# Trying to research an 8" mid-bass. A little help?



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Hey guys,

Searching for specific parameters for a midbass is a bit daunting. I've looked for hours trying to find one that will work within budget.

Okay, here are the parameters of what I'm looking for:

$200 or less for the pair. 
8" midbass woofer design.
92db sesitivity @ [email protected]/1m
150 to 175-watts RMS
4-ohms
Have a clean, controlled output from 50Hz to 250Hz @ it's RMS rating.
Free-air design (optimal) or small sealed of .5 cuft or less, (ie something that will work with a fiberglass door panel enclosure design)

The midbass will be not have the luxury of the amp doing a highpass, so it's either going to be high-passed using a passive filter @ probably 70Hz with a 12db/octave slope, or an F-Mod type RCA device in-line.

Does anyone with good knowledge of products know of a "fit"? I've honestly looked today and didn't want to ask but both google and here I've hit a dead-end many times.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

I know of a perfect midbass for you, but as it turns out the somabitch can only handle 149 watts and will only play in large pacifist-designed box (hates the violence of that bass air.) But best of luck with your search Ditt's beet farm


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

Here is an awesome 6.5" driver.
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49858


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> 92db sesitivity @ [email protected]/1m


What the **** does [email protected]/1m mean?

Why are you so hung up on sensitivity and power ratings, when you clearly don't understand them? Do you think, just maybe, that there's a reason why the experienced experts aren't hung up on the same pointless **** that you are?


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

capnxtreme said:


> What the **** does [email protected]/1m mean?
> 
> Why are you so hung up on sensitivity and power ratings, when you clearly don't understand them?


I'm just trying to match up a midbass to my other drivers. It won't hurt to have them matching. I'm just paranoid that at different volumes they are not going to sound correct together. Sensitivity is an indication of how efficient the driver is with each watt. It seems logical to me that if two speakers have unmatched sensitivity they may have radically different behavior when running the same wattage. 

For instance, you get two speakers with similar design but unmatched sensitivity by 3db. Put one on your right channel and the other on your left channel. You might have them sounding decent together with a balance adjustment at volume 20, but when you crank it to volume 35 they need to be re-balanced again. See where I'm going with this? THAT is what I'm worried about when selecting a matching speaker. 

So sue me for being paranoid.


----------



## azngotskills (Feb 24, 2006)

You know you can level match through gains right? I mean this is if you are running active and not mismatching components to a passive crossover


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

So please explain how you are going to "match up" a "[email protected]/1m" sensitivity rating?

Paranoia FTW!


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> Sensitivity is an indication of how efficient the driver is with each watt.


O RLY. So what does [email protected]/1m mean?



> It seems logical to me


Slow down partner!!


----------



## azngotskills (Feb 24, 2006)

capnxtreme said:


> So please explain how you are going to "match up" a "[email protected]/1m" sensitivity rating?


LMAO i didnt catch that  hahah


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> I'm just trying to match up a midbass to my other drivers. It won't hurt to have them matching. I'm just paranoid that at different volumes they are not going to sound correct together. Sensitivity is an indication of how efficient the driver is with each watt. It seems logical to me that if two speakers have unmatched sensitivity they may have radically different behavior when running the same wattage.
> 
> *For instance, you get two speakers with similar design but unmatched sensitivity by 3db. Put one on your right channel and the other on your left channel. You might have them sounding decent together with a balance adjustment at volume 20, but when you crank it to volume 35 they need to be re-balanced again. See where I'm going with this? THAT is what I'm worried about when selecting a matching speaker.
> *
> So sue me for being paranoid.


Doesn't work that way. If it did, horns could only be mated to 18" woofers.


----------



## ca90ss (Jul 2, 2005)

An 8" driver that will handle 150w at 50hz free-air........not gonna happen.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

ca90ss said:


> An 8" driver that will handle 150w at 50hz free-air........not gonna happen.


Cool. So, I need to build an enclosure then? Hmm. This at gives me a limitation factor I didn't expect and makes me weigh things differently. Perhaps then a midbass won't be necessary and I should just stick with my comps set at 120Hz highpass from the amp and try to get my subs to do the duty. Problem with that is, I don't know why, but I like having a little bass from the doors. Call me kooky, but having that seems to make it sound better, even if it's just a tactile or 'feel' effect.


----------



## mSaLL150 (Aug 14, 2008)

Elemental Designs 9kv.2 in a small sealed enclosure.

I HATE when subs try to play midbass. Get some proper midbass drivers or cross your components lower.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

t3sn4f2 said:


> Doesn't work that way. If it did, horns could only be mated to 18" woofers.


I just seems to have it stuck in my head that if the sensitivity doesn't match, it will not sound right. I know I can use the amp gain to match them up but I can't help but to think at different volumes/wattage points they will lose sync in their output at some point. It just seems to make sense, I mean, if one driver behaves differently in relation to power input, why would you match it with another driver that outputs more efficiently per watt? Call me confused if that isn't the case.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

mSaLL150 said:


> Elemental Designs 9kv.2 in a small sealed enclosure.
> 
> I HATE when subs try to play midbass. Get some proper midbass drivers or cross your components lower.


Isn't this considered a 'sub' though? So, are you recommending it or not?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

azngotskills said:


> You know you can level match through gains right? I mean this is if you are running active and not mismatching components to a passive crossover


x2

this is the benefit of having an active setup. it's essentially what the original members of this site founded the site on. 


tspence, have you considered going active and ditching your quest to stay passive? no matter your reasons to not go active, I'm pretty sure you're going to solve a lot of your 'problems' if you allow yourself to drive each speaker with it's own dedicated channel of power. 


summary: go active. though you may learn a lot, you seem to be running in circles. from your posts I get the gist that you're not so much up for doing what you say you want to do (ie: build a passive). save yourself the headache and at least try an active setup. the ability to mix and match drivers with much less effort will suit you VERY well.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

OK, her skin color doesn't matter , nor her height weight ,etc..,

Now take your pants off and get yer bean snapped !!!


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

a$$hole said:


> OK, her skin color doesn't matter , nor her height weight ,etc..,
> 
> Now take your pants off and get yer bean snapped !!!


i ****ing hate rebecca pidgeon. 

stupid spanish harlem roses. I got weeds growing in my gravel driveway. I like those more.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> x2
> 
> this is the benefit of having an active setup. it's essentially what the original members of this site founded the site on.
> 
> ...


Maybe you've missed my point in all this. I DO want to go active but still want to match sensitivity because it just seems 'wrong' not to. I would like some more information about how different speakers can not match in sensitivity and stay at similar volume as more wattage is applied. I just want to be sure.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> I just seems to have it stuck in my head that if the sensitivity doesn't match, it will not sound right. I know I can use the amp gain to match them up but I can't help but to think at different volumes/wattage points they will lose sync in their output at some point. It just seems to make sense, I mean, if one driver behaves differently in relation to power input, why would you match it with another driver that outputs more efficiently per watt? Call me confused if that isn't the case.


When you lower the output of the louder driver you are giving it less power. After that, whatever gain you add to each is equal for both so output raises equally as well.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

t3sn4f2 said:


> When you lower the output of the louder driver you are giving it less power. After that, whatever gain you add to each is equal for both so output raises equally as well.


So, once you match the volume at one point all speakers will stay matched on the output regardless of the volume knob setting? I'm not saying you're wrong, my brain just doesn't want to accept that. Are there test graphs that show say the drivers in an active setup with a volume of 25% and then a volume of 50% or 75%? I would like to know for sure I'm not going to have a weird difference. Subs are one things but when you get into the mids it's a bit more critical to have consistency.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Good call tspence ,

I walked out on a concert when the drummer got excited ... he was way louder than the rest of the band ... so i'm up on top of my seat yelling hey HEY you are maKING THE mU sIC NOT SOUND RITE

Then I left ... **** him and the horse he rode in on !!


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> So, once you match the volume at one point all speakers will stay matched on the output regardless of the volume knob setting? I'm not saying you're wrong, my brain just doesn't want to accept that. Are there test graphs that show say the drivers in an active setup with a volume of 25% and then a volume of 50% or 75%? I would like to know for sure I'm not going to have a weird difference. Subs are one things but when you get into the mids it's a bit more critical to have consistency.


Nope, no easy way of showing you this. Only way to clear that kind of doubt is through understanding, and that only comes from learning from the bottom up. Once you understand it that way, you'll be able to see it how you are looking to see it.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Do you see anyone else pissing and moaning this badly about sensitivity matching speakers??? That should answer your question...quit trying to wrap your brain around it and...it'll only make it hurt worse. Yeah its nice to have it close..but then again gains to kinda take care of that problem if used in the correct manner.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> Maybe you've missed my point in all this. I DO want to go active but still want to match sensitivity because it just seems 'wrong' not to. I would like some more information about how different speakers can not match in sensitivity and stay at similar volume as more wattage is applied. I just want to be sure.


You don't learn by reading. No offense, I'm somewhat the same way.

So, having said that, GO ACTIVE and quit worrying about it. You want to know how this works... the best way is to find out first hand. Your questions aren't getting the answer you want anymore because you're not asking anything new; rather asking the same thing a few different ways. 

Do it. Quit wasting your time. Then you can have better understanding and you'll have learned something first hand. This is much more valuable than reading. In the 3 weeks you've been asking this stuff, you could've already implemented a small active setup in your home and ordered a few different $10 drivers from madisound and completed your own listening tests.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

wait until she convulses and goes limp [ abate her breath and her heart will be happy ! ]

She'll lock right up on you and squeeze your lemon til the juice runs down her leg.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Okay,

I like the idea of the 9Kv.2 being used as a midbass as long as it can go up to 250Hz and a little beyond on an 18db/octave lowpass from the amp to meld with the Infinity Refs that will go into kicks. I might even try to fit both the 9Kv.2 and the comps in the door but doing a sealed enclosure for the 9Kv.2's would make that a bit tough, so I'll have to do some fantasizing about which configuration would be better.

I'm going to buy a pair of RE SE 12's and run them at 1-ohm off my A7HC amp to do the deep bass duty. Those 12's will go into sealed .95 boxes for an ultra-flat response. 

I am considering still running some new 6x9s in the rear deck with the old Kingwood amp bridged to 4-ohm and running at 115-watts RMS just to piss you guys off and keep my rear fill thrills.


----------



## atsaubrey (Jan 10, 2007)

I didnt read thru all the posts but I think the new ID XS8 coming out might fit the bill nicely. I can tcomment on playing all the way down to 50hz but it will be very very close to that and will definately take more than 150rms in a car door. If it is anything like its XS cousins it will play flat well past 4,000hz as well. Can you say awesome 2 way?


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

just an FYI a 8" midbass in a sealed enclosure up to 250hz it going to be a BIATCH to make it sound good. ESPECIALLY if you are doing the enclosure out of fiberglass...I thought I could let my 6" minisubs go to at least a 100hz but they just wont work...I hardly even use them now because I've got the mids working so well...but none the less when they do go on they are only getting 50-80hz or so..fiberglass resonance is a ***** in those higher freq. You can check out my build to see how much of a pain enclosures for those minisubs was, and there is a ton I didn't show that I had to do to reduce resonance...


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> You don't learn by reading. No offense, I'm somewhat the same way.
> 
> So, having said that, GO ACTIVE and quit worrying about it. You want to know how this works... the best way is to find out first hand. Your questions aren't getting the answer you want anymore because you're not asking anything new; rather asking the same thing a few different ways.
> 
> Do it. Quit wasting your time. Then you can have better understanding and you'll have learned something first hand. This is much more valuable than reading. In the 3 weeks you've been asking this stuff, you could've already implemented a small active setup in your home and ordered a few different $10 drivers from madisound and completed your own listening tests.


It's not that simple. I'm in the planning phase. At the end of this month I will get bonus money along with boocoo overtime money that I will use to buy gear and supplies, then dive in and play for a few months testing, poking prodding and playing until I have a system that I really love. 

After this upcoming round, there will only be 2 major things left to do. 1. Further quieting the car's interior. 2. The JBL MS-8 processor.  Then my car audio will rule the world!


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> It's not that simple. I'm in the planning phase. At the end of this month I will get bonus money along with boocoo overtime money that I will use to buy gear and supplies, then dive in and play for a few months testing, poking prodding and playing until I have a system that I really love.
> 
> After this upcoming round, there will only be 2 major things left to do. 1. Further quieting the car's interior. 2. The JBL MS-8 processor.  Then my car audio will rule the world!


You'll certainly rule something with those baddazz infinity making mad VBA!!!


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> It's not that simple. I'm in the planning phase. At the end of this month I will get bonus money along with boocoo overtime money that I will use to buy gear and supplies, then dive in and play for a few months testing, poking prodding and playing until I have a system that I really love.
> 
> After this upcoming round, there will only be 2 major things left to do. 1. Further quieting the car's interior. 2. The JBL MS-8 processor.  Then my car audio will rule the world!


it is that simple. how is it not?

getting a processor can't really simplify things any more in terms of what you're asking about. Seriously. How is it complicating your situation?


Oh, and that MS-8 ain't coming out anytime soon. I wouldn't put all your eggs into that basket.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

guitarsail said:


> You'll certainly rule something with those baddazz infinity making mad VBA!!!


Go ahead, clown my Infinity Refs. They are staying!  I picked them out in a blind test shootout and will not be changing them unless I find some speakers I like more. So, just forget about trying to convince me. They are staying in my setup and that's that. It's a 'preference' thing and we all have our own quirky things that are in our systems that we like.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Hey I wasn't trying to get you to change...I was commenting on the mad dbz!


And really...all your bets are on the MS-8?? you have heard the 20% gear 80% install right??? If your install is Shiat...the MS-8 wont save you...plus...once it comes out...bring on the "I can't figure out why my MS-8 won't make my system sound badazz-spoonfeed me" thread that will get thrown strait into the YSHSF column in reference to what we have all be telling you in all of your other threads....


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> it is that simple. how is it not?
> 
> getting a processor can't really simplify things any more in terms of what you're asking about. Seriously. How is it complicating your situation?
> 
> ...


These are long term goals over the course of a year. The most current goals are over the next 3-4 months. The next stage is acoustics then the stage after will be processing. I think these are realistic plans and I will approach each with studying and researching until I am happy that I'll have something I'll like. The MS-8 is best car audio processor concept ever and I will wait another year for it if that's what it takes. I have plenty of other challenges to preoccupy myself with in the meantime before a processor will make a big difference.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

guitarsail said:


> Hey I wasn't trying to get you to change...I was commenting on the mad dbz!
> 
> 
> And really...all your bets are on the MS-8?? you have heard the 20% gear 80% install right??? If your install is Shiat...the MS-8 wont save you...plus...once it comes out...bring on the "I can't figure out why my MS-8 won't make my system sound badazz-spoonfeed me" thread that will get thrown strait into the YSHSF column in reference to what we have all be telling you in all of your other threads....


That center channel will work wonders though


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

guitarsail said:


> Hey I wasn't trying to get you to change...I was commenting on the mad dbz!
> 
> 
> And really...all your bets are on the MS-8?? you have heard the 20% gear 80% install right??? If your install is Shiat...the MS-8 wont save you...plus...once it comes out...bring on the "I can't figure out why my MS-8 won't make my system sound badazz-spoonfeed me" thread that will get thrown strait into the YSHSF column in reference to what we have all be telling you in all of your other threads....


Actually, the MS-8 is for fine-tuning. I'll use it to get a flat response curve first, then play with the final response curve until it sounds fab to me. I doubt I'll be disappointed with it.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

t3sn4f2 said:


> That center channel will work wonders though


 I'm gonna start twitching. Haha...I still think my passive setup sounds darn near as good as ALOT of passive setups I've heard. Install install install. Tuning. Of course the above oppinion is just IMHO. I hope to get enough tuning and loose ends tied up next year to win or place hi next season with my passive setup. Wouldn't that be a shock to the active is better mindset. (don't get me wrong...active rocks, especially if your install is great and its just to eek the last couple of % points out of things) but damnit I want to kick some ass with passive!


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

t3sn4f2 said:


> That center channel will work wonders though


You don't have to have a center channel. There are multiple configurations it will let you dial in from what I've read. Slow your roll man. Don't be so quick to criticize.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> I doubt I'll be disappointed with it.


Is that before or after the "I can't figure out how to use it" thread you'll inevitably start.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

guitarsail said:


> Is that before or after the "I can't figure out how to use it" thread you'll inevitably start.


Nope. You're not going to get that from me. I'll be posting the pictures and tutorials on how I got my rig tweaked on my DIYMA user page and blog. I actually know my way around EQs and mastering software. I think you sell me short too much. You'll likely be surprised I'm not as dumb as you think. I just needed certain hardware facts and fiction sorted out. I'll be fine choosing my crossover points and tailoring my EQ curve.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> You don't have to have a center channel. There are multiple configurations it will let you dial in from what I've read. Slow your roll man. Don't be so quick to criticize.


Really? Did not know that.  

My comment was in defense of it. 

But, if you aren't planning to use the Logic 7 feature with a center channel, then there are other options I would consider before it.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> Nope. You're not going to get that from me. I'll be posting the pictures and tutorials on how I got my rig tweaked on my DIYMA user page and blog. I actually know my way around EQs and mastering software. I think you sell me short too much. You'll likely be surprised I'm not as dumb as you think. I just needed certain hardware facts and fiction sorted out. I'll be fine choosing my crossover points and tailoring my EQ curve.


Fantastic I'll be sure to read and laugh when in gets published in the next AES letter.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> These are long term goals over the course of a year. The most current goals are over the next 3-4 months. The next stage is acoustics then the stage after will be processing. I think these are realistic plans and I will approach each with studying and researching until I am happy that I'll have something I'll like. The MS-8 is best car audio processor concept ever and I will wait another year for it if that's what it takes. I have plenty of other challenges to preoccupy myself with in the meantime before a processor will make a big difference.




you're putting all your eggs into one basket and running in circles. you're going to put all your faith in a processor that you know nothing about and that won't be out for a very long time. that pretty much sums up this thread...

I give up. You other folks have fun.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> you're putting all your eggs into one basket and running in circles. you're going to put all your faith in a processor that you know nothing about and that won't be out for a very long time. that pretty much sums up this thread...
> 
> I give up. You other folks have fun.


What are you talking about? My system will sound great long before a sound processor is ever used on it. I'm certainly NOT putting all my eggs in one basket. This is a progressive plan. There are other sound processors out there which I can use just as easily to achieve what I'm after. It's just that the MS-8 will allow me to do that a LOT more easily and precisely.


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

tspence73 said:


> I am considering still running some new 6x9s in the rear deck with the old Kingwood amp bridged to 4-ohm and running at 115-watts RMS just to piss you guys off and keep my rear fill thrills.


Wait, wait, wait, Wait, WAIT... did he just say Kingwood??


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

t3sn4f2 said:


> Really? Did not know that.
> 
> My comment was in defense of it.
> 
> But, if you aren't planning to use the Logic 7 feature with a center channel, then there are other options I would consider before it.


The key for me is the binaural method of sampling the in-car sound for measurement. THAT is the single biggest plus as far as I'm concerned. That method is the closest measuring technique to mimicking REAL human hearing during sampling I've seen for audio processors. IMO, it's not about what some RTA says is 'perfect', it's more about your ears, BUT using the best methodology during the capture and processing doesn't hurt. 

Also, the MS-8 has a configuration for 3-way active fronts and I think with 8-inputs it might even do that plus allow for my rear channels too at the same time. I would spend tons more money trying to get separate processors to work to achieve that. The MS-8 is just good stuff.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

imjustjason said:


> Wait, wait, wait, Wait, WAIT... did he just say Kingwood??


That was my old amp man. Chill.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> Nope. You're not going to get that from me. I'll be posting the pictures and tutorials on how I got my rig tweaked on my DIYMA user page and blog. I actually know my way around EQs and mastering software. I think you sell me short too much. You'll likely be surprised I'm not as dumb as you think. I just needed certain hardware facts and fiction sorted out. I'll be fine choosing my crossover points and tailoring my EQ curve.


I can't wait. I'm sure car audio veterans and noobs alike will flock from all corners of the Internet to enlighten themselves with tspence73's "The Proper Way to Connect a Kingwood to Your 6x9's (or ED)" tutorial.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

capnxtreme said:


> I can't wait. I'm sure car audio veterans and noobs alike will flock from all corners of the Internet to enlighten themselves with tspence73's "The Proper Way to Connect a Kingwood to Your 6x9's (or ED)" tutorial.


Thats what I am saying! I just can not WAIT to read tspences tutorial on how to **** up...i mean fix up my system. Dude if you want the best measurement systems out there get your hands on a SIM3 or TEF system and have at it...good freakin luck.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

OK, I remember you now....You posted a couple weeks back looking for 2 Ohm midbasses powered by 150-175 watts. Now you want high sensitivity 4 Ohm midbasses to mate up with you Infinity Reference components with hopes of running the MS-8 down the line?

Well, I can understand why you want to match sensitvity, one should select drivers that are close but there is WAAY more to it and I think you are focusing on one factor and either you don't know or are ignoring the other factors?

As far as needing 175 watts 92 dB @ 1w/1m midbasses....Trust me, there are many 8" drivers with less sensitivity running less power installed in a well treated door that will out pound your 6010cs drivers. There are some 8 Ohm drivers with 100 watts that will do the job. You have to consider the other factors...and active is the way to go unless you really want to spend a lot of time trying to get the correct crossover point and level going passive....why? 

As far as the MS-8...I know of a Team JBL member running their amps and subs that makes many of the BIG shows (On his way to USAC as we speak) that is not talking about that unit any more. I would not wait on it....just find a current solution.

I don't know your knowlegde base but by some of your questions, I think you should not get set in your ways but continue reading. Maybe some speaker building books like the loudspeaker cookbook for example. Also, car audio related tutorials:
http://www.teamaudionutz.com/
http://www.carsound.com/columns.shtml

Read all that and you will see some of the other factors that need to be considered in your system design...there is more to deal with in the car....don't just take the word of this group here.


----------



## circa40 (Jan 20, 2008)

Sounds like a job for the kicker RMB8, if you can find them (not to be confused by the SS models - junk).


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Saw this this morning while dropping a deuce, thought it may fit, it's not 4 ohms but many of are not concerned with impedance, it's WAY overrated  But it meets the rest of your criteria.

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&partnumber=264-330&sf=08g-21&destination=264-330


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

I just love how when someone is losing their argument or can't come up with something worthy as a response they resort to saying that the equipment someone has used equates to their knowledge. 

From reading up on the modern processors it's pretty clear that they are easy to use, fairly automatic and all you have to do is follow the directions and a good portion of it is done for you. Heck, the alpine processor videos I've seen all make total sense to me and look easy to use/fairly straight forward. I think you guys are just hatin'.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

I missed that argument to send you that link, but I can say one thing in response to your most recent post. I have never used an automatic processor that was worth a squirt of bird piss. The listening environment has too many variables and people's tastes are different.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

chad said:


> Saw this this morning while dropping a deuce, thought it may fit, it's not 4 ohms but many of are not concerned with impedance, it's WAY overrated  But it meets the rest of your criteria.
> 
> http://www.parts-express.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&partnumber=264-330&sf=08g-21&destination=264-330


My amp at 8-ohms would probably only do 90-watts RMS. And the xmax on that driver is only like 2mm. I would trust my 6.5" comps with bass below 100Hz with it's 4.4mm xmax before that paper cone. Am I missing something? It just seems like a rather low-tech speaker. 

I think I see your point with this one in that it's a bass guitar amp speaker but it's specs show it only goes down to 70Hz. I'm going to be using program material that may also be a bit rough on this speaker such as synth mid-bass and other sounds. If all I played was rock music, this would probly work very well but I need something a bit more robust/tough.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

What's the sensitivity of your comps? What's the voice coil diameter? Note the X-Max of other sensitive drivers others have used for years with great success (JBL professional)

Sorry mang but you ain't gonna find a high excursion driver with high efficiency, you gotta rob Peter to pay Paul.

And remember, Max output= Sens+10LogP


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

chad said:


> What's the sensitivity of your comps? What's the voice coil diameter? Note the X-Max of other sensitive drivers others have used for years with great success (JBL professional)
> 
> Sorry mang but you ain't gonna find a high excursion driver with high efficiency, you gotta rob Peter to pay Paul.
> 
> And remember, Max output= Sens+10LogP


Remember that for an 8-ohm speaker the sensitivity to match my speaker would be 89db 1w/1m due to 2.83v giving a different result with a different ohm load.

That's why on 4-ohm car speaker you must be sure to qualify whether they used 2.83v to get their result or did they use the PROPER 2v for testing a 4-ohm speaker's sensitivity.

To matchup the sensitivity you must use a 3db difference for each ohm load reduction. 

92db 1w/1m @ 4ohm using 2.83v is the same as 89db 1w/1m @ 8-ohm using 2.83v.

The sensitivity rating traditionally was used for 8-ohm drivers using 2.83v as the standard to get the 1w/1m output. When the 2.83v is used for 4-ohm speakers the output is actually 3db more than 8-ohm speakers. So, you must factor this difference in when trying to look for matching sensitivity.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

So let me get this strait. Your objective is to match sensitivities as close as you can between drivers and to find an 8" midbass with an 89db sensitivity at 1 watt at 50Hz?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> Remember that for an 8-ohm speaker the sensitivity to match my speaker would be 89db 1w/1m due to 2.83v giving a different result with a different ohm load.
> 
> That's why on 4-ohm car speaker you must be sure to qualify whether they used 2.83v to get their result or did they use the PROPER 2v for testing a 4-ohm speaker's sensitivity.
> 
> ...



#1, that's what gain controls are for
#2, your tweets will never ever, ever see the full power of the amplifier
Even a 8 ohms, 92dB is a damn fine number.

So throw max volume figures of the tweets out the door


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

chad said:


> #1, that's what gain controls are for
> #2, your tweets will never ever, ever see the full power of the amplifier
> Even a 8 ohms, 92dB is a damn fine number.
> 
> So throw max volume figures of the tweets out the door


Remember that I'm just looking for a heavy duty midbass for frequencies between 50Hz and 250Hz. The Infinity Ref component woofer is going to be used as a midrange speaker for 250Hz and up. So, that's my plan. The recommendation for the Elemental Designs 8" woofer looked like a solid contender to me. Maybe even more robust that I really need, but I don't think having more than is needed is a bad thing. The only issue I have with the Elemental Designs woofer is that it might not be very sensitive. They didn't list sensitivity at all. However, if what people are saying is true then 175-watts RMS should be enough to power these with good output. Only thing is I need to make an enclosure for it.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

I would not discredit the ED like you are looking at, but as you said the enclosure will be needed to make it perform to it's fullest, that that will indeed be a royal pain in the ass. Time to sit down with some beer in the garage and figure it out  That's the fun part!


----------



## drocpsu (May 3, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> The key for me is the binaural method of sampling the in-car sound for measurement. THAT is the single biggest plus as far as I'm concerned. That method is the closest measuring technique to mimicking REAL human hearing during sampling I've seen for audio processors. IMO, it's not about what some RTA says is 'perfect', it's more about your ears, BUT using the best methodology during the capture and processing doesn't hurt.
> 
> Also, the MS-8 has a configuration for 3-way active fronts and I think with 8-inputs it might even do that plus allow for my rear channels too at the same time. I would spend tons more money trying to get separate processors to work to achieve that. The MS-8 is just good stuff.


Really? Why not save the money and use REAL human hearing while doing processing (with any number of capable processors)? Hmm....just a thought.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

drocpsu said:


> Really? Why not save the money and use REAL human hearing while doing processing (with any number of capable processors)? Hmm....just a thought.


Okay, read my posts a little more carefully and you will see that the MS-8 is intended to get me to a starting point of flat response. THEN the MS-8 allows me to draw whatever additional change to the EQ curve that I want to tailor the sound to my unique likes. That means it's not just going to put the system flat, but also allow me to change what I want. I like this idea very much. 

Also, it's much simpler to use than the traditional 30-band EQs and RTA. It's like the Alpine processor, only a step better on user adjustability.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

Can't wait till this guy comes clean. He's damn good at running you guys around. Bravo, my friend. I'm impressed.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

chad said:


> I would not discredit the ED like you are looking at, but as you said the enclosure will be needed to make it perform to it's fullest, that that will indeed be a royal pain in the ass. Time to sit down with some beer in the garage and figure it out  That's the fun part!


So, the website says that a .35 cuft enclosure is needed but it will work minimum in a .23 cuft? When I do the fiberglass for the doorpanel, do you think it's feasible to do a .35 cuft enclosure with it? I'll have to do measurements to see how much actual space the door panel has for an enclosure.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

FoxPro5 said:


> Can't wait till this guy comes clean. He's damn good at running you guys around. Bravo, my friend. I'm impressed.


Did it ever occur to you that I know a decent amount of info but don't know everything and I just want to be comfortable figuring everything out first before putting a ton of free time into this project? When I am working on it I won't be on here very much if at all. I'll be working on it.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> When I am working on it I won't be on here very much if at all.


*holds breath*


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

tspence73 said:


> ...I just want to be comfortable figuring everything out first before putting a ton of free time into this project?


Is this ton of time you are spending on the computer posting / researching / asking questions not valuable free time?


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

I promise you I'm not "resorting" to saying things bad about your equipment. I'm saying you've got a major boner on the MS-8 which may or may not ever come out for all of us to buy. Especially when there are many processors out right now that are proven to do the job. Also chad nailed it on the head with processors that "do" the job for ya so far sound like piss. We're not talking 30band eq and a RTA here. I'm talking fully parametric eq's and a infiite band analyzer. Like SIM, TEF, SMAART. ANywhoo we know you're not going to listen to anyone about that because the MS-8 Is going to make your system awesome..if you ever get one.....

On the the 8"...yeah you need to do alot of research as Chad has said about how speakers work...there is no such thing as a HI XMAX HI Efficiency driver. And have you ever been on a stage where one of those "wimpy non robust non heavy duty" 8incher cabinets is wanging away...call me crazy but they are far from being wimpy and not heavy duty enough....


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

bikinpunk said:


> *holds breath*


I just spit sweet tea everywhere... that's not fair!!


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

tspence73 said:


> Did it ever occur to you that I know a decent amount of info but don't know everything and I just want to be comfortable figuring everything out first before putting a ton of free time into this project? When I am working on it I won't be on here very much if at all. I'll be working on it.


Did it ever occur to you that you're better off growing beets than messing with us?


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

tspence73 said:


> Did it ever occur to you that I know a decent amount of info


NOPE!


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

imjustjason said:


> I just spit sweet tea everywhere... that's not fair!!


Was it Milo’s? If not, it doesn’t matter!


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

bikinpunk said:


> Was it Milo’s? If not, it doesn’t matter!


It was Monell's... MmmMm!!


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

FoxPro5 said:


> Did it ever occur to you that you're better off growing beets than messing with us?


I'm really confused with the beets..


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

guitarsail said:


> I'm really confused with the beets..


Fox wants him to find another hobby...


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Just checking..I was mostly confused about why it was beets... as apposed to picking up underwater basket weaving


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

guitarsail said:


> I'm really confused with the beets..


Are we talking about Doug Funnie, Pattie Mayonnaise, and THE BEETS!?


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

/\/\/\/\/\ nice


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Tsk tsk. Jealousy and hatred.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

HA! I just damn near spewed soda out my nose on that one.


----------



## shadowfactory (Oct 20, 2008)

Call me crazy but if I went to a new class at school and started telling everyone how much I know and how wrong they were (including the professor) I would be labeled as arrogant and a blowhard.
See a connection?

Also the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, is that why you are surprised when your threads end up here?


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

shadowfactory said:


> Call me crazy but if I went to a new class at school and started telling everyone how much I know and how wrong they were (including the professor) I would be labeled as arrogant and a blowhard.
> See a connection?
> 
> Also the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, is that why you are surprised when your threads end up here?


I think he prefers that role... IMHO.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

It is entertaining to see the vast majority of thread starts to be tspence when you wander into the YSHSF subforum...I always get a chuckle when a new one appears.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

I think certain people act like jerks and the thread ends up here. If you look back you can see who derails the thread and it's not me.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Your threads start without rails...


hence why they end up here. 
If you know your **** so much and have done so much research..then why the help me find a 8"...wah wah wah


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

guitarsail said:


> Your threads start without rails...
> 
> 
> hence why they end up here.
> If you know your **** so much and have done so much research..then why the help me find a 8"...wah wah wah


Because I knew what I wanted in the product I was looking for but don't know every product in existence. I searched google and this site for hours yesterday before asking. I wasn't able to find a driver to match what I want. So I asked for some help from people who likely have browsed far more of these products than I have. So, this wasn't some random post. You however should please not post in my threads if you don't have anything to contribute. Really, all you do is just try to crap all over things and you don't add anything useful.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Well see thats just not true...I contribute in many of your threads useful things. Even in this one, trying to help explain a little about the tradeoffs in driver design. Also some other ideas for analyzing software. Also in your other threads on cables sizes, amperages, mad DBZ of orchestra's which you promptly bowed out of discussing with me once I pointed out I was in an orchestra for 10 years. Also I have contributed help on how to properly design a sealed enclosure for a midbass and how technically challenging that can be far beyond trying to find the space but in making a FG cabinet that is resonant free. Funny how you wizz past all the good advice and point out my crapping on your thread when you ignore mine and many others genuine efforts to help. I believe I'm nearing bowing out of this thread for a lack of competancy and insanity as pointed out by shadowfactory a few posts up. I'll reserve a couple of posts in this thread for the certain I'm not a whiney spoonfed biatch replies that will inevitably follow after MUCH useful advice has been given but you refuse to listen to because your **** smells better...my only question is...why the **** ask for the advice then? 

On a helpful posting note.....High efficiency low Xmax proaudio drivers are going to be the only ones you are going to find that fit you 92db sensity desires for whatever reason. But I know you wont listen because you stuck on a few meaningless T/S parameters.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Open up the hanger hear comes the birdie....you have your bib on for the spoonfeading???

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=264-424

This personally is a badass 8" fits your magical 150watt power wants, has a 96db rating and will just generally rock midbass.

Gasp its freq response stated only goes down to 100hz! It must not be able to play 51hz.......


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

guitarsail said:


> Open up the hanger hear comes the birdie....you have your bib on for the spoonfeading???
> 
> http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=264-424
> 
> ...


Yea...you noticed that too. With an fs of 107Hz, I'd say it's a no go. Nice try though. I appreciate that you didn't keep up the insults. I'm trying hard on this project and some people just want to mess me up or get me to quit.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

uh.... I was kinda joking actually making a point about looking at the T/S parameters without the knowledge to translate them...if you think about it the -3db down point is 100...go a couple octaves further from its already hi efficiency..and what do you get....a driver that will play 50hz relatively fine. that driver would work great.

Noone wants you to quit car audio...we want you to STFU and listen and learn and experiment on your own.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

guitarsail said:


> Your threads start without rails...


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

/\/\/\/\ Thank you thank you...please feel free to sig


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> I just love how when someone is losing their argument or can't come up with something worthy as a response they resort to saying that the equipment someone has used equates to their knowledge.
> From reading up on the modern processors it's pretty clear that they are easy to use, fairly automatic and all you have to do is follow the directions and a good portion of it is done for you. Heck, the alpine processor videos I've seen all make total sense to me and look easy to use/fairly straight forward. I think you guys are just hatin'.


I hope that my post was not lumped into this response? Yeah, some guys are giving you a hard time and i can't speak for them but Myself.....all I have ever tried to do on the forum was learn and help others. Yes, this is a DIY forum and one would think guys here would be open to just about any thing but.....Many follow conventional wisdom. When you come here asking questions be prepared for answers that follow that line of thinking. Yes, you want to do a specific thing but is that the right thing to do? Many will try to enlighten you to their way of thinking or a more conventional way of thinking and that is OK. You should take in everything that people give you and form your own conclusions. However, it seems as if what others have said has not mattered much and you are set on doing what you set out to do. There is nothing wrong with that...go right ahead...that is how you learn...by DOING! Get some speakers and hook those things up and make your own crossover for them…what better way to learn about

Nevertheless, before I posted a response to this post I did read through your previous post to try and get an idea about what questions you have asked. When you posted the 2 Ohm midbass thread I posted a 8 Ohm system design that was probably had the potential to be as potent as the 2 Ohm driver and system design you were asfter. Take that info for what it is worth....There is good info here...

Still, I think you would better served to go back and continue to read (Start with a speaker builder book like I mentioned and the links) than to continue to post questions like these. A true midbass driver with the exact specs that you are looking for may not exist? However, there are drivers that will get the job done...I don't think that you are trying to hear that yet? You will...in time.


Walt


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> Yea...you noticed that too. With an fs of 107Hz, I'd say it's a no go. Nice try though. I appreciate that you didn't keep up the insults. I'm trying hard on this project and some people just want to mess me up or get me to quit.


I've said it a ga-jillion times and some in this thread will understand. A HIGH EFFICIENCY 10" driver is normally a MIDRANGE. To get those numbers you have to look at pro and and a 10" in pro works as a midrange driver!

Remember tho, you are putting it in a car, you are dealing with a boundary and transfer function and many have found a professional MIDRANGE to work exceptionally well as a midbass in that application regardless of FS.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

chad said:


> I've said it a ga-jillion times and some in this thread will understand. A HIGH EFFICIENCY 10" driver is normally a MIDRANGE. To get those numbers you have to look at pro and and a 10" in pro works as a midrange driver!
> 
> Remember tho, you are putting it in a car, you are dealing with a boundary and transfer function and many have found a professional MIDRANGE to work exceptionally well as a midbass in that application regardless of FS.


Yeah, that was pretty much the point of my presentation..its nice to get some backup though!


----------



## dawgdan (Aug 10, 2006)

I'm with Fox. I don't think tspence is a real person. There's no one that could be this brick-headed. I feel like I'm arguing with dryer lint.

But for someone to donate almost 400 posts for entertainment.. that's brick-headed perseverance!


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

well...maybe...but by golly if he's a real person it certainly is some funny/frusterating/headbanging on a wall stuff.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

dawgdan said:


> I'm with Fox. I don't think tspence is a real person. There's no one that could be this brick-headed. I feel like I'm arguing with dryer lint.
> 
> But for someone to donate almost 400 posts for entertainment.. that's brick-headed perseverance!


I don't know. Maybe you guys aren't explaining yourselves very well.  I am trying. From what I'm reading in other older posts some of these drivers wouldn't even be considered as true midbass duty. At least not for what I'm trying to use them for. From what I understand, once you get under the FS of a driver the bass response tends to dip drastically below that point. Like my Infinity 6.5's are at 95Hz FS and they cry when doing a wattage above their RMS lower than their FS. I don't like the sound of bottoming out drivers. It's too obvious. I want a quality experience. I really enjoy my Infinity Refs as midrange/hi range, but I'm craving something more punchy and strong under 100Hz that they can't deliver in the doors. So, I'm trying to fill that role. I know my sub can do the duty but without the tactile feel from the doors it just doesn't seem 'right' to me. Am I the only one that feels that way?


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Your infinity's cry...because they are infinitys...

Heres a question that may not have been asked...Tspence...how old are you? and what (if you are of age) do you do for a living??


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

guitarsail said:


> Your infinity's cry...because they are infinitys...
> 
> Heres a question that may not have been asked...Tspence...how old are you? and what (if you are of age) do you do for a living??


I'm not getting personal here. I don't ask about your life, I'm not interested in dating you dood. And don't be talkin' about my Infinity's


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

WLDock said:


> I hope that my post was not lumped into this response? Yeah, some guys are giving you a hard time and i can't speak for them but Myself.....all I have ever tried to do on the forum was learn and help others. Yes, this is a DIY forum and one would think guys here would be open to just about any thing but.....Many follow conventional wisdom. When you come here asking questions be prepared for answers that follow that line of thinking. Yes, you want to do a specific thing but is that the right thing to do? Many will try to enlighten you to their way of thinking or a more conventional way of thinking and that is OK. You should take in everything that people give you and form your own conclusions. However, it seems as if what others have said has not mattered much and you are set on doing what you set out to do. There is nothing wrong with that...go right ahead...that is how you learn...by DOING! Get some speakers and hook those things up and make your own crossover for them…what better way to learn about
> 
> Nevertheless, before I posted a response to this post I did read through your previous post to try and get an idea about what questions you have asked. When you posted the 2 Ohm midbass thread I posted a 8 Ohm system design that was probably had the potential to be as potent as the 2 Ohm driver and system design you were asfter. Take that info for what it is worth....There is good info here...
> 
> ...


I wasn't saying anything about you man. You've been helpful. It's cool.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> Maybe you guys aren't explaining yourselves very well.


Dude... seriously.

I have a hard time believing that a gimmick account could be so clever and dedicated. And I also have a hard time believing, well... I just don't know wtf to believe. My money is on chad, though.


----------



## shadowfactory (Oct 20, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> From what I understand, once you get under the FS of a driver the bass response tends to dip drastically below that point.





> to work exceptionally well as a midbass in that application regardless of FS.


You obviously DON'T understand.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

chad said:


> I've said it a ga-jillion times and some in this thread will understand. A HIGH EFFICIENCY 10" driver is normally a MIDRANGE. To get those numbers you have to look at pro and and a 10" in pro works as a midrange driver!
> 
> Remember tho, you are putting it in a car, you are dealing with a boundary and transfer function and many have found a professional MIDRANGE to work exceptionally well as a midbass in that application regardless of FS.


Okay, okay. Maybe I'm not finding what I want on the web is because I'm asking for too much. Great efficiency but also great extention. Okay then. But but for an 8-ohm driver rated at 89db @ 2.83v 1w/1m to get 50Hz isn't asking for the impossible, at least I didn't think so. But rather I was asking for a 4-ohm driver doing 92db @ 2.83v 1w/1m to do that duty which I thought would be feasible. Again, maybe I'm wrong. I'm not an electronic engineer. I was just trying to find something that will matchup and work well.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

shadowfactory said:


> You obviously DON'T understand.


No, I do understand enough to know that once you get under the FS of a driver the bass response goes south. I've looked at enough response graphs to know that.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> I was asking for a 4-ohm driver doing 92db @ 2.83v 1w/1m to do that duty which I thought would be feasible.


Maybe you shouldn't be lecturing on sensitivity measurements, then.  I swear to God.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

capnxtreme said:


> Maybe you shouldn't be lecturing on sensitivity measurements, then.  I swear to God.


Look, on a 4-ohm driver (like my comps 92db) most specs list 2.83v 1w/1m which when translated to an 8-ohm driver is 89db 1w/1m. 89db 1w/1m didn't seem that 'high efficiency' to me. Now you guys seem to be posting drivers that are WELL over 92db 1w/1m at *8-ohms* which is like 8db MORE efficient than my comps! Then you're saying that is an example of what I'm asking for. That's plain BULL. Do you see where I'm going? And you guys are trying to say I'm dense? Jesus, look at the numbers and factor the translation of the true sensitivity of the drivers. You guys are supposed to be intelligent. I'm asking about *matching* sensitivity, NOT 3-8db more efficiency than my comps.

Not to be ungrateful but I've been accused of being an idiot when asking straightforward questions and being answered with disproportionate responses then when I actually mention that it's not what I asked for I get insulted and degraded. You guys need to actually READ what is going on here.


----------



## dawgdan (Aug 10, 2006)

*Efficiency doesn't matter.* 16 watts is enough to make a 90 db/[email protected] speaker reach 100 decibels. Have you ever heard 100 decibels at full range? It hurts. 

Get the whole efficiency thing out of your head right now. It's totally illogical to even consider it when dealing with amplified speakers. You have gain adjustments on your amplifiers - that can make up for any sort of loudness issues. You also have a volume knob on your head unit. 

At the level you're at, this isn't rocket science. Quit pretending that it is.

Did you ever ditch your test tones CD like I asked you to last week? Or are you still using tones as your reference?


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

dawgdan said:


> *Efficiency doesn't matter.* 16 watts is enough to make a 90 db/[email protected] speaker reach 100 decibels.


Actually it's 11-watts, but take loss from power and speaker cables then 16-watts might be close enough to accurate. I still haven't been given data on how speakers that react differently to each watt can somehow maintain accurate correlation of output with other drivers in the speaker system. But hey, I'll give the benefit of the doubt.

If the Elemental Design woofers will deliver enough performance to matchup with my comps at the given parameters I specified, then just say 'yes' or 'no'. I will then make a purchase decision on that. I just want some advice on what will work and then some consensus. Not a bunch of babble crabble. Jeez!


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> I'm not getting personal here. I don't ask about your life, I'm not interested in dating you dood. And don't be talkin' about my Infinity's


well thank God. 

I ask because most mature people wouldn't do what you have been doing every freakin thread you start. Asking to much? We have all answered your questions.... thoroughly...the problem is you don't under-****ing-stand the answers. Most clearly you don't understand driver design or we wouldn't be droning on how you can't have a highefficiency high xmax driver, or any other of the other things like how a Pro Audio driver will work amazing for what you are wanting..And if your infinitys are such the ****...just put a couple sets of the 6inchers in there and gain some efficiency by multplying drivers instead of looking for a speaker that can't exist.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> I just want some advice on what will work and then some consensus. Not a bunch of babble crabble. Jeez!


Babble crabble??? You mean the info we've been giving you liike real freakin data, drivers that will work...and the fact that no one else has the problem you are going on and freakin on about? Benefit of the doubt...get out from behind the damn computer trolling along and go ****ing test it.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> Look, on a 4-ohm driver (like my comps 92db) most specs list 2.83v 1w/1m


----------



## tophatjimmy (Dec 16, 2005)




----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

at the above two pics...I hate you both...I just shot pepsi out my nose...damn


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

You're just jealous, tophat.


----------



## tophatjimmy (Dec 16, 2005)

I swear it's like trying to explain something to a chunk of styrofoam.....


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Please....don't give styrofoam a bad rep.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> I still haven't been given data on how speakers that react differently to each watt can somehow maintain accurate correlation of output with other drivers in the speaker system. But hey, I'll give the benefit of the doubt.


And you're trying to tell us that we don't read? 

Various posts throughout this thread:



> You know you can level match through gains right?





> x2





> When you lower the output of the louder driver you are giving it less power. After that, whatever gain you add to each is equal for both so output raises equally as well.





> but then again gains to kinda take care of that problem if used in the correct manner





> #1, that's what gain controls are for





> You have gain adjustments on your amplifiers - that can make up for any sort of loudness issues.


And you are complaining that we haven't given you data to prove that your understanding of gain is recockulous? What kind of data are you looking for? Do you need data to prove that food is edible? That up is up, and down is down? Gain is gain. WTF do you want from us?


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> ... but without the tactile feel from the doors it just doesn't seem 'right' to me. Am I the only one that feels that way?


WTF? You should be trying to eliminate that, not enhance it.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

wha wha whaaaattt??? You mean to tell me that localizing my speakers through tactile fuction is a bad thing???


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Nobody has bothered to answer to the facts I presented. Like how I've been given links to drivers that don't match the application. Like how the drivers will dip drastically after the FS on bass response, to the point of performing barely better than my 6.5's and only because of a larger cone surface. I would have to seriously EQ to flatten out the response of those drivers. Also, no response to the fact that people have recommended ultra-high efficiency drivers that are WAY more efficient than my comps. There have got to be drivers closer to my comp's efficiency that perform decently.

Lastly, I asked for a straight 'yes' or 'no' answer on whether the Elemental Designs woofer will work given my parameters and got no answer. It seems people here are more into arguing than resolving issues.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

guitarsail said:


> wha wha whaaaattt??? You mean to tell me that localizing my speakers through tactile fuction is a bad thing???


tactile fuction indeed.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> Nobody has bothered to answer to the facts I presented. Like how I've been given links to drivers that don't match the application. Like how the drivers will dip drastically after the FS on bass response, to the point of performing barely better than my 6.5's and only because of a larger cone surface. I would have to seriously EQ to flatten out the response of those drivers. Also, no response to the fact that people have recommended ultra-high efficiency drivers that are WAY more efficient than my comps. There have got to be drivers closer to my comp's efficiency that perform decently.
> 
> Lastly, I asked for a straight 'yes' or 'no' answer on whether the Elemental Designs woofer will work given my parameters and got no answer. It seems people here are more into arguing than resolving issues.


heres your answer....NO!

For ****s sake you know your T/S parameters so well...did you even go to their website and look at the freakin specs...OMG 83.43db!!! They are 10DB down at 1 watt how the **** would those work...you want to know if those work but you wont take something that is MORE sensitive than your infinitys that you would turn DOWN and make match.....ANd the drivers presented do match you application you just dont f'ing realize it because your head is to far stuck up your own bum....
**** the bed running this is a pig [email protected]#. I'm out of this one until the next thread. Lest TSpence here decides he wants to tell me more how I'm not helpful when the answers have been spoonfed and dribbled out onto his freakin bib


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Rudeboy said:


> WTF? You should be trying to eliminate that, not enhance it.


You see? Everyone likes something that maybe others don't. It just seems more natural to me to have some nice bass response near my location.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> Nobody has bothered to answer to the facts I presented. Like how I've been given links to drivers that don't match the application. Like how the drivers will dip drastically after the FS on bass response, to the point of performing barely better than my 6.5's and only because of a larger cone surface.





chad said:


> I've said it a ga-jillion times and some in this thread will understand. A HIGH EFFICIENCY 10" driver is normally a MIDRANGE. To get those numbers you have to look at pro and and a 10" in pro works as a midrange driver!
> 
> Remember tho, you are putting it in a car, you are dealing with a boundary and transfer function and many have found a professional MIDRANGE to work exceptionally well as a midbass in that application regardless of FS.





beet farmer said:


> I would have to seriously EQ to flatten out the response of those drivers. Also, no response to the fact that people have recommended ultra-high efficiency drivers that are WAY more efficient than my comps. There have got to be drivers closer to my comp's efficiency that perform decently.





> You know you can level match through gains right?





> x2





> When you lower the output of the louder driver you are giving it less power. After that, whatever gain you add to each is equal for both so output raises equally as well.





> but then again gains to kinda take care of that problem if used in the correct manner





> #1, that's what gain controls are for





> You have gain adjustments on your amplifiers - that can make up for any sort of loudness issues.





> Lastly, I asked for a straight 'yes' or 'no' answer on whether the Elemental Designs woofer will work given my parameters and got no answer. It seems people here are more into arguing than resolving issues.


Issues like, how to build enclosures for rear deck 6x9's, and how to match the sensitivity of midbass drivers to Infinity Ref comps? At least we're focused on the right issues, eh?


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Just make the best selection you can, install them and see what happens. You are going 10 layers deep into problems that you don't even have. Do something!


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Rudeboy said:


> Just make the best selection you can, install them and see what happens. You are going 10 layers deep into problems that you don't even have. Do something!


I don't have money to waste on this. That's why I'm trying to get the best info I can. I have told you guys that the Elemental designs didn't list a sensitivity, so it seems it's too low. But now suddenly it being 10db down it's suddenly not usable? So, sensitivity matters afterall? Anyway, can we focus like a laserbeam and find a driver that is neither 96db 8-ohm PA speaker nor 80db subwoofer and try to find a real 8" midbass around 89db-92db and 4-ohm? That would be nice.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Dude the ratings are right there on there website. google Elemental Designs 9kv.2 and damn there it is first link. And you are the one that said it HAD to be 92db sensitive...We're trying to tell you the sensitivity does not ****ing matter, i was merely pointing that out to you in a sarcastic manner.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

guitarsail said:


> Dude the ratings are right there on there website. google Elemental Designs 9kv.2 and damn there it is first link. And you are the one that said it HAD to be 92db sensitive...We're trying to tell you the sensitivity does not ****ing matter, i was merely pointing that out to you in a sarcastic manner.


Sorry, I took another look and realized that I missed that spec. I honestly didn't notice it when I originally looked at the site. So, are you saying the Elemental designs woofer will work or not? Can we all drop the 'sarcasm' and talk straight for a change? I know you think my questions suck but I'm at least trying. Certain people here give an answer that is not a match to what I ask and then act like I don't get it. Well, I'm trying, so give straight answers and drop the crap.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

beet farmer said:


> Can we all drop the 'sarcasm' and talk straight for a change?


How ****ING HELPLESS can you get?



guitarsail said:


> the sensitivity does not ****ing matter


----------



## dawgdan (Aug 10, 2006)

tspence73 said:


> Certain people here give an answer that is not a match to what I ask and then act like I don't get it. Well, I'm trying, so give straight answers and drop the crap.


You're wanting to be spoon-fed the answers. That's the problem. A majority of the contributors to this board consider spoon-feeding to be everything that is wrong about this hobby. Learning and wanting quick answers are two totally different things, and I'm dumbfounded that you do not realize this.

I'll repeat, in this application, *efficiency doesn't matter*. You have gain controls on your amplifier for a reason. So quit trying to find drivers with a specific efficiency rating. You totally fail to realize that even attempting to replicate these efficiency ratings does not make music any more enjoyable to listen to. And that's your goal, right? 

I've never paid one iota of attention to efficiency ratings in the 15-odd years I've been into this hobby. It simply does not matter when you have a volume knob and/or gain controls and/or equalization.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Yes it will work. Gain match them together. Turn the comps down or turn the 8" up, to break it really far and basic down. But if were going to go this route and suggest things that would work and how...I refer to the 8" pro drivers as the best bet if you are truly going to listen to us. See I can play very nice if you truly intend to listen and forget what you think you know and try to learn.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> I'm not getting personal here. I don't ask about your life, I'm not interested in dating you dood. And don't be talkin' about my Infinity's


He's looking for your background, he's a performance audio engineer for a living, and I've been doing it for longer than that mufugga, hence why I have more patience 

We both have extensive backgrounds in live engineering, he prolly has more in the trenches because I started touring early. I now build recording and experimental studios, along with performance venues and lecture halls... for a living..... 


Wanna date hot stuffs? You got a couple drinkain buddys


----------



## dawgdan (Aug 10, 2006)

Ok, here. I give up. Here's spoon-feeding at its finest. 

http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=45_228_257&products_id=849

There ya go. 4 ohm, 8" speaker with high efficiency. And, it's cheap. No, it's not the best speaker out there, but it's so cheap that you don't have much to lose.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

guitarsail said:


> Yes it will work. Gain match them together. Turn the comps down or turn the 8" up, to break it really far and basic down. But if were going to go this route and suggest things that would work and how...I refer to the 8" pro drivers as the best bet if you are truly going to listen to us. See I can play very nice if you truly intend to listen and forget what you think you know and try to learn.


and to think that we've been thru this already 

He asked for a specific set of parameters, we gave him several drivers, he bitches over Fs not KNOWING what that FS does in a CAR now he complains... COME ON MAN!

We JUST GAVE YOU WAHT YOU WANTED TRY THEM, this is D (as in DO) I (as in IT YOURSELF) M (Mobile) A (Audio) We have spoon-fed you waht WILL WORK and yet you contridict with anechoic theory, which happens to be somewhat right.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

dawgdan said:


> Ok, here. I give up. Here's spoon-feeding at its finest.
> 
> http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=45_228_257&products_id=849
> 
> There ya go. 4 ohm, 8" speaker with high efficiency. And, it's cheap. No, it's not the best speaker out there, but it's so cheap that you don't have much to lose.


It's TOO sensitive, it will never work


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

guitarsail said:


> Yes it will work. Gain match them together. Turn the comps down or turn the 8" up, to break it really far and basic down. But if were going to go this route and suggest things that would work and how...I refer to the 8" pro drivers as the best bet if you are truly going to listen to us. See I can play very nice if you truly intend to listen and forget what you think you know and try to learn.



Okay, let's say we gain match them. At 83db at 1 watt, the 9kv.2 will reach 103db SPL @ 111-watts. The Infinity comps would have to be turned down so that they would be at 103db SPL and would only need roughly 55-watts or so to get to that SPL. I might be able to squeeze another 2db out of them at 175-watts RMS and get them to 105db. Well short of my hopes of at least clean 112db from this system. That extra 10db ensures that equalization will only rob 7db or so from that on average which leaves just enough loud output to be pretty happy.

The question is, will that be the true response from the 9kv.2 in a .35 cuft sealed enclosure? I've seen online that it can get like 140db SPL in vented designs. Not that I'm under any illusions that kind of SPL will come out of my doors with a flat-reponse intention. What kind of SPL can I really expect?


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

chad said:


> He's looking for your background, he's a performance audio engineer for a living, and I've been doing it for longer than that mufugga, hence why I have more patience
> 
> We both have extensive backgrounds in live engineering, he prolly has more in the trenches because I started touring early. I now build recording and experimental studios, along with performance venues and lecture halls... for a living.....
> 
> ...


I don't know man. Those paper whizzer cone specials just don't seem like my thing.  Do you honestly think that 96db PA speakers are a good match for my 89db 1w/1m (when comparably measured)? That's a 7db difference. Pretty wide margin. Not to knitpick or anything. You are at least trying to help.


----------



## dawgdan (Aug 10, 2006)

I'm willing to bet you've never heard 112db full range in your life.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> I don't know man. Those paper whizzer cone specials just don't seem like my thing.
> 
> LOL you are gonna piss off the tube guys
> 
> ...


I like to go as efficient s possible and pulling back, that MID may only do 92 dB where you want it to go on the bottom end, but pulling back is better than boosting the lows because you eliminate power compression, make things breathe easier, life s good. Imagine putting a big fuggin motor in your car and setting a target as to how fast you want it to run a quarter. now you lose a bunch of weight, to hit the same target, it's easier. This "easiness" is headroom. This is why sealed enclosures work damn fine in a car but people in the know prefer vented, which, can be off the wall at first but after tuning gives you more headroom 

A more efficient rig, run easy on the amps in impedance will hit you in the jaw. A system run to the ragged edge in impedance may get loud but IMHO does not have that dynamics edge that a properly engineered system does.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

dawgdan said:


> I'm willing to bet you've never heard 112db full range in your life.


I sure have, and then some, and when done right it will either knock your knees out or give you a hell of an adrenaline rush.


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

tspence73 said:


> Okay, let's say we gain match them. At 83*db* at 1 watt, the 9kv.2 will reach 103*db* *SPL* @ 111-watts. The Infinity comps would have to be turned down so that they would be at 103db *SPL* and would only need roughly 55-watts or so to get to that *SPL*. I might be able to squeeze another 2*db* out of them at 175-watts RMS and get them to 105*db*. Well short of my hopes of at least clean 112*db* from this system. That extra 10*db* ensures that equalization will only rob 7*db* or so from that on average which leaves just enough loud output to be pretty happy.
> 
> The question is, will that be the true response from the 9kv.2 in a .35 cuft sealed enclosure? I've seen online that it can get like 140db *SPL* in vented designs. Not that I'm under any illusions that kind of *SPL *will come out of my doors with a flat-reponse intention. What kind of *SPL* can I really expect?


You know I've been seriously into car audio now for 25 years and my main goal has always been for it to sound good to ME. I have had at least different 30 systems of my own with countless changes throughout and installed well into the hundreds for friends over the years and the letters SPL have NEVER been an issue, I don't remember them even coming up in my 25 years... I see those 3 little letters in nearly every post you make.

WHO CARES ABOUT THE FREAKIN SPL!!!!  Move on, forget about high school and put together a system that sounds good... to YOU!!

You continually brag on how you chose the Infinity's in a blind SOUND test... so why are you trying to chose a midbass based entirely on numbers... 

People in the forum constantly describe the sound and rate drivers based on thier likes and dislikes... *not SPL outputs*. Find a driver that reads like it would have the sound YOU like and go for it. If the rest of your system is up to par you will be able to level match them with anything.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

dawgdan said:


> I'm willing to bet you've never heard 112db full range in your life.


If you've been to a rock concert, you've heard SPL that loud.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> If you've been to a rock concert, you've heard SPL that loud.


Remember who's reading


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

imjustjason said:


> You know I've been seriously into car audio now for 25 years and my main goal has always been for it to sound good to ME. I have had at least different 30 systems of my own with countless changes throughout and installed well into the hundreds for friends over the years and the letters SPL have NEVER been an issue, I don't remember them even coming up in my 25 years... I see those 3 little letters in nearly every post you make.
> 
> WHO CARES ABOUT THE FREAKIN SPL!!!!  Move on, forget about high school and put together a system that sounds good... to YOU!!
> 
> ...


The point is to focus on the science of what I'm aiming for in my sound. I know that if I can get a high enough clean peak output, then I can turn it up and rock out without hearing the speakers or amps strain or distort. That's my goal. Not pure SPL for the sake of pure loudness, but rather the HEADROOM so that I can have the cleanest sound at any volume to sound the way I like it. That's my goal. I have to pay attention to SPL capabilities if I'm to have the results I'm looking for. I see what you're saying but I have to make sure I have the headroom.

Do I over-think it all? Maybe. I would really like someone to step up and lay out the equipment and settings I would need to make that happen but it's not likely.

Right now I'm likely to get a set of RE SE 12's for the deep bass. I'm using my Infinity comps for the mid/hi's. The only remaining thing is the mid-basses to fill that performance gap.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Gotta give a guy credit, he has good ideas. 

And right ideas.

And distorted views 

Love him!


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Haha...thanks for the backup chad...and I hope dawgdan was asking tspence if he's ever heard that full range. Good lord I still remember the scariest loud I ever heard was one Midthrow cabinet from an EV X-array when we were doing impulse testing on it.. That one cabinet was probably the single loudest thing I have ever heard...scared me so ****lless...plus how ungodly clean it was...


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

tophatjimmy said:


> I swear it's like trying to explain something to a chunk of styrofoam.....


Very good! Styrofoam don't absorb jack ****, just like beet farm Bob here.


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

chad said:


> Gotta give a guy credit, he has good ideas.
> 
> And right ideas.
> 
> ...


I don't know man... I think the intentions may be there lost in the BS somewhere... but the method is a complete clusterf*ck!!


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

FoxPro5 said:


> Very good! Styrofoam don't absorb jack ****, just like beet farm Bob here.


That's Mr. Beetfarm Bob to you you beet eating beetnik.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

OMG, I almost collapsed a lung laughing at the tags in this thread:



> Tags
> Another TSpence disaster, *Fail Festival,* ignorant, overthinking, talking to brick wall


Bwahahahhahhaaaaaaaaa.............!


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

I see it as someone who strives for something that is JUST beyond reach and is asking for help. The basic understanding is there.

Us old dogs learned it from books, he's grabbing internet, and as we all know that can be flat out ****ing ugly.

Welcome to old DIYMA with a challenging member, people wanted it back, here it is.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> That's Mr. Beetfarm Bob to you you beet eating beetnik.


and now he made something sig worthy


----------



## dawgdan (Aug 10, 2006)

tspence73 said:


> If you've been to a rock concert, you've heard SPL that loud.


Most rock concerts are not that loud across the full audio spectrum. Sure, there are transients that get that loud, like bass hits and cymbal crashes, but the rest of the music is not playing at that level. If it were.. well, you'd be crying.

BTW, you did not answer my question about your test tone CD. Did you trash it yet? Have you graduated into testing audio with "real calibration equipment" like a music CD that you actually would listen to?


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

chad said:


> and now he made something sig worthy


Hell, his VBA is right there in the DIYMA title... Now with violent bass air.

He's just SOOOO freaking thick headed... but I was too once... once!


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Fail festival was mine!


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

imjustjason said:


> Hell, his VBA is right there in the DIYMA title... Now with violent bass air.
> 
> He's just SOOOO freaking thick headed... but I was too once... once!


and I, Me, C-H to the A muthafuggin D was the first one to make fun of it 

We were all there, a community is built on tolerance, he's NOT fake, he has a legit IP, he's on other forums, there are pics of his car. 

Have fun with it, learn, and remember back, good god. Feed him good info and he takes it. Give him **** and **** man, I'd throw it back too!

We all walk thru life not knowing what EXACTLY to say. so I leave you with rickyisms.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR3QHoqfhX8


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

tspencing coined by dawgdan
definition by me
tspencing:the act of repeatedly going back for head banging insanity!


----------



## rockondon (Jan 18, 2008)

omfg rotflol!!!!

Every thing about this beetr is priceless.
Like Chad said "you wanted it ,here it is." 
Freaking priceless.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

It's bedtime. Entertainment hour is over fellas. I'll be back on Sunday to continue my quest.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

guitarsail said:


> tspencing coined by dawgdan
> definition by me
> tspencing:the act of repeatedly going back for head banging insanity!


I suggest searching "Bikinpunk"


----------



## dawgdan (Aug 10, 2006)

tspence73 said:


> It's bedtime. Entertainment hour is over fellas. I'll be back on Sunday to continue my beet seed germination.


Fixed.


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

chad said:


> We were all there, a community is built on tolerance, he's NOT fake, he has a legit IP, he's on other forums, there are pics of his car.
> 
> Have fun with it, learn, and remember back, good god. Feed him good info and he takes it. Give him **** and **** man, I'd throw it back too


*I feel ya!* BUT, way back when I was learning car audio there was NOTHING... Car Audio & Elec mag didn't start print unit 89, Car, Stereo Review had a quarterly mag in 88. There were occasionally an Audio or Stereo Review that would have a CAR issue, I had no real way to learn other than trial and error and books that weren't geared toward car audio (loudspeaker design cookbook FTW)... there were no well informed forum members to spoon feed me... I had to find my own answers... and that's what is so FREAKIN frustrating about this guy... he wants it handed to him on a silver platter. He says he researches... but like you say he's getting a mountain of trash and opinions from the interweb and God only knows where that info came from and how accurate it is or if it is even accurate.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> It's bedtime. Entertainment hour is over fellas. I'll be back on Sunday to continue my quest.



Good night, I'll prolly return Sunday myself.

Chad


----------



## shadowfactory (Oct 20, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> No, I do understand enough to know that once you get under the FS of a driver the bass response goes south. I've looked at enough response graphs to know that.


No, just no. And no. Also no.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

imjustjason said:


> *I feel ya!* BUT, way back when I was learning car audio there was NOTHING... Car Audio & Elec mag didn't start print unit 89, Car, Stereo Review had a quarterly mag in 88. There were occasionally an Audio or Stereo Review that would have a CAR issue, I had no real way to learn other than trial and error and books that weren't geared toward car audio (loudspeaker design cookbook FTW)... there were no well informed forum members to spoon feed me... I had to find my own answers... and that's what is so FREAKIN frustrating about this guy... he wants it handed to him on a silver platter. He says he researches... but like you say he's getting a mountain of trash and opinions from the interweb and God only knows where that info came from and how accurate it is or if it is even accurate.


And now, it's time to take a brotha under the wing and push him over the edge known as the money pit  Some are just more resistant 

The industry, especially DIY is too, much too small to be a dick, If some of you guys walked in my shoes, as a touring guy, in the early 20's, with the big dogs, and knew the **** I took... Yeah... you'd be a bit more tolerant too 

**** I went toe to toe with Navone at that age, young dumb and full of cum, still have not figured out if I came out on top :blush: But he's a good guy, and I'm sure he would prolly say the same of me!


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

chad said:


> And now, it's time to take a brotha under the wing and push him over the edge known as the money pit  Some are just more resistant
> 
> The industry, especially DIY is too, much too small to be a dick, If some of you guys walked in my shoes, as a touring guy, in the early 20's, with the big dogs, and knew the **** I took... Yeah... you'd be a bit more tolerant too
> 
> **** I went toe to toe with Navone at that age, young dumb and full of cum, still have not figured out if I came out on top :blush: But he's a good guy, and I'm sure he would prolly say the same of me!


There's only one problem with taking him under wing... he doesn't seem to listen... there have been a few brothas try to help him and he bites the hand that's feeding him... thus all of the flames. I try to reason with him more than shoot technical data at him... I don't know if it's sinking in or not. I'm just trying to give him some of that good old school of hard knocks knowledge... you've got it, you know what I am talking bout.


I wish Navone would do another print of the old techbriefs so I could get the ones I am missing!!


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

chad said:


> *We were all there*, a community is built on tolerance, he's NOT fake, he has a legit IP, he's on other forums, there are pics of his car.
> 
> Have fun with it, learn, and remember back, good god. Feed him good info and he takes it. Give him **** and **** man, I'd throw it back too!
> 
> ...


WHoa! WE!?!? Easy there big shooter. Watchu taking 'bout, yo? 

I remember the fist time you posted that vid. I blew a huge snot bubble and urinated on myself. 

tspensicles: quite simply, the balls to hit reply.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

FoxPro5 said:


> WHoa! WE!?!? Easy there big shooter. Watchu taking 'bout, yo?
> 
> I remember the fist time you posted that vid. I blew a huge snot bubble and urinated on myself.


I can dig some Pwnage up n both you and me sizzle-chest 

You get Pone-d eventually 


chad


----------



## shadowfactory (Oct 20, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> Entertainment hour is over fellas. I'll be back on Sunday to continue my quest.




Lol you enjoy being ridiculed by others simply for the attention? You need more fulfillment in others areas of life, badly.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> You see? Everyone likes something that maybe others don't. It just seems more natural to me to have some nice bass response near my location.


That's fine, but you have been saying you are trying to achieve faithful reproduction. Intentionally introducing localization cues is not consistent with that. Before you can begin to meet your goals, you have to be honest about what they are.



tspence73 said:


> I don't have money to waste on this. That's why I'm trying to get the best info I can. I have told you guys that the Elemental designs didn't list a sensitivity, so it seems it's too low.


You can minimize money wasted on experimentation by doing research, but you can't eliminate the possibility when you are implementing the solution yourself. Most of us are amateurs and trial and error is just part of the process. If that is not an acceptable trade off, find a different route, You only have 3 choices:

Experiment (which implies possible failures)
Hire an experienced installer who has the experience to fulfill your goals.
Find someone with an identical car and a system you like and copy their installation exactly.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Rudeboy said:


> That's fine, but you have been saying you are trying to achieve faithful reproduction. Intentionally introducing localization cues is not consistent with that. Before you can begin to meet your goals, you have to be honest about what they are.


I am trying to be faithful to the source but also want to have an experience that I enjoy. Besides, if music is mixed in the music studio the way it's supposed to be, then two full range point source speakers are used to create all the effects for the listening experience. That would include drums and other effects located where the speakers are. When a drummer hits successive drums across from left to right (which is common in rock music), then I want to 'feel' that across the 'front' of the car in a tactile way. Mid-bass woofers in the doors can help translate this effect.

Also, when a good amount of midbass (down to at least 60Hz on the crossover) the sound seems to 'feel' and even 'sound' more alive. Whether this is merely a tactile effect fooling my brain into thinking I'm hearing this difference or not isn't the point. The point is the 'experience' and perception is nearly everything in reproducing the sound. Even if it's just tactile and not truly audible. So, as a 'preference' and an 'opinion', having a set of mid-basses that are:

1. Well amplified (at least 120 watts RMS but ideally around 250-watts to add a few more db output if the driver is capable of it, most that do 250-watts RMS are pro competition designed drivers.)
2. Decently efficient (86db-90db sensitivity measured at a true voltage for it's ohm load so it's a REAL 1w/1m standard, such as 2.83v for 8-ohm, 2v for 4-ohm

For those people having a hard time following what is being talked about in this thread please visit the following sites for a clear explanation on how you can pre-determine what kind of output you can achieve from a given speaker sensitivity and amplifier power. It's VERY important that you understand these basic concepts before attempting to design a speaker system:

SPL, your hearing and how loud each level of SPL actually gets. Remember to reference the listening times associated with the SPL and the damage to your hearing that can occur. I strongly recommend you design a system for SPL levels that are loud and clean but also BREIF for those loud levels above 105db and no more than a session of listening (30-50 minutes length of an album) at average levels of 95-104db:
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html
http://www.integratedaudio.com/help/sensitivity.pdf


An addendum to the sensitivity rating and how to translate that for different ohm loads (VERY IMPORTANT and constantly overlooked information). This will make you look twice and carefully ask what the TRUE sensitivity rating is on any car stereo speaker that is 4-ohms or less. (2-ohms is not shown and that would be a -6db loss off of the sensitivity done at 2.83v for a 2-ohm speaker.):
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-qP9HgleVvYM/Learn/reviews/20030722/match_speakers.html?page=3


When designing a system, your component speaker amplifier will very likely not need to be rated any higher than 120-watts RMS per channel to deliver the most audible output possible for nearly all modern car comps built today. Let me use my own 4-channel interior speaker amplifer as an example of the "waste" on both power and money can get you and break this down into sound byte examples and build the facts so those with ADD like me can absorb these concepts without losing focus. 

Yes, I truly have ADD and must take medication for it. That makes it VERY hard for me to learn and drives my boss and previous teachers and mentors crazy. Even the medicine doesn't conquer my problem totally and I still struggle and I know there are more out there wanting to participate in a hobby like this who just have a hard time going through all the information and staying with it. Having a mindset of wanting to be precise helps and you have to use a lot of mental effort to do gain the epiphany on the info that others take for granted and can learn easily.

Okay, sound byte style example on how too apply these principles for my kindred:

I have a 175-watt x 4 @ 4-ohm amplifier. 

My component speakers are rated at 90-watts RMS @ 4-ohms. 

The impedance curve on my speakers show that 200Hz-300Hz frequencies are the dominant frequencies by which the current will be limited. That means the most current (electrical) flow allowed by the speaker occurs at 200Hz to 300Hz frequencies. 

For instance, running a pure full-ouput 200Hz tone to my speakers will generate a noticable amount of heat on the amplifier due to the high current flow. 

The FS (resonant frequency) of my driver is 95Hz. I don't have a graph to show you but the frequencies below 95Hz receive far less current and watts from the amplifier at frequencies below the FS. There is a natural roll-off below 95Hx that looks like a crossover got put on it. At 50Hz there is a noticable 10db SPL dip. This should tell you that the Infinity Reference component speaker is a VERY poor choice for frequencies below 100Hz. 

The watts rating of 90-watts RMS is the most you can put on the speaker at full range frequencies without the speaker suffering response or physical problems. Above this RMS wattage it would be wise to place a passive filter in-line or use a crossover on an amplifier. 

What this means is that to get the Infinity comp to a higher SPL than:
89db SPL = 1-watt
99db SPL = 11-watts
*107db SPL = 90-watts*
We would have to stop frequencies below 100Hz from reaching the speaker. Preferably at the steepest slope possible. (I have not received an answer from Infinity as to the maximum SPL capability of this driver when filtered at 120Hz and what it's power handling would be. As stated by others they are either incapable of giving this information or they are simply not interested in providing it for a entry-level component speaker. If Mr. Andy Wehmeyer would be so kind to provide this info, I would be greatly appreciative.)

Assuming the comps can deliver handling at 111-watts RMS, the SPL would be 109db SPL. It would now take 1,111-watts to double the volume. 55-watts more after that 111th watt is for the most part, inaudible. That's it. After factoring in wattage losses from cables, the most wattage the amp needs to be rated at and make 111-watts RMS is probably somewhere between 115 & 120-watts RMS. My amp again does 175-watts RMS. That's only about 55-watts of additional power. That's not even enough wattage to push out even 1 more db of SPL. 


Because my amplifier only has an 18db/octave crossover, it's not nearly steep enough. 

In my listening tests, I can hear the driver bottoming out on pure tones and music with it's own mechanical motor noise while trying to differentiate between plastic buzzing and the actual driver's motor noise.

It's clear that the crossover frequency needed to go up. Without accurate test data from Infinity, the only choice I have is torture tests and listening tests. A setting that would be 120Hz-130Hz (on my amp's vaguely marked knobs) I found that the 'bottoming out'/driver noise was still audible on pure tones but not with music. 

This lends to my theory that this driver when is run above it's RMS it's better off being used as a midrange, NOT a midbass driver. 90-watt or less, it's motor noise is inaudible with music with a 80Hz -100Hz crossover, so it's feasible to use as a mid-bass in a low power application. Over 90-watts RMS power, if you are a discriminating listener, you must concede the limitations and move that highpass frequency into the lower-midrange frequencies to eradicate audible motor noise in the driver.

This how I came my conclusion that a midbass speaker would be a good idea so that I could have the midbass performance and keep the midrange/hi-range performance of this speakers I like.

I want to Set the equipment for the loudest possible clean output with maybe a bit more extra to allow for inaudible clipping/distortion to squeeze that extra bit of output that might be needed on quieter pieces of music that need high volume.

The Infinity Reference is rated at a true 89db @ 1w/1m sensitivity when factoring in the 3db loss due to a 4-ohm load. Cross it over at 250Hz to remove the audibility of any motor noise from the driver. 

The 12" RE SE subs are 86db each. With two subs that should be a match at 89db. The subs will be sealed with an intention of a flat response and an average output of around 115db estimated. So it's going to hopefully have the needed headroom to deliver strong bass output at peaks with low distortion.

That leaves the midbass decision. I know it's the obvious conclusion and one I didn't want to face doing but it will fill the performance gap in the system and deliver an added benefit of a nice tactile feel. 

These SPL estimates do not include cabin gain or loss. Car acoustics are not always predictable. There is likely a cabin gain at 30-50Hz as well as 300Hz. I'm not knowledgable enough about car acoustics to go any further, but those are two all but certain acoustic problems I've found so far. 

----------------------------------------------------------
A side thing here about my speakers of choice:
I realize that audiophiles will NOT recommend an Infinity Reference speaker for a high end audio application. However, after exhaustively blind testing every mass market speaker in a shootout, the Infinity Reference speakers are the best sounding speakers. And I'm not talking by a small margin. My ears REALLY like them. Especially on orchestra and Spanish guitar as well as rock music and in acoustic vocal tracks. I've always had the opinion that when someone finds a speaker that sound 'perfect' to them, to not listen to anyone else's opinion and GO WITH THAT SPEAKER, WHATEVER IT IS. Especially for the critical mid/hi range. 

Very knowledgeable people have tried to steer me away to other speakers that I can't even audition in my area, so until I can hear them and compare, I'm sticking to the winning mass market speaker in my own personal BLIND tests. I could have spent more money on any number of different speakers up to $500. 

I chose the Infinity Reference in a BLIND test connected to an amplifier, crossed over at 120Hz with a common 1000-watt RMS powered pair of Alpine Type-R subwoofers, at a output setting of my own choosing and taste. Against Infinity's own highest price speakers, Alpine's Type-X and every low end mid-end and in-between speaker, I chose the Infinity Reference comps as the best sounding. 

It wasn't a truly scientific test, and volume matching drivers was attempted after the switch of speakers at my direction. I gave each speaker a valid trial without knowing which was which. I gave the salesman a clipboard with a numbered piece of paper and instructed him to randomly dial in a different speaker when I was finished with my notes. We tested only 6.5" sized speakers, both components and coax's. We both chose a 5.25" Sony coax as a placebo that we both agreed sounded like ****zu. I instructed him to even at times come back to a previously chosen speaker to try and trip me up so I could review the test data with a degree of skepticism of my subjective drivel on each sampling.

My personal favorites going into the competition were the Polk db series which I had read about thoroughly and even auditioned several times and felt their sound was 'neutral', uncolored and I believed that was the holy grail. JL Audio. Infinity Perfects. I very much wanted to pick these but wanted to hold fast to my decision by a completely 'scientific' method. I've always read about people liking different speakers best that have their own 'signature' sound. I truly believed that the best speaker design & best test results on paper will be revealed by a blind test no matter what.

I decided and made a promise to myself to buy the speaker that came out as the best rated out of three different testing sessions at the time of day (early to late evening) my ears seem to have less ringing due to sinus issues, are less irritated by loud sounds (like in the morning I don't like noise above 80db SPL, I get headahes and am generally grumpy) when I'm relaxed and enjoy listening to music. 

Using a clipboard to make comments. I chose material that included handpicked 3-minute sections of what I consider 'reference' recordings of the highest quality opera, classical, acoustic guitar and rock music from my own collection as well as the salesman's own 'rap' and R&B CDs to add additional perspective. 

Speakers I generally ended up surprised that I didn't like. (Reinforced by repeated playbacks in the same test and in a different location and having the SAME critical evaluation.) For instance, Boston Acoustics SL60 comps. I have read so many good things about Boston Acoustics. Turned out that I didn't even need a blind test. The highs were so 'metalic' and anything that had a high frequency element, even something non-metallic, sounded, 'metallic'. It was easily one of the worst sounding tweeters I heard in the contest. I however though the mid-range was neutral, well balanced and reminded me of the Polk db series drivers. Later on at a different location, I correctly identified these comps immediately upon walking in the area they were playing. I asked the salesman, is that the SL-60 playing? He said, 'yes, aren't they good'? I faked interest and played it off to avoid discussing my opinion. 

I have since spoke with people in serious audio discussions and gave my opinion to shock and angst. People cannot hold a conversation about audio products without getting deeply offended. Especially about speakers. I have to admit, it makes me feel bad when people say awful things about my speakers, such as "bright enough to confuse bats so you can f'k with them at night and make them run into things" or the classic, "you must be deaf". 
-------------------------------------------------


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

chad said:


> He's looking for your background, he's a performance audio engineer for a living, and I've been doing it for longer than that mufugga, hence why I have more patience
> 
> We both have extensive backgrounds in live engineering, he prolly has more in the trenches because I started touring early. I now build recording and experimental studios, along with performance venues and lecture halls... for a living.....
> 
> ...


And here is some info on myself. I have no "engineering degree" but plenty of home audio tinkering to tell a few stories about:

For the record, my ears have audibility up to 17.3KHz with a sharp rolloff after that. The same hearing results I had 9 years ago when using the same testtones on my computer at the same SPL output levels. When my ears are not ringing due to a sinus related condition, I can also as a grown adult identify the 15KHz ring tone and also hear that same irritating 15KHz television tube sound I could hear when I was a teenager. So, nothing wrong with my ears. There is a -3db tweeter option on my Infinity Reference xomps as well as EQ controls on most decent head units. I don't use the -3db option on the crossover because my tweeters are mounted on the 6x9 adapter plate in the door with the woofers. The -3db adjustment is obviously intended for pillar-mounting in close proximity to someone's ear's. I do however find myself reducing 2-KHz to 6-KHz on my EQ as I increase the volume of my system due to what sounds like unbalanced output at those frquencies only when I get the SPL up to an average of 97db to 104db SPL. This could be a subconscious method of me protecting my ears/hearing from pain against high SPL at frequencies the human ear is highly sensitive to.

Anyway, the point is that two people with perfectly good/normal hearing seem to appraise sound quality differently. Neither of us are likely to be technically 'trained' listeners. I have however over the years attempted to use mastering software to 'tweak' songs that I like a lot to sound more 'real' when played back on various equipment. I believe I have developed a pretty good reference of the music material I'm familiar with and really 'know' a well recorded piece of music when I hear it. Dynamic, low compression, natural reverberance, depth of image not just side to side but the well maintained illusion of positioning distance behind and in-front of me, binaural-type quality, superb re-equalization to off-set poor microphones, well balanced overdriven effects on instruments or sounds (whether intended or not) in proportionally correct relation to the rest of the mix so as to minimize masking effects on layered subtleties in the mix, etc. 

When I listen to music I try to turn off this analytical and judgemental perception, not only because it's unrealistic and obsessive, but because I use to find myself just not listening to really great music just because I was disgusted with the quality of the recordings themselves. Hence, the 'obsessive compulsive' early years of my music listening where I tried to take music I liked and literally attempt a remaster of the CD with both analog and digital equipment. 

Like on 90's rock music taking an early 80's analog dbx dynamic range expander and use my computer's digital direct-x 20-bit plug-ins on Soundforge, increase the frequencies on the drums centered on their effective frequency using a well guesstimated Q, run it digital-out (using my pro SEK'D prodif 24-bit digital i/o card, very expensive in the late-90's) to my Sony Minidisc recorder to do a clean 20-bit D/A conversion, then pass it thru the dbx dynamic range expander, record it in analog to my HIFI VHS or capture it back to digital to my CD-R. Then pass it back to the computer in digital and reduce the frequencies carefully to fit within the 0db digital peak while even allowing for some overall loss if needed to maintain the desired and more realistic sounding impact of the drums. I used the fantastic direct-X stereo image tool as well as an analog SRS processor to find a world of buried spacial cues, ambience and effects that were hidden on old 1980's recordings. For instance, my remaster of "People are People" by Depeche Mode by comparison to the original is probably the single greatest remaster difference I ever pulled off which I honestly think sounds like how the band intended it sound. I would be willing to dig it up and upload it to anyone who wants to run the original track against my outrageous remastered version. 

I took care to maintain the cleanest signal possible in my process. Why did I use an old analog dynamic range expander? Because in my opinion, the digital dyanmic range expansion/compressor plug-ins sounded "wrong" and gave the sound a very obvious 'pumping' effect when adding dynamics while in contrast the dbx analog expander when set a specific way with just the right pre-equalization on targeted frequencies and later doing a handpicked reduction of the effected frequencies, produced a 'punchy' impact to the drums that was MUCH more REAL and didn't move of effect the 'air' or noise floor of the recording. I believe the reason is that after the impact, the analog signal was returned so quickly to the default average that the change on the rest of the frequencies were 'masked' by the 'impact' from those bass frequencies. The results were Like I was THERE in the studio on a 'live' take, feeling and experiencing the impact of a live session (or what I imagined a live session in a garage or basement sized room would sound like). 

I had guitars and a drum set as a kid but my parents pretty much let me do my own thing and having severe ADD with no proper instruction, all I could do was just pretend. I liked to play with the guitar amp reverb. I remember what it all sounded like in real proximity to me and just knew later on that 1990's recordings and subsequent 2000's rock recordings squeezed the 'life' out of the sound. Even to the point where the 2000's rock could not even be 'fixed' with my dynamic range 'trick' like the 90's recordings could.

I eventually 'finally' decided that after chucking many good modern musical CDs because of their wretchedly awful sound quality and lack of dynamics (I mean worse, MUCH worse than vinyl records once were, I mean having a 16-bit digital dynamic range of 96db and only using 10db of it is beyond unforgivable. I'm shoicked true studio engineers haven't gone on strike over their 'art' having been destroyed by 'market research' indicating 'hot' recordings sell more.) 

I took my analog studio gear to a pawn shop and got rid of them forever. Maybe I shouldn't have done that. I wanted to be an audio engineer at one time but the difficult mathematics and my ADD problem just were too difficult to reconcile. It's not an excuse. If I didn't try my best, I wouldn't have quit. I'm not a quitter. I tried going to school but need too much time to figure out the difficult material. When it comes to time limits on learning, well, the more complex the problem, the longer I need. The more reading that is needed, the harder it is to keep focus. Even on medication as an adult the problem is only 'helped', not 'cured'. That and having to work full-time it just became obvious that while I had the passion, and understood many of the concepts, heck, even had the imagination, I just lacked the overall talent to achieve the degree. I honestly did try but mathematics is not a subject that an engineer should struggle at. And I'm no pretender. I want truth and objective facts, with fantasy being isolated to playing with the facts to create something new or improved. The kicker for me is that I believe I'm intelligent enough. I conducted a private IQ test experiment using online resources. I did the tests 4 months apart to avoid the possibility of improving the score by virtue of repetition then again after another 4 months if the results were skewed. The test revealed that the results were skewed while medicated and not medicated. The first test while medicated early in my dosing day on Metadate I scored a 126 IQ. 4 months later I did not dose for 4 days, 3 days to recover from withdraw symptoms and the crashing effects of going off the medicine. On the 4th day I felt normal, no big problems other than a tad bit of work performance issues for a few days. I scored a 113 IQ on the non-medicated result. I figured the first test may be a fluke or that I could have gotten lucky and answered correctly on some more questions. After another 4 months I tested while medicated and got a 131 IQ result. Considering the effect the medicine has on concentration, focus and taking a heightened sensation of awareness down several levels I'm not surprised that there is a difference.

From what I then read on IQ tests they vary in methodology and as a result of looking into IQ tests more deeply and analyzing them. That's a debate for another thread on another forum. I have come to really doubt the validity of most IQ tests at accurately measuring differences in intelligence between people who are at or above the the mean average. 

Okay, that's enough about me. You wanted to know more about me, there ya go. I'm fairly new to car audio and have learned quite a bit about equipment advances and speaker design that I didn't know previously. I feel like I have some good knowledge in some areas but incomplete knowledge or misconceptions in other areas. So, when I try to dip into those subjects I'm shaky on, I end up looking like a goof when I try to apply a concept from another area of audio that I understand to an area I don't have a good grasp on.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

dude... cliffs.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> dude... cliffs.


Sorry about the long scattered posts. lol.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

i wanted to read them, honestly. but I couldn't take it. :/


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Hey, 

I've been meaning to ask the sound reinforcement experts here. On the rule that for every addtional speaker you add 3db SPL, does that count for each coil in a dual voice coil subwoofer? 

For instance:

Two single voice coil subs rated at 90db sensitivity. Two of them will do 93db at 1-watt..

With two DUAL voice coil subs, does 1-watt to each coil add 3db more 'per coil' or is is only counted on a 'per cone' basis? I've always wondered about that. I couldn't find the answer on google anywhere.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> i wanted to read them, honestly. but I couldn't take it. :/


Ah well. I know how you feel. It's easier for me to write it than to read it myself. haha


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> Hey,
> 
> I've been meaning to ask the sound reinforcement experts here. On the rule that for every addtional speaker you add 3db SPL, does that count for each coil in a dual voice coil subwoofer?
> 
> ...


You gain that because you are doubling acoustic power in the same space. In terms of a DVC, as long as you are supplying the other coil with the additional amount of power already supplied to the first then yes, technically you will gain 3dB sans losses, because you are essentially putting twice the electrical power into the same space. Cone excursion will go up whereas when doubling speakers cone excursion does NOT go up but rather stays the same. the gain comes from acoustic coupling.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

chad said:


> You gain that because you are doubling acoustic power in the same space. In terms of a DVC, as long as you are supplying the other coil with the additional amount of power already supplied to the first then yes, technically you will gain 3dB sans losses, because you are essentially putting twice the electrical power into the same space. Cone excursion will go up whereas when doubling speakers cone excursion does NOT go up but rather stays the same. the gain comes from acoustic coupling.


Okay doc, in English. That sounds like a 'yes' you gain 3db per coil? I think your next profile pic should be Doctor Emmit Brown.










No, this sucker's electrical, but to power that Jackhammar time machine subwoofer I needed something with a little more kick....plutonium!










YES! 188db!!!!!


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

bikinpunk said:


> i wanted to read them, honestly. but I couldn't take it. :/


I'll bet nobody asks him any more questions 

[slowly backing away]


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Okay,

So, critique my math on this one gentlemen so that I can have a clear grasp on the factoring:

Two 12" RE SE 4-ohm Dual Voice Coil subs.

Each coil treated as if it's a separate driver.

That means 4 speakers.

Four 4-ohm voice coils wired in parallel = a 1-ohm load.

My A7HC amp at 1-ohm outputs 1,200-watts RMS. 300-watts per coil RMS.

With an 86db sensitivity and 4 coils at 1-watt EACH, we have 95db SPL, meaning a draw of 4-watts from the amp.

At 11-watts per coil, or 44-watts total off the amp, the SPL is 105db.

At 111-watts per coil or 444-watts total off the amp, the SPL is 115db.

The remaining 756-watts are split up among the 4-coils leaving a mere 189-watts per coil.

The most I can hope to gain over 115db is a paltry 2db? Is that correct on how much SPL the remaining 756 watts will deliver total? Or am I mistaking this?

Hello? Anybody?


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

bikinpunk said:


> dude... cliffs.


Cliffs... Hmpfh! I am going to have to wait till that one comes out on video... definately a renter... I don't think I would drop the $11 to see it in the theater...:blush:


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Yeah no ****...sorry I asked ....also backs away slowly...


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Okay...well...what about the most recent question at hand?


----------



## ca90ss (Jul 2, 2005)

tspence73 said:


> What this means is that to get the Infinity comp to a higher SPL than:
> 89db SPL = 1-watt
> 99db SPL = 11-watts
> *107db SPL = 90-watts*
> ...


You forgot to take power compression into account which can be >3db at rated power.


----------



## shadowfactory (Oct 20, 2008)

tspence73 said:


> Okay,
> The most I can hope to gain over 115db is a paltry 2db? Is that correct on how much SPL the remaining 756 watts will deliver total? Or am I mistaking this?
> 
> Hello? Anybody?


Why do you have such a hard on for numbers anyway? Take your own advice and USE YOUR EARS. If it sounds good, live with it.


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

OK on the count of three we all walk away...I know it is so damn hard...for me too..but we all need to walk away and quit tspencing ourselves and see what happens....
1.....2.....3.......


----------



## shadowfactory (Oct 20, 2008)

x10000000

I'm out for good.


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

I always wondered how it would end.

Later guys.


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

ca90ss said:


> You forgot to take power compression into account which can be >3db at rated power.


The comp has a vented pole and seems to perform well enough at loud volumes. I'll check with Infinity and see if they know.


----------



## Eric Stevens (Dec 29, 2007)

tspence73 said:


> Hey,
> 
> I've been meaning to ask the sound reinforcement experts here. On the rule that for every addtional speaker you add 3db SPL, does that count for each coil in a dual voice coil subwoofer?
> 
> ...


This is a common misunderstanding. You do not gain +3dB of system efficiency every time you double the cone area.

If you have 1, 2, 4, or 8 speakers the nominal splo at 1 watt is still the *same *regardless of how many drivers you have reproducing the sound. 

*What* does happen as you increase the cone area is you extend the bottom end extension of the system lowering the effective low end limits of the system. The exact effect will be determined by frequency and environment.

When you double the driver you double the power handling of the system and that give you a theoretical +3dB increase in output potential at full volume if you have double the power to drive the system.

This is a simplified explanation because I am making all the statements based upon half space conditions. As you move into smaller environments and especially the constant pressure domain this will change but only for drivers that have output in those lower frequency ranges. Mids and tweeters will not be affected by the change in the environment.

Eric
Image Dynamics


----------



## PimpMySound (Oct 10, 2008)

Was Vance Dickason wrong in his famous loudspeaker cookbook?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

PimpMySound said:


> Was Vance Dickason wrong in his famous loudspeaker cookbook?


Wha?


----------



## guitarsail (Oct 12, 2007)

Vance Dickason is the ****...he mentored me some in his LCR arrays for live sound...some cool shiat...and guys..we've been so good with not tspencing...start it on OT!!!! Stop the madness!


----------



## Eric Stevens (Dec 29, 2007)

PimpMySound said:


> Was Vance Dickason wrong in his famous loudspeaker cookbook?


No Vance is and was very correct in his books.

No what Vance says is that if you have 1 speaker with 1 watt and then increase the quantity of speakers to 2, each with 1 watt the spl will increase +3dB. 

I am saying that the increase in spl comes form the increase in power not the increase in cone area or driver count. 

1, 2, or 4 drivers with a total power input of 1 watt will all be playing the same spl.

Eric
Image Dynamics


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Eric Stevens said:


> No Vance is and was very correct in his books.
> 
> No what Vance says is that if you have 1 speaker with 1 watt and then increase the quantity of speakers to 2, each with 1 watt the spl will increase +3dB.
> 
> ...


Correct. But THEN where things go to hell is when people assume an amp will double power when the impedance is halved so adding a speaker just HAS to gain you an automatic 3dB........ , see where the thinking comes in? I know what you are saying, others know what you are saying but yet others will be completely lost


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

So, in WinISD, when you enter a power figure for the SPL plot, you're essentially entering the power PER DRIVER, not total power in the system?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Correct.... I think..... I need to look but I believe so. Because each driver has a P-in figure for the SPL measurement. If you make that P-in fig 1W 1 driver would equal the sens plot, whereas 2 drivers with 2 combined watts in would be 3dB over the sens plot.

Clear as mud?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

DIYMA Automatic Dupe Feature


----------



## FG79 (Jun 30, 2008)

bikinpunk said:


> In the 3 weeks you've been asking this stuff, you could've already implemented a small active setup in your home and ordered a few different $10 drivers from madisound and completed your own listening tests.


Question for you B.P.:

What are your methods for testing out drivers from madisound?

I bought a Morel 4" woofer, mounted it in my car and they wouldn't take it back. Once you put the screws through, you're screwed right?

I'm not 100% sure what the exact subtlety is, and think someone should clarify. 
Not trying to be sarcastic or anything....I'm serious. 

I want to try out a few drivers from madisound and will gladly buy the one I like.


----------

