# Help Me Decide: JL Audio 12W3V3-4 or Sundown SA-12 D4



## MPom452813 (Feb 18, 2015)

I have heard great things about the JL Audio 12W3V3-4 and the Sundown SA-12 D4, and cannot decide which to get. Which do you recommend and why? Do they have any notable distinguishing characteristics?


----------



## Lycancatt (Apr 11, 2010)

the jl has a bump in frequency response, done for marketing reasons, to make it appear louder. it makes the bass from it unprocessed sound boomy, but processed it does sound very good and is built well.

I'd like to see more sundown products out in the streets, and I feel they are built to a higher standard so I voted for it.


----------



## MPom452813 (Feb 18, 2015)

Interesting... can you explain this "bump" a little more to me? Also, by unprocessed do you mean it will sound poor without a good DSP? That would be a huge negative for me, because I am going to start off with a LC6i (keeping my stock HU) first and upgrade to a proper DSP later.


----------



## SHAGGS (Apr 24, 2011)

Untrained ears, without starring at an RTA, probably won't notice much difference in sound characteristics, between the two. Output may be a different story, thou.
I've never run one of the V3's, but I've run many JL subs over the years, W1's W3V1's and V2's W4's W6's and a W7. 
I've yet to be disappointed with any of them.
That being said, I'd go with the Sundown, and voted as such.
It's cheaper (msrp at least) 
More excursion (13mm compared to 19mm)
Sundown is notorious for under rating power handling and over building everything


----------



## cwruck (Oct 29, 2011)

The jl is one of my favorite sounding subs. They sound great in either ported or sealed.
The sundown on the other hand sounds good as well, but not quite comparable to the jl.
If your goal is to add bass that blends in nicely with the system. I say the jl.
If your goal is to get loud and have a sub that can take a beating. No doubt the sundown will do that better


----------



## SQLnovice (Jul 22, 2014)

I have an almost new 12W3V3-4 I can let go for $150. But with the added shipping cost from Miami to CO it will end up not being such a good bargain.


----------



## tyroneshoes (Mar 21, 2006)

vented the sa, sealed the JL

also depends on 2 or 4 ohm power

Had both. Sundown SA isnt great sealed. SD is better for that. SA vented is excellent. Lower distortion, higher power handling and more output in vented.

JL is a pretty good sub overall but you can get better for cheaper. Its easy to toss in a sealed enclosure and smooth out 40-50 hz as thats where they have a bump most of the gen pop likes. You may need to do nothing.

What enclosure/amp do you have and are you open to other suggestions?


----------



## MPom452813 (Feb 18, 2015)

tyroneshoes said:


> vented the sa, sealed the JL
> 
> also depends on 2 or 4 ohm power
> 
> ...


I was already leaning towards a ported box, and your experience/recommendation makes me lean even more. 

However I have a few questions about boxes. I am not very familiar with the details of how the boxes interact beyond simple google searches. Most basic explanations said sealed boxes generally produce tighter, sometimes more accurate bass, but require more power to achieve comparable volume levels to the ported box. Ported boxes were said to require less power for volume, create a more "powerful" bass effect, and sometimes achieve better super-low end frequency response. 

How true is the "sealed is more accurate" argument? You claimed the SA actually sounds better in a ported box - so are there exceptions? 

Also, if there was tangible loss of fidelity, how much are we talking? Is the difference between sealed and ported like going from clean and tight but wont "hit you in the chest" to earth-shattering but muddy by comparison? Or with a good sub like the SA-12, and assuming both the sealed and ported boxes were well constructed to their respective proper dimensions, is this difference in fidelity negligible on both sides of the spectrum? 


You also mentioned the Ohms. Does that have any impact on SQ? I was under the impression that if they were wired for identical power consumption, for example one amp running an SA-12 D2 (2-Ohm duel coil) at 4-Ohms 800 Watts would sound for all intensive purposes identical to another amp setup running the SA-12 D4 (4-Ohm duel coil) 2-Ohms 800 Watts. 


I was going to power an SA-12 D4 with a Rockford Fosgate Prime 1,200-Watt Class-D 1-Channel Amplifier wired in parallel resulting in 800 Watts x 1 @ 2-Ohms. The reason I chose this amp is because it is in my budget of $250 for a mono amplifier, and if I want to run a double amp setup later, I can run two D4's in parallel again resulting in (1,200 Watts x 1 @ 1 Ohm)/2 = 600 Watts per sub (if that statement is incorrect, let me know. Not totally sure about it).

I'm totally up for amp suggestions, but keep in mind $275 is at the absolute top of my budget for a mono amp. As for sub suggestions, It took me a ridiculous amount of time to get down to these two, id prefer to stick with the Sundown (leaning out of JL now) for my own sanity. 


Sorry I'm asking a lot of questions here haha. I appreciate everyone taking the time to give me their input and knowledge.


----------



## tyroneshoes (Mar 21, 2006)

Ohms doesnt matter. Just match up to the sub to the amp you have like you are. 

Vented can sound very accurate, just a lot louder than sealed. Sealed is more controlled, but the SA is still very accurate vented in the proper box. Sealed boxes are more forgiving for size. Vented has to be tuned considering the woofer being used.

Your setup is fine and I like the SA in this size enclosure

LAB SlapBox™ 2.25 ft^3 Ported MDF Enclosure - Sundown Audio SA-12 Sub


----------



## MPom452813 (Feb 18, 2015)

tyroneshoes said:


> Ohms doesnt matter. Just match up to the sub you have like you are.
> 
> Vented can sound very accurate, just a lot louder than sealed. Sealed is more controlled, but the SA is still very accurate vented in the proper box. Sealed boxes are more forgiving for size. Vented has to be tuned considering the woofer being used.
> 
> ...


I am curious why the cubic feet exceed Sundowns recommendations (1.5-2.0) at 2.25, and also why it is 33hz instead of the recommended 35hz. For that matter, what are hz and how do they have an impact? 

Also, I think I can fit that box, but maybe not exactly where I want it. I know ported boxes are on the larger side, but do you know of any alternatives that are slightly smaller?


----------



## tyroneshoes (Mar 21, 2006)

hz is the frequency of a sound. subs play from 30ish-90ish hz usually where a tweeter usually plays 3000 hz - 20,000hz or so. Its what the numbers on graphic eq's stand for.

That box was designed professionally using bassbox and experience and I have used his enclosures before, theyre right on the money. 

The familiar boomy sound of a sub is usually 40-50 hz

No you dont want to use a smaller size sub enclosure. the SA tuned to 33 is perfect for that sub. Too high and it wont sound as accurate and be boomy. 33 hz in 2.25 cuft is all around good sq and spl 

If you need a small box, go sealed and dont get the sa, get the sd


----------



## MPom452813 (Feb 18, 2015)

tyroneshoes said:


> hz is the frequency of a sound. subs play from 30ish-90ish hz usually where a tweeter usually plays 3000 hz - 20,000hz or so. Its what the numbers on graphic eq's stand for.
> 
> That box was designed professionally using bassbox and experience and I have used his enclosures before, theyre right on the money.
> 
> ...


Good SQ and SPL is exactly what I want. I want to feel the bass but not at the cost of muddiness. Thanks for the advice, I will likely go with this Box.


----------

