[Neon01]

Recently bought a used 2010 135i with base stereo (I'm posting here simply because that forum gets zero traffic and for stereo, E8X/E9X are essentially the same) which had some upgraded gear. Came with a set of MB Quart RUA 213 comps in the doors, stock speakers in the rear deck, SWS-8X underseat, and a couple of Alpine amps driving it with LOCs up in the dash along with Technics base stereo harness to capture the signal.

Unfortunately, there was a LOT wrong with the system when I got it: the underseat subs were totally blown (showed no conductivity & infinte resistance and I could feel a LOT of resistance when I lightly pressed the cone), the 4ch amp was defective and not outputting anything from the driver's front speaker, the passenger rear deck speaker was blown, and the LOCs weren't functioning properly. Crazy...

So I got rid of the crappy Alpine amps, picked up a JL Audio Cleansweep and XD600/6 amp, along with two new SWS-8Xi (2ohm for 100w each from the 600/6) subs. I also ran the speaker outputs to the back instead of converting them in the dash, since I needed to run them to the cleansweep in the trunk.

Got it all in and I'm pretty disappointed. There seems to be a pretty large gap in the sub/midbass range. I will confirm tonight with a SPL meter and my cleansweep test tone disc. The bass is also very...directional. I wired the subs in stereo on recommendations, but as a result, I'm really hearing the bass emanating from the driver's side. I know the gap is my fault - I had read the experts say that the SWS are more subs than midbass, but most people said they did a decent job complementing a set of 4" components, so I thought for sure I would get pretty good spectrum coverage with a set of 5.25" comps. I'm pretty surprised at how little extension the 5.25" comps have into the midbass range.

I'm still trying to get it dialed in, but I have no 1/3 oct EQ, and the cleansweep is not user adjustable, so all I can really play with is the gain on the subs relative to the fronts/rears, and the single band x-overs on the 600/6. I currently have the Earthquakes low-passed at about 150hz and fronts high-passed around 80hz. I was hoping the overlap there would help with the midbass somewhat.

Overall, the SWS' just seem to be pretty sloppy, and I'm surprised they don't go lower than they do. It could be a byproduct of the quasi-ported enclosure (I'm accustomed to dealing with sealed on all but the lowest octave subs - my home sub is a custom 10 ft^3 15" ported to 17Hz and low-passed at 40hz).

Any suggestions are appreciated. I'm willing to throw a bit more money at this (maybe a EQ or processor to try to take care of my freq nulls), but not much. I know the right way to do this is probably with the Jehnerts, but they're pricey and hard to find. Are there any auto-eq'ing products like the JBL MS-8 that don't add processor lag to the signal (Bluetooth problem)?

[ctuna]

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=641323

[Technic]

Originally Posted by Neon01

Are there any auto-eq'ing products like the JBL MS-8 that don't add processor lag to the signal (Bluetooth problem)?

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=744658

[VP Electricity]

Hm. We do these all the time. You should not play 4" components that low, you could easily lose one.

I think the big problem is that there was never any signal correction in the system at all. But the MS-8 is the only one in our testing which has such significant latency as to cause this BT problem.

[Neon01]

Originally Posted by VP Electricity

Hm. We do these all the time. You should not play 4" components that low, you could easily lose one.

I think the big problem is that there was never any signal correction in the system at all. But the MS-8 is the only one in our testing which has such significant latency as to cause this BT problem.

I thought the RUA 213 are 5.25" comps. Are they not? Most online sources say so, anyway (though this is far from proof).

Also, the signal correction is being done with a JL Audio Cleansweep. That's the only reason I didn't attempt to code my HU to put out low level balanced outputs.

I'm definitely going to look into the Alpine product Technic linked. That does look very nice, though I'm having trouble reconciling with the remote command unit of necessity.

[Technic]

Originally Posted by Neon01

I thought the RUA 213 are 5.25" comps. Are they not? Most online sources say so, anyway (though this is far from proof).

Also, the signal correction is being done with a JL Audio Cleansweep. That's the only reason I didn't attempt to code my HU to put out low level balanced outputs.

I'm definitely going to look into the Alpine product Technic linked. That does look very nice, though I'm having trouble reconciling with the remote command unit of necessity.

You may have to consider coding this OEM HU to HiFi so you can eliminate the Cleansweep. This way you can go straight to the XD600/6.

The RUA213 are 160mm and they should give you better midbass than most 100mm.

You should take some time to inspect how this install was really wired. It could be possible that there are some phase problems (speaker + and - wires swapped).

[VP Electricity]

There is no need to remove the CleanSweep. It corrects the signal just fine when properly calibrated and wired, I did not realize it was in there. Recoding kills the rear speakers.

Yes, I forgot they are 5.25. I am not convinced those are installed in such a way that you are getting better midbass, but if they were, they ought to go to 80 OK - I was mistaken in that regard.

[Technic]

The Cleansweep will not calibrate properly if the front and rear Stereo inputs are used. They need to be summed first.

[VP Electricity]

Originally Posted by Technic

The Cleansweep will not calibrate properly if the front and rear Stereo inputs are used. They need to be summed first.

Categorically disagree. CS will properly calibrate so long as you do not expect full-range out of it. Measure the output. You won't get a green LED, but if you measure the output, you aren't trying to draw a conclusion from a multicolor LED.

Edited to add "out of the rears" - you will of course get full-range signal from the front outputs.

[Technic]

Originally Posted by VP Electricity

Categorically disagree. CS will properly calibrate so long as you do not expect full-range out of it. Measure the output. You won't get a green LED, but if you measure the output, you aren't trying to draw a conclusion from a multicolor LED.

Edited to add "out of the rears" - you will of course get full-range signal from the front outputs.

When you measured it, what was the actual output if the inputs are not summed? I quit using the CS long time ago because of the sum requirement by a separate module.

JL Audio talks about noisy output as well as the obvious failure to calibrate if non-full range signals are input.

[Neon01]

It's kind of academic in my case. Though initially I had planned to use 4 channel out from the CS to the JL XD600/6, I decided the best way to go is probably just to use the front two channels (corrected by the CS) and use the 2 ch operation mode of the XD600/6. From what I can gather in the manual, this just duplicates the signal to the second and third set of internal amps, each with independent gain and x-over. So, though I lose my Fade control at the HU, I can effect the similar (static) results with differential gain settings.

[Neon01]

Originally Posted by Technic

You should take some time to inspect how this install was really wired. It could be possible that there are some phase problems (speaker + and - wires swapped).

I physically checked each of the inputs and outputs from/to the harness that you made. The previous owner your HU harness, only without the additional 9 wire bundle that takes the speaker outs to the back, which I simply duplicated with 18g speaker wire.

I tried testing resistance on the subs, and they show the appropriate 2 ohms each, but the front speakers won't settle on a reading for the resistance test. They WILL, however, read the appropriate 4ohms when tested for continuity with my digital multimeter. I'm not technical enough to know the difference there, or why the result is different. I suspect that it has something to do with the crossovers for the comps messing with the way resistance is tested? I know there are (small) caps in crossovers, so that would probably explain the variation if the multimeter is actually providing a miniscule current to test resistance.

Is there a way I can test polarity with a multimeter or source?