Mark Levinson 21-speaker audio sounds terrible on the GX 550 Luxury +
- Thread starter Redline
- Start date
"Additionally, we have looked further into your concern with a product specialist and our records indicate that the third speaker has a box assembly. This means that it outputs the noise reducing sound to reduce noise and does not operate as a normal speaker"
what?
So this is basically a noise cancelling speaker then & not a normal one?
My ML has been great from day 1. The fact that the 550 is so quiet inside makes it even more pronounced. But again the way one perceives the sound is very subjective.
Same with the RX350h 2024. I did a sound analysis here: Help with mysterious sound issue with Lexus RX 350h 2024 Mark Levinson 21 speakers
I'm trying to contact Natan Budiono who works in the field and possibly for Harman Kardon automotive.
DM me or reply here if you'd like to stay tuned to what I find out / manage to do about it.
It's subjective but there are also some real issues that not everyone's ear can detect - see my reply on OP for an analysis.
I would be interested in what you hear.
Then they are lying! I don’t Lexus wants to deal with a recall
All the assets shared by other posters agree that there are NO woofers in the second row doors. In the overhead view diagram with the red lettered speaker locations, the woofers are the D size in the front door. In the part number schematic shows clearly the big speaker in the second row is only for the '10SP' option. There is no part identified for that spot in the 21SP config. This is clearly the physical design for some reason, but good grief, it does seem like a terrible design choice. I've got a little north of 3K miles on my OT+, and don't really notice an improvement after breaking-in. This system does sound better than my 2017 4runner, but I attribute a lot of that to the dramatically quieter cabin. I'd say it sounds on par with my wife's 2018 Sienna system....fine, but nothing like premium, and definitely not like a paid upgrade.
The fact that there have been recommendations to disable features to improve the sound does seem to point to a software problem that might be addressable in an update though. I don't notice much quality difference with surround sound and auto-sound-leveling turned off though personally. I also don't notice much difference between surround sound being on and off just in general. The presence of a 'surround sound' option at all make it seem like the system should be able to handle Apple's Spatial Audio, or dolby's atmos, or some kind of surround input, but I can't hear it if that is what's happening.
Def bummed out by this aspect of the vehicle, and hope there's something that can be done in a software update. Eager to hear what georgeciobanu finds out
The fact that there have been recommendations to disable features to improve the sound does seem to point to a software problem that might be addressable in an update though. I don't notice much quality difference with surround sound and auto-sound-leveling turned off though personally. I also don't notice much difference between surround sound being on and off just in general. The presence of a 'surround sound' option at all make it seem like the system should be able to handle Apple's Spatial Audio, or dolby's atmos, or some kind of surround input, but I can't hear it if that is what's happening.
Def bummed out by this aspect of the vehicle, and hope there's something that can be done in a software update. Eager to hear what georgeciobanu finds out
Welcome to the forum and thanks for your input.
This hasn't been true for ages, if ever. It's a common wife's tale told by sellers, especially of "audiophile" gear. The reality is that it reduces returns significantly on often overpriced gear because our brains are malleable as are our preferences, and over time, you get "used" to things.
I have a wide gamut of extremely high end audio equipment (studio-related), and I can say with great certainty that when demoing it to friends/family, every single last one had different opinions of good vs. bad, and I could easily sway opinions by removing a room correction EQ curve then re-adding it (returning the audio to the original form). Just the change and then some discussion about the technical aspects of room correction (delay compensation, frequency response, etc) was generally enough that most would say everything sounded "amazing" and the sound stage was "holographic" and so on and so forth (all the snake-oil terms you see with the 20k+ a pair speakers out there).
TL;DR: The cones don't need break-ins, people's ears do. You're either tuning it to your preference, or your preference is adjusting to the system. Nothing wrong with that at all!
It's also important to note that everyone's hearing is different, and even if you adjust for hearing (I've got the audiograms and equipment to do it) - preference still differs. If you play absolutely perfectly flat response audio, almost everybody will think it sounds awful. The harman curve is an attempt at normalizing things for listeners, but even that won't sound good to most - people have been conditioned by modern music to want more emphasis on bass/sub-bass, and think that a harman curve equalized speaker setup is tinny.
So what does this mean with regard to the GX ML sound system? Just curious, since that's the point of the thread.
Ormandj, in addition to jclaffee’s question, would love to hear your opinion on Lexus’ design to front load where the sound is projecting from in there ML system across multiple models. The majority of the sound is calibrated to sound as if it is coming from the center dash. When fading the sound to be more truly centered (over drivers right shoulder) the power and quality die off. Simply said, there are more speakers placed and weighted for front center sound vs true centered placement.
The quality of the ML system is average (imo) but the calibration is a serious contributing factor that diminishes the overall quality. Thoughts?
It means you don’t need to let the system “break in”, you either need to tune it to your preferences or get used to it/develop a taste for it. The other option is forgoing the system and upgrading aftermarket to your preference, but I generally do not suggest that in these types of vehicles unless money is no object.
It just depends what you are solving for. Do you ride alone? I’d prefer a centered sound stage directly in front of me in that scenario. With passengers, that changes. I was not very impressed with the ML system in the overtrail+s at the dealership, but it wasn’t bad. Just disappointing after stepping out of an xc90 t8 w/ the bowers system. You can press a button and change the soundstage to driver focused (centered in front of driver, sounding like it is emanating from a location at the windshield or even a little further out over the hood) or shared for passengers, for example.
It is miles ahead of the system in my ‘24 Wrangler, on the other hand.
I no longer attempt to beat nature and just accept cars are big glass cages with terrible acoustics, and good enough is good enough. I’m not putting up acoustic panels in a GX.
The XC90 B&W system is the closest I’ve heard to “good” from a factory system, but $2k in a home setup absolutely demolishes it. The ML in the GX is definitely worse, but still a lot better than many other vehicles. I would have expected more, in an $80k vehicle, personally, but I would still buy the vehicle in spite of this.
Last edited:
I have the GX 550 OT+ with the ML sound system. I will probably take it to my high quality local audio shop to see if they can add an underseat subwoofer and add/replace high quality speakers in the rear passenger doors or back, so that I can get a more enveloping sound as the driver. I like the ML sound (it's balanced, not "wow"), but dislike the "front stage only" approach when I'm driving solo. I'd prefer a more balanced front-to-back 'surround' than the ML was designed to give.
Similar threads
