legacycentral bbs

I've had a 92 Legacy L sedan for about a year know. I absolutely love driving the car, but the sound has left something seriously lacking.

I replaced the stock radio with a Pioneer Premiere CD deck that puts out 50 watts a channel. I've now got the pennies saved up to take the next step. I want to replace all the speakers and put a 10" or 12" sub in the back. I don't want to really wow anyone, I just want to enjoy my music. I also want to keep costs as low as possible.

If anyone could also give suggestions for some basic entry level aftermarket 6 1/2" speakers thatd be awesome.
Unfortunately, I know jack about setting up subs, especially in older cars, including what components I'm going to need and where to put them. So if anyone could help me in that regard too thatd be awesome.

Thanks in advance!

methinks you should remove the snorkus and plop one something akin to what petridish has and not turn the radio on again. I'm loving driving just listening to my car as it is now. But yeah speakers, polks and infinities are going to be my suggestion.

rmorriso,

Please remove the banner from your signature.

Thank you

Legacy777 wrote:Please remove the banner from your signature.

After you're done with that, go check out josh's page on stereo stuffs. While it may not be a be-all-end-all answer to stereo questions, it will give you a good idea of a start point.

http://www.surrealmirage.com/subaru/subaru.html

Get some nice speakers to fit the stock location, retrofit the subaru tweeter kit and add a WRX subwoofer. The cost will be low and you will have great sound.

Replacing the stock speakers with new aftermarket ones will produce nice results on it's own. My rears were all moldly and nasty after about 14 years.
If you want to put more effort into the system, I run one 12" 500W sub with an 700W amp. Both are mounted on a box for easy removal if cargo space is needed.

I feel that 40 watts per channel on the mains with good efficiency is more than enough, and 80 for the sub. If anyone is local I wouldnt mind if you tried a CD in my car.

The stock speakers are paper cone!

ciper wrote:add a WRX subwoofer. The cost will be low and you will have great sound.

The WRX sub is good for.... well, not much. It adds a bit of bass, but barely anything. Nice 6.5's will put out as much bass as the stock option sub in the WRX will.

Your major companies are what you want for sound. Personally, I like Pioneer speakers. I've got a set in the 95, and they are pretty decent. Nice crispness, and I can take full advantage of my sub (600w through a 15) without fear of blowing them. As long as it's a poly cone and rubber surround, you'll be alright. Polk/Momo speakers are surprisingly nice actually. The carbon fiber cone has some great rigidity, and the surround is pretty flexible. The magnet is decent quality, and they don't top out as much as other speakers I've seen do (my friend has a set in his car).

Subs? Get something decent. It's all about the amp. A quality, efficient amp is what you need. Kenwood makes decent amps, as does Audiobahn. Stay away from Sony, I've heard nothing but bad things about their amps.

The actual sub, well, subs are similar between pricepoints. If you want great quality, Rockford Fosgate, Alpine, and Infinity make some great stuff in the lower price range.

I listened to a stock WRX sub and thought it was a complete waste of space, money and weight. A good set of speakers would create no need for the stock WRX sub. Good for a stock system, but useless for any aftermarket style system.

"The WRX sub is good for.... well, not much. It adds a bit of bass"

Why do you say that? Ive added the WRX sub to three different cars now and all the owners where very happy (one was myself).
Are you one of the guys who wants bass you can hear over everything else? My intention is for flat frequency response and the WRX sub does this nicely, heck even the 80 watt unit does it well.

I prefer having something hitting notes that the door speakers won't, at a volume level that the stock speakers can't acheive.

Driving in the city, I could see how the stock sub could be OK. But on the highway, going 80mph with all 4 windows down and the sunroof open, it just doesn't cut it.

A quality set of speakers will put the wrx sub to shame. Just my experience. It's about as effective as the stock sub in an Explorer. It adds slight body to the music, but always to little for the volume level you have.

I prefer being able to hear my music on the highway. I could blast it in town if I really wanted to and piss everyone off, but I don't really do that. I listen to music loud enough for me to hear, not people around me.

I simply wouldn't waste my money on something that would do me no good.

"going 80mph with all 4 windows down " Is a waste of energy

More gas is used rolling a single window down than would be with the AC turned on. I dont understand why you would want to listen to music on the highway with them all down anyways, much of the sound is lost out the windows.

Otherwise I guess I would agree that the WRX subwoofer couldnt drown out 85DB of background noise!

I've driven solely highway miles, at almost exclusively 80mph this week through an entire tank of gas. All 4 windows were down and the sunroof open almost the entire time.

I got no different mileage now than before. I'll get you an exact number when I fill up my tank, but I've gotten the same miles on this tank as I did making the same drives in the fall with the windows up.

Even driving at 50mph, the stock WRX system did not fulfill my needs.

For the amount of input you feed it, you don't get near the amount you expect. When the sub produces the sound I want, the speakers are to loud to stay in the car with.

You will be happier with even an innexpensive system (like one of those $199 specials at Circuit City).

I always drive with the windows down unless its unbearably hot and humid as I like the smells and air flow in the car.

Steve

ciper wrote:"going 80mph with all 4 windows down " Is a waste of energy

More gas is used rolling a single window down than would be with the AC turned on.

To further support my claim, and to enlighten you, I refer you to the following:

Number 1

Quote from site:

"rolling down windows wins the efficiency contest hands down. Open windows will cut your fuel efficiency by about 2 to 3 percent; the air conditioner will cut it about 15 percent."

Number 2

Quote from site:

"Operating an air conditioner in hot weather can increase fuel consumption by more than 20 percent in city driving."

Number 3

Quote from site:

"Some sources claim that closing windows and using a car's air conditioner will result in higher fuel economy at freeway speeds than leaving the windows open without the air conditioner. FSEC tests showed this in not the case. In repeated evaluation at 65 miles per hour, our test car experienced 11% better fuel efficiency with no A/C and the windows open than using the air conditioner. We also found that closing windows at freeway speeds improved fuel efficiency by 2-3%."

Brought to you by your friends at Google and your good friend BAC5.2.

I would search myself an post conflicting information, it does exist. Instead lets just agree that

The WRX sub is a good unit at low volumes. When driving with the windows open on the highway it wont be able to keep up.

I still disagree about the WRX sub. I, personally, don't find it sufficient at low volumes. No "powered" sub will provide the quality and clarity of a modular style setup. A decent sub and decent amp running decent power will provide significantly better performance than any powered sub could ever provide. Plain and simple, at least from my standpoint. There is no way a powered sub can compete to a stand alone system that optimizes air space and efficiently manages power. It's like comparing a stock turbo to a ball bearing turbo. Both can make 15psi, but one DEFINATELY can do it more efficiently than the other.

And I searched to find conflicting information. Every relevant link I checked supported my side of the story. Does it really pain you that much that I am right? Before, I figured you stuck to your "AWIC" guns to try and "test" the newbie (and you were right about the AWIC being more efficient, I never argued that). But about this?

I have EPA GOVERNMENT tests that prove me right.

EPA test

"Average fuel efficiency decline with A/C: 21%

Average fuel efficiency decline with windows (open vs closed): Unknown, but likely small."

Sorry Ciper. I like you and everything, but I'm right, and it hurts me as much as it hurts you when I say, you are wrong.

"No "powered" sub will provide the quality and clarity of a modular style setup."

How is a powered sub different from the external unit, just that one houses the amplification in the same case as the driver and the other doesnt.

Ill give you a good example you can spend time researching yourself. SVsubwoofers is considered by far the best subwoofer available for the money in home theater. They provide powered and unpowered units that are the exact same model. The performance of the two is equal when an external amp of similar specs is used. http://www.svsubwoofers.com/subs_cylinders.htm

Your argument is the same stuff that comes up on the Audiophile forums. You are trying to be an elitest and its not cool. No matter what others say there are users who are convinced that "seperates" (usually monoblocks for each speaker) will automatically sound better no matter the situation and the amplification built into any receiver will always be worse.


I gave up the windows up argument because Ive wasted too much time on thread off shoots similar to this. Its probably true that the windows down idea is the most efficient based on the data you showed, I have still heard more often that windows up and using the air conditioner is more efficient.
Either way, Id still rather have lower ambient noise and clean sound than the constant wind noise drowning out part of the music.

Could someone else please spend the time showing BAC5.2 that a subwoofer with integrated amp isnt automatically worse?

The sound system in my wagon consists of 4 very efficient 3 way speakers, 120 watt subwoofer and 6 dish in dash cd with tape at 40 watts per channel. The sound is great, volume is 7/40 for normal driving and 12/40 for 80mph highway. Total I spent 375 or so. Dont assume I dont know quality sound either, the components I use on my home theater are of high qaulity and I know what to expect in the car.

ciper wrote:You are trying to be an elitest.

Gee, and you aren't? Again, I refer you to my "FMIC" post. You said things to the effect of, "FMIC is worthless, AWIC is so much better and will always be better for everything."

Sorry Ciper. No.

Also, note that I am speaking of car audio, not home audio where size is not limited as much.

Do you happen to notice that most car audio options are standalone units? Pick the sub optimized for your application, pick the amp that is optimized for your application.

Subs in cars are usually spec'd for the area they are sitting in (always for the case, and a recomended set of levels and outputs for certain trunk space requirements). Some subs (ported), if run "open atmosphere" where there is nothing to rebound the waves BACK to the sub, will sound like crap. This is the difference between sealed, ported, and bandpass boxes. To alter and form the waves and how the sub acts for optimum performance.

There is a thing called optimization. You, undoubtedly know exactly what it is. A powered unit for car audio is rarely optimized for sound performance and is rather more concerned with space (stock units for example).

I'm not an elitest, I just have experience with both, and I prefer seperate units.

I would argue that the number of subs installed in vehicles is probably even for both types. Look at all the users of powered Bazooka style units!

You are right that many are optimized for space (or for ease of installation, which I feel the WRX one is), the increase in sound quality, price and volume with the units you recomend is small compared to the amount of space and flexability lost. Most people want to get to the spair tire without moving a big box around. They dont want holes drilled into the body. They want to fold the seats down and use the storage.
On average the seperate unit you suggest (including amp) would take 10 times the space and cost 4 times as much. I doubt it gives 10 times or 4 times the sound.

I know you have seen plate amps. What stops me from taking the unit you wanted and adding a plate amp to it, creating the unit you think sucks so badly?!

If most aftermarket subwoofers sold are seperate units then I will say most shops want to make profit from two seperate units plus the added installation, instead of giving the person the best priced units for the need.

You say to design the sub for the space and choose the amp to match. The underseat sub had a driver spec'd for the application (underseat) and an amplifier to match (line leve inputs, 4 by 9 inch space, 120 watts).

You need to reach a balance between OPTIMIZATION and Usability. Sure I could fill the entire rear section of my wagon with a speaker setup, but I dont need bragging rights. I can produce great quality of sound for far less than your setup and maintain full functionality of the vehicle as well. A good balance. I get the added benefit of looking completly stock (and deter theives) as well.

"note that I am speaking of car audio, not home audio where size is not limited as much. "
I dont understand, if space is limited in car audio then why isnt my suggestion for the underseat one a good one? If space is not a problem in home audio then why are powered subs available?

I still say there are fewer situations where the FMIC is better than the AWIC. Too many people just follow what others have done instead of researching the options. The front mount cooling ability is related to the air moving over it at the exact moment. The water one can perform equally except with the added feature of delaying the need for air flow. Cooling ability and heat removal can be matched with either, just that the AWIC has the buffer and more parts.
I always say the air water is better? You should read my last post in this thread http://bbs.legacycentral.org/viewtopic.php?t=15000

Understandable entirely.

I had a Bazooka Bass Tube style sub. It was probably the worst junk ever tossed in my trunk. The quest for small size and flexability and cost balance led to poor quality and not so good sound (I hated mine).

Bolting a plate amp to a sub enclosure is quite a different story. You don't weld 2 cars together and call it 1 car. You call it "2 cars welded together." See what I'm saying?

I never said people didn't use the joint units (as you say about FMIC, just because everyone uses it, doesn't mean its right). I said that there are more individual options than joint, powered options.

Just like the FMIC vs. AWIC, one is better for someone than the other. Seperate units is better, and preferable for me. It might not be for you. I have a big ass sub in my trunk, and I enjoy it because it does it's job and it does it with clarity and volume on demand. I don't have any problems with getting the spare out, and I don't try to impress people with it. I paid the same amount as I would have paid for a quality powered enclosure, and I like the results a lot more. I don't lose much functonality because I don't have much of a need to fold down the seats (sedan remember). If I have to, I remove the sub and leave it home (since things in the back screw up the airspace in the trunk, I wouldn't use the sub with the trunk full anyway). Simple planning, and I've never had a problem with the sub. Different strokes for different folks, but I feel you can be significantly more flexible with a seperate setup than a powered enclosure. ESPICALLY if you build your own box.

And I still KNOW that windows down is more efficient than A/C on. I have the gas receipts to prove it. Think and hear what you want about the issue, but I'm still right, and you know it. Do a test yourself if you don't believe me, instead of being a pawn like you complain about who use FMIC's just because, in your words, "Too many people just follow what others have done instead of researching the options." Seriously, I've provided ample information and research, yet you still take people's "word" over actual research.

My wife's RS had a factory sub and it didn't do much. It was OK if you weren't used to listening to a nice stereo, with good bass. Most of the music I listen to doesn't have a ton of bass, but having a nice 12" sub definitely adds positively to the listening experience. Most people that listen to ANY music in my car are fairly impressed.

Having said that, I think the best thing to do is upgrade the head unit first (preferably one with three sets of preouts, front rear and sub). Once you've taken care of that, I'd upgrade all the crappy paper speakers to something aftermarket. After that, add an amp to power separate components (tweets and mids) in the front doors and use the head unit to power the rears. Then it's time for bass. Build your own sealed or ported sub enclosure and get an amp to power it all from the third preout on the head unit you've got and you can manually adjust the sub volume (and usually frequency) from the head unit:D

-Brian

Brian - That's what I'd do. Actually, that's what I did, lol (except for the component amp).

Headunit, speakers, then sub/amp. I control boost remotely rather than through the headunit though (easier that tapping through menus), plus, the controller was free, so I couldn't complain, lol.

I don't think the big issue here is what is better/optimized/etc.

I think the big issue here is people have different tastes. I for one consider myself extremely anal when it comes to setting up sound systems, which is why I have spent the money I have on my stereo system. It's the best balance of high end stuff and not going insane. Again...others may think I spent too much....it's a personal preference. Also....others may not hear a difference between my system and one that is less costly. I have a friend who is even more particular, and spent a lot more on audio equipment. To me....I can't justify the money even if I can notice a very slight increase in quality/performance.

If that person can't hear the difference, by all means go with the less costly option if it fills your needs. This is also what makes a great salesman. One that will sell you something you need, vs. one that will sell you something they think you need.

Well put Josh. I think most of the decision comes down to whether or not you want bass. I personally don't think I'll be able to own another daily driver without it.

-Brian

eastbaysubaru wrote:Well put Josh. I think most of the decision comes down to whether or not you want bass. I personally don't think I'll be able to own another daily driver without it.

-Brian

That's how I feel. I had to take my system (save speakers and headunit) out of my 95, and I truely miss being able to crank it up when I want.

Bass gives body to music. Proper imaging is nothing without correct body. It's like having a real bad ass car, but with only 40hp @ 9k. Sound's decent, but not something that could be lived with daily.

And windows down is more efficient than AC on.