6.5 vs.6x9 rear deck?

[Col. Mustard]

I know for a fact that a decent pair of 6x9's will blow away 6.5 coaxials for midbass, but alot of people on here seem to be against the use of 6x9's. could anyone explain? I have installed hundreds of speakers ranging from tweeters to 15's, and I've never encountered a situation where I would rather have 6.5's over 6x9's for rear midbass fill. Thanks

[jle30]

i just got done putting 8" coax in the rear deck of my e30. They have serious midbass. Round speakers will definitely give you better sound quality.

[StereoInstaller1]

I went another way to get serious midbass...

They are now upholstered, but my pics are at the shop...

[NC325iC]

jesus dude

how much do those xtecs run? dollar wise

[Jean]

rear midbass fill is an oxymoron no ? rear fill = having just enough presence yet not enough to know it's coming from the back, but midbass should be upfront and not hitting you from the back imho.

of course if all you care about is how loud the system is, then it's mute point.

[Boarderx192]

I would also like to know the answer to this. I dont want to run a Sub in the trunk so I was thinking about putting some 6.5 components up front and some 6x9's in the rear but everyone says dont do it. Why?

[Jordan]

I would also like to know the answer to this. I dont want to run a Sub in the trunk so I was thinking about putting some 6.5 components up front and some 6x9's in the rear but everyone says dont do it. Why?

First off rear fill = FTL. Music belongs in front of you.
Second.. oval speakers suck.

Put 6.5in in your front kicks well amped and they do fine with a sub in the back.

[E30JOE]

Not true...about the oval speakers sucking.. back in the day I had a pair of 2-way alpine 6x9 that hit harder than any 10" sub's...But this was before alpine turn to crap ! If you don't want to do a sub I would go with a good pair 2-ways not 3or4 you need to keep the image up front. And you shouldn't stick with one speaker company. fine the best components in your budget to work with. Do your home work this will save you money and time.

First off rear fill = FTL. Music belongs in front of you.
Second.. oval speakers suck.

Put 6.5in in your front kicks well amped and they do fine with a sub in the back.

[Mtriple]

Rear fill is a very subjective thing. Personally, I HAVE to have it. I cant stand a system with just front stage, it just sounds too thin. To me a proper rear fill set up is just loud enough that you can barely hear it if you turn your ear towards the rear. With your head pointed front and center you shouldnt be able to hear anything from the rear. Rear fill adds depth to a front stage in my opinion.

[bolognablake]

Running active = no rear fill.

A properly time-aligned front stage with thoughtful driver placement will sound better than a vehicle with rear fill.

The exception being a 5.1 system. I ran a 5.1 system in my Trailblazer with the Alpine H-701 processor for a while, but with so few recording that are encoded in 5.1, it was worth not being able to run active. That, and the wart that contained two 3" full-range drivers for my center channel in the middle of my dash looked really out of place.

[Mtriple]

Running active = no rear fill.

A properly time-aligned front stage with thoughtful driver placement will sound better than a vehicle with rear fill.

The exception being a 5.1 system. I ran a 5.1 system in my Trailblazer with the Alpine H-701 processor for a while, but with so few recording that are encoded in 5.1, it was worth not being able to run active. That, and the wart that contained two 3" full-range drivers for my center channel in the middle of my dash looked really out of place.

Again, very subjective so I think you're wrong. I've run full active systems in the past and it sounds too artificial if sound quality is your goal. In my opinion, nothing sounds better than a very good passive system, properly placed, with just the right amount of rear fill.

And again, very subjective...

[StereoInstaller1]

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that active or passive would effect whether or not you wanted rear fill. I will agree that active systems can sound more "artificial" while passive crossovers can be more "blended"...but passive crossovers also lack detail and dynamics, while active systems can be too analytical...so subjective, so hard to pin down. I typically prefer passive in the home, active in the car.

As far as rear speakers go, IMO (and none of this can be anything but opinion) it is all about the size of the vehicle.

Little bitty cars = no rears

Bigger cars + SUVs (even extra cab full size pickups) = rear fill

Either way, I prefer the rears to be either in the rear doors, or facing the rear of the car...basically, anywhere EXCEPT the rear deck.

Luke

[elsabor67]

I have a setup in my car that runs 5 1/4 components and have them set so the rear just blends with the strenght of the Infinity 6 1/2 components up front. Not overly banging but just enough to feel a surrounding blend. I am not a fan of 6x9 sets because even though they set a tight midbass, at high volumes they tend to distort and sound like junk.

I think it also depends on what the person likes to hear and how. I like my music clear and with a tight hard bass, not that booty banging BoooooooooooooooooooooooooooM that sound like a 500lb bomb hit.

[Col. Mustard]

Thanks for the info and opinions guys, I appreciate it :drink:

[bolognablake]

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that active or passive would effect whether or not you wanted rear fill.

If you're running active using the headunit (I.E. a hand unit that has band-pass) you wont have a channel for rear fill.

If you think an active set-up sounds artificial, then it's no set-up correctly, or they're crossing over the speakers outside of their usable range.