# POLL: Pick your 8" Midbass



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Taking a temp of the members here for which would be their preference in 8" midbass drivers for a setup where the midbass will be expected to play between 50-250hz. Driver would be mounted in a door.
Lets assume you have adequate power for your selection.

Im going to try discluding any discontinued or extremely hard to get drivers as they arent practical or useful for someone searching for a new 8" midbass.


----------



## doitor (Aug 16, 2007)

Might be just a bit biased, but L8's for a full HAT Legatia frontstage.

Jorge.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Dammit....apparently the poll took too long to post 
figures...

Anyways, I'd still like people to chime in and give their opinions on what they prefer and why for the 50-250hz range, assuming you have adequate power for whatever your selection would be.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

I was thinking about the peerless SLS as its gotten really good reviews. Im not sure how much I'd gain for the extra $300 or so it would cost for the L8's...


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

I've never used an 8" mid bass before so I can't comment yet, but I'll be able to here shortly.

I had some Dayton R225's and listened to them in the house a little bit, but never installed them in the car, and now I have some DLS IR8's on the way, but I won't have them installed for a while.


----------



## ClinesSelect (Apr 16, 2006)

For 50-250....the Peerless XLS. I know its discontinued _and_ hard to find but they are worth the effort to locate. 

Much easier to find would be a pair of JL 8ib4. Also a very solid performer.


----------



## chijioke penny (Mar 22, 2007)

honestly, with 100watts on them ......I REALLY liked the way the dayton's rs225's sounded in my car over the current peerless sls 8's(w/200watts on them) .... only thing bad about the daytons is that on my set one of the drivers spider separated from the voice coil  and maybe the peerless just need more break in time


----------



## CAMSHAFT (Apr 7, 2006)

MW172........


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

everyone likes the oz audio 200Ls

that i have


----------



## customtronic (Jul 7, 2007)

CAMSHAFT said:


> MW172........


I second that. I've listened to a couple of cars with the Dyn's and they sounded awsome.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

ClinesSelect said:


> Much easier to find would be a pair of JL 8ib4. Also a very solid performer.



[shameless plug] and I have a set of 8IB4s for sale as well.[/shameless plug]

I'm thinking a set of RS225s since the JLs are too deep. Maybe Bob's Morel HU9.1s as well. Both are very good, but if they fit, I'd do SLS8s.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

CAMSHAFT said:


> MW172........


Another way I might go as well. I really want L8s but they're too deep. 



60ndown said:


> everyone likes the oz audio 200Ls
> 
> that i have


I know I did. They sounded GREAT in your van.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

chijioke penny said:


> honestly, with 100watts on them ......I REALLY liked the way the dayton's rs225's sounded in my car over the current peerless sls 8's(w/200watts on them) .... only thing bad about the daytons is that on my set one of the drivers spider separated from the voice coil  and maybe the peerless just need more break in time


What can you say about the difference in performance between the two that you prefer the Dayton? I would think that the Dayton would be a more musical and distortion free driver in the lower midrange area, but it doesnt seem like it would have as much low end extension or impact. What have you experienced?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

60ndown said:


> everyone likes the oz audio 200Ls
> 
> that i have


I like the last bit 

Are you running them or *selling* them?

Hows the performance?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Honestly, I can make fit what I want to run (L8/SLS/JL/etc) but Im concerned about price too. I'd rather not spend 450 for a set of 8's if I can get as good performance from another set of drivers (between 50-250hz) for considerably less.


----------



## ClinesSelect (Apr 16, 2006)

quality_sound said:


> I'm thinking a set of RS225s since the JLs are too deep.


Between those two choices, I would find a way to make the JLs fit. 


/off topic


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

quality_sound said:


> I know I did. They sounded GREAT in your van.


even tho 1 spider was half torn off and the x over was sending a severely degraded signal to 1 of them:blush:



captainobvious said:


> I like the last bit
> 
> Are you running them or *selling* them?
> 
> Hows the performance?


not for sale, but they are well respected and can be found if you look for some. loud low tight punchy and $150 a pair if you can find some.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

but i bet any of the other drivers would be as good, cant beat 8" dedicated mid bass.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

captainobvious said:


> Honestly, I can make fit what I want to run (L8/SLS/JL/etc) but Im concerned about price too. I'd rather not spend 450 for a set of 8's if I can get *almost* as good performance from another set of drivers (between 50-250hz) for considerably less.


exactly


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

ClinesSelect said:


> Between those two choices, I would find a way to make the JLs fit.
> 
> 
> /off topic



I'm going to give it another go, but I'm not holding my breath and I'm not going to mod my door panels other than grinding some excess material on the back side.


----------



## CAMSHAFT (Apr 7, 2006)

quality_sound said:


> Another way I might go as well. I really want L8s but they're too deep.


Not to take anything away from the beautiful driver that the L8 is, the 92mm mounting depth compared to the 77.9mm of the Dyn is a good difference.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

Ill third the MW172, especially after having the shear pleasure to listen to them on a semi normal basis.


----------



## SQ4ME2 (Jul 22, 2007)

i liked the Kef 8" i used to have. i heard kicker makes a good one and i always wanted to hear Dynaudio


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

captainobvious said:


> I was thinking about the peerless SLS as its gotten really good reviews. Im not sure how much I'd gain for the extra $300 or so it would cost for the L8's...


You'll lose sonically by spending more.

The SLS8 is a modern design with Faraday shielding in the motor and a very linear suspension. The L8, so far as I can tell, is just a generic 8 with about the same (or less) throw, less sophisticated motor, and less cone area. 

The SLS8 is just about the perfect car-fi midbass, assuming its depth isn't too great for a given application.


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

On another site someone is doing a test between all these in the car. So far this the outcome but the test is not complete. I can say the guy testing is up to the task.IMO Not sure what else he is going to add to the test. This is just a snap shot of the outcome so far. I hope he adds the OZ Audio 200Hs to the test.

These are not my comments just some cutting and pasting.

Scan-Speak Revelator 18S/8531-I really, really love the sound of the Scan. It's just so buttery smooth and transparent sounding. Probably my favorite so far.

Peerless XLS 830491-Not yet tested

Dynaudio MW172-The MW172's have a neutral presentation to the stage. They aren't attention getters like the L8's. They are not razor sharp, but will not back down if you need them. Sensitivity isn't so great, like any other Dyn speaker I've used. Remind me of the old Seas Performance mids, in this respect. They have a great 'pop and fade' ability. Improvement in sub-midbass integration vs the L8's so far. I think this is due to their "laid back" nature so many have spoke about before. MW172 vs L8....50 hz and down....L8 wins by fatality.

Hybrid L8-I've had the L8's in for about a week. Absolutely wonderful all-around midbass that does everything very well. Smooth, responsive, plays deep with authority, takes a ton of power (415x2 real world watts), nice upper end fill, and fairly transparent. Definitely NOT sub-sounding like the JL's. The L8's are downright vicious. Best thing I like about them is the ultimate blend between the overall sound, punchyness and raw output.

JL Audio 8IB4-Full, juicy sounding, but with a slight hint of boomyness. They have a sub-like sound to them. Doing great of 400w each. Nice on the top end (~250 hz) but not as good as the Scan's.

To bad the test is not posted on DIYMA but he has left DIYMA. So I will cut and paste this over here.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Genxx said:


> On another site someone is doing a test between all these in the car.



Can you provide a link please? Would be another interesting read.
Thanks!


On a side note, I went ahead and placed my order today for a pair of 8" midbasses and 2 deflex pads.


























Oh, you wanted know which ones I guess...? 

Peerless SLS

I couldnt justify spending at least twice as much for some of the others I was considering, especially seeing as how that money can go toward installation to make what I have sound very good.

We'll see how they pan out once I install and tune.


----------



## EricP72 (Mar 23, 2008)

I would like to see a review of the following:

peerless SLS 
Kicker rmb8
JL zr8000 (don't know if it shipped yet)
Hat L8


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

My car came with RMB8's in the doors. Even after I made the doors more suitable as enclosures, they were muddy, unrefined, boomy, and generally awful. In the same spots, the SLS8's are none of those things. I see no reason to think that the Jello or HAT stuff would be the equal (let alone better) of the SLS8, though the XLS8 is better, and for some installs (with significant EQ) the B&C 8NDL51 is a superior choice.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Heres a VERY good 8" midbass review including the Peerless SLS:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11159&highlight=peerless+sls

and another of the SLS:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5706


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

DS-21 said:


> My car came with RMB8's in the doors. Even after I made the doors more suitable as enclosures, they were muddy, unrefined, boomy, and generally awful. In the same spots, the SLS8's are none of those things. I see no reason to think that the Jello or HAT stuff would be the equal (let alone better) of the SLS8, though the XLS8 is better, and for some installs (with significant EQ) the B&C 8NDL51 is a superior choice.


From what I've read the B&C lacks the low frequency extension of the SLS...my main reason for not going with them (along with price of course)


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

DS-21

I have not heard the L8 but everyone I have spoken with that has and everything I have seen written on them is very positive.

I would not rule them out so easily. Atleast listen to them before you decide they are completely beaneth all the raw drivers out there.

I should have the chance to hear them by Aug. So I am not at this point prepared to say they are as good as the SLS or Rev ect at this point. However, I will at least keep an open mind and give them a listen before I make a decision about them.

I really liked the Lotus 8's. I have heard the SLS and at that price point for midbass they are almost unbeatable even at a higher price.IMO

To the OP I think you made a great choice. The SLS should impress.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

I'd have looked at the L8's myself, but the outrageous price stopped that dead in it's tracks. It may be a nice sounding driver, but the price tag kills any chance of me ever hearing them...at least in own car. There just isn't any reason for them to cost that much ($539.99) that I can see.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

DYnAudio MW172


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

89grand said:


> I'd have looked at the L8's myself, but the outrageous price stopped that dead in it's tracks. It may be a nice sounding driver, but the price tag kills any chance of me ever hearing them...at least in own car. There just isn't any reason for them to cost that much ($539.99) that I can see.


Is that price for a pair?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

89grand said:


> I'd have looked at the L8's myself, but the outrageous price stopped that dead in it's tracks. It may be a nice sounding driver, but the price tag kills any chance of me ever hearing them...at least in own car. There just isn't any reason for them to cost that much ($539.99) that I can see.


Well, if you go by that price, (per pair, yes) they still come in under the Revelators, within reason to be considering the Seas Mag and Nextel cones as well.

I just couldnt see paying that much for a driver thats only being asked to play up to 250hz. If I wanted to use them up to say 500-1Khz, it probably would have been a different story.

To be clear, I also have not heard the L8's yet. They may very well sound better to me than what I decided to go with, but only time and my wallet will tell.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

michaelsil1 said:


> Is that price for a pair?


It is, but it's still way to much for me. I bought all my drivers (two 8" mids, two large format tweeters and 10" sub) for $100 less than that.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

captainobvious said:


> From what I've read the B&C lacks the low frequency extension of the SLS...my main reason for not going with them (along with price of course)


That's why I wrote that you'd need lots of EQ for it. It has the volume displacement to go low enough, but needs some frequency sculpting. I think you made the right choice, though. I've been using SLS8's in my daily driver since probably 2004 or early 2005 - probably the first one here by a good year or so to do so - and I've yet to see anything interesting enough to make me consider swapping them out.



Genxx said:


> I have not heard the L8 but everyone I have spoken with that has and everything I have seen written on them is very positive.
> 
> I would not rule them out so easily. Atleast listen to them before you decide they are completely beaneth all the raw drivers out there.


I didn't say they were beneath _all_ the raw drivers out there, just one in particular, Peerless's SLS8. And I stand by that. The L8 is, at best, a well-optimized obsolete design. It doesn't even have (at least, the literature doesn't say it has) Faraday shielding, let alone one of the newer linear-BL motor designs. By contrast, the SLS8 is an extremely well-optimized conventional design, with good use of Faraday shielding in a conventional overhung motor. Given that I've not seen a good example of a cutting-edge 8" woofer (i.e. no JBL W8GTi, no Exodus Koda-X, no TC/AudioPulse LMS-Ultra 8) for limited-bandwidth midbass use I think it's hard to beat even by such great drivers as the Seas Lotus.


----------



## 86mr2 (Apr 29, 2005)

89grand said:


> It is, but it's still way to much for me. I bought all my drivers (two 8" mids, two large format tweeters and 10" sub) for $100 less than that.


Right On! In fact, as I remember, wasn't just this pretty much the point of this site when I originally joined it? Now it seems to have morphed into just another "How much can I outspend the other guy on boutique car audio products?" site.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

86mr2 said:


> Right On! In fact, as I remember, wasn't just this pretty much the point of this site when I originally joined it? Now it seems to have morphed into just another "How much can I outspend the other guy on boutique car audio products?" site.


Yeah, I agree. When you can buy two Dayton RS225's for $100, it's just not logical to me to spend 5.4 times that amount on another driver that is no way 5.4 times better. Granted, I just spent $200 on a set of DLS 8" mids (I didn't really want to spend that much), but I had limited options because of install depth, but even then, that's way less than $540.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

I guess its all relative. If you have the money, and a more expensive driver *slightly* outperforms a much less expensive unit, you may decide its worth the small gain. Some people do, and some people dont. 
To me though, the midrange is the place to splurge if you're going to.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

captainobvious said:


> I guess its all relative. If you have the money, and a more expensive driver *slightly* outperforms a much less expensive unit, you may decide its worth the small gain. Some people derive their self esteem from telling people what equipment they have, and some people dont.
> To me though, the midrange is the place to splurge if you're going to.


fixed.


----------



## EricP72 (Mar 23, 2008)

DS-21 said:


> My car came with RMB8's in the doors. Even after I made the doors more suitable as enclosures, they were muddy, unrefined, boomy, and generally awful. In the same spots, the SLS8's are none of those things. I see no reason to think that the Jello or HAT stuff would be the equal (let alone better) of the SLS8, though the XLS8 is better, and for some installs (with significant EQ) the B&C 8NDL51 is a superior choice.


yeah my car with a set of kick rmb8 already installed, and i can't stand them, no impact or nothing. So i'm looking for a set of bargin 8" mid-bass drivers and so far i'm thinking of getting the peerless like you suggested, but i wanna wait until the jl zr800 comes out and someone does a review. I have been told the jl 8ib are nice also. The HAT were on my list until i was told the price  so def not for me.


----------



## yermolovd (Oct 10, 2005)

you think jls will make your list, given you've been turned down by the price of HATs?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

yermolovd said:


> you think jls will make your list, given you've been turned down by the price of HATs?


good point...


----------



## EricP72 (Mar 23, 2008)

I was under the impression that the new jl's are listing at 200 msrp. Also does anyone know when these will ship?


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

i have the l8 midbasses and i have to say that i won't be buying another midbass any time soon.

i could see spending less on other drivers to test, but then you just end up selling them at a loss and buying another set to try/test/sell. by the time you get through 3 or 4 trial and errors, you could have easily paid for a pair of l8s - and have none of the extra labor.

imo and ime you get what you pay for. every industry. every time.


----------



## ClinesSelect (Apr 16, 2006)

benny z said:


> i have the l8 midbasses and i have to say that i won't be buying another midbass any time soon.
> 
> i could see spending less on other drivers to test, but then you just end up selling them at a loss and buying another set to try/test/sell. by the time you get through 3 or 4 trial and errors, you could have easily paid for a pair of l8s - and have none of the extra labor.
> 
> imo and ime you get what you pay for. every industry. every time.


That is some endorsement of the L8. Can you give us a review of the L8 compared to the other 8" midbass drivers you used?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

ClinesSelect said:


> That is some endorsement of the L8. Can you give us a review of the L8 compared to the other 8" midbass drivers you used?


I'd also like to hear how you feel they stacked up against others you've used/demo'd.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

benny z said:


> imo and ime you get what you pay for. every industry. every time.


That's really rather amusing.


----------



## Skierman (Mar 3, 2008)

Not wanting to hijack your thread but does anyone know of a good 8inch woofer/mid to run in an 2way active setup? Need it to be able to play up to 4khz


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Skierman said:


> Not wanting to hijack your thread but does anyone know of a good 8inch woofer/mid to run in an 2way active setup? Need it to be able to play up to 4khz


4k is dam high IMO, that spectrum is way to broad and wont be easily achievable. if you want one that plays down in sub region and high, the highest youll prolly see that performs nice will be around the 1.5k range.


----------



## Skierman (Mar 3, 2008)

I'm looking into the crossover points on the XDP4000 (below) and trying to select around that. Right now I am thinking the MW172. I will be running 3 ZPA amps for thats all I really have room for. The doors have plenty of room for a 3 way but I will not be going that direction in this vehicle. Any recommendations?

Channel A (Sub) Lowpass 78hz / 99hz @ 0db / 36db / 72db/octave

Channel B (Low) Lowpass 500hz / 793hz / 1.25khz / 4.00khz / 5.03khz / 6.34khz @ 0db / 24db / 72db/octave
Channel B (Low) Highpass 78hz / 99hz / 500hz / 793hz / 1.25hkz @ 0db / 24db / 72db/octave

Channel C (Mid) Lowpass 500hz / 793hz / 1.25khz / 4.00khz / 5.03khz / 6.34khz @ 0db / 24db / 72db/octave
Channel C (Mid) Highpass 78hz / 99hz / 500hz / 793hz / 1.25hkz @ 0db / 24db / 72db/octave

Channel D (High) Highpass 6.34khz / 5.03khz / 4.00khz @ 24db / 72db/octave


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

Megalomaniac said:


> 4k is dam high IMO, that spectrum is way to broad and wont be easily achievable. if you want one that plays down in sub region and high, the highest youll prolly see that performs nice will be around the 1.5k range.


Not an issue at all with a MW172. No audible breakup up to the 4k range on axis or 30 or so off. I as well as Im sure many others would love to see a '262' set, but with a diminishing market, Im sure it is way out there.


----------



## amapro704 (Mar 23, 2008)

6spdcoupe said:


> Not an issue at all with a MW172. No audible breakup up to the 4k range on axis or 30 or so off. I as well as Im sure many others would love to see a '262' set, but with a diminishing market, Im sure it is way out there.


Don, what difference do you hear running a 172 that high in a 2 way vs having a 142 play the majority of that 1-5k range in a 3 way. On paper it kind of seems like you could go either way but I know in practice there has got to be major tonality differences between the 2 setups. A large driver playing up to 4k or a smaller one playing down to 1k or lower. Its gotta sound different... ??


----------



## kevin k. (May 5, 2005)

6spdcoupe said:


> Not an issue at all with a MW172. No audible breakup up to the 4k range on axis or 30 or so off. I as well as Im sure many others would love to see a '262' set, but with a diminishing market, Im sure it is way out there.


Hey Don... hope you and yours had a safe and happy holiday weekend. 

Maybe there is no audible break-up at up to 4 kHz and 30 degrees off-axis, but the user (in this case, me) has definitely begun to lose a fair amount of output. In my own personal experience the driver holds output up to 2 kHz and then begins to fall in response. By 3 kHz and 30 degrees off-axis, I was down about 5 to 6 db. And by 4 kHz and 30 degrees off-axis, I was down by about 10 db.

Personally, I'd probably cross the 8" lower, say, maybe in the 2 to 2.5 kHz range.

All of the above, of course, is my own experience... in my own car... and in my own install. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

amapro704 said:


> Don, what difference do you hear running a 172 that high in a 2 way vs having a 142 play the majority of that 1-5k range in a 3 way. On paper it kind of seems like you could go either way but I know in practice there has got to be major tonality differences between the 2 setups. A large driver playing up to 4k or a smaller one playing down to 1k or lower. Its gotta sound different... ??


Its honesty been several years when I experimented with it that way. Although if my slowly failing memory serves me correctly I preferred the domes moreso for stability. While the cones did a good job, it was the dome that remained fairly neutral throughout. The dynamics not as fun or impactful, but for theyre job, they maintained a sweet spot quite well. Ive since never again tried another in a large format for that high a range, so more accurate thoughts cant really be expressed now.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

kevin k. said:


> Hey Don... hope you and yours had a safe and happy holiday weekend.
> 
> Maybe there is no audible break-up at up to 4 kHz and 30 degrees off-axis, but the user (in this case, me) has definitely begun to lose a fair amount of output. In my own personal experience the driver holds output up to 2 kHz and then begins to fall in response. By 3 kHz and 30 degrees off-axis, I was down about 5 to 6 db. And by 4 kHz and 30 degrees off-axis, I was down by about 10 db.
> 
> ...



Blah ! Wifey and kids were away enjoying the holiday and I was stuck working. Safe? Never when *I* have tools. 

Im with you though on the output. A noticeable bit of loss, but tonality will remain stable. Is that something that be compensated for? Sure, but at what cost? Overall its ability is there, but not without compromise. 

Depending on the 8 in question ... in this case the 172 - I would feel very at home in the 2.2 or so range.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

benny z said:


> imo and ime you get what you pay for. every industry. every time.


LOL just don't buy items on sale is all I got to say!


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

clinesselect & captainobvious - no, i have not heard any other woofers besides the l8s in my own car.

i have heard various other 8s in other vehicles and have never been impressed. this honestly could be in large part to install - it takes a lot of work to make 8s perform ib and the l8s are no different. i have a lot of time into my own doors. but i feel i've gotten it "right" and i don't have any desire to start swapping others in for comparison. i couldn't be more happy with them. gobs of solid, clean bass, fast attack, natural decay, and capable of playing well into sub land.

one midbass i would like to hear is the new id 6x9. a bimmer buddy of mine has them installed identically to my l8s in his 5-series. i would love to hear them, but he is in new zealand.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

benny z said:


> imo and ime you get what you pay for. every industry. every time.


Hmmm...so Bose IS good after all!


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

89grand said:


> Hmmm...so Bose IS good after all!


for the masses, sure.

i didn't say you don't have to be selective.  there is a such thing as taste.


----------



## ClinesSelect (Apr 16, 2006)

benny z said:


> clinesselect & captainobvious - no, i have not heard any other woofers besides the l8s in my own car.
> 
> i have heard various other 8s in other vehicles and have never been impressed. this honestly could be in large part to install - it takes a lot of work to make 8s perform ib and the l8s are no different. i have a lot of time into my own doors. but i feel i've gotten it "right" and i don't have any desire to start swapping others in for comparison. i couldn't be more happy with them. *gobs of solid, clean bass, fast attack, natural decay, and capable of playing well into sub land.*
> one midbass i would like to hear is the new id 6x9. a bimmer buddy of mine has them installed identically to my l8s in his 5-series. i would love to hear them, but he is in new zealand.



Is it possible that another 8" driver could also meet that criteria? Have you heard a properly installed/tuned and adequately powered Peerless XLS, SLS or JBL 2118H? Just curious, nothing more.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

benny z said:


> *i couldn't be more happy with them.* gobs of solid, clean bass, fast attack, natural decay, and capable of playing well into sub land.
> 
> one midbass i would like to hear is the new id 6x9. a bimmer buddy of mine has them installed identically to my l8s in his 5-series. i would love to hear them, but he is in new zealand.



Thats what is important 

FWIW I've also heard good things about the ID 6x9 as well.


----------



## dkh (Apr 2, 2008)

HAT L8    

You could do without a sub with two of them


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

89grand said:


> Hmmm...so Bose IS good after all!


As soon as I get my new XP Mls setup going I'm heading to Ccity to test one of these out. I bet my money there is a at least a 5db dip from 60hz down, around 150-400hz, and over 16khz. Any takers?


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

No highs , No lows ,it must be Bose


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

Someone asked about the ZR800-CW a few pages back... Here is some info.

This speaker is now shipping. MSRP is $229/ea. (dealers set actual selling price). Grille is included. Yes, it is expensive... but if you're looking for a very high quality dedicated midbass driver in an infinite-baffle application, it is a highly capable performer.










Free Air Resonance (Fs): 46.27 Hz
Electrical “Q” (Qes): 0.702
Mechanical “Q” (Qms): 11.667
Total Speaker “Q” (Qts): 0.662
Equivalent Compliance (Vas): 0.787 ft3 / 22.29 litres
One-way, Linear Excursion (Xmax): 0.34 in. / 8.6 mm
Efficiency (1W/1m): 87.0 dB SPL
Effective Piston Area (Sd): 33.34 in2 / 0.0215 m2
DC Resistance (Re): 3.935 ohm
Moving Mass (Mms): 34.23 grams
BL: 7.471 N/A
Motor Strength (BL^2/Re): 14.18
Inductance (Le): 0.602 mH
Nominal Impedance: 4 ohm
Power Handling (continuous): 125W
Frequency Response: 50 Hz - 500 Hz (± 3 dB)
Voice Coil Diameter 1.75-in. / 44 mm
Manufactured in USA

Frame Outer Diameter 8.26 in. / 209.8 mm
Grille Tray Outer Diameter 8.49 in. / 215.6 mm
Magnet Outer Diameter 4.54 in. / 115.3 mm
Frontal Grille Protrusion 1.17 in. / 29.7 mm
Mounting Hole Diameter 7.125 in. / 181.0 mm
Mounting Depth 3.39 in. / 86.0 mm

APPLICATION INFORMATION
The ZR800-CW is a powerful 8-inch component woofer designed to operate in automotive sound systems reproducing the frequency range between 30 Hz and 400 Hz. It can be used in infinite baffle or enclosed applications as an extremely potent, dedicated midbass speaker or as a full woofer. 
Active Filtering is Recommended: When used as a mid-bass speaker, we recommend the use of dedicated amplifier channels and active filtering (electronic crossovers) with the ZR800-CW. The ZR800-CW maintains smooth frequency response characteristics up to 500 Hz, so it is advisable to cross it over with mid-range speakers at 300-400 Hz to ensure a smooth transition. Pushing it higher than this range may result in uneven response which may require equalization to correct.

As a dedicated mid-bass speaker operating above 50 Hz (with active filtering) the ZR800-CW can be safely operated at power levels momentarily exceeding 200 watts per woofer. When operating below 50 Hz as a true woofer, power should be limited to no more than 125 watts per woofer in infinite baffle applications.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

Those would rule with a neo magnet.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Very cool to see the full specs on the ZR800's posted up. Thanks for that msmith!

And about the ID 6X9 midbass, they're NICE!! I got to hear them installed in a 2-way setup paired with some horns in ASTAUBREY's car. Those things have amazing output and good clarity to boot. They also get bonus points for the "just to be different" category in my book. 

Zach


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

Boostedrex said:


> Very cool to see the full specs on the ZR800's posted up. Thanks for that msmith!
> 
> Zach


You're welcome... added a few more (Le, BL, Mms, etc.)


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

msmith said:


> You're welcome... added a few more (Le, BL, Mms, etc.)


I meant to ask in my first post, but what is the cone made of?


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

msmith said:


> You're welcome... added a few more (Le, BL, Mms, etc.)


And in doing so, you got my attention. 

Care to share any details on the motor design?


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

Boostedrex said:


> I meant to ask in my first post, but what is the cone made of?


Boostedrex:
The cone and dust cap are mica-filled polypropylene. The surround is Santoprene. The spider is a Nomex/Poly-Cotton blend with a progressive roll design.

DS-21:
The motor is a conventional overhung topology, carefully refined via our DMA system. The t-yoke is forged and then machined to maintain tight tolerances and the pole is extended a few millimeters. No Faraday rings are used. The voice coil is a two-layer, bifilar winding using copper wire. On paper, there isn't anything terribly exotic going on... but it is a very well-balanced design and is very precisely put together.

Best regards,

Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc.


----------



## dBassHz (Nov 2, 2005)

DS-21 said:


> I've been using SLS8's in my daily driver since probably 2004 or early 2005 - probably the first one here by a good year or so to do so


Really? I thought I was the 1st... Did you buy them overseas? The SLS 8s are the best dedicated midbass drivers that I have used (45 Hz - 200 Hz). Though I really did not notice much of a sonic difference between them and my JL 8IB4s. The SLS 8s definitely had more output then the 8IB4s but I could not perceive the added benefit of the faraday rings.

The Dayton RS225-4s really need proper enclosures to sound good IMO.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Wouldn't mind seeing one of those ZR800's tested on the Klippel (wink wink)

Im interested to see how it fares in the distortion plots and a nice transient response waterfall plot.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

dBassHz said:


> Really? I thought I was the 1st... Did you buy them overseas?


No. I bought mine from Phil Bamberg when they were still an OEM-only product. (Or, at least, no American vender had yet begun stocking them.) Apparently, I bought them in 12/2004, and think I installed them sometime later that month. I'm bolstering my recollection based on this post and this one.

FWIW, I don't think I've used any drivers in any home or car system as long as I've used the SLS 8. (I briefly replaced the Aura Whispers in my car system with KEF Ci50's, but those designed-for-in-wall-use 2" widebanders fell apart in my roadster, and I'm going to try out the 2" Peerless widebanders I bought from John Krutke at some point, so the whole system hasn't been the same.) That in and of itself says something. And not just, "wow, he's managed to live on the same continent since _2004!_" Which, for me, is indeed rather a shock.


----------



## dBassHz (Nov 2, 2005)

DS-21 said:


> No. I bought mine from Phil Bamberg when they were still an OEM-only product. (Or, at least, no American vender had yet begun stocking them.) Apparently, I bought them in 12/2004, and think I installed them sometime later that month. I'm bolstering my recollection based on this post and this one.
> 
> FWIW, I don't think I've used any drivers in any home or car system as long as I've used the SLS 8. (I briefly replaced the Aura Whispers in my car system with KEF Ci50's, but those designed-for-in-wall-use 2" widebanders fell apart in my roadster, and I'm going to try out the 2" Peerless widebanders I bought from John Krutke at some point, so the whole system hasn't been the same.) That in and of itself says something. And not just, "wow, he's managed to live on the same continent since _2004!_" Which, for me, is indeed rather a shock.


Very cool. Kappa had a setup exactly like yours (SLS 8s & Whispers) in his Xtera, which sounded pretty good besides the slight lack of top end and the limited output of the Whispers.

I've been trying to get my hands on some 4" KEF coincidental (small enclosure or in-wall) drivers for some time. Why exactly did the 2" KEF drivers fall apart (build quality, environmental factors)?


----------



## EricP72 (Mar 23, 2008)

msmith said:


> Someone asked about the ZR800-CW a few pages back... Here is some info.
> 
> This speaker is now shipping. MSRP is $229/ea. (dealers set actual selling price). Grille is included. Yes, it is expensive... but if you're looking for a very high quality dedicated midbass driver in an infinite-baffle application, it is a highly capable performer.
> 
> ...


yeah i asked about the zr800, i still will like to see a compariosn of that driver with a L8 and the peerless model just so i'd know if i'm getting the best driver i can afford. The local shop here in detroit told me 199 each out the door. To me thats a lot considering for an extra 150 each i could purchase 2 12w7


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

dBassHz said:


> Very cool. Kappa had a setup exactly like yours (SLS 8s & Whispers) in his Xtera, which sounded pretty good besides the slight lack of top end and the limited output of the Whispers.


The top end isn't a big deal to me. Fine treble details disappear in the breeze with the top down. 

And output, honestly, for casual listening they do really well. I tend to listen to different stuff in the car than at home - more MIA or Pearl Jam, less Shostakovich or Mahler - so they work pretty well. That said, I'm going to be experimenting with the KEF eggs, and if they're a big improvement over the Whispers I'll likely commission bespoke a-pillars for them.



dBassHz said:


> I've been trying to get my hands on some 4" KEF coincidental (small enclosure or in-wall) drivers for some time. Why exactly did the 2" KEF drivers fall apart (build quality, environmental factors)?


Check on eBay. Strays seem to come up. I just bought a pair of the 3" driver eggs for about $70.

The glue joint failed between the cone and the surround. They're repairable, but because they're so small it would be a huge pain to do so.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

My suggestion:
Dayton RS210HF 8" subwoofer


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

captainobvious said:


> Wouldn't mind seeing one of those ZR800's tested on the Klippel (wink wink)


Since you asked so nicely...
http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_components_pages.php?page_id=258


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

^^^^ Wow, you post Klippel curves and nobody cares around here. Interesting!


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

no, they're all busy fapping. give them some time.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

quality_sound said:


> no, they're all busy fapping. give them some time.


That sounds about right. LOL! It's odd that a company would post Klippel curves on here instead of NGDang doing it. +1 to JL Audio for putting all of the info out there for everyone to see. 

Zach


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

msmith said:


> Since you asked so nicely...
> http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_components_pages.php?page_id=258


Certainly nothing to be ashamed of there. The suspension looks really great.

Thanks for showing everyone how car-fi companies should interact with enthusiasts, once again.

[edit]Just saw the second message. Give us a few minutes, man!  [/edit]


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

msmith said:


> ^^^^ Wow, you post Klippel curves and nobody cares around here. Interesting!


I think we're all in our garages measuring door depth.


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

I am impressed. Nice klippel results. Looks like I will be adding these to the very short list of 8's for the truck.

msmith-- When can we get a 4" to do do an all JL 3-way.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

msmith said:


> Since you asked so nicely...
> http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_components_pages.php?page_id=258


Awesome. They look quite good.
Kudos to you and JL for putting the info out there that informed audio enthusiasts want to see.
With many companies, it seems as if they have something to hide. Respect for JL for doing what should be standard in the industry but sadly, is not.

If I didnt just get Peerless SLS', I would certainly take a hard look at these. As it stands, I will probably still take a chance to demo them as soon as I get a chance.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

+1 for JL!


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

Genxx said:


> I am impressed. Nice klippel results. Looks like I will be adding these to the very short list of 8's for the truck.
> 
> msmith-- When can we get a 4" to do do an all JL 3-way.


We are working on a new 4-inch midrange, but it probably won't be ready until next year. 

You could use a C5 5.25 inch as a mid, which is a very smooth speaker, if you have the room.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Hmmm, a 4" dedicated midrange from JL huh? That would be really cool.


----------



## James Bang (Jul 25, 2007)

I'm glad I came across this thread. i will now be going with a peerless sls for dedicated midbass so my idq8 can handle the midrange


----------



## ryanjorunner (Jun 19, 2008)

the idq is nice


----------



## Dangerranger (Apr 12, 2006)

msmith said:


> Since you asked so nicely...
> http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_components_pages.php?page_id=258


^^One of the biggest reasons I have so much respect for JL. One of the very few car audio companies that can and does squeeze every ounce of potential they can out of the driver they're implementing. Ya'll were always good but the FEA/DMA packages, tooling, investment and engineering that started with the W7 created a domino effect and the resulting trickle down has given you one hell of a potent lineup from top to bottom. Kudos from me, just letting you know it doesn't go unnoticed


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

That ZR-800CW looks very nice.  Gonna have to give em a try. GREAT to see the data/graphs on these as well! Props again to JL Audio and Manville!

For now (for the Poll) I'll stick with the XLS8 as it's the only 8" that I've got extensive listening time on and can highly recommend.

On another note:

Manville, I'll give you MAD PROPS if you can get that 4" Mid designed with a Neo Motor, Ultra-Compact/Installer-Friendly Chassis, and optimum performance in 1 Liter Sealed or less!  _PLEASE!!!???_

You see, this is going to be your ONLY 4" midrange, so please make it the best it can possibly be, and back it up with installer-friendliness, lol, as we all know that the midrange is the most important driver to get right. Silky smooth, but with detail and focus to die for. I'd really like to see this new driver blow the S-S 12m and every other mid out of the water.  C'mon Manville, I know you guys have the resources to do this! Take your time and do it right...you will sell a bagillion. Consider high-end home audio OEM sales as well. 

Well, that's my rant, lol. Now back to our previously scheduled program.


----------



## AudioBob (May 21, 2007)

Man I'm bummed. I tried to order a pair of the new JL 8" ZR midbass and they are already on backorder. We tried direct to JL so we are going to try to see if the distributor has them. The 8" mid is the last piece of the puzzle for my new 3-way front that I am working on.

My friend is an authorized JL Dealer so he is working on getting them. I'm ready to mount them and get everyone a review. I am going to run them active off of my 300/2.


----------



## vactor (Oct 27, 2005)

when are these JL's gonna be available?


----------



## AudioBob (May 21, 2007)

They have been released for sale and are on JLs' website. Manville Smith said that they were shipping now.


----------



## phoenix (Jul 19, 2008)

hmmmm.... no mention of the new future id xs8's. those new jl's look sweet


----------



## phoenix (Jul 19, 2008)

hertz?


----------



## glide 1 (Mar 26, 2006)

Anyone know of a distributor for these in the US. they look very interesting, as well as other drivers on the site. www.ciare.com

...and look at the sensitivity!!


----------



## phoenix (Jul 19, 2008)

glide 1 said:


> Anyone know of a distributor for these in the US. they look very interesting, as well as other drivers on the site. www.ciare.com
> 
> ...and look at the sensitivity!!



i can't imagine those speakers ever being distributed here in the us


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

phoenix said:


> hertz?


nope


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

glide 1 said:


> Anyone know of a distributor for these in the US. they look very interesting, as well as other drivers on the site. www.ciare.com
> 
> ...and look at the sensitivity!!


The sensitivity looks like 91db at 4 ohms - is not special. With a whooping 2.5 mm of xmax you can't really eq in too much to flatten things out bellow 100hz. I wouldn't use them as a midass, the B&C NDL51 walks all over this.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

phoenix said:


> hmmmm.... no mention of the new future id xs8's. those new jl's look sweet


Well, honestly neither one looks any more impressive than the SLS8. 

ID has some reactionary notions about motor design that are going to hold their products down to the "they were good in the mid 1990s..." level until they join the modern age. And 4.8mm xmax is not impressive at all for a modern 8 targeted for the lower registers. It'll probably cost similar to B&C 8NDL51 money too, and I don't see it comparing favorably to that superlative driver in any way.

The JL is useful because it's a good bit less deep, and it certainly looks like a high quality piece (parts look great, I assume it will feature Jello's usual standout build quality) but I'm not convinced the motor is up to the SLS8's standard. Peerless's bass driver motors are really something special. (Actually, all of Peerless's drivers that I've played with - XLS, SLS, the old CSX series of midwoofers, the previous HDS series of midwoofers, the new HDS Exclusive line of midwoofers - have uniformly impressed me with their performance and build quality for the asking price. And yet they seem chronically looked-over, perhaps because they're not as well known as Vifa and cost a lot less than ScanSpeak.) And, of course, the SLS8 is a whole lot cheaper.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

DS-21 said:


> Well, honestly neither one looks any more impressive than the SLS8.
> 
> ID has some reactionary notions about motor design that are going to hold their products down to the "they were good in the mid 1990s..." level until they join the modern age. And 4.8mm xmax is not impressive at all for a modern 8 targeted for the lower registers. It'll probably cost similar to B&C 8NDL51 money too, and I don't see it comparing favorably to that superlative driver in any way.
> 
> The JL is useful because it's a good bit less deep, and it certainly looks like a high quality piece (parts look great, I assume it will feature Jello's usual standout build quality) but I'm not convinced the motor is up to the SLS8's standard. Peerless's bass driver motors are really something special. (Actually, all of Peerless's drivers that I've played with - XLS, SLS, the old CSX series of midwoofers, the previous HDS series of midwoofers, the new HDS Exclusive line of midwoofers - have uniformly impressed me with their performance and build quality for the asking price. And yet they seem chronically looked-over, perhaps because they're not as well known as Vifa and cost a lot less than ScanSpeak.) And, of course, the SLS8 is a whole lot cheaper.


You haven't played with the xxls version yet? I've got a pair of 10s that I'm hoping will fulfill my midbass needs. I can tell you already that these are fantastic drivers, the bumped backplate is about an inch worth, and the monstrous rubber surround is orgasmic to the touch. I can't wait to power them up!


----------



## yermolovd (Oct 10, 2005)

with all this talk about SLS8 and me not getting what I want out of my lotus 8 on, I checked the available dimensions of my existing mounting and I can get SLS to fit, so I'm trying it out, around mid August.


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

glide 1 said:


> Anyone know of a distributor for these in the US. they look very interesting, as well as other drivers on the site. www.ciare.com
> 
> ...and look at the sensitivity!!


A bit overstated... a quick calculation reveals an actual 1W/1m of 96.9 dB @ 1W/1m based on their published Fs, Vas and Qes specs.


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

DS-21 said:


> Well, honestly neither one looks any more impressive than the SLS8.
> 
> The JL is useful because it's a good bit less deep, and it certainly looks like a high quality piece (parts look great, I assume it will feature Jello's usual standout build quality) but I'm not convinced the motor is up to the SLS8's standard.


Has someone measured the motor of the Peerless woofer and provided Klippel curves? I would be interested in seeing those to determine if your hunch is valid.


----------



## $rEe (Jan 15, 2008)

For having tried SLS8 and HDS8 I prefer very much HDS8 it nèttement more details.

The SLS8 is fantastic for its price, it really knocks (that did not HDS8)


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

msmith said:


> Has someone measured the motor of the Peerless woofer and provided Klippel curves? I would be interested in seeing those to determine if your hunch is valid.


http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9060&highlight=sls8


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

cvjoint said:


> You haven't played with the xxls version yet? I've got a pair of 10s that I'm hoping will fulfill my midbass needs.


No, never really saw a need. I don't tend to abuse my drivers so the extra xmech over the XLS12 isn't useful to me, and the XLS has more useful parameters for my uses. That, and I already had one XLS, so might as well stick with the same thing.

I agree that considering the XXLS is only like $2 more or something, it's probably the better buy, though.



$rEe said:


> For having tried SLS8 and HDS8 I prefer very much HDS8 it nèttement more details.


They're entirely different drivers, but both excellent. The SLS8 is really designed, I would guess, for compact home subwoofers. It happens to have really low inductance and work very well as a car audio midbass in free-air with minimal EQ as well. The HDS8 (which I've also used, albeit in a home context, and really, really like) is good all the way to 2kHz or so, doesn't have the throw of the SLS8, and has better parts quality for similar money.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

DS-21 said:


> No, never really saw a need. I don't tend to abuse my drivers so the extra xmech over the XLS12 isn't useful to me, and the XLS has more useful parameters for my uses. That, and I already had one XLS, so might as well stick with the same thing.
> 
> I agree that considering the XXLS is only like $2 more or something, it's probably the better buy, though.


The xxls I just got is a pure brute compared to the xls8 I had, I'm thinking it's more in the trim than the size. I was stuck on the xls10 for the longest time, especially since I can flush mount that one in the door as a direct replacement for the Seas w26. However, I modeled all 1 million versions of the 10" Peerless subs (that's soo neat btw, it's like getting a custom driver) and the nomex xxls gave me a Q of .7 so I went with it.


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

DS-21 said:


> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9060&highlight=sls8


Thanks... you're right, the SLS 8 motor curve is very symmetrical and has a nice broad plateau. Xmax is very similar to the ZR800-CW as well... I don't see any significant superiority to the ZR motor in this data, but that's open to interpretation, I guess. The suspension curves are clearly not as good as the ZR. It's also interesting and anomalous that Peerless specs the driver's Le as 2.1 mH, but the test results you linked show a much lower number (less than half that value).

Certainly a good looking driver... it would be interesting to compare it to our 8W1v2, which is closer in price, similar in mounting depth and intended application. I'll see if I can dig up some data and post it.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

msmith said:


> It's also interesting and anomalous that Peerless specs the driver's Le as 2.1 mH, but the test results you linked show a much lower number (less than half that value).


That actually seems to be a trend with Peerless's dedicated bass drivers. Independent measurements (whether from Mr. Dang, HobbyHifi, Klang+Ton, or Voice Coil) always seem to report the inductance at significantly lower than spec. I have no idea why they'd want to make their drivers look worse than they are.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

msmith said:


> Thanks... you're right, the SLS 8 motor curve is very symmetrical and has a nice broad plateau. Xmax is very similar to the ZR800-CW as well... I don't see any significant superiority to the ZR motor in this data, but that's open to interpretation, I guess. The suspension curves are clearly not as good as the ZR. It's also interesting and anomalous that Peerless specs the driver's Le as 2.1 mH, but the test results you linked show a much lower number (less than half that value).
> 
> Certainly a good looking driver... it would be interesting to compare it to our 8W1v2, which is closer in price, similar in mounting depth and intended application. I'll see if I can dig up some data and post it.


I'll be interested to see how the 8W1v2 and the SLS8 stack up as well. Do you feel that the 8W1 would work well as a dedicated midbass?


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

Boostedrex said:


> I'll be interested to see how the 8W1v2 and the SLS8 stack up as well. Do you feel that the 8W1 would work well as a dedicated midbass?


Maybe if you didn't try to push it too high or too hard, but I really don't think so... it's inductance is on the high side for that application and its suspension isn't really designed for operation outside of controlled airspace (small sealed). The ZR800 is far better suited for that use, IMO.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

msmith said:


> Maybe if you didn't try to push it too high or too hard, but I really don't think so... it's inductance is on the high side for that application and its suspension isn't really designed for operation outside of controlled airspace (small sealed). The ZR800 is far better suited for that use, IMO.


I'm curious as to how manufacturers view the car environment as a speaker box. Do you guys model a large sealed, perfect IB, or something else?


----------



## J0ne (Aug 7, 2007)

http://www.hemphop.com/speakerstore.html

bomb


----------



## macmovieman (Dec 24, 2009)

Damn this was a long thread. I know it is over a year old now but there was some good data on 8 inch mid bass. Anyone want to comment on their JL 8s?


----------



## rosenbaumtravis (Nov 8, 2008)

No mention of DLS? The DLS Iridium 8's are a great driver. I have them in my G37 doors, IB, cossed at 50-400 and they sound great.


----------



## MRKBass (Dec 22, 2009)

Hello. Im just getting back into car audio after a 12 yr hiatus so I'm looking for a little input from someone who has used this driver as a dedicated midbass. I've pretty much sold myself on the JL based on its performance and mounting depth. I'm intending to put these in the doors of my 03 ram reg cab 2500 pickup. Im just curious how much power they need to make a decent midbass presence. Im running one 5 channel amp, a SS 705s, focal 165kr2 in q form kicks running passive, working on installing boyd audio's stealth enclosure (.85 cu) in the center console for a single 10 running off the sub channel, and hoping I have enough power left over in the remaining 2 channels (2x50 rms @12v) according to soundstream's specs to run these. Also looking for suggestions on sub for this sealed enclosure. Im open to ideas....fire away. Thanks everyone, I appreciate it! Matt


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

macmovieman said:


> Damn this was a long thread. I know it is over a year old now but there was some good data on 8 inch mid bass. Anyone want to comment on their JL 8s?


If my ZR800s would fit in my new car I'd keep using them. They're outstanding midbasses drivers.


----------



## JohnKoz (Jan 11, 2018)

quality_sound said:


> If my ZR800s would fit in my new car I'd keep using them. They're outstanding midbasses drivers.


Hi there, I was reading this thread today and was curious how well those zr800 held up? I know this is a pretty old speaker and an old thread but I'm thinking of using those in my doors. Where do they stand today?


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

JohnKoz said:


> Hi there, I was reading this thread today and was curious how well those zr800 held up? I know this is a pretty old speaker and an old thread but I'm thinking of using those in my doors. Where do they stand today?




They’re still the best dedicated, in-car, true midbass drivers I’ve heard. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Truthunter (Jun 15, 2015)

I have ZR800s in my front doors and just love 'em. I'm concerned that they will not be made anymore as Crutchfield states "This item is no longer available"


----------



## Hammer1 (Jan 30, 2011)

Try the illusion carbon 8. Great mid bass speaker and it is a shallow mount


----------



## DeLander (Feb 23, 2006)

I like my current Stevens Audio MB-8s over the Beyma 8BR40/Ns that I used in the past.


----------



## JohnKoz (Jan 11, 2018)

Well I just ordered a pair of zr800's. So they get my vote


----------



## SHAGGS (Apr 24, 2011)

Truthunter said:


> I have ZR800s in my front doors and just love 'em. I'm concerned that they will not be made anymore as Crutchfield states "This item is no longer available"


Dang! Did not know that.
Looks like they are in the discontinued category on the JL site.
Guess I waited too long to pick up a pair.


----------



## CrimsonCountry (Mar 11, 2012)

*Re: POLL: Pick your 8&amp;quot; Midbass*

Im new to all this but loving my OEM Volvo/Dynaudio-made 9s (really between 8" and 9"). Got them bridged on a P900.4 (zero amp gains and lowered in DSP) and they sound great in my 3-way. Amazing for the price.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

SHAGGS said:


> Dang! Did not know that.
> Looks like they are in the discontinued category on the JL site.
> Guess I waited too long to pick up a pair.


Are they?? I figured Crutchfield was just dropping them like they usually do if sales aren't that great, but if JL says so then dang. Wanted to try a pair but they're really at the limit in mounting depth & protrusion for my doors. Maybe they're coming out with a newer design. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## SHAGGS (Apr 24, 2011)

Yup. The TR, VR, and ZR lines are all discontinued.
Current offerings are C1, C2, C3, C5, and their new C7 is the top dog.
Nothing bigger than a 6.5 midbass, thou.

Car Audio - Speakers - C7


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

8" mids have never really been a big enough demand for car audio brand so it's understandable but at the same time, sad. I'm sure there will be another next best option after a while.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Niebur3 (Jul 11, 2008)

Dynaudio MW182's


----------



## beak81champ (Oct 2, 2015)

Seems as if the Audio Development W800’s are the new big dog in 8” midbass at the moment.


----------



## bassfreak85 (Jul 26, 2009)

beak81champ said:


> Seems as if the Audio Development W800’s are the new big dog in 8” midbass at the moment.


Never heard an impressive fiberglass cone. Breakup in the lower midrange on everyone I heard.


----------



## bassfreak85 (Jul 26, 2009)

B&C no questions asked I have the 8BG51 they are sick.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

beak81champ said:


> Seems as if the Audio Development W800’s are the new big dog in 8” midbass at the moment.


installing a set as we speak. i guess i'll find out for myself soon



bassfreak85 said:


> Never heard an impressive fiberglass cone. Breakup in the lower midrange on everyone I heard.


here ya go.. breakup starts at 2k

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-8-woofers/scanspeak-22w/4534g-discovery-8-woofer-4-ohm/


----------



## bassfreak85 (Jul 26, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> beak81champ said:
> 
> 
> > Seems as if the Audio Development W800’s are the new big dog in 8” midbass at the moment.
> ...


wouldn't touch the scan. I'd destroy it plus it's going to be bottom heavy and won't touch the B&C driver in extention or midbass.
to low of and fs and etc for a freeair door where you rely on the drivers suspension..
All the raw home audio. Low qts / FS drivers don't like high high-output freeair in cars. They are peaky it's the 250 to 400hz range esp the fiber cones..


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

bassfreak85 said:


> wouldn't touch the scan. I'd destroy it plus it's going to be bottom heavy and won't touch the B&C driver in extention or midbass.
> to low of and fs and etc for a freeair door where you rely on the drivers suspension..
> All the raw home audio. Low qts / FS drivers don't like high high-output freeair in cars. They are peaky it's the 250 to 400hz range esp the fiber cones..


use a crossover. problem solved. Ive used em in multiple cars all of which sounded amazing (IB in the kicks, and sealed enclosures in the doors) and know of a few other competitors using thing and loving them. havent used the B&C myself, but have heard a car with them. it didnt make me want to try them, but i know how it goes from car to car, install to install, tune to tune


----------



## dcfis (Sep 9, 2016)

bassfreak85 said:


> B&C no questions asked I have the 8BG51 they are sick.



Anyone recommend the 6.5 version?


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

bassfreak85 said:


> wouldn't touch the scan. I'd destroy it plus it's going to be bottom heavy and won't touch the B&C driver in extention or midbass.
> to low of and fs and etc for a freeair door where you rely on the drivers suspension..
> All the raw home audio. Low qts / FS drivers don't like high high-output freeair in cars. They are peaky it's the 250 to 400hz range esp the fiber cones..




Similar to my findings on the Q. Recently swapped to Beyma's Studio series 8's in the doors and they're very good on toms, lead guitar, and on into the vocal range. Definitive and snappy, but even with more xmax, the 60-120hz range is no match for the higher Qts/Fs 8's that resided before them. Music content & acoustics aside, it's a waste to try and force a driver to do what you need it to do when something else is more proficient in that range out of the box.


----------



## msmith (Nov 27, 2007)

The ZR800-CW is no longer in production. It has been discontinued. 

There is no direct replacement at this time, but there may be one in the future.


----------



## Dan750iL (Jan 16, 2016)

Woofers Etc still has the ZR800s.


----------



## GreatLaBroski (Jan 20, 2018)

SB Acoustics SB23NRXS45-8 is worth a look if you don’t mind running 8 ohm.


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

Dan750iL said:


> Woofers Etc still has the ZR800s.


Good luck with that.  

I would have a sales rep at WoofersEtc snap a smartphone pic of the actual box and drivers with a note beside it showing the current date and your name on it. Unless I received that prior to ordering, there's NO WAY I would consider purchasing anything from them, and probably wouldn't anyway just because of the questionable "Authorized Dealer" status of that company.


----------



## Dan750iL (Jan 16, 2016)

bbfoto said:


> Good luck with that.
> 
> I would have sales rep at WoofersEtc snap a smartphone pic of the actual box and drivers with a note beside it showing the current date and your name on it. Unless I received that prior to ordering, there's NO WAY I would consider purchasing anything from them, and probably wouldn't anyway just because of the questionable "Authorized Dealer" status of that company.


Rut roh....


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

msmith said:


> The ZR800-CW is no longer in production. It has been discontinued.
> 
> There is no direct replacement at this time, *but there may be one in the future*.


Sad day and sorry to hear, Manville.

But I'd imagine that the Bold text above equates to, "currently under development".  I certainly hope so anyway.


----------



## SHAGGS (Apr 24, 2011)

bbfoto said:


> Good luck with that.
> 
> I would have a sales rep at WoofersEtc snap a smartphone pic of the actual box and drivers with a note beside it showing the current date and your name on it. Unless I received that prior to ordering, there's NO WAY I would consider purchasing anything from them, and probably wouldn't anyway just because of the questionable "Authorized Dealer" status of that company.





Dan750iL said:


> Rut roh....


I briefly considered ordering a pair from them, in spite of they're notorious reputation for using the "bait and switch" sales tactic.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

bassfreak85 said:


> B&C no questions asked I have the 8BG51 they are sick.


Whyyyyy does B&C have three different woofers that all appear to be identical?

My all time favorite 8" midbass is probalby the B&C 8NDL51. I bought those about fifteen years ago off someone who said mine were B&C "prototypes."

Never thought anything of it, then noticed that QSC uses a woofer that's a dead ringer for the 8NDL51, and it's called something like the 8NX.

Curiosity got the better of me, and I actually ordered a pair off of QSC... And they appear to be the exact same woofer. I even measured the T/S, there's virtually no difference.

And now they sell a "8BG51?"


----------



## dcfis (Sep 9, 2016)

Patrick Bateman said:


> bassfreak85 said:
> 
> 
> > B&C no questions asked I have the 8BG51 they are sick.
> ...



We count on you to tell us! It's a noble pursuit the rest of the world rests on your shoulders


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

SHAGGS said:


> I briefly considered ordering a pair from them, in spite of they're notorious reputation for using the "bait and switch" sales tactic.


Yup, that's the main reason why I made my comment about getting an actual dated & I.D.'d picture of the item to make sure that it is actually In Stock at the time of your order. That way they can't even try their notorious bait and switch tactic.


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

Patrick Bateman said:


> Whyyyyy does B&C have three different woofers that all appear to be identical?
> 
> My all time favorite 8" midbass is probalby the B&C 8NDL51. I bought those about fifteen years ago off someone who said mine were B&C "prototypes."
> 
> ...



Interesting. I was looking into the 10" and 12" versions a while back to possibly build my own DIY Electric Bass Guitar cab. I don't really play bass guitar, but a friend needed some cash a while back so I bought his Ibanez SR500 that was in beautiful shape, so I figured I'd noodle with it. I've always loved bass guitar, and a good bass line can make or break a song, so wth?! But about as far as I've got with it is, "Another One Bites the Dust", haha. 
.


----------



## chasingSQ (Sep 25, 2017)

i really like my illusion 8's


----------



## bassfreak (Apr 11, 2007)

well i know for a fact my dumbass co worker kicked my passanger several times. now it sounds like its rubbing abit. even sealed up these things kick ass but i think im gonna try hte sundown neo prov3s. if your are interested i'm gonna get some recones for them. ill get some pics of them naked.


----------



## bassfreak (Apr 11, 2007)

audirsfaux said:


> i really like my illusion 8's


too expensive or id try them. 150 per mid is about as much as i go..


----------



## SHAGGS (Apr 24, 2011)

bassfreak said:


> i think im gonna try hte sundown neo prov3s.


Oh! Those look interesting! And only $264 for a pair on Woofersect.
I hate to admit it, but I've never even looked in the "speakers" category on Sundown's site, I only know how to find the subs.:blush:


----------



## Dan750iL (Jan 16, 2016)

bbfoto said:


> Yup, that's the main reason why I made my comment about getting an actual dated & I.D.'d picture of the item to make sure that it is actually In Stock at the time of your order. That way they can't even try their notorious bait and switch tactic.


I guess I lucked out. I ordered a pair of ZR800s from them through Amazon and got them without any hassle.

I did have one thing with them after I ordered an ID subwoofer a while back. They called and tried to switch on me and actually offered me another sub I wanted more. They offered a V3 instead of the V4 on a 10" IDMAx. I didn't give it much thought at the time since I felt that I had made out well.


----------



## Oscar (Jun 20, 2010)

dcfis said:


> Anyone recommend the 6.5 version?


I dunno about the 6.5" version, but the 8FG64-8 is freakin awesome. It's being used in some amazing 3-ways as a midbass from 55-2500 Hz


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Patrick Bateman said:


> Whyyyyy does B&C have three different woofers that all appear to be identical?
> 
> My all time favorite 8" midbass is probalby the B&C 8NDL51. I bought those about fifteen years ago off someone who said mine were B&C "prototypes."
> 
> ...




The 8BG51 is certainly different from the 8ndl51. Specs are a bit different (including a lower FS)...heck even the surround is totally different. The 8ndl51 has a double roll where the 8bg51 has a more traditional surround and the 8bg51's is rubber whereas the 8ndl51 is cloth. The 8BG51 models nicely for midbass application.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Bah, I gave up on B&C's and with that all of the PA stuff. I've installed them in virtually every car and compared them to top shelf Seas/Scan and they never have the resolution of HiFi drivers. The motors are good of course but the combination of stiff suspensions and those treated paper cones are not for me. 

The kink they have due to high FS makes them punchy and they're fun to audition once or twice for the wow punch/spl gut factor. But if you really want resolution go with a stiff cone, pliant suspension, light coil. At anything less than 10/10s I'd rather have Seas/Scan. It saves my eardrums from damage as well.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

captainobvious said:


> The 8BG51 is certainly different from the 8ndl51. Specs are a bit different (including a lower FS)...heck even the surround is totally different. The 8ndl51 has a double roll where the 8bg51 has a more traditional surround and the 8bg51's is rubber whereas the 8ndl51 is cloth. The 8BG51 models nicely for midbass application.


And the 8mbx51, more midrangishh but still pretty good as midbass, so sensitive.




cvjoint said:


> Bah, I gave up on B&C's and with that all of the PA stuff. I've installed them in virtually every car and compared them to top shelf Seas/Scan and they never have the resolution of HiFi drivers. The motors are good of course but the combination of stiff suspensions and those treated paper cones are not for me.
> 
> The kink they have due to high FS makes them punchy and they're fun to audition once or twice for the wow punch/spl gut factor. But if you really want resolution go with a stiff cone, pliant suspension, light coil. At anything less than 10/10s I'd rather have Seas/Scan. It saves my eardrums from damage as well.


Interesting.
It’s something I suspected and the reason why I’m actually going back to more regular drivers to check by myself (+ like you I don't need that high SPL anymore). 
Except for my midbass, in these constrains, I didn't find anything better than the 10MWnd, for now.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Elgrosso said:


> Interesting.
> It’s something I suspected and the reason why I’m actually going back to more regular drivers to check by myself (+ like you I don't need that high SPL anymore).
> Except for my midbass, in these constrains, I didn't find anything better than the 10MWnd, for now.


I went with Scan classic for tight fits, they are very small dimensionally for a hi fi driver. 

Efficiency wise it's not as though PA drivers are good at it. While the motor is powerful it's not as linear as the best hi fi drivers, so it will loose steam at high excursions. Midbass also requires that you move that super stiff suspension and it tightens exponentially compared to hi fi. It's rare a PA drivers is anywhere close to Hi Fi below 100hz and that's 1 watt frequency response you're looking at on most white sheets.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

cvjoint said:


> I went with Scan classic for tight fits, they are very small dimensionally for a hi fi driver.


I've been using the same driver as well. 25W. I'll be trying the AudioTechnology Flex 10 shortly to see if that is a step up (I'm sure it will be). The Scans are limited in xmax, but are still excellent and have enough xmech to get the job done while being fairly shallow for a 10".


-Steve


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Agreed. I posted this in my build log recently about why I chose the 10" Scan Discovery for midbass purposes:
For midbass, I spent a lot of time modeling different drivers; focusing mainly on pro-audio drivers due to their higher sensitivity but time and time again I found they always had plenty of output... but typically started rolling off much too soon for my tastes, thus causing them to require EQ to boost the low end along with a very steep filter thereby messing with the phase in (IMHO) the most phase-important area in the frequency spectrum. The Scanspeaks I decided to go with have a low-90's sensitivity which is quite good. They have a very low Fs but will be crossed over as a midbass so aspects like compression are mitigated. Coupling that with the knowledge of what boundary enforcement does to the response from my kick-drivers, they'll provide more output in the critical bandpass area without needing a steep filter than other options would have. I can have my cake and eat it, too.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

I have modeled the scans with a bunch of other 10s, and if the 25W could potentially fit, diameter and depth being ok but probably larger motor than on the neo 10, they also gave a very high Q and pass Xmax for my reference.
Well everytime I see a new 10 I just try, but in my very small and shallow cornered boxes of 9L. I couldn't find better than the beymas 10MWnd.
In sims they look very good, low Q lowest excursion with more spl and power handling than the rest, and probably that I need (and they are super compact).

Deep in the footwells they surprised me even more, I play subless without SSF sometime but it’s not very clear there in the first octave.
An electric filter near 50Hz/LR2 to get an acoustic slope of 70Hz/LR4 and it’s definitely enough, more than enough as I have to cut a lot and reduce output/gains to match the rest.

But even if I think they always play in their super safe zone, I feel like I could get something better, not in SPL or impact, but in details.
Maybe I should re-evaluate my demands or re-calibrate my references for a broader driver selection now that I listen a reasonable levels.
But still, to try good classic drivers I would really need more volume. Not ready yet to cut metal for IB. I could try to add few liters here and there but it’s far from what they would need.

What volume do you have for the 25W guys?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Elgrosso said:


> What volume do you have for the 25W guys?


I'm not running the 25w, which you may already know so your question may not be posed to me anyway but...

I've got my 26w 10" Discovery woofers in the kicks vented externally. You can read about it in my build log. Start with post 1744 for the latest:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...an-build-neverending-tale-44.html#post5327746


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Elgrosso said:


> I have modeled the scans with a bunch of other 10s, and if the 25W could potentially fit, diameter and depth being ok but probably larger motor than on the neo 10, they also gave a very high Q and pass Xmax for my reference.
> Well everytime I see a new 10 I just try, but in my very small and shallow cornered boxes of 9L. I couldn't find better than the beymas 10MWnd.
> In sims they look very good, low Q lowest excursion with more spl and power handling than the rest, and probably that I need (and they are super compact).
> 
> ...


Here is the thing, chasing a low Q is all fine but isn't what you want at the end of the day a lower system resonant frequency? With PA you start with an FS already in the neighborhood where you cross the driver over, what's going to happen when you mount it into an enclosure? I would be stunned if the 25W has a system resonant frequency in your box further up than your PA driver. 

Then you have to keep in mind that simulations are at 1 w. Imagine what happens to the driver Q as you apply power. The Scan will gain Q slowly as you increase output or play lower frequencies, the PA driver will shoot the Q to the moon due to a stiff suspension even if the motor is Class AA. 

The bottom output on PA if high enough is likely due to resonance morso than a HI FI driver. Is it ok to have high output by playing through the system's resonant frequency? I'd say maaaaybe ok for subs... but not for midbass. 

My 25W was the beefier one, specially made for Martin Logan with bucking magnets and higher gap/xmax. It tested at .7Q in the Corvette doors.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

cvjoint said:


> Here is the thing, chasing a low Q is all fine but isn't what you want at the end of the day a lower system resonant frequency? With PA you start with an FS already in the neighborhood where you cross the driver over, what's going to happen when you mount it into an enclosure? I would be stunned if the 25W has a system resonant frequency in your box further up than your PA driver.
> 
> Then you have to keep in mind that simulations are at 1 w. Imagine what happens to the driver Q as you apply power. The Scan will gain Q slowly as you increase output or play lower frequencies, the PA driver will shoot the Q to the moon due to a stiff suspension even if the motor is Class AA.
> 
> ...


That makes a lot of sense thx cvjoint.
This driver FS is near 50Hz, I remember doing some impedance sweeps testing the filling but I’ll have to find them to get back the details on the combo driver/boxes.
Maybe it doesn't make sense but I just thought that the resulting higher resonance could be managed with a high enough XO and EQ. Now what I understand is that even tamed, these effects are still part of the sound and probably in the same proportions.

So the Q changes with power? Here again something I completely overlooked. I understand now the different graphs in voice coil test benchs for example, with 2 & 20V applied.
So is this an effect or related to power compression?






ErinH said:


> I'm not running the 25w, which you may already know so your question may not be posed to me anyway but...
> 
> I've got my 26w 10" Discovery woofers in the kicks vented externally. You can read about it in my build log. Start with post 1744 for the latest:
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...an-build-neverending-tale-44.html#post5327746


Sure I read your thread but didn’t remember the driver.
The 26W looked better simulated in my boxes but it’s also 1cm larger.

Ok now I think I just have to try the 25W or similar that would fit.
I'll consider smaller as well, 8 or 9, they might react better in this volume.
Last step would be venting outside.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Elgrosso said:


> That makes a lot of sense thx cvjoint.
> This driver FS is near 50Hz, I remember doing some impedance sweeps testing the filling but I’ll have to find them to get back the details on the combo driver/boxes.
> Maybe it doesn't make sense but I just thought that the resulting higher resonance could be managed with a high enough XO and EQ. Now what I understand is that even tamed, these effects are still part of the sound and probably in the same proportions.
> 
> ...


There are also other bits that are strange on PA like chuffing noise. PA manufactures care a lot about power handling so they design drivers with lots of airflow and ports. When air goes through those ports you get a lot of, well, noise. Some wonder PA drivers have a lot of this but no one talks about it. Maybe I'm just OCD but you can hear the thing when you use it as a bass driver. 

For seeing how Q changes with excursion see some of Erin's tests:
This is a Scan:
http://medleysmusings.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Total-loss-factor-Qts-X.png
This is a stock Honda speaker also tested by Erin, click on the PDF and find the QTS graph
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...el-fun-honda-civic-oem-6-5-driver-tested.html

The Honda driver doubles the Q with only 3mm of excursion, the Scan? Same Q because it's freaking unbelieavable.  There are also graphs of FS over excursion 

Q is going to change mostly with suspension and motor non-linearities, ie. motor strength drops as the coil moves out of the gap and the suspension stiffens.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Elgrosso said:


> Sure I read your thread but didn’t remember the driver.
> The 26W looked better simulated in my boxes but it’s also 1cm larger.
> 
> Ok now I think I just have to try the 25W or similar that would fit.
> ...



Understood. I don't want to derail this too much further, and I know that you are probably already aware of what I'm about to say but I think it's useful to discuss it anyway in case others are reading. For anyone following along, the specific Scan drivers we are talking about are:
Scanspeak Classic 25W/8565
Scanspeak Discovery 26W/4534G


When I was shopping for a new 10" midbass, I liked that the 25w over the 26w for a few reasons:

It's nearly 1/2 inch more shallow than the 26w which is pretty significant when you're talking about drivers in the kicks vs legroom .
The 25w is about 0.66 inches smaller in OD (though, pretty much the same ID).


However, I chose the 26w over the 25w for a few reasons:

Higher Sensitivity. This is something that can't be made up and I wanted to start with as much sensitivity as possible while balancing other aspects.
The 26w is about $120 cheaper per driver compared to the 25w. So, if I accidentally blew up one it's relatively cheap to replace.


Xmax wise, they're pretty much a wash; the 25w has about 0.5mm more linear xmax (one-way). 

So the real tradeoff between the two is price/sensitivity (26w) or size (25w). The legroom isn't an issue for me since I'm venting the drivers externally. Therefore, I didn't have to worry about enclosure space so I backed them up to the firewall and have plenty of legroom. I'm crossing my midbass (electrically) at about 70hz/LR2 and modeling the driver in an IB configuration showed me that it wouldn't exceed xmax until well over the power I can provide it. 

Everyone's needs differ so the above is why I chose what I chose. That doesn't mean it's the best choice for everyone else. YMMV.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Good points.

And yes, the Scan 25W/8565-00 is what I am running. As for your question of airspace Elgrosso, Mine vent into the framerail area to see more airspace volume. I ran my DATS woofer tester on them before and then after installing with no appreciable change in the Qts/Qtc so they are seeing enough airspace. I would be pretty wary of installing them in a very small sealed enclosure but if you can vent them, they are a terrific driver and like Erin said they have very appealing dimensions from an installation perspective.


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

> There are also other bits that are strange on PA like chuffing noise.


This is the reason I pulled the 8NDL51s out of my car. I could not get enough clearance from the back of the motor structure to minimize this noise. Completely free air (not mounted in my kicks) they were pretty good but EVERY time I put them in any incarnation of my kicks they got noisy.

BTW - Once you hear the chuffing noise it is ALL you hear.

I currently have the 18WU/4741T-00 in my kicks but wanted more displacement so I have bee looking at 10s as well. For many of the reasons Erin mentioned:



> When I was shopping for a new 10" midbass, I liked that the 25w over the 26w for a few reasons:
> It's nearly 1/2 inch more shallow than the 26w which is pretty significant when you're talking about drivers in the kicks vs legroom .
> The 25w is about 0.66 inches smaller in OD (though, pretty much the same ID).
> 
> ...


I am looking to go with the 26W as well. 

The deciding factor for me was displacement from these entry level Scans. My 18WUs with 50% more Xmax (9mm vs 6mm) still fall short in the displacement department (139 cm^3 vs 210 cm^3). PLUS the price difference is huge and I have already had someone put their big ugly shoes into the cone of one of the 18WUs. My fault as the grille didn't protect them sufficiently but still tough to stomach at $320 a pop.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

SSSnake said:


> I am looking to go with the 26W as well.
> 
> The deciding factor for me was displacement from these entry level Scans. My 18WUs with 50% more Xmax (9mm vs 6mm) still fall short in the displacement department (139 cm^3 vs 210 cm^3). PLUS the price difference is huge and I have already had someone put their big ugly shoes into the cone of one of the 18WUs. My fault as the grille didn't protect them sufficiently but still tough to stomach at $320 a pop.


Dude, we work right down the street from each other. Any time you want to demo the system you're welcome to it. That way you can hear the Scans and get an idea how they perform in my application.


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

I appreciate the offer and will take you up on it some time soon. I am in the middle of a couple of capture efforts so time is short lately (I get on here while waiting for others or eating lunch). 

I want to hear the coaxials more than the midbasses


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

SSSnake said:


> I want to hear the coaxials more than the midbasses


I dunno... it's a slippery slope... I'm already considering re-building my home theater setup so I can use them from 400hz+. They're _ridiculously _good.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

The Classics are really underrated. The motor is a work of art with multiple shorting rings placed in all the right places. The cones and suspensions are stiff and resonances are treated with rigor yielding drivers with really wide bandwidth and high resolution. The moment you hear one free air you fall in love with it, it's just that good. The aluminum version I have a gem, in may ways a bit more high fidelity than the latest revelator/illuminator designs, better behaved and more transparent at low/medium output. The new rev/illuminator trade off a bit of that sweet rosonance/damping behavior to work better in small boxes and higher output in lower octaves. But as long as you don't need that extra 1db out of your 10" midbass the Classic will deliver in spades.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

cvjoint said:


> The Classics are really underrated. The motor is a work of art with multiple shorting rings placed in all the right places. The cones and suspensions are stiff and resonances are treated with rigor yielding drivers with really wide bandwidth and high resolution. The moment you hear one free air you fall in love with it, it's just that good. The aluminum version I have a gem, in may ways a bit more high fidelity than the latest revelator/illuminator designs, better behaved and more transparent at low/medium output. The new rev/illuminator trade off a bit of that sweet rosonance/damping behavior to work better in small boxes and higher output in lower octaves. But as long as you don't need that extra 1db out of your 10" midbass the Classic will deliver in spades.


But if you're using it in a limited bandpass, well above Fs and well below breakup (like I am) then you're paying for features that aren't extremely beneficial. 

Which gets back to my comment above... these choices are application dependent.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

ErinH said:


> But if you're using it in a limited bandpass, well above Fs and well below breakup (like I am) then you're paying for features that aren't extremely beneficial.
> 
> Which gets back to my comment above... these choices are application dependent.


In think halving the inductance while boosting the coil length and width as the SD1 motor does is quite nice in-band. Having your cake and eat it too basically. The other nice thing is having a soft suspension but that has minimal cone rocking modes. That's what you money is spent on when you buy Classic. I agree that the choice is hard between the aluminum cone you have, which has far less energy storage than that of the soft cone Classic and the motor of the Classic which is superior for any frequency.

But, if you could have the aluminum cone done a-la top of the line Scan approach complete with all sorts of ribbing and geometry tweaks to reduce flex, the SD1 motor, more motor added it to it, and 4 layer coil to twist the knob to 10/10 you got yourself a nice driver:
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/archive/25w-8567-se.pdf

Someone will have to pry this thing out of my hands. Beats me why they don't make this puppy. I guess people were fools a decade ago and would not listen to metal cones. You can cross this sucker at 1,500hz and still avoid breakup.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

Thanks for the great informations and shared experience guys.
Now it’s between 25 & 26w and I’m thinking about another one, the satori 9.5”.
25/26w would be the best if I can vent somewhere, and then the size would drive the selection.
While the satori shows a manageable response in sealed, could be a starting point.
It would ask to modify the boxes as it is deeper with smaller OD, but its cone seems also deeper, so maybe more angle options for a better compromise volume/clearance for the break pedal.
Right now I have to place the box empty first, and then mount the driver, both would not pass behind the pedal.

If my hand allows it I’ll check my boxes this week end, thx again.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Elgrosso said:


> Thanks for the great informations and shared experience guys.
> Now it’s between 25 & 26w and I’m thinking about another one, the satori 9.5”.
> 25/26w would be the best if I can vent somewhere, and then the size would drive the selection.
> While the satori shows a manageable response in sealed, could be a starting point.
> ...


I own no less than 8 Satori woofers! Amazing drivers.  Up there with Vifa NE fighting for best wide bandwidth woofer, and also best of neo magnet construction. I also have 6 Vifa NE drivers. 

For my next car I have the following picked out for midbass:
10" Scan Classic paper
10" Scan Classic Aluminum
10" Vifa NE heatsinked
and looking to add
10" Seas Excel magnesium
10" Scan Revelator aluminum 

I figure I'll swap between them when I get bored. Maybe I should add the Satori too, after all that's what my rears will be for fill.


----------



## Jscoyne2 (Oct 29, 2014)

I have the satori mr16p-4 in my door pods. They sound fantastic. I could get you an open door FR if you'd like.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Jscoyne2 said:


> I have the satori mr16p-4 in my door pods. They sound fantastic. I could get you an open door FR if you'd like.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk



MR16p or MW16p? The MR is the midrange design with less xmax and a little higher sensitivity. MW16p would be a better choice for 2-way in a door.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

cvjoint said:


> In think halving the inductance while boosting the coil length and width as the SD1 motor does is quite nice in-band. Having your cake and eat it too basically. The other nice thing is having a soft suspension but that has minimal cone rocking modes. That's what you money is spent on when you buy Classic. I agree that the choice is hard between the aluminum cone you have, which has far less energy storage than that of the soft cone Classic and the motor of the Classic which is superior for any frequency.
> 
> But, if you could have the aluminum cone done a-la top of the line Scan approach complete with all sorts of ribbing and geometry tweaks to reduce flex, the SD1 motor, more motor added it to it, and 4 layer coil to twist the knob to 10/10 you got yourself a nice driver:
> http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/archive/25w-8567-se.pdf
> ...



Looks like the paper cone version which I have has a slightly lower FS, lower Le and stated higher sensitivity but looking at the FR graph, that's probably only because of the rise in response around 1k...so really pretty comparable sensitivity. The paper cone version with the shorter coil sacrifices in xmax (1mm less, but same xmech) and power handling. Your aluminum cone version also has smoother response from 500hz-1Khz. 
I'd be interested in hearing those side by side with mine. I don't know that it would necessarily be worth the change though for a couple reasons...

1. No gain in sensitivity
2. If my passband used is about 50hz-300hz, I wouldn't see any benefit of the smoother response 2 octaves higher
3. While higher power handling is nice, in my install they are IB so I'll reach xmax easily anyway. The extra mm of xmax is always a plus though.

I agree on these Classic woofers though George, they are quite nice. The 25W/8565-00 is very resolving in my demo room setup. 


Cheers


----------



## Jscoyne2 (Oct 29, 2014)

captainobvious said:


> MR16p or MW16p? The MR is the midrange design with less xmax and a little higher sensitivity. MW16p would be a better choice for 2-way in a door.


The MR. Its a 3 way with the Sls midbass and alpine tweets

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk


----------



## GreatLaBroski (Jan 20, 2018)

captainobvious said:


> Jscoyne2 said:
> 
> 
> > I have the satori mr16p-4 in my door pods. They sound fantastic. I could get you an open door FR if you'd like.
> ...




My MW16P-8’s sound amazing into the midrange and offer clarity down in the midbass range that blew me away. I’m going to either run them in the doors well sealed, or the 7.5” versions (MW19P-8) sealed in small .25 cuft 3D printed polycarbonate enclosures in my doors.

The 8-ohm versions model really well down low in the enclosure size of a car door. My MW16P-8’s have higher QTS than advertised st 0.429 and QMS of 5.5xx.

Ive been interested in the Satori 9.5” one’s too, but no space for them in my car. I’d love someone to give them a shot and report back.


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

> Ive been interested in the Satori 9.5” one’s too, but no space for them in my car. I’d love someone to give them a shot and report back.


I have been looking at this one as well but the mounting depth is higher than the Scan discovery. Beautiful driver with great specs though.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

captainobvious said:


> Looks like the paper cone version which I have has a slightly lower FS, lower Le and stated higher sensitivity but looking at the FR graph, that's probably only because of the rise in response around 1k...so really pretty comparable sensitivity. The paper cone version with the shorter coil sacrifices in xmax (1mm less, but same xmech) and power handling. Your aluminum cone version also has smoother response from 500hz-1Khz.
> I'd be interested in hearing those side by side with mine. I don't know that it would necessarily be worth the change though for a couple reasons...
> 
> 1. No gain in sensitivity
> ...


The paper has a much smaller coil, shorter and only half the layers. The upsides are that:
* inductance is lower
* coil is lighter 
the downsides are:
* 100w vs 150w power handling
* lower motor strength
* 6mm gap vs 8 mm gap a less linear motor

Sensitivity wise it's tricky to interpret but ultimately not important for power output. Soft cones have more ragged response and some of that output is due to the high energy storage not entirely due to the light cone. It's not a good way to get more sensitivity. It basically breaks up all over the place. Metal cones have low energy storage but unleash it in one swoop in higher octaves. It will have lower sensitivity but sound better as long as you filter out the heavy ringing up top. Sensitivity matters if you have an undersized coil, don't have power available, or want to play at high distortion levels. The aluminum cone has a beefier coil, more motor strength, and even more of it at high xmax because it's more linear, so you can make up for the lost sensitivity. In either case, none of the drivers are going to sound that good when maxing out the coil anyway. If you have the power, I'd say aluminum is the winner. I always have 200w-400w each on the midbasses. 

In 50hz-300hz the aluminum is far more rigid, it may not show up in 1 watt FR but at high output it distorts the cone shape far less. Usually the soft cones are better at crossing higher but this aluminum one is so behaved it's even competitive there. I've used mine to 1,000hz. 

And so I'd say the only real benefit is the lighter coil, cone and lower LE. It will have better transients. However, the energy storage issues of soft cones are to me far more audible than adding a bit of weight to the coil and cone.

FYI I found another version of the aluminum ones yesterday and I bought it:
25w/8567-01, seems to have the same motor as the soft cone one, only a cone difference.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

cvjoint said:


> ...
> 
> Sensitivity wise it's tricky to interpret but ultimately not important for power output. Soft cones have more ragged response and some of that output is due to the high energy storage not entirely due to the light cone. It's not a good way to get more sensitivity. It basically breaks up all over the place. Metal cones have low energy storage but unleash it in one swoop in higher octaves. It will have lower sensitivity but sound better as long as you filter out the heavy ringing up top.
> ...


What energy is stored?
Where is the energy stored?
And how is it stored?


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

Elgrosso said:


> ...
> 
> ...
> Sure I read your thread but didn’t remember the driver.
> ...



There is an 18mu woofer... which is not exactly shallow.
While I have a set (I am using/keeping), i do not know if they are appropriate for your goals?


----------



## Oscar (Jun 20, 2010)

Holmz said:


> What energy is stored?
> Where is the energy stored?
> And how is it stored?


If inductance hasn't already killed the output, when the coil tries to move the diaphragm faster than it can maintain it's composure (because nothing is infinitely rigid), then the energy is stored in the flexing (which indicates stress/strain) of the diaphragm. The diaphragm will ultimately want to restore to it's original shape assuming it is not beyond the point of no return (still within an elastic-condition, even in an infinitesimal range). 

So what energy: kinetic energy from the motion of the coil onto the cone/diaphragm itself

Where: within the diaphragm itself . These stresses within the paper-fibers, or polymer-links, or metal alloy matrix, or within what ever the material is.

how: mechanical engineering terminology would be: flexural stress/strain energy as a result of an applied net force causing deformation/displacement away from the neutral fibre. 

*Elastic Strain Energy*


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

GreatLaBroski said:


> My MW16P-8’s sound amazing into the midrange and offer clarity down in the midbass range that blew me away. I’m going to either run them in the doors well sealed, or the 7.5” versions (MW19P-8) sealed in small .25 cuft 3D printed polycarbonate enclosures in my doors.
> 
> The 8-ohm versions model really well down low in the enclosure size of a car door. My MW16P-8’s have higher QTS than advertised st 0.429 and QMS of 5.5xx.
> 
> Ive been interested in the Satori 9.5” one’s too, but no space for them in my car. I’d love someone to give them a shot and report back.


Funny that you mention having a slightly higher Q than advertised. I've been wondering if other drivers have somewhat erroneous specs. Not that it's a bad thing in this case. Higher (at least .4) is good is most cases

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## GreatLaBroski (Jan 20, 2018)

Bayboy said:


> Funny that you mention having a slightly higher Q than advertised. I've been wondering if other drivers have somewhat erroneous specs. Not that it's a bad thing in this case. Higher (at least .4) is good is most cases
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Both drivers have T/S specs really close to one another, so QC is good. The higher-than-advertised QTS was very welcome on the 6.5" driver, so good on SB Acoustics.

Much better than the surprise Morel gave me with drivers that had far higher FS than advertised. My Supremo Piccolos had 1146hz FS vs 800hz advertised and CDM880's that came today have 620hz FS vs 390hz advertised. Drivers match perfectly, so QC was good. But nice buffing of stats Morel..


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

GreatLaBroski said:


> Both drivers have T/S specs really close to one another, so QC is good. The higher-than-advertised QTS was very welcome on the 6.5" driver, so good on SB Acoustics.
> 
> Much better than the surprise Morel gave me with drivers that had far higher FS than advertised. My Supremo Piccolos had 1146hz FS vs 800hz advertised and CDM880's that came today have 620hz FS vs 390hz advertised. Drivers match perfectly, so QC was good. But nice buffing of stats Morel..


Not the first that I've seen with test results coming out a bit different on drivers, but yeah, good from a car door install standpoint. As far as domes, yeah that's questionable. I don't see that number falling that much even after break-in. That's just pure marketing

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## GreatLaBroski (Jan 20, 2018)

Bayboy said:


> I don't see that number falling that much even after break-in. That's just pure marketing
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


That's my feeling, I'm going to run them anyway because in my really limited testing so far they sound excellent. Really natural female vocals and electric guitar. Rolloff is natural and really well behaved.

But having this happen twice now is souring me on the brand. 620hz vs 390hz is over 50% higher than advertised FS. Come on Morel, just tell it like it is, or make your driver actually perform to the stats you want to advertise.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Is it causing you to deviate from the minimum recommended crossover point? I can't imagine it not doing so, but I've seen otherwise. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## GreatLaBroski (Jan 20, 2018)

Bayboy said:


> Is it causing you to deviate from the minimum recommended crossover point? I can't imagine it not doing so, but I've seen otherwise.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Morel crosses it over with their Elate 603 passive set at 450hz @ 6db, which sounds impossibly optimistic. I was hoping to get it to around 450-500hz with LR4 slope but that seems less likely to work than when I had expected a ~400hz fs.

So in other words, yes I'm probably now going to have to change my plans and hope I can get away with 600hz LR4 now. I'll start there and see how far it can go down before I start running into issues. My midbasses will have the bandwidth to accommodate that, but it's just the principle.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

*Re: POLL: Pick your 8&quot; Midbass*



GreatLaBroski said:


> Morel crosses it over with their Elate 603 passive set at 450hz @ 6db, which sounds impossibly optimistic. I was hoping to get it to around 450-500hz with LR4 slope but that seems less likely to work than when I had expected a ~400hz fs.
> 
> So in other words, yes I'm probably now going to have to change my plans and hope I can get away with 600hz LR4 now. I'll start there and see how far it can go down before I start running into issues. My midbasses will have the bandwidth to accommodate that, but it's just the principle.


Is that their electrical or acoustic point? There's several component sets that do similar, use a cap way up in frequency on the tweeter but the roll-off meshes much lower with a mid with no low pass filter. Kind of deceiving although it works. Just makes more guesswork in replacing it with an active filter. 

On a side note, didn't realize how much that tactic is used until I started following Avtozvuk.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## GreatLaBroski (Jan 20, 2018)

Bayboy said:


> Is that their electrical or acoustic point? There's several component sets that do similar, use a cap way up in frequency but the roll-off meshes much lower with a mid with no low pass filter. Kind of deceiving although it works. Just makes more guesswork in replacing it with an active filter.
> 
> On a side note, didn't realize how much that tactic is used until I started following Avtozvuk.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


You know what. That might be it.

That would explain the really nice roll-off that I commented on. Because yes, it is the electrical point since I tested this with the DATS v2. Thanks for telling me about that, I think you might be on to something there.

It's going to be a while until I get around to the build, but I'll post a log here and we'll see what the final crossover comes out at. It should also be a Dirac Live build which might be fun.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

Holmz said:


> There is an 18mu woofer... which is not exactly shallow.
> While I have a set (I am using/keeping), i do not know if they are appropriate for your goals?


I considered it, but it’s a big difference, much less output if I remember.
Although I’d like to hear it one day.
But the 22w maybe, if it helps on placement.




GreatLaBroski said:


> That's my feeling, I'm going to run them anyway because in my really limited testing so far they sound excellent. Really natural female vocals and electric guitar. Rolloff is natural and really well behaved.
> 
> But having this happen twice now is souring me on the brand. 620hz vs 390hz is over 50% higher than advertised FS. Come on Morel, just tell it like it is, or make your driver actually perform to the stats you want to advertise.


Got kind of similar surprises with the domes I recently tried.
Not so much the measured FS that was close to spec, or even lower. 
But while listening they always wanted higher and higher to play really cleanly.
Once high enough they really have something special I agree, neutral or natural, like they disappear.


----------



## GreatLaBroski (Jan 20, 2018)

Elgrosso said:


> Got kind of similar surprises with the domes I recently tried.
> Not so much the measured FS that was close to spec, or even lower.
> But while listening they always wanted higher and higher to play really cleanly.
> Once high enough they really have something special I agree, neutral or natural, like they disappear.


Yeah I think BayBoy was correct about an internal capacitor affecting the electrics Fs rating, because otherwise it makes no sense that morel would cross them over with a 6db slope at 450hz. But if there’s already a cap which is creating another 6 to 12 dB of slope then that makes perfect sense.

Yeah, there’s a quality to them that sounds really special. I’m hoping I’ll be able to blend these well in my car because I like the shallow depth and vocal detail I’m seeing right now. We should do a forum 2-3” dome midrange shootout test at some point in the future.

I’m currently thinking Satori MW19P-8 / Morel CDM880 / Scanspeak D3004. Mmm.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

GreatLaBroski said:


> Yeah I think BayBoy was correct about an internal capacitor affecting the electrics Fs rating, because otherwise it makes no sense that morel would cross them over with a 6db slope at 450hz. But if there’s already a cap which is creating another 6 to 12 dB of slope then that makes perfect sense.
> 
> Yeah, there’s a quality to them that sounds really special. I’m hoping I’ll be able to blend these well in my car because I like the shallow depth and vocal detail I’m seeing right now. We should do a forum 2-3” dome midrange shootout test at some point in the future.
> 
> I’m currently thinking Satori MW19P-8 / Morel CDM880 / Scanspeak D3004. Mmm.



I'm not suggesting that a hidden cap is what's changing it, rather the cap value in the passive may not be crossing where you think. The only way to know is by an impedance sweep of the mid and cross-reference the value on the cap. Could be bad QC, who knows... I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time someone has questioned the actual Fs and xover point on those mids. Either way, this is getting a bit off-topic from the original post of 8" midbass so I digress


----------

