What do you guys think?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Mar 23, 2005 | 04:23 PM

#21

flitcroft

Registered User

Joined: Sep 2003

Posts: 3,802

Likes: 0

From: Los Angeles

Quote:

Originally Posted by s2l,Mar 23 2005, 04:20 PM

personal prefrence. But if you are the kind of person that wants audio fatigue then thats on you. I find them to be too bright, not enough lows, barely decent amount of midrange and quite frankly, at the price theyre asking, you can do much better. After doing a number of systems with mb quartz in a wide range of vehicles and theyre all lacking in the same way, i imagine its safe to say that theyre garbage. But hey, onto each his own.

Darkknight how is that useless information? just because you're a mb quartz groupie doesnt mean theyre the best. Theyre not, deal with it. What i posted is my own opinion. I laugh at people who jump on the mb quartz bandwagon the same way i laugh at people who swear up and down that JL audio W7 is the best sub out there.

How low do you want your loudspekers to go? The MB Quart QSD 216s are pretty clean at the 35hz crossover. I don't know of a car audio speaker that gets much lower. They have more than enough bass to require dynamatting both doors, without any subs involved.

I agree that they're are bright (and fatiguing, good point) and cold*, but bass is not lacking here.

* Specifically, I mean that they initially sound like they deemphasize the midrange, but that does not mean the midrange is not there. As with any real world installation, you have to tune the speakers for your vehicle. In 5 minutes you can 100% of the midrange back in the sound, but you can't in my experience and amplifier, get them to sound truly warm. But I like my sound this way so it works for me