanel.
I changed the amp to a DSR1 that is feeding a "flat" signal to a Mosconi Pico 8/10 DSP.
I even changed the ACM EQ settings to "00", i.e. flat signal/no eq.

That Mosconi has the ability to measure the electrical input.

So i measured the input to the Mosconi this morning (DSR1 EQ set to all flat, so no change in response there).

At volume lvl 30 the signal measured totally flat.
At volume lvl 3 the signal had an 8 dB bass boost at ~50Hz.

So if you work with an aftermarket DSP or DSP amplifier that measure that system at volume lvl 10 or so with pink noise... please note that you're loosing a bit of bass output when going higher than that due to the diminishing bass boost at higher volumes.
 

StangTime

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Threads
51
Messages
2,513
Reaction score
2,532
Location
Ontario 🇨🇦
First Name
Todd
Vehicle(s)
19' GT PP1 Manual
Just an information for all the people doing the ForScan mod to disable EQ on their systems.
My system was a 12-speaker Shaker system.
That means variable line level from ACM to DSP-amplifier in drivers kickpanel.
I changed the amp to a DSR1 that is feeding a "flat" signal to a Mosconi Pico 8/10 DSP.
I even changed the ACM EQ settings to "00", i.e. flat signal/no eq.

That Mosconi has the ability to measure the electrical input.

So i measured the input to the Mosconi this morning (DSR1 EQ set to all flat, so no change in response there).

At volume lvl 30 the signal measured totally flat.
At volume lvl 3 the signal had an 8 dB bass boost at ~50Hz.

So if you work with an aftermarket DSP or DSP amplifier that measure that system at volume lvl 10 or so with pink noise... please note that you're loosing a bit of bass output when going higher than that due to the diminishing bass boost at higher volumes.
Good to know and thanks for sharing this info! I had seen a post on another Ford forum where someone did some frequency plots of the head unit output and there was indeed some bass boost being applied even after the Forscan change.

That being said, this is not a bad thing. At lower volume levels it is good to have a slight increase in the bass response to compensate for how we perceive sound.

I have to revisit my RTA measurements and adjust my EQ keeping this in mind.

Does your Mosconi show a plot or give you a level based on frequency? I would like to see a screen shot of this.
 

Cathul

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
733
Reaction score
305
Location
Germany
First Name
Peter
Vehicle(s)
Ford Mustang GT
The Mosconi has an RTA. Will do a Screenshot next time i am working on my car.

edit: attached screenshot shows different measurements.
Vol 3 is with highest bass boost. Starting at Vol 15 it's basically flat.

Screenshot 2022-03-19 162555.png
 
Last edited:

S550_Newbie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
7
Messages
408
Reaction score
452
Location
North Georgia Mountains
First Name
Kelly
Vehicle(s)
2020 GT PP1
The Mosconi has an RTA. Will do a Screenshot next time i am working on my car.

edit: attached screenshot shows different measurements.
Vol 3 is with highest bass boost. Starting at Vol 15 it's basically flat.

Screenshot 2022-03-19 162555.png
Does that DSP have the equivalent of AccuBass that AC uses?
 

Cathul

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
733
Reaction score
305
Location
Germany
First Name
Peter
Vehicle(s)
Ford Mustang GT
No, that is an RTA measurement of a sine sweep on the input of the DSP amplifier.
 

StangTime

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Threads
51
Messages
2,513
Reaction score
2,532
Location
Ontario 🇨🇦
First Name
Todd
Vehicle(s)
19' GT PP1 Manual
So, knowing this now. What is the effectiveness of this Forscan eq code that we have been going on about to give us flat output?
 

 
15 - Steeda - 5
Top