Is this speaker upgrade worth it?

[Michael A. Covington]

We have a 1996 Olds Cutlass Ciera and a 1995 Dodge Caravan, and in each,
we've put in a Sony 35-watt (x 4) stereo system a few years ago. In the
Olds, we've upgraded the front speakers; in the Dodge, all speakers are
still original.

For the 6x9 rear speakers, would one-way speakers such as the Kenwood
KFC-6949S be a substantial upgrade from the original factory-installed
speakers? The appeal of them is that they would fit in place of the
original ones, with no change of grille cover or anything, and not disturb
the original appearance of the vehicle. Or do we need to spend more money
and get 3-way speakers with protruding front elements, with special covers?

What kind of 6x9 speakers did Chrysler and GM probably give us in the first
place?

Thanks,
--

Michael A. Covington - Artificial Intelligence Ctr - University of Georgia

"In the core C# language it is simply not possible to have an uninitialized
variable, a 'dangling' pointer, or an expression that indexes an array
beyond its bounds. Whole categories of bugs that routinely plague C and C++
programs are thus eliminated." - A. Hejlsberg, The C# Programming Language

[Michael A. Covington]

I've ascertained that in both cars, the old speakers are 10 ohms, paper
cone, 1 way.

Since they are 10 ohms, and my amplifier is expecting 4 ohms, that explains
a lot!

It is presumably topping out (reaching its maximum voltage excursion) while
delivering only a few watts through such a high resistance.

So if nothing else, I get a better electrical match, and I get a
polypropylene cone instead of a paper cone, and it's new rather than 9 years
old. Should I go for it?

On the Olds, my alternative is to get someone to cut holes in the rear deck
and install a better (2- or 3-way) speaker. On the Dodge, I don't know of a
speaker better than this one that will fit in the space available.


"Michael A. Covington" > wrote
in message ...
> We have a 1996 Olds Cutlass Ciera and a 1995 Dodge Caravan, and in each,
> we've put in a Sony 35-watt (x 4) stereo system a few years ago. In the
> Olds, we've upgraded the front speakers; in the Dodge, all speakers are
> still original.
>
> For the 6x9 rear speakers, would one-way speakers such as the Kenwood
> KFC-6949S be a substantial upgrade from the original factory-installed
> speakers? The appeal of them is that they would fit in place of the
> original ones, with no change of grille cover or anything, and not disturb
> the original appearance of the vehicle. Or do we need to spend more money
> and get 3-way speakers with protruding front elements, with special
covers?
>
> What kind of 6x9 speakers did Chrysler and GM probably give us in the
first
> place?
>
> Thanks,
> --
>
> Michael A. Covington - Artificial Intelligence Ctr - University of Georgia
>
> "In the core C# language it is simply not possible to have an
uninitialized
> variable, a 'dangling' pointer, or an expression that indexes an array
> beyond its bounds. Whole categories of bugs that routinely plague C and
C++
> programs are thus eliminated." - A. Hejlsberg, The C# Programming
Language
>
>

[MZ]

> I've ascertained that in both cars, the old speakers are 10 ohms, paper
> cone, 1 way.
>
> Since they are 10 ohms, and my amplifier is expecting 4 ohms, that
explains
> a lot!
>
> It is presumably topping out (reaching its maximum voltage excursion)
while
> delivering only a few watts through such a high resistance.
>
> So if nothing else, I get a better electrical match, and I get a
> polypropylene cone instead of a paper cone, and it's new rather than 9
years
> old. Should I go for it?
>
> On the Olds, my alternative is to get someone to cut holes in the rear
deck
> and install a better (2- or 3-way) speaker. On the Dodge, I don't know of
a
> speaker better than this one that will fit in the space available.

2-way 6x9's are also common, and according to many folks tend to sound
better than their corresponding 3-way versions (there are a number of
reasons for this). There are some that have lower set tweeters which would
allow you to fit them under your stock grills. I'm drawing a blank about
which ones provide this, but for some reason CDT comes to mind. At least
the older ones.

Don't put much stock in the material the cone is made of though. Some of
the best sounding speakers available use treated paper cones.

[Michael A. Covington]

"MZ" > wrote in message
...

> 2-way 6x9's are also common, and according to many folks tend to sound
> better than their corresponding 3-way versions (there are a number of
> reasons for this). There are some that have lower set tweeters which
would
> allow you to fit them under your stock grills. I'm drawing a blank about
> which ones provide this, but for some reason CDT comes to mind. At least
> the older ones.

That would be good. I need a maximum mounting depth of 3 inches with no
protrusion in front of the rim. Can somebody tell me where these are
available?

[Michael A. Covington]

> 2-way 6x9's are also common, and according to many folks tend to sound
> better than their corresponding 3-way versions (there are a number of
> reasons for this). There are some that have lower set tweeters which
would
> allow you to fit them under your stock grills. I'm drawing a blank about
> which ones provide this, but for some reason CDT comes to mind. At least
> the older ones.

The CDT CL-69X appears from the pictures to have a lower-set tweeter, but it
costs 5 times as much as the Kenwood I was contemplating, and CDT's web site
doesn't give exact dimensions. I've e-mailed them to ask. Thanks.

[MZ]

Check DEI too.

--
Mark
remove "remove" and "spam" to reply


"Michael A. Covington" > wrote
in message ...
> > 2-way 6x9's are also common, and according to many folks tend to sound
> > better than their corresponding 3-way versions (there are a number of
> > reasons for this). There are some that have lower set tweeters which
> would
> > allow you to fit them under your stock grills. I'm drawing a blank
about
> > which ones provide this, but for some reason CDT comes to mind. At
least
> > the older ones.
>
> The CDT CL-69X appears from the pictures to have a lower-set tweeter, but
it
> costs 5 times as much as the Kenwood I was contemplating, and CDT's web
site
> doesn't give exact dimensions. I've e-mailed them to ask. Thanks.
>
>

[MZ]

http://www.directed.com/audio/speakers/directed/default.asp

--
Mark
remove "remove" and "spam" to reply


"MZ" > wrote in message
...
> Check DEI too.
>
> --
> Mark
> remove "remove" and "spam" to reply
>
>
> "Michael A. Covington" >
wrote
> in message ...
> > > 2-way 6x9's are also common, and according to many folks tend to sound
> > > better than their corresponding 3-way versions (there are a number of
> > > reasons for this). There are some that have lower set tweeters which
> > would
> > > allow you to fit them under your stock grills. I'm drawing a blank
> about
> > > which ones provide this, but for some reason CDT comes to mind. At
> least
> > > the older ones.
> >
> > The CDT CL-69X appears from the pictures to have a lower-set tweeter,
but
> it
> > costs 5 times as much as the Kenwood I was contemplating, and CDT's web
> site
> > doesn't give exact dimensions. I've e-mailed them to ask. Thanks.
> >
> >
>
>

[Michael A. Covington]

Thanks!

"MZ" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.directed.com/audio/speakers/directed/default.asp
>
> --
> Mark
> remove "remove" and "spam" to reply
>
>
> "MZ" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Check DEI too.
> >
> > --
> > Mark
> > remove "remove" and "spam" to reply
> >
> >
> > "Michael A. Covington" >
> wrote
> > in message ...
> > > > 2-way 6x9's are also common, and according to many folks tend to
sound
> > > > better than their corresponding 3-way versions (there are a number
of
> > > > reasons for this). There are some that have lower set tweeters
which
> > > would
> > > > allow you to fit them under your stock grills. I'm drawing a blank
> > about
> > > > which ones provide this, but for some reason CDT comes to mind. At
> > least
> > > > the older ones.
> > >
> > > The CDT CL-69X appears from the pictures to have a lower-set tweeter,
> but
> > it
> > > costs 5 times as much as the Kenwood I was contemplating, and CDT's
web
> > site
> > > doesn't give exact dimensions. I've e-mailed them to ask. Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[Michael A. Covington]

Returning to my original question, how bad are the Kenwood 1-way (dual cone)
6x9 speakers that I can get for $50 a pair? Will they be a great deal
better than the General Motors and Chrysler OEM speakers? (Granted that
they have appropriate power handling capacity and the correct impedance,
which the original ones didn't; *that* should make a substantial
difference.)

On a scale of quality, could you rank...

(1) Original paper-cone 1-way OEM speakers;
(2) Kenwood 1-way dual-cone speakers (KFC-6949S);
(3) 2-way speakers such as DEI (Directed) 690dc;
(4) substantially better 2- or 3-way speakers up to perhaps $300/pair.

This is for rear use, assuming I already have respectable 2- or 3-way
speakers in the front.

Where do diminishing returns set in? Will the upgrade from (1) to (2) be a
big change or a minor one? How about from (2) to (3)?

Many thanks.

[Scott Johnson]

"Michael A. Covington" > wrote
in message ...
> Returning to my original question, how bad are the Kenwood 1-way (dual
cone)
> 6x9 speakers that I can get for $50 a pair? Will they be a great deal
> better than the General Motors and Chrysler OEM speakers? (Granted that
> they have appropriate power handling capacity and the correct impedance,
> which the original ones didn't; *that* should make a substantial
> difference.)

Usually an aftermarket speaker will sound better than stock. just don't
expect a lot of treble from those speaker considering they don't have a
tweeter.

>
> On a scale of quality, could you rank...
>
> (1) Original paper-cone 1-way OEM speakers;
> (2) Kenwood 1-way dual-cone speakers (KFC-6949S);
> (3) 2-way speakers such as DEI (Directed) 690dc;
> (4) substantially better 2- or 3-way speakers up to perhaps $300/pair.
>
> This is for rear use, assuming I already have respectable 2- or 3-way
> speakers in the front.
>
> Where do diminishing returns set in? Will the upgrade from (1) to (2) be
a
> big change or a minor one? How about from (2) to (3)?
>
> Many thanks.
>
>