how would you set these speakers up?

I have a pair of peerless sls 6.5s in the doors,they crossed over at 600hz/low ,a pair of dayton rs 150 6.5"in my kick panels crossed over@ 600hz /high mated with a pair of jl audio crt050 tweeters crossed @ 4000hzhigh. My question is how would you wire them up and what size amp and how many channels

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

If they're crossed over already, you're done.

What, precisely, is your desired end result?

Active? Passive? What do you feel you're missing?

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

haemphyst wrote:

---

If they're crossed over already, you're done.

What, precisely, is your desired end result?

Active? Passive? What do you feel you're missing?

---

Sorry if i wasnt specific enough,I meant how much power would you run to them and how would you do it?.what size amp how many channels and how would you wire them?

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

haemphyst wrote:

---

If they're crossed over already, you're done.

What, precisely, is your desired end result?

Active? Passive? What do you feel you're missing?

---

The system is a passive setup using in line crossovers,my desired end result would be nice ,clean music .I feel like i am not getting full potential out of this set up ,it is currently powered by a kenwood 500x4 amp that produces 40 watts rms per channel.The highs share the 40watts (daytonrs150's and jl audio crto50),and the sls each have 40watts rms going to them.I know i am underpowering them and am thinking about a 6channel amp I just dont know how much power or if using a 6 channnel would be my best option

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

That's really going to be completely up to you, depending on what kind of sound you are looking for.

In my system, for example, I run my 6's @ 330W per channel, from 80Hz to 600Hz. My 4's are run at 175W per channel, from 600Hz to 3.5kHz, and my tweeters run at 175W per channel at 3.5kHz and up. Six dedicated channels. Even I admit I am a bit insane, running 1200 watts to my doors, more than nearly ANYBODY even runs to a dedicated subwoofer.

Now, while I don't run AT those power levels, EVER, there is that much power "on tap", for perfect reproduction. My amplifiers never even remotely get close to clipping...

Most people would be happy with 1/10th of that much power. 75 watts each woofer, 50 watts each "mid", and 25 to 30 watts each tweeter... Using passive crossovers? Two channels. Using active crossovers? Four or six channels. Nobody is going to be able to answer that question for you with a solid cut-and-dried solution. How radical do you want to get?

When you get into a three-way system in your doors, it's a different animal completely...

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

haemphyst wrote:

---

That's really going to be completely up to you, depending on what kind of sound you are looking for.

In my system, for example, I run my 6's @ 330W per channel, from 80Hz to 600Hz. My 4's are run at 175W per channel, from 600Hz to 3.5kHz, and my tweeters run at 175W per channel at 3.5kHz and up. Six dedicated channels. Even I admit I am a bit insane, running 1200 watts to my doors, more than nearly ANYBODY even runs to a dedicated subwoofer.

Now, while I don't run AT those power levels, EVER, there is that much power "on tap", for perfect reproduction. My amplifiers never even remotely get close to clipping...

Most people would be happy with 1/10th of that much power. 75 watts each woofer, 50 watts each "mid", and 25 to 30 watts each tweeter... Using passive crossovers? Two channels. Using active crossovers? Four or six channels. Nobody is going to be able to answer that question for you with a solid cut-and-dried solution. How radical do you want to get?

When you get into a three-way system in your doors, it's a different animal completely...

---

I basically want to get maximum performance out of my speakers ,thanks for the info and I do understand that there is no cut and dry answer just looking for ideas on the best way to set it up ,I have been reading into seperate channels for each individual speakers thats seems to be most commom for 3 way setups,basically i am thinking 80watts rms to each of my sls 6.5s 600lp/hz.and 60wattsrms to each dayton and 50wattsrms to each jl audio crt050

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

I wouldn't do that.  Since you already have passive Xovers built, wire all three speakers to the same amp and feed them 100 to 150 watts.  I bet it will sound just as good as a tri-amp setup and you won't have to worry about getting it all balanced correctly.  (Did you pad the tweeter to match the midwoof sensitivity?)

-------------
Support the12volt.com

dyohn wrote:(Did you pad the tweeter to match the midwoof sensitivity?)

can you put that in lamens terms so i can understand?lol Im still new at this!!

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

The Dayton RS-150 woofer has a sensitivity of about 88 db/watt/meter and the TR050 tweeters have sensitivity listed at 91 db/watt/meter.  So, in order to match these so they play back at the same relative volume levels you'll need to pad the tweets by about -3db.  This means you need to insert an L-pad or fixed resister network that will attenuate them by -3db.  BTW the tweets will never see more than 10 watts in a 100 watt per channel system, and usually much less than that.

-------------
Support the12volt.com

DYohn] wrote:

---

The Dayton RS-150 woofer has a sensitivity of about 88 db/watt/meter and the TR050 tweeters have sensitivity listed at 91 db/watt/meter.  So, in order to match these so they play back at the same relative volume levels you'll need to pad the tweets by about -3db.  This means you need to insert an L-pad or fixed resister network that will attenuate them by -3db.  BTW the tweets will never see more than 10 watts in a 100 watt per channel system, and usually much less than that.

---

No,i havent done that yet!! Can i get the l pads or fixed resistors at partsexpress? could you recommend some? What about if I got a 2 channel amp that 150watts rms x2@4ohms and wired them up like this: the mid,woofer and tweeter on the left side of the truck to one channel and the right side on the other channel ,instead of how they are wired now : The dayton and the tweeter share one channel per pair (so they shar approx 40 watts rms)and the dedicated midbass is wired in stereo so getting about 40 watts rms each (if the amp actually produces that)

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

I suggest buying an 8-ohm L-pad which you can then use to dial in the tweet by ear.  THIS will work and they come with a nice knob.

One for each tweeter.  Not the mid, the tweeter.

-------------
Support the12volt.com

Do you think if I changed my amp from my current kenwood kac6404 it has these specs:

4-Channel Class AB Car Amplifier RMS Power Rating:
4 ohms: 40 watts x 4 chan.
2 ohms: 60 watts x 4 chan.
Bridged, 4 ohms: 130 watts x 2 chan.
Max power output: 125 watts x 4 chan. MOSFET power supply LED power indicator 4/3/2 channel operation Speaker-level inputs (adapter included) Short circuit, DC offset, overload, and thermal protection circuitry Aluminum die cast heat sink Built-in cooling fan Gold-plated RCA level inputs Gold-plated screw terminals Fixed high-pass filter (80 Hz, 12 dB/octave) Variable low-pass filter (50-200 Hz, 12 dB/octave) CEA-2006 compliant amplifier Frequency response: 50-200 Hz Dimensions: 13"L x 2.3"H x 9"D

To a zapco i450 with these specs, would it make a big difference?
4-Channel with Crossover and Remote Bass
-Balanced line input for OEM integration
-Unbalanced RCA input
-RCA output
-Bridgeable 4-channel amp
-MOSFET power supply
-Bass equalization
-Variable electronic crossover
-Remote bass gain

4-channel, 4 ohms: 4 x 50 Watts
4-channel, 2 ohms: 4 x 90Watts
Stereo, 4 ohms: 2 x 180 Watts
T.H.D. : <0.3%
Frequency Response: 10 - 25KHz
S/N Ratio: >90dB
Channel Separation: >50dB
Dimensions: 13"L x 9.9"W x 2.25"H
ZAPCO








-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

difference in output would be inaudible. Difference in overall fidelity? Possibly noticeable. The Zapco amplifiers are much better designed circuits than the Kenwoods, (no matter WHAT Kenwood claims on their birthsheets) and may or may not sound better to YOU.

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

haemphyst wrote:

---

difference in output would be inaudible. Difference in overall fidelity? Possibly noticeable. The Zapco amplifiers are much better designed circuits than the Kenwoods, (no matter WHAT Kenwood claims on their birthsheets) and may or may not sound better to YOU.

---

Could you explain a little more in depth about oveall fidelity?thanks for the info

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

I was simply expressing a subjective ideal... Sound perception is completely subjective, but there are cues in all music, that can be "psychoacoustic".

The slew rate, IMD, damping, THD, S/N ratio, output current, and most all of the other things that make up an amplifier's output, will all likely be significantly better on the Zapco amplifiers than on the Kenwoods. Knowing this may make the system "sound better to you". This is where the psychoacoustics come into play.

If your ear and brain are highly trained, there are differences in amplifier topologies that are audible. Class A biasing, vs. Class AB biasing are plainly differentiatable to someone that knows what they are listening for. Is it a physical "thing" that they are hearing? Is it a *quantifiable* difference? It's really unknown, but it has been shown over and over that it can be heard. Those are "psychoacoustics". *WILL* you hear a difference? *I* can't tell you that you will. *COULD* you hear a difference? Maybe. Is that potential difference actually the amplifiers, or is it your brain SAYING there is a difference? Again... It is not anything I can tell you WILL be there...

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

thanks again haemphyst ,do you think this amp would make a difference:Clarion APA4320 4/3/2 Ch. Amp 80x4@4ohm 230wattsrmsx2@4ohm

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

For the same reasons I previously stated, only in the opposite direction. There are not MANY amplifiers I would put a step below the Kenwood, but anything from Clarion, I would.

NOBODY will be able to tell you if you will hear any difference, as an absolute... With more power, it MAY get louder, but that's all I could possibly commit to. I don't know, man...

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

ok thanks a bunch haemphyst, Im looking for a good amp to basically double my power and produce good clear sound any recomendations would be greatly appreciated

-------------
-A vision without a plan is just a hallucination-

You will be throwing good money after (perceived) bad...

I firmly believe you have as much as you need... Tuning is what you need to focus on, now. Get it sounding RIGHT before you add any power. Adding power, without proper level adjusting, gain matching and overall tuning will gain you nothing. Doubling your power will not make it sound better, only louder, and even that's debatable as to whether or not you will even be able to hear it!

If you twist my arm for a good amp recommendation, consider seriously the Alpine PDX amps - specifically the 4.100. Good power, and really clean sounding. More than you are looking for, but also not TERRIBLY expensive for the performance level...

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."