Second Generation Reverse Engineering of the 17 speaker Lexicon sound system (POOGE)
- Thread starter Aurally
- Start date
One more question...the Metra 82-7302 speaker adapter kit...on the Crutchfield website it says not compatible with my vehicle. Is that why you had to trim a few tabs off, or did you by chance order another iteration of this kit? Thanks.
- Thread starter
- #43
Aurally
Hasn't posted much yet...
The Metra 82-7302 kit is what I got. The pictures on the Crutchfield site look exactly like mine.
Thank you sir!
______________________________
thrice62
New member
- 4
- 0
- 1
- Genesis Model Type
- 2G Genesis Sedan (2015-2016)
Man I remember reading all of these forums for my girlfriends 2016 3.8 sedan. Everyone made me concerned about how complicated the audio system is and how insulated the trunk is blah blah. I just had an audio shop attempt the full install. I did NOT replace the stock Navi or radio I did gut the OEM speakers tweeters and the lame subwoofer. I also added 2 aftermarket amps 1 for the speakers and 1 for the subwoofer. U don't need an equalizer but u will need a sound processor for factory radio settings otherwise the speakers will sound muffled as I had that issue with out the processor. Once that was installed in the car it sounded great.
- Thread starter
- #46
Aurally
Hasn't posted much yet...
Center speaker 96350-3T000 replacement
I debated on whether to use the same Scanspeak midrange for the center channel as well, but decided to go with the Faital Pro instead for the following reasons:
- The Scanspeak is a bit smaller, which required me to make another adapter ring.
- Since the Scanspeaks have a "leaner" midrange, I was concerned that using three of them in the front would add too much of its own signature to the sound.
- The faital Pro has higher efficiency, which is closer to the original.
"FaitalPRO 4FE32 4" Neodymium Professional Full-Range Woofer 4 Ohm" from www.parts-express.com!
Mounting it is straightforward, I had to cut off two of the mounting tabs, after which it dropped right in place of the original.
For the tweeter, there is a host of replacements. I settled on the PRD100 ribbon tweeter, as it fit with minor modification, and was the right size and on sale:
SLS PRD100 Planar Ribbon Tweeter
I had to cut the front plastic baffle with a hacksaw, and drill two mounting holes. It fits a bit awkwardly, but works out ok. See pictures CenterModFront.jpg and CenterModback.jpg .
As for the sound, the driver parameters were close to original, the only main concern is the abscence of the plastic screen baffle. The plastic baffle on the original is glued on and can be easily pryed off. I could either re-glued it on the new driver, or use an electronic cross-over instead. Trying both methods, I ended up using neither.
In the end, the tweeter has far less sibilance than the original, and gotten rid of the acoustic screen baffle removed some of the peakyness in the upper midrange as well.
Since the center speaker often plays together with the left and right front speakers, the sonic signature is harder to describe and measure in the car, so I will wait until the front tweeter replacement is complete.
I debated on whether to use the same Scanspeak midrange for the center channel as well, but decided to go with the Faital Pro instead for the following reasons:
- The Scanspeak is a bit smaller, which required me to make another adapter ring.
- Since the Scanspeaks have a "leaner" midrange, I was concerned that using three of them in the front would add too much of its own signature to the sound.
- The faital Pro has higher efficiency, which is closer to the original.
"FaitalPRO 4FE32 4" Neodymium Professional Full-Range Woofer 4 Ohm" from www.parts-express.com!
Mounting it is straightforward, I had to cut off two of the mounting tabs, after which it dropped right in place of the original.
For the tweeter, there is a host of replacements. I settled on the PRD100 ribbon tweeter, as it fit with minor modification, and was the right size and on sale:
SLS PRD100 Planar Ribbon Tweeter
I had to cut the front plastic baffle with a hacksaw, and drill two mounting holes. It fits a bit awkwardly, but works out ok. See pictures CenterModFront.jpg and CenterModback.jpg .
As for the sound, the driver parameters were close to original, the only main concern is the abscence of the plastic screen baffle. The plastic baffle on the original is glued on and can be easily pryed off. I could either re-glued it on the new driver, or use an electronic cross-over instead. Trying both methods, I ended up using neither.
In the end, the tweeter has far less sibilance than the original, and gotten rid of the acoustic screen baffle removed some of the peakyness in the upper midrange as well.
Since the center speaker often plays together with the left and right front speakers, the sonic signature is harder to describe and measure in the car, so I will wait until the front tweeter replacement is complete.
Attachments
- Thread starter
- #47
Aurally
Hasn't posted much yet...
Tweeter replacement
The Audax tweeter I was testing was ok, but fell short in both output and extension. The main reason being that it had lower efficiency, and the driver was shaped for a more beamed response. To be more compatible with the original design, I needed one with more output and more disperse response.
I ended up using the Dayton Audio rear mount tweeter, mainly because of its form factor.
"Dayton Audio ND20FB-4 Rear-Mount 3/4" Soft Dome Neodymium Tweeter" from www.parts-express.com!
The outer mounting diameter is almost the same size as the original (See picture tweeter01.jpg).
For the mounting, I made a plastic sleeve to go around the tweeter using the clear plastic from a blister package cut into a strip. This sleeve centers and aligns the tweeter with the car's mounting ring. By doing so, the tweeter placement angle is now exactly like the old stock tweeter. Tweeter02.jpg shows the same sleeve now attached on the mating side. Once the tweeter is inserted, the front face of the tweeter touches the mounting rim perimeter just like before. Some string keeps the tweeter in place for now (see tweeter03.jpg). With the plastic centering sleeve, it has no place to move. I may change it to a metal mounting bracket later, but the string seems like a pretty good solution. Finally, a 5uF capacitor is in series with the tweeter, mainly as protection from the amp. I found adding any additional crossover doesn't do much, because the car's DSP rolls it off much faster than most simple crossovers I can put in place.
Sound wise, it's closer to the stock tweeter now, with less sibilance. With this change, I have now replaced all speaker drivers in the front of the car.
Next up, I will make some final measurements. Since the back of the car is still full stock, I can compare the response front vs. back by using the fade balance on the head unit.
The Audax tweeter I was testing was ok, but fell short in both output and extension. The main reason being that it had lower efficiency, and the driver was shaped for a more beamed response. To be more compatible with the original design, I needed one with more output and more disperse response.
I ended up using the Dayton Audio rear mount tweeter, mainly because of its form factor.
"Dayton Audio ND20FB-4 Rear-Mount 3/4" Soft Dome Neodymium Tweeter" from www.parts-express.com!
The outer mounting diameter is almost the same size as the original (See picture tweeter01.jpg).
For the mounting, I made a plastic sleeve to go around the tweeter using the clear plastic from a blister package cut into a strip. This sleeve centers and aligns the tweeter with the car's mounting ring. By doing so, the tweeter placement angle is now exactly like the old stock tweeter. Tweeter02.jpg shows the same sleeve now attached on the mating side. Once the tweeter is inserted, the front face of the tweeter touches the mounting rim perimeter just like before. Some string keeps the tweeter in place for now (see tweeter03.jpg). With the plastic centering sleeve, it has no place to move. I may change it to a metal mounting bracket later, but the string seems like a pretty good solution. Finally, a 5uF capacitor is in series with the tweeter, mainly as protection from the amp. I found adding any additional crossover doesn't do much, because the car's DSP rolls it off much faster than most simple crossovers I can put in place.
Sound wise, it's closer to the stock tweeter now, with less sibilance. With this change, I have now replaced all speaker drivers in the front of the car.
Next up, I will make some final measurements. Since the back of the car is still full stock, I can compare the response front vs. back by using the fade balance on the head unit.
Attachments
- Thread starter
- #48
Aurally
Hasn't posted much yet...
Taking stock of the current situation
Since the last update, I changed the midrange crossover from a simple inductor to a 2nd order filter, to force a steeper roll-off at the top. Overall, it lowers the output in the 7kHz region, which can become unpleasant when played at high volumes. I may still do this for the center speaker as well.
With all the drivers modded out on the front car section, it's time to take a few more measurements. First, placing the microphone in the center of the cabin above the center console, and switching the fade balance from F=10 to B=10, it shows the difference of output from the modified front speaker vs. stock back speakers (FvBcentercabin.jpg). The golden curve is for the front speaker and the green curve for the back speaker. Since the subwoofer is enabled at all times, the frequency response below 50Hz is the same. At the top end, the curves also align, as the replacement tweeter have about the same sensitivity as before. In the bass and midrange, however, the output is lower because the replacement drivers aren't as sensitive. In a multispeaker environment, level matching is always an issue, especially when each person sits in a different quadrant. To illustrate that, let's repeat the same test, but place the microphone next to the driver's right ear, shown in fvsBrightear.jpg. Here, the front fade is shown in red, and the back fade in blue. Because the mic is now closer to the front midrange and bass, the levels are almost dead even, with some minor differences. The difference in this case is mostly in the bass, showing more output in the 50-80hz region, and possibly in the 200-300 range. Subjectively listen to the sound, this is also the biggest perceived difference. To drive this point further, let's looks at the harmonic distortion curves. frontdistortion.jpg shows the response of front speakers when F=10, but the response is broken down into the harmonics. The black curve shows the total harmonic distortion ThD, which is peaked at 60Hz (red arrow). reardistortion.jpg is the same response, but for the stock speakers in the back, where the ThD is now peaked at 180Hz. Subjectively, this difference is quite audible.
The measurement illustrates the trade-offs of the bass driver. The stock driver has less distortion, but also less output. The new bass drivers have more output, but rattles the door far easier. In the cabin, the new speakers definitely make the music more enjoyable, and I will definitely, swap out the back bass speakers as well in the future.
For readers who do not like to look at graphs, I have made two short video clips with my phone, switching between front and back balance. The difference in bass in the music is not very illustrative for this clip, as it is dominated by the sub-woofer. Since the back door tweeter is obstructed by the front seats, the back fade should sound darker to begin with. But in the radio.mp4 clip, one can hear the voices having less low end boom when switched to the front speakers, which I believe is in part due to the reduction of the ThD at 180Hz. I have long forgotten how the stock speakers sound in comparison, but you can just perform the test in your car and decide if these changes are small or significant. The tonal balance is more related to the setup of the test (e.g. where the phone is located), so one needs to listen past that difference and focus on what is more natural sounding, not what is clearer or brighter sounding.
The video clips can be accessed in my album below.
Since the last update, I changed the midrange crossover from a simple inductor to a 2nd order filter, to force a steeper roll-off at the top. Overall, it lowers the output in the 7kHz region, which can become unpleasant when played at high volumes. I may still do this for the center speaker as well.
With all the drivers modded out on the front car section, it's time to take a few more measurements. First, placing the microphone in the center of the cabin above the center console, and switching the fade balance from F=10 to B=10, it shows the difference of output from the modified front speaker vs. stock back speakers (FvBcentercabin.jpg). The golden curve is for the front speaker and the green curve for the back speaker. Since the subwoofer is enabled at all times, the frequency response below 50Hz is the same. At the top end, the curves also align, as the replacement tweeter have about the same sensitivity as before. In the bass and midrange, however, the output is lower because the replacement drivers aren't as sensitive. In a multispeaker environment, level matching is always an issue, especially when each person sits in a different quadrant. To illustrate that, let's repeat the same test, but place the microphone next to the driver's right ear, shown in fvsBrightear.jpg. Here, the front fade is shown in red, and the back fade in blue. Because the mic is now closer to the front midrange and bass, the levels are almost dead even, with some minor differences. The difference in this case is mostly in the bass, showing more output in the 50-80hz region, and possibly in the 200-300 range. Subjectively listen to the sound, this is also the biggest perceived difference. To drive this point further, let's looks at the harmonic distortion curves. frontdistortion.jpg shows the response of front speakers when F=10, but the response is broken down into the harmonics. The black curve shows the total harmonic distortion ThD, which is peaked at 60Hz (red arrow). reardistortion.jpg is the same response, but for the stock speakers in the back, where the ThD is now peaked at 180Hz. Subjectively, this difference is quite audible.
The measurement illustrates the trade-offs of the bass driver. The stock driver has less distortion, but also less output. The new bass drivers have more output, but rattles the door far easier. In the cabin, the new speakers definitely make the music more enjoyable, and I will definitely, swap out the back bass speakers as well in the future.
For readers who do not like to look at graphs, I have made two short video clips with my phone, switching between front and back balance. The difference in bass in the music is not very illustrative for this clip, as it is dominated by the sub-woofer. Since the back door tweeter is obstructed by the front seats, the back fade should sound darker to begin with. But in the radio.mp4 clip, one can hear the voices having less low end boom when switched to the front speakers, which I believe is in part due to the reduction of the ThD at 180Hz. I have long forgotten how the stock speakers sound in comparison, but you can just perform the test in your car and decide if these changes are small or significant. The tonal balance is more related to the setup of the test (e.g. where the phone is located), so one needs to listen past that difference and focus on what is more natural sounding, not what is clearer or brighter sounding.
The video clips can be accessed in my album below.
______________________________
Attachments
apachestar
Hasn't posted much yet...
- 9
- 0
- 1
Aural:
I have a 2009 Genny w/ 17 spkr Lex and love it. But I am really (REALLY) impressed by the work. I built my own house system system off Apple Xpress modules, Sure electronics PS and amps in mailboxes (when adapated great speaker stands!). I love the G1 output and would not spend time on it, but my 2009 is ready to be turned in. I hate the G2 Ultimate and G80 have no Carplay. That is great. But if the G2/G3 I get is subpar, I will revert to your EXCELLENT work.
I have a 2009 Genny w/ 17 spkr Lex and love it. But I am really (REALLY) impressed by the work. I built my own house system system off Apple Xpress modules, Sure electronics PS and amps in mailboxes (when adapated great speaker stands!). I love the G1 output and would not spend time on it, but my 2009 is ready to be turned in. I hate the G2 Ultimate and G80 have no Carplay. That is great. But if the G2/G3 I get is subpar, I will revert to your EXCELLENT work.
I see in the video that you listen to NPR also.Taking stock of the current situation
For readers who do not like to look at graphs, I have made two short video clips with my phone, switching between front and back balance. The difference in bass in the music is not very illustrative for this clip, as it is dominated by the sub-woofer. Since the back door tweeter is obstructed by the front seats, the back fade should sound darker to begin with. But in the radio.mp4 clip, one can hear the voices having less low end boom when switched to the front speakers, which I believe is in part due to the reduction of the ThD at 180Hz. I have long forgotten how the stock speakers sound in comparison, but you can just perform the test in your car and decide if these changes are small or significant. The tonal balance is more related to the setup of the test (e.g. where the phone is located), so one needs to listen past that difference and focus on what is more natural sounding, not what is clearer or brighter sounding.
The video clips can be accessed in my album below.
Have you made any more changes? I was hoping to read where you changed out the rear sub. I'd really like it to have a little more punch, and a bass control knob so I can adjust it independently of the rest of the speakers. Right now it just feels too soft. There are a number of songs I have that contain some already subtle bass that's minimally audible in what one would call a really good system, where in this audio system if I didn't already know that the sound from the song was there I wouldn't even be able to listen for it to hear. I find myself really straining to hear a hint of the subtleness of it.I don't want to take away from OP's response, but I believe the absolute best solution, that keeps most of the OEM appearance, trunk space and has maximum effectiveness, would be the replacement of the OEM subwoofer with an aftermarket subwoofer. You can do this in two ways, direct in the hat shelf in the identical place of the OEM sub, or mounted firing through the ski-pass. Acoustically, both should be similar if not identical, but the hat shelf is the cleaner looking solution. Depending on the subwoofer chosen, the hat shelf may very well require reinforcement and sound dampening to avoid rattles and vibrations, and is therefore the more expensive mounting option. If I were to go for that option, I would pick a low-profile subwoofer that is known to work well in infinite baffle applications, such as the JL Audio TW5 subs, but I'm sure there are others. A competent installer should be able to help you with that. I would advise against the placement of a generic subwoofer enclosure inside the trunk, unless you are ok with a "disconnected" sound of the bass, and many trunk rattles (as you need to turn up the volume dramatically to get the sound waves out of the very-well sealed and insulated trunk). good luck.I see in the video that you listen to NPR also.
Thanks for the reply. My preference is to just swap out the OEM sub with one that will give me more punch when I want to turn it up, along with allowing me to hear the subtleties in other songs where the low bass frequencies are meant to be less pronounced. Perhaps I didn't look well enough but I haven't seen anything about the specs of the OEM sub. RMS rating, size, sensitivity, etc. And maybe I'll have to had a small mono amp and bass knob to an aftermarket sub to give me the control and sound I'm looking for. Just looking for info and options.
______________________________
I believe the OEM sub is 10". JL Audio also has "marine subs" that are designed for infinite baffle, and I think they have 10" versions, but they will be much "thicker" and the magnet will hang into the trunk and you will be able to see it. I think the TW5 models could probably be hidden better, if that is your goal. Either, with some aftermarket amplification, I'm sure will be a vast improvement over the weak OEM sub.
Edit: You can look in the audio section what I did, and you can imagine that sub could have gone underneath the hat shelf in place of the OEM sub, and I'm sure the audible results would be the same. This 12" sub is actually a little overkill in terms of providing low end "fill" to the OEM system, but with proper amp gain adjustment this can be easily achieved.
Edit: You can look in the audio section what I did, and you can imagine that sub could have gone underneath the hat shelf in place of the OEM sub, and I'm sure the audible results would be the same. This 12" sub is actually a little overkill in terms of providing low end "fill" to the OEM system, but with proper amp gain adjustment this can be easily achieved.
- Thread starter
- #54
Aurally
Hasn't posted much yet...
The short direct answer is no, I am not planning on changing the sub:I see in the video that you listen to NPR also.
- In order to adhere to my original premise of not changing the amplifier, I would need to find a sub driver that is more efficient than the current one, and with higher excursion and lower distortion.
- It would take a lot of effort for me to take out the sub and measure it. But based on what I have seen in the other OEM drivers, I think it's a good assumption that it would be difficult to find a suitable replacement in the first place.
More philosophical, I don't think replacing the sub adds to the enjoyment, for the following reason:
- Most people want bass "punch", and has little to do with the subwoofer. As someone hits the kick drum, the punch comes from the overtones it generates, and how well these overtones are time aligned. That is where the mid-bass (40-200Hz) makes a bigger difference. This is addressed by changing the door speakers, not the subwoofer.
- The car generates a lot of low frequency rumble, which masks some of the bass. So, one would really want a speed dependent algorithm that changes the bass output depending on how much you rev the engine, and how strong your vents are blowing. If you just set the bass high to drown out the noise under worst condition, it will be unpleasant at the other times.
Many people will tell me that I am wrong, and a subwoofer makes a huge difference. But my counter is this:
- Have people actually listened to some warble tones to see how low 30Hz sounds in their car, or identified the bass note in their favorite track and see what frequency the note corresponds to?
- Have people measured the output of their subwoofers? In particular, at the level these subwoofers are playing, how much of the output is actually harmonic distortion? In fact, I would argue that some of the "punch" comes from the distortions that the subwoofer generates. For instance, suppose the woofer is asked to generate a 25Hz tone. Once it distorts, it generates 50Hz, 75Hz ... harmonics which will be perfectly time aligned coming from one single driver. In effect, you have placed a kick drum in your car that is energized by the music you are playing. There is no doubt more "punch", but it's distortion.
It's hard to convince people, but the mid-bass is where most people should place the effort on. Too many badly designed, badly positioned bookshelf speakers have people convinced that 6" drivers don't make satisfying bass.
Thanks Aurally. After I made the post I considered it more and started considering going with just the rear door speakers to see if it gives me what I'm wanting to hear. I did a little measuring with a couple songs that I have in my collection on some studio speakers so that I can see what frequency it is that I'm not hearing in the car and it turns out that it's (the sounds I'm not hearing) playing at about the 65Hz range. I can easily hear it on the studio speakers, but I'm straining in the car to even recognize that it's there.
- Thread starter
- #56
Aurally
Hasn't posted much yet...
idlemind,
Two things to keep in mind:
- Even though the fundamental tone is at 65Hz, doesn't mean there has to be a lot of energy there. This phenomenon is called the missing fundamental ( Missing fundamental - Wikipedia). Unless you are listening to electronica, electric bass, or movie sound effects, the overtones in the mid-bass (130Hz, 195Hz in this case) could easily dominate. Many car audio forums discussions are obsessed about the mid-bass, and rightfully so.
- Changing the rear door speakers is ok, if you usually listen with the fade towards the back speakers. In addition, if you always listen with surround enabled, the back door speaker may get even less output due to logic 7 steering. Unless you are being chauffeured, I would change the front door speakers first. In any case, the front-rear woofers are identical, so it's relatively easy to experiment. Taking the door trim apart is as easy and as clean as I have seen for a car door.
Finally, for your needs, I would use this Dayton Audio speaker, which will give the most apparent difference:
"Dayton Audio PS65LP-4 6-1/2" Ultra Efficient Low Profile Full-Range Driver 4 Ohm" from www.parts-express.com!
Based on my calculations, it will sound about 3dBs louder than the stock speaker, which is as if you are playing the stock speaker a twice the amplified power. Changing the rear door speakers adds another 3dBs, which will be very noticeable.
Two things to keep in mind:
- Even though the fundamental tone is at 65Hz, doesn't mean there has to be a lot of energy there. This phenomenon is called the missing fundamental ( Missing fundamental - Wikipedia). Unless you are listening to electronica, electric bass, or movie sound effects, the overtones in the mid-bass (130Hz, 195Hz in this case) could easily dominate. Many car audio forums discussions are obsessed about the mid-bass, and rightfully so.
- Changing the rear door speakers is ok, if you usually listen with the fade towards the back speakers. In addition, if you always listen with surround enabled, the back door speaker may get even less output due to logic 7 steering. Unless you are being chauffeured, I would change the front door speakers first. In any case, the front-rear woofers are identical, so it's relatively easy to experiment. Taking the door trim apart is as easy and as clean as I have seen for a car door.
Finally, for your needs, I would use this Dayton Audio speaker, which will give the most apparent difference:
"Dayton Audio PS65LP-4 6-1/2" Ultra Efficient Low Profile Full-Range Driver 4 Ohm" from www.parts-express.com!
Based on my calculations, it will sound about 3dBs louder than the stock speaker, which is as if you are playing the stock speaker a twice the amplified power. Changing the rear door speakers adds another 3dBs, which will be very noticeable.
______________________________
