I just located a speaker that seems to be too good to be true. It has no crossover, and is full range. Don't know how it works, but whatever.

It's 8" so it should fit directly into place in the strut towers with no adapter bracketing needed. It's about 170 US for a pair, which seems like a fantastic deal.



Anybody using them yet? If someone gets and installs a pair, let me know how they work out.

 

paper cone for $170/pair?
doesn't seem like a good deal at all to me, but i've been out of the stereo biz for a while, any other comments?

 

Some reading may clarify this...
http://www.oldhifi.com/fostex.html

My personal opinion, unless you're creating a system on a huge budget there is no need for stiff, exotic materials in the cones. Not to mention some of the best home audio in the world still uses simple, treated paper drive units.

Also car audio is a huge compromise as it is, why bother obsessing over precision of sound, it's never going to be close to right anyway. You just build something satisfying on a good budget.

 

Home audio does use paper cone speakers, but you have to think about some things...your home speakers don't have to put up with things such as sun, weather, etc like car speakers do. If someone would help me post a pic, I will show ya what I just put in my FC.....these are way cool, as they look like they were specifically made for cars with rotary engines.....someone help me out and you'll see what I mean.

 

I know they have a chance of disintigrating under the conditions they are exposed to in a car. You bring up a good point.

It's more the surround material (the coupling between the cone and the basket) that is apt to fail and rot though. Hopefully the material on these is rubber, not foam. Other than that, they still look like they'd easily fit the bill.

e-mail me that picture and I'll host it for you.
pey8888@hotmail.com

 

Paper cones will fall apart in a hurry mounted in the rear shock towers ... trust me. It's a full range speaker because it uses a whizzer cone, which sounds like crap.

 

Paper cone... Then when you get it you treat it with some laquer. Problem solved.

Also, the original components in my FC were paper cones with foam surrounds. Perfect contenders to disintigrate, but when I pulled them out they looked in tip top condition. If they were going to rot I'm sure they would have done it by now.

Indeed it does used this whizzer thingy, BUT, it's 8" and not a sub, there simply isn't anything else out there like it. All 8" drivers are basically subs. If there was such a thing as 8" coaxials, I'd be touting their virtues for the FC, but there isn't and this is the next best thing. I'm sure this whizzer gadget isn't that offensive, Fostex is a big company that I'm sure they wouldn't want their name associated with a dog of a component.

 

I've pulled probably 50 of those rear speakers out, they all look fine but if you poke the coke they're brittle and crack. And if you put laquer on the cone, you completely change the Q and all other Theile-Small parameters and the speaker ceases to function as it was originally intended.

Trust me, I know what I'm talking about. And you don't want a full range speaker in back to begin with, it will screw up your soundstage. Just get a good 6.5" midrange/midbass. Seal that whole shock tower off, fill it with polyfill, and be happy. Concentrate on putting your money and effort into the front stage speakers. 90% of the sound should be coming from the front. So 90% of your budget should go there too. It's harder to get a good front stage in an RX-7, but the benefit is worth the effort. Just ask the guy who just bought my RX-7 Convertible ... in which I managed to fit a CDT 3-way component set up front. The results were astonishing ... no stupid rear fill speakers either.

 

So if 90% of the sound is coming from the front system, then wouldnt it be fesible to use the rear strut towers for maybe a 6.5'' component sub? Wouldnt that help on space, wieght, and the soundstage?

 

90% of the sound will come from the front speakers if you adjust it that way.

Currently I've got my balance about dead centre, because if you've got them all up front the image looses that holographic quality.

I don't know why people keep saying fronts only.

The absolute ideal set up would be:
Component up front. Mids and highs.
A 6.5" coaxial in the rears.
Two 10" subs in the storage bins.

Woofers = Dynaudio
Tweeters = Scan Speak
Coax = whatever's decent out there

 

Uhm, you've got some misconceptions stuck in your head I see. Your recordings are 2 channel stereo recording, which means they're meant to be reproduced properly with 2 channels, not 4. And good imaging is just that, a focused soundstage coming from the front channels. It's called rear fill for a reason, because in a car the rear channels are only meant to fill in. They're not meant to bring any attention to themselves. People say fronts are the most important because they are. And I guarantee anybody on here that knows their stuff will back that up 100%.

The absolute ideal setup would not be as you describe either. First off, you should be using matched drivers, with a crossover network designed for those matched drivers. Although I can't complain with the choice of Dynaudio or Scan Speak, you shouldn't ever used mis-matched pieces from different manufacturers unless you really really know what you're doing. As far as building custom networks based off the speakers unique parameters. Even then, it's stupid to do all that when companies put all their R&D into doing just that.

No, the idea setup would be something like a 3 way component set up front, with all the drivers located as close to each other as possible ... as high as possible ... and as far away from your ears as possible to equalize distances. Then a decent 5.25 or 6.5 midbass/midrange in the rear shock towers running a bandpass crossover from about 100 - 2500 hz. Give the fronts about 150 - 200 watts, and the rears 25 or so. You put your 'idea' setup against mine and we'll see who wins a soundoff.

Oh, and while subs do work in the bins, they're not the ideal location. You want them at the back of the car ... preferable corner loaded. Putting them in the middle of the car and you do get cancelation, which means less SPL and it won't go as low as it would otherwise.

And how did this thread turn into this anyway?

 

Boosted 7, how about some recommendations for the FD?

I'm about to put a roll bar in the back. Should I bother upgrading the speakers back there before I put in the bar or not?

And you thoughts on front speakers?

 

Having rear speakers still keeps two channel in tact. Two channel is left and right, not front and back. You want the image coming from the centre of the car (it's a tradeoff because you don't have the speakers facing you, nor can you get proper separation between the channels due to the limited width of a car). So the most desirable soundstage is dead centre.

As far as mixing components, tell that to any really high end speaker company. Almost all of the top loudspeakers have raw drivers from manufactures that don't match.

 

what about all the sq winning competition systems that dont just have "rear fill"?

Many if not all that ive worked with and seen have imaging that takes rear speakers into consideration.

 

With over 17 years in the car audio biz I can say without any doubts that Ryan/BOOSTD 7 is exactly right.

 

plus the glass absorbs to much of the sound to make the rear fill even worth fooling with.