A few alternatives to dash squakers/midtweets

I don't understand what magic JBL has at their disposal that will deliver a dramatically better result than you can get yourself. If you put the car in a chamber and put dummies in the seats with mic an use digital eq to flatten all the frequencies, all that changes as soon as you start the engine and drive down the road. And, there have always been *very* expensive home speakers with passive crossovers, as a lot of audiophiles eschew digital eq. I'm not trying to knock the JBL, it's just that I question the assertion that it's the all-out unbeatable best. It's agreed that it's 6x9 "woofers" won't put out really deep bass, yet, if you add a 10" amplified sub, you immediately break all of the equalization.
It's certainly good and maybe it's grea, but unbeatable it is not.

 

I have those Jl's in my truck...they are excellent. My brother has the same amp and the polks in his ride. The jl's don't seem to take near the watts to drive them.

 

There's nothing magical or fuzzy about Auddyssey. It emits white noise through each speaker and digitally equalizes the pre-amp to flatten the frequency responses. But you can often get better results by moving a speaker a few inches, because then you won't need to use digital eq to distort the sound.

 

JL doesn't make class D amps in that range. I haven't heard anything bad about pioneers new line of amps, but if you have some information I will happily switch. 75 watts per channel has plenty of head room for prius speakers.

As I said before, I agree that if you aren't upgrading your speakers, and like the head unit, the jbl system is a good choice. For myself and others the head unit lacks features that we need, so if you are not getting the sun roof or atp, getting the model II makes sense.

That guy definitely doesn't know his stuff. The DLS speakers have a very high crossover (5000hz) which causes a very different frequency response in the car than the original low crossover jbls. This makes them inherently hard to tune with the speaker positioning. He did not want "kids" touching it, which removed the possibility of someone with more experience to recommend better speakers or to tune them in a better way.

 

Thanks. How do you think they each sound?

 

I don't know why you had to respond, but yes, of course I'm an expert. Most of the companies you've mentioned have consulted with me in their designs.

SO... let's take a given head unit and speaker, and we'll put it inside an anechoic chamber, emit white noise through the amplifier, and measure its frequency response. It will most likely be relatively flat. A better speaker should be flatter, a larger woofer should have less fall-off at lower frequencies, a better amplifier will distort less and will have better rise and fall times with changes of amplitude. You're following me here, right?

Now I put the exact same equipment inside a car, and suddenly I find all sorts of peaks and valleys in the frequency response, because the speaker baffle is made of thin, vibrating metal, the upholstery absorbs random frequencies, and the plastic and glass reflect random frequencies.

There are TWO ways to solve this problem. The Audyssey-type solution is to digitize the input and equalize it. The problem with doing this is that you must create sound that doesn't exist. You sample at a given frequency, then you must output less data than you have input. That's the only way you can digitally equalize. The other problem is that you have equalized for a quiet vehicle without occupants. The second way to solve the problem is to modify the sound absorbing and reflecting properties of the listening environment to reduce the variance in frequency response. In a room, when you put a speaker in a corner, it reflects from the two walls and floor in three different ways. Moving the speaker just a few inches changes these reflections. Adding material that absorbs or dampens specific frequencies is a more effective way of correcting the problem than using an active equalizer. With an active EQ, what sounds good in your seat may not sound good to the person sitting next to you. In fact, what sounds good to you may sound bad to you when a 150 pound bag of salt water is sitting next to you, and, in fact, these eq systems don't correct for the 150 pound bag of salt water that sits in the driver's seat, either.

So, is Audyssey good? Sure. Will it make sound better? Definitely. Is it the best solution? I don't believe so.

 

We both prefer the JL's. It might be that there is just more headroom.

 

Just completed a speaker upgrade in an i-tech prius (equivalent to US car with navigation package without JBL, advanced technology package, solar roof package). Replaced speakers front and rear with Boston Acoustics SC60 splits, Boston GTA-1005 mounted under the passenger seat, and Pioneer SLIM251S4 10" Bass Reflex Subwoofer located (velcroed) in the bin under the cargo floor. For reference, we have a Gen 2 Prius as well with the JBL package, the Gen 3 Prius without JBL stounded better to start off with, though only marginally. The target sound quality was the Mark Levinson system in a Lexus IS250 which was our previous car. Issues that arose were that the standard head unit is 'equalized' with a strong treble emphasis, mainly because the standard 'tweeters' in the top of the dash are actually small midrange drivers (presumably to try to improve the sound spread in the cabin). This had to be overcome with the setting of the amp and crossovers, but once adjusted the sound quality is excellent. The other related issue was a high level of hiss from the system initially, again overcome by careful adjustment of levels. The sub fits with a few millimetres of clearance under the cargo floor, in its supplied enclosure. The main speakers handle most of the bass, but the sub gives some extra impact for percussion. Overall sound is better than the Levinson (more detail and clarity, tighter bass). The overall conclusion is that you can get a pretty acceptable outcome using the standard head unit, provided some care is taken.