Another stereo question - speakers
 

6.5" vs. 6"x9"

Just when I thought I had my system figured out! I was told that 6.5" speakers actually sound better than 6"x9" speakers. Opinions?

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

round speakers have a more clearer sound from what I have been told because the cone is uniform in size.

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

if you can hear the difference between a 6.5 and 6x9, and care enough to know that you hear the difference. you need to adjust the bra that is on top of your head so that they may sound the same.

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

mechanically, you can build a lighter, stronger speaker in a round cone shape then out of a oval cone shape, so in that instance the waterfall chart would show alittle difference. and further more you could consider the cone being a horn because of the point of initiation and it could give the 6x9 a wider dispertion pattern. but the main reason I would rather use a 6.5 is to be able to use a hole saw to cut the hole easier then a saw cutting an oval

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

LOL, I was just commenting on what I was told! :D

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

Man, there are way to many choices out there! :rolleyes:

I am looking at Infinity Kappa speakers, 693.7i(6x9) or 63.7i(6.5). So, in your opinion, what would sound better. 4 6x9s, rated at 110 watts RMS, with 125 watts RMS to each or 4 6.5s, rated at 75 watts RMS, with 90 watts RMS to each?

Or would your above comment come into play and it depend on how my head bra was adjusted? :D

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

power is the key to life, I would go with the most power you can. the shape and size of the speakers does not have that much to do with it.

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

I know a lot of people underpower the speakers. I always try to overpower by about 10%(at rms).

What are the advantages of going to component speakers? I know they are suppose to sound better but why? Are they better speakers or just the crossover systems help them produce better sound?

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

actually co-axial speakers sound better, but there are more speakers out there that are seperate that use better parts and crossovers, that is why people think seperate are better. If you could get a single speaker to produce the full spectrum of sound it would be the best, so you need to get as close to that as possible, which means that a coax speaker is technically better.

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

Wow, I learn something new everyday! Thanks for the info.

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

Yes, must go with big power!!! Take from me, I'm a live engineer, know a little about that. Co-axials sound better because when you put the tweeter in the center instead of lining components up (vertical is typical), it negates the need for more complex crossover networks. When speakers are non-coincident (this is most of the world) there's going to be problems in the transfer areas of each speaker when they are combined together. The transfer areas are where the woofer quits working and the tweeter picks up. (typically around 2000 hertz). Using cheap crossovers, each speaker will roll off sound very slowly meaning they are each working on each other's intended frequencies. This causes all kind of problems we pro audio guys call comb filtering. Each speaker is making the same sound but the tweeter is smaller and will react more quickly than the woofer and will make sound first. The woofer's soundwaves that are a little bit behind in time will interfere with the tweeter's soundwaves and when combined there will be problems in that range that the 2 speakers are common in. And because the tweeter is seperated, there will be those aforementioned problems happening between those 2 speakers (physically) The bigger the speakers, the bigger the problems. That's why my P.A. systems use complicated crossovers and time alignment settings. If one of my settings are off by a few MICRO seconds, then my whole system sounds messed up. The only drawback to co-axial speakers is that the high frequencies will be very pinpointed to a small, area. In other words the sweetspot will be smaller but will sound over all better. Listen to a female's singing voice in different sets of speakers. That will tell you if there are problems or not. If she sounds like she's singing through a straw or seashell, YUCK. An eq will only turn that nastiness down, not fix it. I suggest going with co-axials, a much simpler setup and it will sound better, the woofer and tweeter won't "fight" each other in a certain frequency range. There is more to this, but I'm tired of typing for now.

Bigyellowcat, did you read my post in The Bilge? I know CES was this weekend, think I'll bump it up, it's pretty far back now.

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

yeah, what he said. I did not see that thread but just went and read it, unless you want to sit at a desk and write code you do not want to become a crestron or amx programmer. and there are kids in high school now that are good programmers, so it would be hard to get alot of money starting out because they will work for cheep. I build some crazy audio stuff which is fun, but does not make much money. But I have a new audio project that you might know how to market, or who to talk to. and you would probably be able to run it so call me next week and we can talk.

Re: Another stereo question - speakers
 

Thanks for the help guys! :)