Lately some have been interested in upgrading the TSX audio without a sub, as I did.
This poll is to find out if you would be interested in the follwoing system:

This theoretical system would include:

Soft-dome tweets in the factory locations (play lower, sound way better than factory)

5.25 or 6.5 mid-woofs in F door (again, louder and play lower than factory)

audiophile-grade passive xovers

(sound quality and build quality of this system comparable to Alpine X-type or MBQ Premium)

6x9 mid-woofer in rear (similar to MB Q RCE 269 woofer)

50x4 amp (comparable to Alpine in sound quality)

interface box - level matching, line driver, four-band parametric EQ adjusted by installer to predetermined curve using RTA analyzer, and electronic crossover with "subsonic" filter on 6x9s to keep them from ever flapping. This box would allow the installer to "tune" the system for your vehicle.

All this gear would be from a new company that you'd never heard of - but when you looked at it, it would have similar look and feel to MBQ, Alpine, etc. and have a similar warranty.

Your sound quality - volume, dynamics, bass response, vocals - would all be substantially improved.

Thanks to Dan Martin and fdl for pointing out the shortcomings of my first attempt...

 

Thanks for all the poll replies... keep 'em coming! : )

 

Elduderino:

Your describing almost exactly what I'm looking for. I'd add the rear door speakers as I like a little of that dreaded "rear fill." Are you pursuing this setup to make it possible for people here? I was thinking this week of placing the order for my full Focal setup at Street Noyz but maybe I should wait a little while longer if the system you describe is a possibility.

 

hey eld, how about a jl e6450 to power all six drivers? Check out Performance Auto Sound out of Canada for a nice review of the amp.

 

cfox, don't wait for me, Argentina (I figured you might get the obscure reference : )

I have a product idea but I won't be ready any time in the immediate future. My research suggests there is a hole in the 12V product offering that could be remedied, but it would involve a business model that no one has ever tried in car audio before. Not a bootstrapping sort of venture... would require an angel up front to turn it on...

I'm on a biz trip at present, but I'll PM you about it when I have more time in a week or so.

I'll look into that review then, jp... I'm currently torn on the topic of smaller active channels or larger channels with passive xovers. I've read some articles that state that in non-pop music, the energy distribution to the tweeter is significant, and so I worry about the tweeter running out of power if I went active but went with smaller channels to keep cost down, and still went with a tweeter playing fairly low (2200-ish). My reference is the JL 300/4 and the Scan chambered tweets in our TSX.

Thanks, all.

 

hey Eld, I am using scan speak drivers in my stereo upstairs. The speakers are Meadowlark Audio Shearwater Hot Rods (yeah, its a mouthfull). 7 inch mids, 1 1/8th inch tweeters with a 1st order x-over. At presently I am driving them with 100 W tube monoblocks, and they go as loud as I want (haven't measured them, so I won't quote any spl's). Your system will be more efficient if you don't add the (power-robbing) passive drivers. How more efficient? Again, I haven't measured, but "knowledgable" people have said as much as 3 dbs. Right now I am using my 300/4 driving JL XR series components with all four channels time aligned and crossed over using my Alpine head Unit. I fooled around with crossover slopes and points, and I ended up with the passive slopes and crossover point sounding the best. So why go active to just end up with the same points and slopes? Efficiency, more precision (digital versus 5% analog parts), and the ability to time align each driver to my seat. Good luck, experiment, and find what sound the best to you. Oh by the way, Genesis Ice (UK) have true 6 X 9 subs that are free air. They were well review by a UK car stereo magazine a while back.