# IDMAX 12 vs. JL12w6v2????



## baker001 (Nov 5, 2006)

I currently have a JL12w6v2 pushed by a kicker700.5(sub channel) in a JL spec sealed box. It sounds good,hits all the notes,good SQ. Lately I have been thinking about selling it and trying a 12"IDMAX. I have never heard one in person. From reading the net they seem to get fairly loud and stay clean.What you guys think,get the IDMAX or keep the JL? (I plan to use the kicker to run the IDMAX)


----------



## evan (Dec 2, 2006)

I'd try the 12w6 with more power first.


----------



## baker001 (Nov 5, 2006)

Im trying not to buy another amp.


----------



## evan (Dec 2, 2006)

baker001 said:


> Im trying not to buy another amp.


OK. Maybe you should describe more of what you don't like about the 12w6v2 and what you are hoping to achieve by switching.


----------



## baker001 (Nov 5, 2006)

More decibels in the low areas (40-25hz). I was told that the IDMAX does very well in this area and stays clean.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

baker001 said:


> More decibels in the low areas (40-25hz). I was told that the IDMAX does very well in this area and stays clean.


low lows require lots of power,

when your sub wants to play some low lows (move the cone back and forwards slowly with control) its unable to do it with authority because your amp doesnt have big enought [email protected],

see if you can get 800+ wrms on you jl, im sure that will make you happy.

lots of big amps out there cheap


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

If you're looking for better low end sensitivity and greater output I'd try the W7.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

npdang said:


> If you're looking for better low end sensitivity and greater output I'd try the W7.


hhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmm dub sevens, love mine


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

till this day the idmax 12 is the best sub i've ever heard and does very well off just 500rms. really it's a preference issue, but according to a very reliable source (mr. marv) you'll be better off with the w6v2 as far as the LOWS go.


----------



## andthelam (Aug 9, 2006)

TEAM SHIMANO/FALCON said:


> till this day the idmax 12 is the best sub i've ever heard and does very well off just 500rms. really it's a preference issue, but according to a very reliable source (mr. marv) you'll be better off with the w6v2 as far as the LOWS go.


I think this review has it the other way around w/ the IDMAX being able to extend a little lower. But there's no debate that the IDMAX is more sensitive requiring less power to play loud.

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5698&highlight=idmax


----------



## thadman (Mar 1, 2006)

The LOWS are all about displacement, get as much as you can and equalize the hell out of it Big Sealed with lots of Polyfill or Huge and tuned to 28hz (equalize any peaks out, if required) should appease you.

(2) RSS390HFs? Fi Q15...Q18 ?

Sell your W6 and buy something along those lines, with the proper amount of equalization I'm sure you will achieve the LOWS you desire.


----------



## fit_tuner (Aug 14, 2006)

y dont u try it in a different box? just cuz its built to jl specs doesnt mean its built to suit ur needs


----------



## baker001 (Nov 5, 2006)

I thought about a ported box but I like the tight sound of the sealed box.I guess I can experiment.Its only 25 bucks to build a box.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

would you let me know what size box the JL is in? What does JL use?

Try the JL sub in a test on WinISD, and see what it takes to get .707qtc. (Or I will do it for you, if you like)

My Eclipse LMT gets very, very low, but requires a lot of power. It also needs 1.7 cubes of space to do it. (Thats the 10" version)... There are a few subs that can run nice and low, but they usually require airspace to do it. Look at the transfer function magnitude graphs on WinISD for a glimpse into what it will do.


----------



## fit_tuner (Aug 14, 2006)

actually,i owuld like to know what size box yields a .707qtc. i have a 12w6v2 as well


----------



## evan (Dec 2, 2006)

fourthmeal said:


> Try the JL sub in a test on WinISD, and see what it takes to get .707qtc.


Why is that the number to look for?


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

evan said:


> Why is that the number to look for?


drivers are designd to work in a box that realises the perfect Q, perfect Q is

'that' number.....or something like that i think. physics pwnz me?


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

baker001 said:


> I thought about a ported box but I like the tight sound of the sealed box.I guess I can experiment.Its only 25 bucks to build a box.


I wish someone would please disprove this myth. If you don't get the extra low end extension and you don;t want to buy more power, then a ported box is the way to go. I have heard plenty of clean and tight ported boxes. The JLW6 has all the right components to do well in a ported box tuned very low IMO.


----------



## evan (Dec 2, 2006)

durwood said:


> I wish someone would please disprove this myth. If you don't get the extra low end extension and you don;t want to buy more power, then a ported box is the way to go. I have heard plenty of clean and tight ported boxes. The JLW6 has all the right components to do well in a ported box tuned very low IMO.


Just based on the BEP it would seem to do better in a sealed enclosure.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

think "golden rectangle."

And if that makes no sense, then think that there is in physics, geometry, and many other kinds of math, a unique link between the principles in place from a golden rectangle, and nature. As it turns out, .707qtc will net a response curve that is ideal. At least, to most. Try it out for yourself. 

Here's the response I got:










The JL exhibits good low freq. response in about a 1.85 cubic foot box, sealed. MY guess is that your sub is in a 1.2-1.3 cube box (or smaller) right now, from JL.

Notice, I put my own SW8000 up against the JL. You can see why I purchased what I did. Granted, the JL will over-power mine in SPL, but in low-freq. extension....I think its fair to say I did my homework.


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

evan said:


> Why is that the number to look for?



Point 0.707 Q is the magic number that gives you the best response with no peak. Higher Q gives you a peak or bump at the tunned frequency causing the box to sound boomy at that frequency. A lower Q will cause the sub to roll off too quickly and you lose the low end response.


----------



## fit_tuner (Aug 14, 2006)

such a big box for the w6v2 if you wnat a qtc of .707


----------



## baker001 (Nov 5, 2006)

How much power would the jl take safely. Right now its getting about 425 from the kicker 700.5. Also,I used JL's building plans from their site for the sealed enclosure.


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

camry_tuner said:


> such a big box for the w6v2 if you wnat a qtc of .707


That's what you sacrifice. IF you don't want to increase power then you have to increase box size. Just curious without me running the specs through a box program, how BIG is it?


Well, 400W is what they recommend, but you can always go higher if you use caution and know where it clips(~600-700W) USE CAUTION. Adjusting your crossover will also help increase your power range sometimes. Here is JL's power range chart.

http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_subs_pages.php?page_id=35


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

i have 1500 wrms on my 12w7 (recc 750 wrms by jl) had it in for a couple months now zero problems and lots of fun


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

durwood said:


> That's what you sacrifice. IF you don't want to increase power then you have to increase box size. Just curious without me running the specs through a box program, how BIG is it?
> 
> 
> Well, 400W is what they recommend, but you can always go higher if you use caution and know where it clips(~600-700W) USE CAUTION. Adjusting your crossover will also help increase your power range sometimes. Here is JL's power range chart.
> ...


durwood, I posted a picture of the JL in the right size box for a .707 alignment. Take a look on page 2


----------

