# Alpine SWR-823D / 843D 8" Subwoofers



## jim walter

Hey Everyone,

I've chimed in on a few threads talking about the new 8"s, but promised I'd make my own thread with details and a little Q&A for everyone ... so, here's a basic rundown of some details on the new 8" subs we are launching here in the next few weeks.

Some highlights:

*Segmented Motor Structure w/ 1pc Frame and Shorting Ring*
There a 6 magnets, radially segmented and aligned around the shorting ring/frame/heatsink. The shorting ring is connected to the frame via three legs that allow the entire frame to act as a heatsink. We intro'd this design with our 2010 Type R 10" and 12" and we've carried this into the new 8"s as well …. it’s a pain in the butt to tool and assembly but the results are worth it. Check out the cut-view model, you can see on the left side, the shorting ring is directly connected to the exo-skeleton of the frame with one of three radial ribs the fit through the segments in the magnets.

Result: 
*Great Power Handling:* 350W RMS / 1000W Peak Power Handling
*Super Low Inductance:* 0.55mH (843D) / 0.67mH Le (823D) and its very well tamed and symmetrical with respect to both displacement and current. Graphs attached.

*

H.A.M.R. Surround and FEA Optimized Spider *
Just about perfect progressive compliance that is light and soft enough for super fast transients, but strong enough for full-power operation while unloaded in a vented enclosure or in free-air IB.

Result: 
*Durability:* If any of you have been able to come to our CES Roadshow trainings, you’ll see the 823D run free-air at full clip on an M6 without a hiccup.
*Sound Quality:* We’ve actually been running these as midbass/front subs (56-250Hz/20-250Hz) in the Camaro Demo car. The speed, accuracy and power of these guys in astounding! I’ve got an 8W3 here and an IDQ8 and they can’t hold a candle to it, especially when you get some real power into them (to my ears at least). This SQ isn’t only a function of the suspension, but during my final approvals, I found the difference in suspension materials to play quite a critical role … so I give the suspension credit here. Graphs attached.


*CRC Pole Piece / High-Grade Y40 Magnets* 
14mm of Klippel verified Xmax (70%) stands out from the crowd not only in linear stroke, but also in symmetry. These are extremely well controlled woofers. Graphs attached.

Result:
*High-Output: * These aren’t Jacob’s crazy eights … but they’ll get more than plenty loud and keep their composure while doing it. I absolutely love these in 0.50cubes @35Hz … tons of output for any sane person and a pair of them will smile all day on a PDX-M12.
*Small Box Requirements: * In the CES Demo Camaro, we’ve got them in a plate steel enclosure roughly the size of the woofer’s magnet (0.1-0.2 cubes). For a QTC of 0.90, try a quarter cube. Essentially, they work in boxes smaller than the shipping container they come it. Ported, 0.3-0.5 cubes and keep them in the mid to upper 30s … and they’ll do it with SQ to boot in a vented enclosure.
*Efficiency:* They are 8s, so no 88dB numbers here, but they are 83.5dB efficient and have the excursion and power handling only to get louder from there.

That’s all I can think of for now. Feel free to ask any questions and I’ll be happy to answer them as time permits.
Thanks,
Jim


----------



## usmcsoldriver

I don't see a vent at the rear of this sub, does that mean that i can be mounted with the rear right up against the back of the box like your W0 subs?

If so, would a pair of these offer a noticeable upgrade in SQ and performance over a pair W0 10"'s?


----------



## jim walter

usmcsoldriver said:


> I don't see a vent at the rear of this sub, does that mean that i can be mounted with the rear right up against the back of the box like your W0 subs?
> 
> If so, would a pair of these offer a noticeable upgrade in SQ and performance over a pair W0 10"'s?



Yessir, no vent in the backplate means the mounting depth of 4.5" is the exact depth of the box, no clearance needed.

PS - This is Alpine, not JL (they make the W0).


----------



## BEAVER

Are all of the ts parameters available, yet?


----------



## jim walter

BEAVER said:


> Are all of the ts parameters available, yet?


Yep, forgot those in the first post. Ask and ye shall receive. 823D on the left, 843D on the right.


----------



## Salami

Thanks Jim!!!

Can you post some porn here for us to drool over please?


----------



## usmcsoldriver

WoW. where is my head at. As if I don't know the difference between Alpine and JL.
Mulligan?


----------



## jim walter

Salami said:


> Thanks Jim!!!
> 
> Can you post some porn here for us to drool over please?



I've got some footage on the Klippel and in-box, but I can't attach a .mov here. Booo!


----------



## rexroadj

Jim, I know its been said countless times BUT....THANK YOU for taking your time and being an active member here. Our greatest asset here on the forum is the amazing company representatives that are willing to show and share there time and knowledge. There are some great ones too! I am thoroughly interested in several new alpine products (the h800 + w910) and these 8s are certainly intriguing as I am an 8" fanatic!
I am really excited with the new line up and I have been severely dissapointed with some of the product lines over the last decade or so (exception being the F#1 setup I had  why I ever sold it I will never understand..... well it had its compatibility issues I suppose?)
Any idea what the msrp is expected to be on these? I just stopped a local shop about the h800 and got a very good $ on that  (I feel it was good anyway?) and supposedly due in April? Can we expect the same for the w910 and these 8s? Upon play time of the 910 I may end up with a largely badged alpine system???? who woulda thunk it 
Again, thanks again for all your time, efforts, and knowledge, its greatly appreciated!


----------



## Salami

jim walter said:


> I've got some footage on the Klippel and in-box, but I can't attach a .mov here. Booo!



I don't need no stinkin' video. Give me some good old fashioned porn!!!! Big old pictures!!

Want to see the booty and the front.


----------



## newtitan

all I know this is the 2011 product im waiting for, ive already saved up the cash

cant wait till they are released


----------



## Tempe

*subscribed*


----------



## mikey7182

These sound pretty cool. Definitely in it for pics!


----------



## Salami

Doesn't show much but I found this on Caraudiomag.com


----------



## nineball

jim walter said:


> Result:
> *Great Power Handling:* 350W RMS / 1000W Peak Power Handling
> *Super Low Inductance:* 0.55mH (843D) / 0.67mH Le (823D) and its very well tamed and symmetrical with respect to both displacement and current. Graphs attached.
> Result:
> *High-Output: * These aren’t Jacob’s crazy eights … but they’ll get more than plenty loud and keep their composure while doing it. I absolutely love these in 0.50cubes @35Hz … tons of output for any sane person and a pair of them will smile all day on a PDX-M12.


rated at 350 but they love 600? just wanted to make sure i was reading that right. my collection of 8s may be getting bigger soon...


----------



## jim walter

nineball said:


> rated at 350 but they love 600? just wanted to make sure i was reading that right. my collection of 8s may be getting bigger soon...


MMmmmaybe 

I was a bit conservative with rating them, but you got to realize that we have to recommend/set a good power level where there's good reliability for ANY listener regardless of abuse. I could break them with a M12 but I'd have to try and listen through a lot of distortion to get there.


----------



## jim walter

That's all I've got here on the phone for woofer porn. Monday I'll get some raw parts shots for you guys. 

Jim


----------



## Hardwrkr

Nice teaser pics! I'm looking forward to hearing these. Thanks for the heads-up on them.


----------



## rexroadj

They "look" great!!!!!!!! We really needed some fresh blood in the 8" area! I will absolutely buy a set when they are available...I am an 8 fanatic and there are maybe a handfull I have yet to use.... These I am excited for  The newer Type R lines have really been extremely nice woofers in all aspects of use...


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> Jim, I know its been said countless times BUT....THANK YOU for taking your time and being an active member here. Our greatest asset here on the forum is the amazing company representatives that are willing to show and share there time and knowledge. There are some great ones too! I am thoroughly interested in several new alpine products (the h800 + w910) and these 8s are certainly intriguing as I am an 8" fanatic!
> I am really excited with the new line up and I have been severely dissapointed with some of the product lines over the last decade or so (exception being the F#1 setup I had  why I ever sold it I will never understand..... well it had its compatibility issues I suppose?)
> Any idea what the msrp is expected to be on these? I just stopped a local shop about the h800 and got a very good $ on that  (I feel it was good anyway?) and supposedly due in April? Can we expect the same for the w910 and these 8s? Upon play time of the 910 I may end up with a largely badged alpine system???? who woulda thunk it
> Again, thanks again for all your time, efforts, and knowledge, its greatly appreciated!


Thanks  and youre welcome It's been a fun ride since CES this year, we've been hearing a lot of good feedback from old school Alpine fans. 

These subs are actually shipping in about 10 days. MAP is $159


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> Thanks  and youre welcome It's been a fun ride since CES this year, we've been hearing a lot of good feedback from old school Alpine fans.
> 
> These subs are actually shipping in about 10 days. MAP is $159


Thanks! Phone call is being made


----------



## subwoofery

Always wanted to ask why the Type E 8" never got to the USA? 

Kelvin


----------



## USS Enterprise

jim walter said:


> Thanks  and youre welcome It's been a fun ride since CES this year, we've been hearing a lot of good feedback from old school Alpine fans.
> 
> These subs are actually shipping in about 10 days. MAP is $159


Jim, thanks for being a member here. Your input as an industry professional is much appreciated.

And - you just sold one. I have been looking for a decent 8 for my wife's car. And the specs of this sub seem right up the alley. And the seller was the keyword "IB".
It'll be in the factory rear deck location of her new car, obviously reinforced to take the weight. Any estimated weight on these things, anyway?

If the sub is properly designed be be truly IB-capable, it will be awesome for many of us here in a similar situation.

I will be heading to the local dealer tomorrow and see if he can get me one when they're released.

I've also got this strong vision of 4 of these with 600 per in a low tuned (32hz, give or take) vented enclosure. Would not take up a lot of room.
May be a fun project, the cost is definitely low enough to try out....


----------



## rexroadj

USS Enterprise said:


> Jim, thanks for being a member here. Your input as an industry professional is much appreciated.
> 
> And - you just sold one. I have been looking for a decent 8 for my wife's car. And the specs of this sub seem right up the alley. And the seller was the keyword "IB".
> It'll be in the factory rear deck location of her new car, obviously reinforced to take the weight. Any estimated weight on these things, anyway?
> 
> If the sub is properly designed be be truly IB-capable, it will be awesome for many of us here in a similar situation.
> 
> I will be heading to the local dealer tomorrow and see if he can get me one when they're released.
> 
> I've also got this strong vision of 4 of these with 600 per in a low tuned (32hz, give or take) vented enclosure. Would not take up a lot of room.
> May be a fun project, the cost is definitely low enough to try out....


I am thinking two ported in my center console (similar porting freq.) with similar power  Could get interesting


----------



## rexroadj

actually I might be able to toss 3 in there


----------



## jim walter

USS Enterprise said:


> Jim, thanks for being a member here. Your input as an industry professional is much appreciated.
> 
> And - you just sold one. I have been looking for a decent 8 for my wife's car. And the specs of this sub seem right up the alley. And the seller was the keyword "IB".
> It'll be in the factory rear deck location of her new car, obviously reinforced to take the weight. Any estimated weight on these things, anyway?
> 
> If the sub is properly designed be be truly IB-capable, it will be awesome for many of us here in a similar situation.
> 
> I will be heading to the local dealer tomorrow and see if he can get me one when they're released.
> 
> I've also got this strong vision of 4 of these with 600 per in a low tuned (32hz, give or take) vented enclosure. Would not take up a lot of room.
> May be a fun project, the cost is definitely low enough to try out....


As far as IB goes, my testing was done in a 10cube box since my Jeep is obviously not capable of IB. Anyhow, that 20x VAS so in all truth it's IB. 

My preferred setup for IB was running only one coil to raise the qts a bit to get the type if car audio bass most of us like. A qts of 0.50 is a little too dry for most peoples tastes.


----------



## jim walter

USS Enterprise said:


> I've also got this strong vision of 4 of these with 600 per in a low tuned (32hz, give or take) vented enclosure. Would not take up a lot of room.
> May be a fun project, the cost is definitely low enough to try out....


You mean like this? Try [email protected]

It's painful


----------



## jim walter

Missed your weight question earlier, they are ~ 10lbs


----------



## Problemhouston

Your timing couldn't have been better. I am abig fan of alpine and used their Headunits in all of my comp vehicles. If I didn't already have a crap load of Mcintosh amps I would run alpine power as well. I am constructing an enclosure in my f-150 that sits between the front seats and the dash. I am guessing I will get between .45 and .50 cubic feet out of it. I don't have he surface area to mount anything bigger than an 8. So my question is will a pair of these work I. This small amoun of space?

Thanks in advance for your help.


----------



## FAUEE

Any ideas on what a frequency response would look like in that tiny little box?

This looks like it could be an awesome sub for use as an OEM replacement sub, with a bit more power going to it.


----------



## Problemhouston

The amp I will be using is an Audison LRx 400.1 which is rated at 900x1 at 1 ohm so I should have enough power for a pair of 8's?


----------



## starboy869

I think you would have more than enough.

It's about time Alpine re-released an 8" on NA shores.


----------



## Ray21

Nice. Considering running a quad 8 setup sometime... these look great.


----------



## jim walter

Problemhouston said:


> Your timing couldn't have been better. I am abig fan of alpine and used their Headunits in all of my comp vehicles. If I didn't already have a crap load of Mcintosh amps I would run alpine power as well. I am constructing an enclosure in my f-150 that sits between the front seats and the dash. I am guessing I will get between .45 and .50 cubic feet out of it. I don't have he surface area to mount anything bigger than an 8. So my question is will a pair of these work I. This small amoun of space?
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help.


Sealed, no problem. Vented, if you were going to run a "chimney" vent as to not take up any room, it'd be OK, basically sacrificing 2-3dB of efficiency near tuning vs. having them in the 0.5 cubes each they like. Give them at least 5in^2 of port, but I'd prefer 7in^2 each. If this is for upfront bass, go sealed and it'll be just about perfect. (in the Camaro, we ran ~.20 sealed w/ 400W RMS/sub). We paired that with 4 sealed 12s in the rear running 56Hz and down.


----------



## jim walter

Problemhouston said:


> The amp I will be using is an Audison LRx 400.1 which is rated at 900x1 at 1 ohm so I should have enough power for a pair of 8's?


More than enough power ... but why run an amp at 1ohm? Run it at 2Ohm, where it gives enough power still and doubles it control/DF (to 100 at 2Ohms vs. 50 at 1Ohm) 

I know this is a topic for a different thread, but I'd sell that and get an amp that can make power while maintaining control (damping) at 4ohms, especially in this case where you are looking to maximize SQ. 

There are a few amps on the market that likely have better distortion, S/N, Damping and efficiency ... while making power without sucking gobs of current at 1ohm.

Jim


----------



## Eastman474

jim walter said:


> Yessir, no vent in the backplate means the mounting depth of 4.5" is the exact depth of the box, no clearance needed.
> 
> PS - This is Alpine, not JL (they make the W0).


This is an awesome feature, very nice for install's when space is nothing.
Sounds like theyre going to be pretty cool.
Idk if you postedbut how high will they play?


----------



## jim walter

I'll post up the actual chart when I'm at work, but I believe the first breakup mode was well above 500Hz, iirc it was closer to 800Hz


----------



## jim walter

Eastman474 said:


> This is an awesome feature, very nice for install's when space is nothing.


This was a lesson learned from the Thin subs ... tiny boxes and shallow mounting depths don't like to have clearance behind the backplate. Luckily on the Thins they have a 1.25" flared vent so they can be put as close to 1/8" with no compression. 

It takes some work to get rid of any noise under the dustcap though, we've got 5 vents in the former and 3 more in the cone.


----------



## Eastman474

jim walter said:


> I'll post up the actual chart when I'm at work, but I believe the first breakup mode was well above 500Hz, iirc it was closer to 800Hz


Well that would be awesome to possibly run with horns if they will play that high 


jim walter said:


> This was a lesson learned from the Thin subs ... tiny boxes and shallow mounting depths don't like to have clearance behind the backplate. Luckily on the Thins they have a 1.25" flared vent so they can be put as close to 1/8" with no compression.
> 
> It takes some work to get rid of any noise under the dustcap though, we've got 5 vents in the former and 3 more in the cone.


Thats awesome, cant wait to get my hands on one to play with


----------



## KENNEY

Hey Jim, Just curious. 

Shallow type R 12 vs (2) 8's? 

Say I have 1 cft to work with, and 500-600 RMS. In an application similar to your Jeep, whats going to have better SQ or output?


----------



## jim walter

KENNEY said:


> Hey Jim, Just curious.
> 
> Shallow type R 12 vs (2) 8's?
> 
> Say I have 1 cft to work with, and 500-600 RMS. In an application similar to your Jeep, whats going to have better SQ or output?


It's a tough call. Having switched from two sealed t12s to 2 ported 8s in about the same overall volume. I like the sound of the sealed 12 better, it's more impactful and powerful. The 8s , even ported can almost keep up with the 12s though. Problem is, the vented box is tuned to 35Hz, way higher than I'd personally ever want ... So I'd need to try it closer to 30Hz to give a true opinion there. Output .... I'd give the nod to the T12 with maybe a sacrifice of some 30-35Hz pressure to the vented 8s, but more detail for sure. Then again... If you have 1.0 cubes ..... That's room enough for 3 sealed 8s!!! I'd go that route, even with limited power.


----------



## KENNEY

jim walter said:


> It's a tough call. Having switched from two sealed t12s to 2 ported 8s in about the same overall volume. I like the sound of the sealed 12 better, it's more impactful and powerful. The 8s , even ported can almost keep up with the 12s though. Problem is, the vented box is tuned to 35Hz, way higher than I'd personally ever want ... So I'd need to try it closer to 30Hz to give a true opinion there. Output .... I'd give the nod to the T12 with maybe a sacrifice of some 30-35Hz pressure to the vented 8s, but more detail for sure. Then again... If you have 1.0 cubes ..... That's room enough for 3 sealed 8s!!! I'd go that route, even with limited power.


Hmmm.. So .33 cube would be enough room per driver? Are we talking sub-bass here?!


----------



## jim walter

Yes, they work well as subwoofers in tiny boxes ie - 0.25 sealed was my take home test box. You'll probably like to add a bit of boost at 30Hz to bring things up a bit in the low freq region .. but they will have absolutely amazing SQ in this setup. If you want a bit more extension, 0.5 cubes sealed gets a 0.707 QTC (vs. the 0.85 that we at Alpine usually spec at 0.25 cubes). Then you're back to comparing 2 8s vs. 1 T12.

Honestly .. do you have any more space than 1.0 cubes? If you could get that to fit maybe an extra 0.2 to account for a port. 1.1 cubes net w 10in^2 of port at 18" long ... and you'll be VERY happy.


----------



## jim walter

You asked me.... So I went to the truck today and tried it. 

PDX-M12
A) SWR-T12 in 0.67 sealed
B) 2 x SWR-823D sealed in 0.30 each

Test tracks:
Grove St Party - Waka Flaka
Send Me Someone to Love - Sade
Hot Toddie - Usher

Result: 
The 8s dig every bit as low as the 12s with more efficiency and slightly more output for the same input power, however the T12 has more clean output capability given the power to drive it. SQ wise, you can hear the speed and upper end extension of the 8s clearly on Hot Toddie .... And that's saying something compared to a very well controlled underhung 12. I attribute this to the lower moving mass and super low inductance, but more so this test has really given me a new respect for that 12 that it can just about keep up with two 8s. 

What would I choose? Ported 8s ... With twice that power! In all honesty, I'd be really happy with either of them. If you need to save the depth, the Thin is the ticket ... If you have the extra inch plus of depth... The 8s may be a way to save some money...or you can just add more of them 

The setup









A close up shot of the excursion ... the iPhone doesn't like to take pics of the excursion .. but you can see it in the distortion of the image









Jim


----------



## rexroadj

Jim, 
YOUR KILLING ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am going to have to change my whole setup...I HAVE to play with these..... I have 1.4 to play with in my center console.....could go a few ported or 4 sealed..... Are they shipping yet? I am supposed to get a call from my local dealer when they are in? 
The new type R subs are really spectacular....I was playing with a 12" the other day and was truly impressed with output, clarity, just raw balls! WELL DONE! I am quickly coming around to re-hitch my wagon to the Alpine Band


----------



## huckorris

Woofersetc had them on pre-order a few days ago but *NOW THEY ARE IN STOCK!!!*

WoofersEtc.com - SWR-823D - Alpine 8" Dual 2-Ohm Type-R Subwoofer

WoofersEtc.com - SWR-843D - Alpine 8" Dual 4-Ohm Type-R Subwoofer


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> Jim,
> YOUR KILLING ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am going to have to change my whole setup...I HAVE to play with these..... I have 1.4 to play with in my center console.....could go a few ported or 4 sealed..... Are they shipping yet? I am supposed to get a call from my local dealer when they are in?
> The new type R subs are really spectacular....I was playing with a 12" the other day and was truly impressed with output, clarity, just raw balls! WELL DONE! I am quickly coming around to re-hitch my wagon to the Alpine Band


Haha. They are officially shipping as of last week, but we are still filling backorder for another month or so. 

I would always recommend buying authorized, of course. 

I happy and proud to hear the kudos, there are a lot of guys here that worked really hard to overcome a lot of TR bias and pre-conception. We are confident we have made something different this go around ... And it's fun to see dealers and customers re affirm it. 

I'd go two ported and and add more woofers as needed. You won't, but if you do... Seal 4 of em and smile for life


----------



## donkeypunch22

Nice work Jim. Thanks!


----------



## KENNEY

jim walter said:


> You asked me.... So I went to the truck today and tried it.
> 
> PDX-M12
> A) SWR-T12 in 0.67 sealed
> B) 2 x SWR-823D sealed in 0.30 each
> 
> Test tracks:
> Grove St Party - Waka Flaka
> Send Me Someone to Love - Sade
> Hot Toddie - Usher
> 
> Result:
> The 8s dig every bit as low as the 12s with more efficiency and slightly more output for the same input power, however the T12 has more clean output capability given the power to drive it. SQ wise, you can hear the speed and upper end extension of the 8s clearly on Hot Toddie .... And that's saying something compared to a very well controlled underhung 12. I attribute this to the lower moving mass and super low inductance, but more so this test has really given me a new respect for that 12 that it can just about keep up with two 8s.
> 
> What would I choose? Ported 8s ... With twice that power! In all honesty, I'd be really happy with either of them. If you need to save the depth, the Thin is the ticket ... If you have the extra inch plus of depth... The 8s may be a way to save some money...or you can just add more of them
> 
> The setup
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A close up shot of the excursion ... the iPhone doesn't like to take pics of the excursion .. but you can see it in the distortion of the image
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jim


WOW, Jim your the man! I really appreciate your time spent doing this. I am shocked that you said the 8's are getting as low as the 12 w/ .30 cf. That is incredible.


----------



## Salami

Jim can you post the T/S parameters please?


----------



## Chaos

How well do you think one of these in .9 cu.ft. with a 3" Aeroport tuned @ 35 hz w/ 350 watts would perform?


----------



## BEAVER

Salami said:


> Jim can you post the T/S parameters please?


That was done on the first page... post 5


----------



## jim walter

KENNEY said:


> WOW, Jim your the man! I really appreciate your time spent doing this. I am shocked that you said the 8's are getting as low as the 12 w/ .30 cf. That is incredible.


 you're more than welcome ... I gave my opinion on it, but I had to prove it to myself to back it up. I sent a text to a guy in tech support while testing "prepared to be blown away? Come to Jeep". One of our guys came out to listen and was shocked. The biggest surprise is the amount of perceived weight they have, matched with the speed of 8s. They're damn fun woofers for sure.


----------



## jim walter

Chaos said:


> How well do you think one of these in .9 cu.ft. with a 3" Aeroport tuned @ 35 hz w/ 350 watts would perform?


Would work decent with a bit too much emphasis on the lows for my taste. I might cut a second hole in that box and slap a second woofer in there and deal with a little vent compression to linearize the response a bit. I'll sim it up later to see what it's really doing, but my initial thoughts are the box is a tad large.


----------



## Chaos

Cool. Thanx for the honest answer.


----------



## Salami

BEAVER said:


> That was done on the first page... post 5


:blush: ****. And I posted right after it. 

I am going back to sleep. Maybe my brain will work when I wake up.


----------



## Problemhouston

After I added sand the box I built comes out to exactly .50 cubic feet. What would give me the most output with 600 watts on tap in a sealed enclosure. Pair of the 8's or a single 10 type R? It's going to be my only sub system so I want good output but to also at least play down in the low 40 range. 

Thanks in advance for your help?


----------



## Irishdrunk

Problemhouston said:


> After I added sand the box I built comes out to exactly .50 cubic feet. What would give me the most output with 600 watts on tap in a sealed enclosure. Pair of the 8's or a single 10 type R? It's going to be my only sub system so I want good output but to also at least play down in the low 40 range.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help?


I think it was pretty much established that 2 8's > 12 earlier in the thread

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/1279077-post44.html

So I think they would way output the single 10, even with the same amount of power. Just from what I've read in this thread my opinion would be 8's for both output and SQ


----------



## Offroader5

How's this for a first post. Doing some research on 8" subs for my 4Runner and came across this site. After reading through this thread and seeing that the most likely person to answer the questions is in the room, I came to the conclusion that I needed to sign up and ask away.

My 2003 4Runner came with the JBL Synthesis 10 speaker system and I'm in the process of swapping out the whole system (can't think for the life of me how they could charge so much for this "upgrade").

The sub enclosure in the rear quarter panel is .6 cu. sealed and holds one 8". The more I read about this new Alpine 8...the more I think I want to try it out in this enclosure. Question is, will it work well with the rest of my system layout?

The plan was SPR-60C's (or possibly SPX-17PRO's if I get a wild hair to spend more) in the front doors with the tweet up high in the OEM location, the SPR-60's in the rear doors, and a PDX-5 amp running the whole show.

For the sub, would I be better off going with the dual 4 ohm version run parallel for that mono channel on the PDX-5? Also, is the PDX-5 going to be enough to power the door speakers without issue?


----------



## Angrywhopper

Go with the type X pros... Def worth the extra money.


----------



## Problemhouston

Irishdrunk said:


> I think it was pretty much established that 2 8's > 12 earlier in the thread
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/1279077-post44.html
> 
> So I think they would way output the single 10, even with the same amount of power. Just from what I've read in this thread my opinion would be 8's for both output and SQ


I get that 2 8's have more cone area and will move more air but am more concerned with how the low volume of airspace will effect the low end performance of the difference set ups. If squeezing the two 8's in .50 will choke out the lower frequencies I would rather go with a single 10.


----------



## killerb87

sweet!


----------



## jim walter

Problemhouston said:


> I get that 2 8's have more cone area and will move more air but am more concerned with how the low volume of airspace will effect the low end performance of the difference set ups. If squeezing the two 8's in .50 will choke out the lower frequencies I would rather go with a single 10.


2 8s in 0.5 cubes are going to dig lower than 1 10" in the same airspace, while being a good 2-3dB more efficient. Overall potential output level, I'd imagine the 8s win that one as well. 

Why did you fill your box with sand? Did I read that correctly?


----------



## Problemhouston

Ha ha ha. Well the enclosure isn't your typical shape and I couldn't get an accurate measurement with just LxWxH. So I built cut a cardboard box to exactly .50 cubic feet filled it up with sand and poured the sand into my enclosure. Sure enough all the sand fit in my enclosure. There was more space in my enclosure but I will chalk that up as a loss to driver displacement. 

Looks like I will be going with a pair of 8's then. I'm still a bit concerned about having one 8 firing at me and the other away from me (mounted in the center console). Don't need any cancellation issues.


----------



## Problemhouston

When will I be able get a pair?


----------



## Offroader5

jim walter said:


> 2 8s in 0.5 cubes are going to dig lower than 1 10" in the same airspace, while being a good 2-3dB more efficient. Overall potential output level, I'd imagine the 8s win that one as well.


Is that .5 cu. including the woofer displacment or would that need to be added?


----------



## huckorris

Problemhouston said:


> When will I be able get a pair?





huckorris said:


> Woofersetc had them on pre-order a few days ago but *NOW THEY ARE IN STOCK!!!*
> 
> WoofersEtc.com - SWR-823D - Alpine 8" Dual 2-Ohm Type-R Subwoofer
> 
> WoofersEtc.com - SWR-843D - Alpine 8" Dual 4-Ohm Type-R Subwoofer


They are available.


----------



## Problemhouston

huckorris said:


> They are available.


I swear I just searched for them the oher day and every site I found said pre-order. I will order at least one in the next week or so. Thanks to everyone who answered my questions.


----------



## Oscar

I like that surround type in the sense that using a half-roll "profile" in combination with the pro-audio style "accordian" shape will allow alot more mechanical excursion because the actual length is greater than just using one type or the other, but why not use that added advantage to increase the Sd by using a slightly larger usable cone area? Cone area increases quadratically (for those that are mathematically inclined) with respect to radius, so I would think that efficiency could have been increased without a penalty in the Xsus department. Anyone know what I mean?


----------



## jim walter

Oscar said:


> I like that surround type in the sense that using a half-roll "profile" in combination with the pro-audio style "accordian" shape will allow alot more mechanical excursion because the actual length is greater than just using one type or the other, but why not use that added advantage to increase the Sd by using a slightly larger usable cone area? Cone area increases quadratically (for those that are mathematically inclined) with respect to radius, so I would think that efficiency could have been increased without a penalty in the Xsus department. Anyone know what I mean?


I know exactly what you mean. Example of this in effect - the new Type R speakers have 8% more cone area vs the old ones due to the adoption of HAMR ... So we get it. You'll see the evolution of this into higher Sd's in the future.

To answer why this doesn't have more cone area with this surround, they have 24mm of excursion (mech 26 and 24 sus) ... So we got more X with no loss in Sd


----------



## rexroadj

They are up on crutchfield for those that care about authorized!
I am pretty sure I will get a better deal locally (they like me
Jim....YOU SUCK! I have ZERO need for anything new (except deck and processor) but yet here I am...Buying a pair of these things  Damn you and my love of eights!!!! I have used, tested, listened just about everything available over the last decade plus and none of them have had me more intrigued then these. I will put one up against the winner of the last great 8 challenge (crystal cmp8). My brother inlaw has 4 of them and is only using 2 so I might have to "borrow" one for a while. I actually like the jbl gto and w7 better then the cmp but have a feeling these are going to be the cream of the crop overall. I have no idea why I am doing this  I have two G5 10s and am super happy with just the one ported in my center console and an all Boston system (supporting the local boys
Damn you JIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I need to play with the 910 when its out to see if that does it for me. That is what I am really weary about (not a fan of the last several units, BT, and nav. If thats good then I will definitely go with the h800. Otherwise the new rockford 363 is going to get some serious consideration but will be between the two.


----------



## eggyhustles

Just pulled the trigger on 4 of them. Gonna be my first sealed setup in a long time


----------



## jim walter

Awesome!

What kind of power are you looking at for them? Try 200-400 each and if you can match my test boxes (.3 net after woofer) you'll be a very happy basshead.


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> They are up on crutchfield for those that care about authorized!
> I am pretty sure I will get a better deal locally (they like me
> Jim....YOU SUCK! I have ZERO need for anything new (except deck and processor) but yet here I am...Buying a pair of these things  Damn you and my love of eights!!!! I have used, tested, listened just about everything available over the last decade plus and none of them have had me more intrigued then these. I will put one up against the winner of the last great 8 challenge (crystal cmp8). My brother inlaw has 4 of them and is only using 2 so I might have to "borrow" one for a while. I actually like the jbl gto and w7 better then the cmp but have a feeling these are going to be the cream of the crop overall. I have no idea why I am doing this  I have two G5 10s and am super happy with just the one ported in my center console and an all Boston system (supporting the local boys
> Damn you JIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I need to play with the 910 when its out to see if that does it for me. That is what I am really weary about (not a fan of the last several units, BT, and nav. If thats good then I will definitely go with the h800. Otherwise the new rockford 363 is going to get some serious consideration but will be between the two.


Um, thanks and sorry 

I'll look forward to the results. PM me if you want to talk box design for the tests. Enjoy!
Jim


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> Um, thanks and sorry
> 
> I'll look forward to the results. PM me if you want to talk box design for the tests. Enjoy!
> Jim


I will gladly PM you prior to pulling out the saw 
You know I was just kidding about the sucking part right? 
I greatly appreciate the offer for info...I will gladly except! 
(humbly taking back my negative remarks about alpine in the past, with the hopes and so far proof of truly great steps taken by ALPINE and there new lines)


----------



## eggyhustles

jim walter said:


> Awesome!
> 
> What kind of power are you looking at for them? Try 200-400 each and if you can match my test boxes (.3 net after woofer) you'll be a very happy basshead.


m12 or sundown sax 1200d. Whichever has better clearance under the seat wins :laugh:


----------



## jim walter

eggyhustles said:


> m12 or sundown sax 1200d. Whichever has better clearance under the seat wins :laugh:


Sounds good. I hate to be a speculator (being an enginerd, I like to test before I comment), but I'd imagine the M12 to be quite an upgrade as far as control and SQ go ... especially noticeable on a sealed 8" system. Fingers crossed hoping the M12 fits!


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> Sounds good. I hate to be a speculator (being an enginerd, I like to test before I comment), but I'd imagine the M12 to be quite an upgrade as far as control and SQ go ... especially noticeable on a sealed 8" system. Fingers crossed hoping the M12 fits!


REALLY....... Interesting..... I was not a fan of the original PDX's but the new ones do seem pretty great? I have unfortunately not had the chance to play with them....I think since I am such a recovering alpine (I wouldnt say hater) illiterate customer for the last decade......You should send me a 910, h800, pdx's, and some 8's I am super happy with my SPZ's but if I could fit the pro 5.25's on my dash with tweets in the a-pillars I would put 8s in my doors and 12 in the center console......Just so you can get a fair report from an unbiased source 

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I like my local dealers though  they have always been good to me so I like to be honorable to them!


----------



## AudioPhill

What was the Xsus or Xmech figure? Did the TSP's in listed on page one come from manufacturer or a reliable source?


----------



## jim walter

AudioPhill said:


> What was the Xsus or Xmech figure? Did the TSP's in listed on page one come from manufacturer or a reliable source?


The mechanical clearance is 26.34mm (spider to top plate) and 27.32mm (VC to backplate). The suspension is pretty much full lock at 25mm (>8x rest compliance) and the coil is fully out of the gap at that point. You can input a 1390W 30Hz tone and reach the mechanical clearance if you want...but it's pretty damn tough to bottom it. (Tried this myself as we were making the mech clearance needs for the upcoming grill for it)

TSP's came from the manufacturer (me), and were measured on an industry standard measurement device (used here on DIYMA as well), the KDA .... And are listed as measured. The only thing rounded up is the Xmax, listed at 14mm while the D2 measures 13.4 and the D4 measures 13.6 as the coil windings are a bit different between the two.


----------



## AudioPhill

Using the TSP's posted I get 82.54 as sens that's what throws me off, I'd cover shipping to and from to get some hands on with one for testing.


----------



## AudioPhill

Weird the D4 is a longer ww, usually a D2 coil is a longer ww I thought?

edit, eyes crossed


----------



## jim walter

AudioPhill said:


> Weird the D4 is a longer ww, usually a D2 coil is a longer ww I thought?
> 
> edit, eyes crossed


The Qts listed is a tad high. A broken in 823 will have a qts closer to 0.475 rather than 0.50 (Vas will be ~1L larger too once broken in). 

Here are two samples from our first lot we shipped out that I did a quick check on. Post break-in the Fs on both will drop, along with the Qts while the Vas rises. The SPL will remain as is.

D2 is usually larger OD (WW and layer count is generally fixed, you'll always have a larger cross section of wire for less resistance).


----------



## AudioPhill

So the sens from the first list was a pre-break-in sens but the other parameters were post break in? 

What should we expect fully broken in (rest) Fs and Qts to be? Sens cant reman, the affect of the drop in Fs should be more than the affect of the drop in Qes and raise in Vas. Once enclosed if box is built pre-break-in spec it would give you a larger spike around tuning. 

I know it sounds like I'm trying to pick a fight, but in my 18 years at this, Only large changes in Qes and Vas without a very large shift in Fs allowed the driver to become more sensitive after break in. I have an Archive over 400 drivers deep of Klippel accurate tsp's and maybe 5 became more sensitive.


----------



## jim walter

AudioPhill said:


> So the sens from the first list was a pre-break-in sens but the other parameters were post break in?
> 
> What should we expect fully broken in (rest) Fs and Qts to be? Sens cant reman, the affect of the drop in Fs should be more than the affect of the drop in Qes and raise in Vas. Once enclosed if box is built pre-break-in spec it would give you a larger spike around tuning.
> 
> I know it sounds like I'm trying to pick a fight, but in my 18 years at this, Only large changes in Qes and Vas without a very large shift in Fs allowed the driver to become more sensitive after break in. I have an Archive over 400 drivers deep of Klippel accurate tsp's and maybe 5 became more sensitive.


Doesn't sound like you're trying to pick a fight .. just being a geek  

Post break in, Fs shall be between 39-41Hz, Qes ~.55-.60, Qts ~.50-.55

Here is an 823D from the QA-lot that was broken in.


----------



## AudioPhill

jim walter said:


> Doesn't sound like you're trying to pick a fight .. just being a geek
> 
> Post break in, Fs shall be between 39-41Hz, Qes ~.55-.60, Qts ~.50-.55
> 
> Here is an 823D from the QA-lot that was broken in.


Am i going crazy, isn't that the same TSP's on the right in the previos image posted? Wording there made me think them to be bnib random sample pull as drivers went out for shipping?


----------



## jim walter

Page 1 are OM spec (and have an issue with Fs a bit low on the D2 it appears)

First post of klippel specs were out of the box fist mp lot 

Last post was broken for 2Hrs 15Hz free air at 350w.


----------



## AudioPhill

jim walter said:


> Page 1 are OM spec (and have an issue with Fs a bit low on the D2 it appears)
> 
> First post of klippel specs were out of the box fist mp lot
> 
> Last post was broken for 2Hrs 15Hz free air at 350w.


Theres some details this geek can groove on lol. Cool.


----------



## usmcsoldriver

Has there been any more news/work on using these as Mid Bass drivers in the doors?

I'm starting to think that an excellent affordable All Alpine system would be a pair of these in the doors, 5.75" Type R components on the dash for a 3 way front stage and 2 more of these in the back playing sub duty. Obviously it would all be tuned with an H800! Powered by 2 PDX-5's. 4CH's for Mid/Tweet. 4CH's for Mid Bass. Both Ch5's for Subs!

Come to think of it... Jim, you should have this on your website as one of the recommended builds!


----------



## subwoofery

AudioPhill said:


> Using the TSP's posted I get 82.54 as sens that's what throws me off, I'd cover shipping to and from to get some hands on with one for testing.


I feel that for car audio, sensitivity is not a spec that is too important. 
A higher efficiency driver will need a bigger box than a lower efficiency one. Just physics. 
In home audio, space is not as important as in car audio. 

So I don't really look at sensitivity when choosing a subwoofer - midbass is another story. 

My understanding is that sensitivity and efficiency is 2 different things... 

Better understanding and explanation here

Kelvin


----------



## AudioPhill

subwoofery said:


> I feel that for car audio, sensitivity is not a spec that is too important.
> A higher efficiency driver will need a bigger box than a lower efficiency one. Just physics.
> In home audio, space is not as important as in car audio.
> 
> So I don't really look at sensitivity when choosing a subwoofer - midbass is another story.
> 
> My understanding is that sensitivity and efficiency is 2 different things...
> 
> Better understanding and explanation here
> 
> Kelvin


lol, When they said sens is not important, that was a companies way of selling you something fraudulently lol. As for box size, Qts and Vas determins proper enclosure volume, High Qts also indicates large box requirements and is attributed to low sensitivity. So trying to sum it up as simply as High Sens = Large enclosures, thats not always true. You can use sens to predict a drivers output, but only till the driver leaves it's 100% BL Xmax so if a driver reaches linear BL Xmax at 300 watts and isn't into a state of power compression then its simply sens + gain form power. After linearity ceases, linear gain is no longer a factor so past that point sensitivity isnt as important, but, if you plan to use a driver within its designed capabilities, sens is all thats important to know how loud a driver will get. Thats also not quite that simple, you have to figure in transfer function of its location and enclosure gains/losses, but sens is always the place to start.


----------



## subwoofery

Try to model a Sundown E8 v.2 D4 (calculated 81.52dB). <-- will want an enclosure as small as 0.25cuft to have a flat freq resp. in a car. 
Now try to model an Helix P8 (calculated 88.74dB). 
FS is pretty much the same: 44.7Hz for the Sundown and 41.6Hz for the Helix 

try to get the same Fb figure for both (sealed)... Which one will want the smaller enclosure? 

In a car enclosure size is important. If you don't mind fitting a coffin in your trunk, then good for you but I'd rather fit a pack of beer in mine  

Kelvin


----------



## AudioPhill

Fs means lil as to a subs extension, Q will alter a subs F3 more than Fs


----------



## subwoofery

AudioPhill said:


> Fs means lil as to a subs extension, Q will alter a subs F3 more than Fs


I know that. I put FS numbers so that you can see how the sensitivity plays regarding box size... 
However you didn't answer the little question I asked you... 


> Which one will want the smaller enclosure?


^ fb has to be the same 

Kelvin


----------



## jamieholo11

I currently have two of the 1023d's behind the seat of my truck in smallish sealed boxes (.4cu ea or so) but really considering these eights. The idea is two in (~.5cu) ported boxes. Do you think I will be able to get louder with these eights ported vs tens sealed? I am running about 600wrms for both subs now and will probably run the same amp. I also am unsatisfied with my low end extension in the small sealed boxes, what sort of frequency response in comparison will i be able to achieve with these bad boys.


----------



## jim walter

jamieholo11 said:


> I currently have two of the 1023d's behind the seat of my truck in smallish sealed boxes (.4cu ea or so) but really considering these eights. The idea is two in (~.5cu) ported boxes. Do you think I will be able to get louder with these eights ported vs tens sealed? I am running about 600wrms for both subs now and will probably run the same amp. I also am unsatisfied with my low end extension in the small sealed boxes, what sort of frequency response in comparison will i be able to achieve with these bad boys.


I'll try it tomorrow if I can grab some free time. I know I have 1 .45 box (~0.40 with the woofer in it) ... I'll see if I can round up another. Otherwise, it'll be sealed 10 vs. ported 8 .. either way, I'll let you know.

Jim


----------



## Problemhouston

jim walter said:


> I'll try it tomorrow if I can grab some free time. I know I have 1 .45 box (~0.40 with the woofer in it) ... I'll see if I can round up another. Otherwise, it'll be sealed 10 vs. ported 8 .. either way, I'll let you know.
> 
> Jim


Jim

Could you model a pair of the D4's in .50 cubic feet ported. I would need to have the port outside the enclosure. It would have to be round but I would need to know the diameter and length. Thanks in advance


----------



## eggyhustles

jim walter said:


> Sounds good. I hate to be a speculator (being an enginerd, I like to test before I comment), but I'd imagine the M12 to be quite an upgrade as far as control and SQ go ... especially noticeable on a sealed 8" system. Fingers crossed hoping the M12 fits!


The alpine fits, so the alpine wins


----------



## jim walter

Problemhouston said:


> Jim
> 
> Could you model a pair of the D4's in .50 cubic feet ported. I would need to have the port outside the enclosure. It would have to be round but I would need to know the diameter and length. Thanks in advance


2.5" ID @15-17" depending on how low you'd like it to play. My test boxes are ~.55 net w a 15.5" long port. As you lose that extra .05 cubes, you'll need to up it to 16-17". The good thing with external ports is that they are easy to trim/add length to suit your tastes.


----------



## jim walter

Problemhouston said:


> Jim
> 
> Could you model a pair of the D4's in .50 cubic feet ported. I would need to have the port outside the enclosure. It would have to be round but I would need to know the diameter and length. Thanks in advance


Wait. A pair in 0.5 shared total?


----------



## jamieholo11

Really appreciate the experimenting if you do manage to compare the two scenarios. All this information and personal responses you give are above and beyond of what I have experienced in the past in terms of customer service. Cheers Jim!


----------



## rexroadj

Hey Jim....I think I am picking up one (for now) on Sunday (my only day off for a LONG time I have a center console tuned to 34 and is aprox. 1.3cuft already with a boston g5 10. Do you think that a pair of the 8s will prosper in this setup? It would be great because I can add a new 2x 8" baffle to go over the single ten...(its all downfiring so as long as it doesnt interfere with the bolts its an EASY swap out  I will do a test box/boxes as a .65ish ported and a .4 sealed sample as well......If its worth while and I have the power available....and I want to build a whole new box I can do 3 sealed (two down firing and one rear) I have a boston gt2200 on tap for sub power right now...900x1 at 2ohm. I presume this would be great for the pair..... Or I can do a GT2125 per sub giving about 650 each? I am a little leary doing two subs ported in a shared area with two different (but the same) amps?

Whats your take on my situation....I am really excited to beat the piss out of these for a while


----------



## EricP72

Jim I have a quick question. I read that you used these in a camaro as midbass. Care to elaborate on how they performed in that role? Also are there any plans to create a shallow version specifically for midbass/ door mount? And rexroadj how does these compare to the jblgto?


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> Hey Jim....I think I am picking up one (for now) on Sunday (my only day off for a LONG time I have a center console tuned to 34 and is aprox. 1.3cuft already with a boston g5 10. Do you think that a pair of the 8s will prosper in this setup? It would be great because I can add a new 2x 8" baffle to go over the single ten...(its all downfiring so as long as it doesnt interfere with the bolts its an EASY swap out  I will do a test box/boxes as a .65ish ported and a .4 sealed sample as well......If its worth while and I have the power available....and I want to build a whole new box I can do 3 sealed (two down firing and one rear) I have a boston gt2200 on tap for sub power right now...900x1 at 2ohm. I presume this would be great for the pair..... Or I can do a GT2125 per sub giving about 650 each? I am a little leary doing two subs ported in a shared area with two different (but the same) amps?
> 
> Whats your take on my situation....I am really excited to beat the piss out of these for a while


[email protected] is great for a pair. Looking forward to the results in there. 

I think your sealed box is a tad large, but may give you a little more extension. Have a~ .1 chunk of wood or foam handy to slap in the box to test it with a .3-.33 as well. I though they were a bit more fun in smaller enclosures. 

650W RMS each will give you more than enough power to break them if you want, but that's what I've been running on them in my setup for a while now (M12) with no issue and only once did I smell engineer cologne. But, the dual amp setup in shared airspace is tricky. If you can verify they are putting out the same power with a couple of different test tones (try 20,40,60 and 100), then I don't see a problem with it and headroom is always a good thing


----------



## jim walter

manish said:


> Jim I have a quick question. I read that you used these in a camaro as midbass. Care to elaborate on how they performed in that role? Also are there any plans to create a shallow version specifically for midbass/ door mount? And rexroadj how does these compare to the jblgto?


There will be no shallow version of these, sadly for me (cause I've already got it all drawn up and ready to proto!!!). They're 4.5" deep which is too deep for just about anything outside of a full side of Toyota FJ ... But the tiny .1-.2 enclosure does lend them to kick panel installs for te adventurous guys. 

The feedback we received at CES as midbass/front subs was very positive. I know at least one member on here was able to hear that demo and really liked them as well. 

My personal impression was that I was blown away how fast and powerful they were. Super detailed and dynamic. One of our test tracks was Billy Joel's "It's still rock and roll to me" and the drum pan at 1:25 is AMAZING on these, literally walking across the dashboard. A lot of the staging and placement comes from the processing we did with the H800, but the sound itself, the accuracy and the speed comes straight from the driver. 

Jim


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> [email protected] is great for a pair. Looking forward to the results in there.
> 
> I think your sealed box is a tad large, but may give you a little more extension. Have a~ .1 chunk of wood or foam handy to slap in the box to test it with a .3-.33 as well. I though they were a bit more fun in smaller enclosures.
> 
> 650W RMS each will give you more than enough power to break them if you want, but that's what I've been running on them in my setup for a while now (M12) with no issue and only once did I smell engineer cologne. But, the dual amp setup in shared airspace is tricky. If you can verify they are putting out the same power with a couple of different test tones (try 20,40,60 and 100), then I don't see a problem with it and headroom is always a good thing


Cool! I figured the 1.3 matched up pretty well for the pair.... I will start with that since its built already...just needs an additional baffle put over the one for the 10". 
I was incorrect about the 3 sealed....I can actually do 4! 3 downfiring and one rear.... I dont "want" to go that route unless there would be DRASTIC gains?
I have no way to test the amps to ensure equal output so I will try a few different single amp options..... 

I really want to get this project up and running but I have yet to hear back from 3 of the local dealers????????????? Its really frigging annoying. They have email addresses but dont respond? I work 70hrs a week and dont think to call during normal hours so I send emails asking for price and availability and if they are open on Sundays? (I have also found that the website schedules might not always be what the reality is 
You know....You try and do things the right way and its still a pain in the ass? Could have ordered gray goods and probably already got them and for less????? Although I have terrible luck and its just not a risk I am usually willing to take 
I promise to put up a review on them when done and will post a link here. I am really excited for this....Most excited I have been to try a new sub in a LONG LONG LONG time! Again...if its like the new 12" offering I am truly impressed! Tons of impact and accuracy.... They let me put a 12" in a prefab box in my truck for a day to play with it and I was in love with it just sitting on my backseat!!!


Manish: I will give my thoughts on it as soon as I get my hands on it. I love the JBL Gto8 (as everyone knows Its a phenominal budget sub and far out does its price point and "status". I have a feeling these little babies are going to be a substantial upgrade all around.... I hope anyway?


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> 650W RMS each will give you more than enough power to break them if you want, but that's what I've been running on them in my setup for a while now (M12) with no issue and only once did I smell engineer cologne.


Also...... That is one of the funniest things I have ever heard!!!!!!!!!!!!! :laugh:

Engineer cologne :laugh: I may have to put that in my sig!!


----------



## scout62

Curious about the grill, what kind of time frame are we looking at? I'm thinking a few of these need to go in to the cargo floor of my HHR but they need to be wife-proof.


----------



## eggyhustles

scout62 said:


> Curious about the grill, what kind of time frame are we looking at? I'm thinking a few of these need to go in to the cargo floor of my HHR but they need to be wife-proof.


Speaking of that, my mom punctured a hole into a morel ultimo with a shopping bag


----------



## trojan fan

eggyhustles said:


> Speaking of that, my mom punctured a hole into a morel ultimo with a shopping bag



With a shopping bag...that sounds crazy....what was the bag made of?


----------



## jim walter

scout62 said:


> Curious about the grill, what kind of time frame are we looking at? I'm thinking a few of these need to go in to the cargo floor of my HHR but they need to be wife-proof.


Looking like we are about 8 weeks out or less. My approval samples are on the way this week.

Jim


----------



## jim walter

jamieholo11 said:


> I currently have two of the 1023d's behind the seat of my truck in smallish sealed boxes (.4cu ea or so) but really considering these eights. The idea is two in (~.5cu) ported boxes. Do you think I will be able to get louder with these eights ported vs tens sealed? I am running about 600wrms for both subs now and will probably run the same amp. I also am unsatisfied with my low end extension in the small sealed boxes, what sort of frequency response in comparison will i be able to achieve with these bad boys.


Haven't gotten there yet, been a rough week .. sorry. I will get to it this week though.


----------



## JoeHemi57

What about a sealed Type R 10 vs a ported 8 off the sub channel off the new Xpower 5 channel?


----------



## eggyhustles

trojan fan said:


> With a shopping bag...that sounds crazy....what was the bag made of?


It was a thin plastic bag, but there was a sharp stick inside of it. She packed the trunk and that specific bad was leaning against the sub.


----------



## thelbz

Who hauls sticks in a trunk with a ultimo anyway? But has anyone got their hands on one of these 8's. I would love a review comparing them with the other top 8's on the market.


----------



## eggyhustles

thelbz said:


> Who hauls sticks in a trunk with a ultimo anyway? But has anyone got their hands on one of these 8's. I would love a review comparing them with the other top 8's on the market.


Someone who doesn't know what an ultimo is :laugh:. 

Gonna be installing these tomorrow. Can't wait


----------



## St. Dark

dangit...accidentally "dumb questioned" this..if you can retract that, mods, I'd appreciate it.


----------



## thelbz

eggyhustles said:


> Someone who doesn't know what an ultimo is :laugh:.
> 
> Gonna be installing these tomorrow. Can't wait


What type of set up are you going with? And what are you currently running that will be replaced.


----------



## eggyhustles

4 8's in .5 per sealed. Power will be provided by an alpine m12, so 300 per driver. 

It's replacing 3 ported sundown sa 8's. power was a sundown 1500d

haven't decided i'm if going to leave the front stage the way it is or go with something new. 

Front stage is

2 id xs65's per door
b&c de500 horns + id full horn bodies
JL hd 600/4 for the xs65's and a sundown 125.2 for the horns


----------



## jim walter

jim walter said:


> Haven't gotten there yet, been a rough week .. sorry. I will get to it this week though.


Done. 










Honestly, closer than I thought it would be. 

Power = PDX M12

843D .55 @ 35Hz
1043D 0.48 sealed 

Songs: Grove St Party, All of the Lights, Aston Martin Music

One thing to recognize is that these woofers are roughly the same efficiency, so they are very evenly matched at mid listening levels until you get into a track with solid 30-40Hz energy. The ported box walks away at that point, however, with enough power on tap, the extra excursion (read stronger motor at the same stroke, more efficient at SPL) the 10" catches up. I'm taking 800-1000W, but the 10 sealed surprised me that it could kind of "come back" as the volume increased, even if it gets a bit dirty at this ridiculous excursion level. 

In the end, the 10 can get louder from 50Hz up and 25Hz down, but (just as with any) the ported box can wreck it in the 30-50 range. 

As far as speed and accuracy, the 8 is more controlled than 10, even when ported, pretty awesome to my ears. The 10 sounds great though, not dogging it .. Instead I was surprised how well it could keep up in a tiny sealed box. 

Hope that helps 
Jim


----------



## jim walter

eggyhustles said:


> 4 8's in .5 per sealed. Power will be provided by an alpine m12, so 300 per driver.
> 
> It's replacing 3 ported sundown sa 8's. power was a sundown 1500d
> 
> haven't decided i'm if going to leave the front stage the way it is or go with something new.
> 
> Front stage is
> 
> 2 id xs65's per door
> b&c de500 horns + id full horn bodies
> JL hd 600/4 for the xs65's and a sundown 125.2 for the horns


That box is massive per woofer, any reason you're going so big? I'd drop down to .35

If you're going that big, port them @31-33Hz you'll love it 

Jim


----------



## eggyhustles

Figured better low end extension

so .5 ported would work?


----------



## jim walter

eggyhustles said:


> Figured better low end extension
> 
> so .5 ported would work?


That's 0.5 net after port displacement, but yes. I prefer the ported install. I guess I need to know how loud you're trying to get and how much you are going to miss the sound of flat extension down into the low 30s vs. sealed.

Have you had sealed woofers in your system before? If yes, then you know what to expect .. just don't want to have you disappointed when you're roll-off starts at 50 vs. 30Hz

The fact that they remain well composed and sound great ported pushes me to recommend you to try ported first.

You can see my box in the pictures. It is 0.59 each before I put the woofer into the box. Going down to 0.50 would lose 1-2dB between 30-40Hz, but it'll still be a great setup.

All of that said, 4 sealed would be an absolutely awesome setup for SQ, coupled with that amp ... I know you'll be very content with it.


----------



## jamieholo11

Thanks for the post Jim. Looks like my dealer is going to get a call on Tuesday . The only other thing is what is your port area and length. I am going to try and mimic what you have built(box size and tuning... maybe a touch lower tuning). Looks like I am going to bite the bullet and push some more power to the subs too.


----------



## jim walter

jamieholo11 said:


> Thanks for the post Jim. Looks like my dealer is going to get a call on Tuesday . The only other thing is what is your port area and length. I am going to try and mimic what you have built(box size and tuning... maybe a touch lower tuning). Looks like I am going to bite the bullet and push some more power to the subs too.


I'm using tiny ports 5.25in^2 at 16.25", 1/2 roundover on the exit and the inside edge, no bends. The issue you are going to have with the small box is the length of the port. It's not a problem once you get into a shared chamber (even with just two), but as a single woofer box, the port gets long in a hurry.

For you're box .. I'd run dual 823Ds in a total of 1.3 cubes (net) tuned at 33Hz.

12.5 in^2 of port (4" round equivalent) at 21.5" long. This should be a hell of a setup, linear and powerful down to just about 30Hz, you'll run into the limits right at ~500W each.


----------



## rexroadj

God damn!!!!!!!!!!!! I work 70hrs a week and cant get to the local shop to pick up my F'ing subs.....Sunday is my only break (price you pay to have your name on the door sometimes  and they are closed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I might just see if they can drop them off or ship them because they are like 15 miles away....
All the pics and talk is KILLING ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## jim walter

Sorry to hear that, but I want to say thank you for supporting your local dealer.

Here's hoping they'll help you out and drop them off for you!
Jim


----------



## rexroadj

I'm not worried about it...They're great guys! I would rather go when I have time to shoot the ****. They ordered them for me and I call all the time to apologize for not taking them yet and offer to pay over the phone everytime..... I am awaiting the arival of the h800 and 910....they are also aware of this as well


----------



## eggyhustles

jim walter said:


> That's 0.5 net after port displacement, but yes. I prefer the ported install. I guess I need to know how loud you're trying to get and how much you are going to miss the sound of flat extension down into the low 30s vs. sealed.
> 
> Have you had sealed woofers in your system before? If yes, then you know what to expect .. just don't want to have you disappointed when you're roll-off starts at 50 vs. 30Hz
> 
> The fact that they remain well composed and sound great ported pushes me to recommend you to try ported first.
> 
> You can see my box in the pictures. It is 0.59 each before I put the woofer into the box. Going down to 0.50 would lose 1-2dB between 30-40Hz, but it'll still be a great setup.
> 
> All of that said, 4 sealed would be an absolutely awesome setup for SQ, coupled with that amp ... I know you'll be very content with it.


I have some credit at home depot, so i'll build 2 boxes and see which one i end up liking. Gonna take your advice and try ported out first.


----------



## jamieholo11

My plan was to build separate boxes as my amp will be mounted in the center behind the center console. For each box here are the planned dimensions... 12.5H X 22W X 6D1 X 8D2. Works out to .77cu on bcae1.com. So I have enough room for the port but making a corner may cause some port noise no? Port noise was the main reason I went from one ported 10 to two sealed but I miss my low end extension.


----------



## Salami

St. Dark said:


> dangit...accidentally "dumb questioned" this..if you can retract that, mods, I'd appreciate it.



Click it again and it will go away.


----------



## jim walter

jamieholo11 said:


> My plan was to build separate boxes as my amp will be mounted in the center behind the center console. For each box here are the planned dimensions... 12.5H X 22W X 6D1 X 8D2. Works out to .77cu on bcae1.com. So I have enough room for the port but making a corner may cause some port noise no? Port noise was the main reason I went from one ported 10 to two sealed but I miss my low end extension.


You're fine. Run the port along the top or bottom, offsetting the woofer on that 12.5" face to get the port to fit along that 22" side. Do a 4.5"ish x 1.xx to get the 5-6 in^2 and you're golden.


----------



## JoeHemi57

jim walter said:


> Done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, closer than I thought it would be.
> 
> Power = PDX M12
> 
> 843D .55 @ 35Hz
> 1043D 0.48 sealed
> 
> Songs: Grove St Party, All of the Lights, Aston Martin Music
> 
> One thing to recognize is that these woofers are roughly the same efficiency, so they are very evenly matched at mid listening levels until you get into a track with solid 30-40Hz energy. The ported box walks away at that point, however, with enough power on tap, the extra excursion (read stronger motor at the same stroke, more efficient at SPL) the 10" catches up. I'm taking 800-1000W, but the 10 sealed surprised me that it could kind of "come back" as the volume increased, even if it gets a bit dirty at this ridiculous excursion level.
> 
> In the end, the 10 can get louder from 50Hz up and 25Hz down, but (just as with any) the ported box can wreck it in the 30-50 range.
> 
> As far as speed and accuracy, the 8 is more controlled than 10, even when ported, pretty awesome to my ears. The 10 sounds great though, not dogging it .. Instead I was surprised how well it could keep up in a tiny sealed box.
> 
> Hope that helps
> Jim


Thanks for getting to that i appreciate the info.


----------



## Problemhouston

Ok now I'm really confused. I listen to everything from hip hop to country with Metallica, Nickelback, and Third Eye Blind mixed in. I really like the low end stuff. With the total interior volume of the box at .50 to .54. Which would get me output with 600 watts on tap?

Pair of the 8's sealed?
Single 8 ported (how big/long should the port be?)
Or a single 1043 sealed?


----------



## jim walter

I think that the pair of 8's sealed is going to take the cake on that one, especially with that kind of music. 2 8s in ~0.25-0.3ish each sealed, will have the most headroom, the best sensitivity and the least power compression. Overall total enclosure size is pretty similar with the 2x8 vs 1x10 sealed, but the 8s give you the flexibility to make separate, much shallower and smaller boxes and hide them under the seats (if they fit).

However, if you are REALLY into the low end stuff, there is no replacement for the LF extension of a vented box ... even 2 sealed vs 1 ported, the vented box is going to dig lower on most music content (vented has 6dB more output at 30Hz compared to 1 sealed). Just be careful with 600W, as that's enough power in the long term to do some damage to a single 8" ... which kind of pushes me back to my first suggestion of 2 8s sealed


----------



## Problemhouston

Then a pair of 8's it is. Now I'm wondering if I'm going to run into problems mounting the in the center of the truck facing opposite directions? Do you see any problems with this?


----------



## jim walter

Problemhouston said:


> Then a pair of 8's it is. Now I'm wondering if I'm going to run into problems mounting the in the center of the truck facing opposite directions? Do you see any problems with this?


It's actually a really good setup for SQ as it cancels out vibration. The only downside is you take away a bit of impact, as you no longer have the combined mass of the cones working together as a vibrator to the chassis (think; chair or floor mounted rumblers like the old Clark synthesis thingy). 

End result, less impact/slam from vibration, better SQ.


----------



## Problemhouston

jim walter said:


> It's actually a really good setup for SQ as it cancels out vibration. The only downside is you take away a bit of impact, as you no longer have the combined mass of the cones working together as a vibrator to the chassis (think; chair or floor mounted rumblers like the old Clark synthesis thingy).
> 
> End result, less impact/slam from vibration, better SQ.


That settles it then. Thanks for all your help Jim.


----------



## KENNEY

Great subs here guys. I stuck a couple in both of my rides in tiny sealed enclosures (.35 or so) and they really surprised the hell out of me, even with minimal power going to them. I am a long time fan of small drivers on bass. I have experience with a hand full of 8" drivers out there (Sundown, MTX, Focal, Morel, CDT, JL, ULTRA). I will be hosting a shootout very soon  

But first impressions are very good. I have yet to try these in ported enclosures 

Thanks for participating in the forum Jim, and thanks for your personal recommendations. As you said before, these are very fun drivers! 

The first pic is my MINI Cooper, second, is my F350.


----------



## rexroadj

Got to touch/feel/see but not hear a few the other day at a shop.... REALLY REALLY nice looking drivers....Extremely well made! 

Cant wait to play with'em!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## fish

Just a couple huh Kenney?  

I bet the sextet sounds really nice. I've always wanted to do 6-8 8" subs.


----------



## jim walter

KENNEY said:


> Great subs here guys. I stuck a couple in both of my rides in tiny sealed enclosures (.35 or so) and they really surprised the hell out of me, even with minimal power going to them. I am a long time fan of small drivers on bass. I have experience with a hand full of 8" drivers out there (Sundown, MTX, Focal, Morel, CDT, JL, ULTRA). I will be hosting a shootout very soon
> 
> But first impressions are very good. I have yet to try these in ported enclosures
> 
> Thanks for participating in the forum Jim, and thanks for your personal recommendations. As you said before, these are very fun drivers!
> 
> The first pic is my MINI Cooper, second, is my F350.


AWESOME!! Glad to hear some initial feedback (and that it is positive). Wait till you get them ported, that's where the fun begins. Nice box btw. 

Side note; We've got a Tundra we are getting ready to put 8 of them in. TWICE  Thats right, 16 8s in a Tundra without even moving the seat at all. This will be replacing 3 ported 12s on 4kW ... Needless to say I'm excited.


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> Got to touch/feel/see but not hear a few the other day at a shop.... REALLY REALLY nice looking drivers....Extremely well made!
> 
> Cant wait to play with'em!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Thanks  I really liked the way these ones turned out cosmetically, chunky but purposeful.


----------



## keanuration

after following this thread I want to ditch my setup kicker L7 8 in a rather large ported box .9 cubes and huge port requirement compared to this 8. I'm all about conserving crucial trunk space now with another baby. So should I aim for .6 cubes tuned @ 35 hz for hip-hop & rock? I am really wanting to get my hands on this one.


----------



## TypeR

It looks like this sub is perfect for my limited trunk space. I see people wanting to throw huge power at these...will 200W RMS be enough to get decent sound? I'm not looking for a powerhouse sub here, just something to fill in a bit of bass. 
Jim - for those box volumes you calculated, was that 0.3 ft^3 with or without the volumetric displacement of the sub?
Thanks


----------



## jim walter

TypeR said:


> It looks like this sub is perfect for my limited trunk space. I see people wanting to throw huge power at these...will 200W RMS be enough to get decent sound? I'm not looking for a powerhouse sub here, just something to fill in a bit of bass.
> Jim - for those box volumes you calculated, was that 0.3 ft^3 with or without the volumetric displacement of the sub?
> Thanks


That was after sub, but 0.25 isn't going to affect anything if that's all you have.


----------



## jim walter

I know this isn't very DIYMA relevant, but Alpine Is hosting an event this weekend for dB drag and low rider show ..... But I'll be there and I'd be happy do demo the Camaro or Jeep for anyone this Sunday


----------



## The Baron Groog

Not a happy bunny; Alpine Europe has decided not to bring these into Europe the UK! I have already petitioned them to bring them in, if there are any other UK/Euro users on here who'd like them without the hassle of importing yourself please PM me your email address with SWR8 in the title and I will forward it to my contact at Alpine to see what can be done!

Kenny's Mini reminded me of an install I did for a customer with the Type R 12s-he *had* to have 2 of them in his Cooper S-though the car pictured is actually mine:


----------



## Offroader5

jim walter said:


> That's 0.5 net after port displacement, but yes. I prefer the ported install.
> 
> You can see my box in the pictures. It is 0.59 each before I put the woofer into the box. Going down to 0.50 would lose 1-2dB between 30-40Hz, but it'll still be a great setup.


I really want to try one of these in my 4Runner. It has a .6 cu OEM sealed enclosure in the rear quarter. Question is, what do you recommend for port size & length if I used tube? I can easily add a port to this enclosure but it may need to have an elbow depending on length requirement.

EDIT: Ok, so by my calculations...for a 37hz tune on .6 cu enclosure using a 1.5" tube...it would need to be 4.7" long. Is that right?


----------



## thelbz

Offroader5 said:


> I really want to try one of these in my 4Runner. It has a .6 cu OEM sealed enclosure in the rear quarter. Question is, what do you recommend for port size & length if I used tube? I can easily add a port to this enclosure but it may need to have an elbow depending on length requirement.
> 
> EDIT: Ok, so by my calculations...for a 37hz tune on .6 cu enclosure using a 1.5" tube...it would need to be 4.7" long. Is that right?


That is correct. Tell him what he's won Jim....:laugh::laugh:


----------



## Offroader5

Forgive if the terminology is off a bit...I was messing around with WinISD last night but I don't have it on this computer at work so I'll be winging it as far as wordage 

While messing with WinISD, using a 1.5" round port, it seemed to have quite a bit of port noise/air movement. I upped the size to 2" and it seemed to drop much of it...but the port ended up something like 12" long (don't remember exactly). If I understand correctly, it shouldn't matter if use a 90 elbow to get full port length right?


----------



## scout62

Maybe I missed it...are the external dimentions posted somewhere? Trying to see how many will fit in 38.5x25.25x8.


----------



## Breeze

eggyhustles said:


> Someone who doesn't know what an ultimo is :laugh:.
> 
> Gonna be installing these tomorrow. Can't wait


 Curious about your results eggyhustles, I might be making a move to these aswell from an ultimo, perhaps 4 8's


----------



## mires

scout62 said:


> Maybe I missed it...are the external dimentions posted somewhere? Trying to see how many will fit in 38.5x25.25x8.


That's just over 3 cubes if you're talking about an enclosure that's already built. After you account for driver displacement, I would say you only have enough airspace for about 8 of them.


----------



## eggyhustles

Breeze said:


> Curious about your results eggyhustles, I might be making a move to these aswell from an ultimo, perhaps 4 8's


Had to put the project on hold due to work, hoping to get them in next Saturday. 

OP, my friend picked up two of the 10's. I'm thinking low tuned ported(28-30hz). Would 2.5 net tuned to 30hz work?


----------



## jim walter

jim walter said:


> I know this isn't very DIYMA relevant, but Alpine Is hosting an event this weekend for dB drag and low rider show ..... But I'll be there and I'd be happy do demo the Camaro or Jeep for anyone this Sunday


Just put up a 138.7dB in Street A w/ 3x 843D's ported @ 45-50ish. Ran side by side w 3 ported Sundown 15s that did 139.9. Not sure what kind of woofers but relative to that it put a smile on our faces.


----------



## keanuration

question for you Jim,
so I have the previous type-r 10 could I port that sub in a box @ .8 cubes or should I give up on that and do this 8 instead. What would be the specs for either recommended ported setup? I would love to get this new 8 but at the same time I have an unopened 3rd gen 10. 

thanks


----------



## 91dime

Here's my modified 10" enclosure that I'm fiberglassing to put an 8" type R



















I got alot of work ahead of me but I dont even have the sub yet.


----------



## rexroadj

Better to have a box ready then to have a sub waiting 
Keep us posted!


----------



## 91dime

I'm doing a layer a day until she's done lol. I'm just going to have it carpeted, I don't think I can do it myself.


----------



## rexroadj

Elemental designs did a great video/how to carpeting boxes.... Google it (i'm sure its easy to find). Makes it really easy to follow. Just get something flexible 

I am still waiting to sell my G5s so I can take out my center console and throw in the pair of 8s.


----------



## 91dime

Are you going to port the enclosure?


----------



## jim walter

keanuration said:


> question for you Jim,
> so I have the previous type-r 10 could I port that sub in a box @ .8 cubes or should I give up on that and do this 8 instead. What would be the specs for either recommended ported setup? I would love to get this new 8 but at the same time I have an unopened 3rd gen 10.
> 
> thanks


The 10" will get louder in the equal vented enclosure but the 8" will sound significantly better than the last gen. I'd prefer to see the 8" in 0.65 with a nice port to let it breathe. Overall size should be right about 0.75-0.8 Unless you're a super basshead you'll be very happy with the setup.


----------



## jim walter

91dime said:


> Here's my modified 10" enclosure that I'm fiberglassing to put an 8" type R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got alot of work ahead of me but I dont even have the sub yet.


How big is that gonna be? Volume-wise


----------



## 91dime

Its around .44 cuft, but there's alot of wood inside the box that's not figured in, and the speaker isn't calculated into that either.


----------



## jim walter

91dime said:


> Its around .44 cuft, but there's alot of wood inside the box that's not figured in, and the speaker isn't calculated into that either.


A bit on the large side, but you can always fill it a rad to adjust for your tastes. LF extension vs Impact.


----------



## 91dime

I just did the math to figure in the wood I used to prop the ring and the piece to hold the amp. The total volume will be a little under .30cuft


----------



## jim walter

91dime said:


> I just did the math to figure in the wood I used to prop the ring and the piece to hold the amp. The total volume will be a little under .30cuft


:Excellent: - Montgomery Burns


----------



## keanuration

jim walter said:


> The 10" will get louder in the equal vented enclosure but the 8" will sound significantly better than the last gen. I'd prefer to see the 8" in 0.65 with a nice port to let it breathe. Overall size should be right about 0.75-0.8 Unless you're a super basshead you'll be very happy with the setup.



ok, so I'm stoked about this new 8. My custom fiber/mdf box is easy to modify so this looks like the route to take. My box is .8 cubes so should I use a 3in port at 20in length? I like my music loud and low so tuning into the mid 30s should be good enough?

thanks


----------



## EricP72

Jim any pics of the 8" installed in the camaro? Rex did you get to hear yours yet?


----------



## jim walter

manish said:


> Jim any pics of the 8" installed in the camaro? Rex did you get to hear yours yet?






















Linked off of Car Audio Mag, originally from Alpine.


----------



## jim walter

keanuration said:


> ok, so I'm stoked about this new 8. My custom fiber/mdf box is easy to modify so this looks like the route to take. My box is .8 cubes so should I use a 3in port at 20in length? I like my music loud and low so tuning into the mid 30s should be good enough?
> 
> thanks


Is that 0.8 cubes gross, before we subtract the woofer displacement and port displacement? If so, this will be pretty good .. if that's assumed to be after, its a tad big for this but will just be a bit fat on the low end maybe how you like it.

Jim


----------



## pamantea

Hey Jim, 

I need some advice. 
I have been patiently waiting to get ahold of these subs since they were announced earlier this year. My current setup:
2010 Toyota Tacoma Access Cab TRD
Alpine INA-900 (BT bought separetely)
Imprint Module
Sirius module
Alpine PDX F6 running Hertz component MLK (6.5" and tweeter)
Alpine PDX M12 running a temporary sub until i decide on what to do with the 8"s

So, the original plan was to cut out the storage units (for the jack etc.) under the back seats and build a box for 4 of the type R 8"s in a sealed enclosure. This would be great, except for it would be time consuming, high cost, and I would lose my storage area. I am now thinking of building an enclosure between the seats and put possibly 3 or 4 of the 8"s in there. I was thinking maybe 2 downfiring and 1 up? or all three up? 
What is your opinion and what should I am for for volume and anything else? Thank you in advance!

Peter


----------



## keanuration

jim walter said:


> Is that 0.8 cubes gross, before we subtract the woofer displacement and port displacement? If so, this will be pretty good .. if that's assumed to be after, its a tad big for this but will just be a bit fat on the low end maybe how you like it.
> 
> Jim



yes sir, .8 cubes gross. Or would the new 10 be a better option? But I would rather hang w/ the 8 though.


----------



## Transfer Function

Just wanted to post the TS parameters of these woofers for non-DIYMA members...since I couldn't find them anywhere:


SWR-823D

Nominal Impedance = 2 + 2 Ohms
Frequency Response = 28-200 Hz
Sensitivity @ 1W/1m = 83.5 dB
Re = 1.85 + 1.85 Ohms
Le @ 1 kHz/ 20 kHz = 0.87 mH/ 0.30 mH
Fs = 38 Hz
Vas = 12 L (0.42 ft3)
Qms = 7.8
Qes = 0.55
Qts = 0.50
Xmax @ 10% Distortion = 14 mm
Xmech = 52 mm
Hag = 10 mm
Hvc = 29 mm
Sd = 201 cm2
VC Diameter = 40 mm (1.6")
Magnet Weight = 52 oz

--------------------------------------------

SWR-843D

Nominal Impedance = 4 + 4 Ohms
Frequency Response = 28-200 Hz
Sensitivity @ 1W/1m = 83.5 dB
Re = 3.7 + 3.7 Ohms
Le @ 1 kHz/ 20 kHz = 1.23 mH/ 0.35 mH
Fs = 40 Hz
Vas = 12 L (0.42 ft3)
Qms = 7.5
Qes = 0.60
Qts = 0.55
Xmax @ 10% Distortion = 14 mm
Xmech = 52 mm
Hag = 10 mm
Hvc = 29 mm
Sd = 201 cm2
VC Diameter = 40 mm (1.6")
Magnet Weight = 52 oz


PS - These should be an interesting upgrade from my GTO804s.


----------



## thelbz

I got a 823d this weekend for $99 but it doesnt fit perfectly so going to have to build a new enclosure. its .7^3 tuned @34hz. It has some port noise but does get loud with 400w running it. I would like to know how many square inches of port to use for the new box to reduce port noise and still play loud and low.


----------



## jim walter

thelbz said:


> I got a 823d this weekend for $99 but it doesnt fit perfectly so going to have to build a new enclosure. its .7^3 tuned @34hz. It has some port noise but does get loud with 400w running it. I would like to know how many square inches of port to use for the new box to reduce port noise and still play loud and low.


Don't bend the port and you can go as low as 5in^2. I'd do 7in^2 but it starts to get a tad long. Depends on the shape of the box but with these small of vents I really recommend against bent ports. If you're gonna bend it, go bigger.


----------



## thelbz

It's at 4.68 square inches and isn't bent. Thanks for the info Jim


----------



## nineball

Transfer Function said:


> Just wanted to post the TS parameters of these woofers for non-DIYMA members...since I couldn't find them anywhere:


on diyma?


----------



## rommelrommel

What's the driver displacement on the 8?


----------



## Ferazzz

Man I've always wanted to install a dual 8" setup and I don't know why.....although I only have around 500-550rms i'm sure it can still sound decent in 2.0cubic feet sealed for too


----------



## rexroadj

Ferazzz said:


> Man I've always wanted to install a dual 8" setup and I don't know why.....although I only have around 500-550rms i'm sure it can still sound decent in 2.0cubic feet sealed for too


WAY WAY WAY WAY too big for a pair!


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> WAY WAY WAY WAY too big for a pair!


Yeah. That's the proper enclosure for ~6-8 of these 

500-550rms is great power for a pair though, as these are quite sensitive as a pair (more than most 12s). 

I'd recommend using the space you have to build a nice vented enclosure for them if youre up for it.


----------



## keanuration

hey jim,

I like my music low and loud. So what should I tune my .8 cubes enclosure to?


----------



## Ferazzz

rexroadj said:


> WAY WAY WAY WAY too big for a pair!


Reall? Because with my one ten Alpine recommends 0.6, and I went 1.25 and man was I happy I did. It hit low and deep. Now I just came back from listening to my JL 12W6V2 in 1.5 sealed and am extatic!!!!! However I still want some 8's and don't know why  They must sound incredible with all types of music.....


----------



## rexroadj

Ferazzz said:


> Reall? Because with my one ten Alpine recommends 0.6, and I went 1.25 and man was I happy I did. It hit low and deep. Now I just came back from listening to my JL 12W6V2 in 1.5 sealed and am extatic!!!!! However I still want some 8's and don't know why  They must sound incredible with all types of music.....


Well dont listen to me.....BUT YOU SHOULD LISTEN TO THE GUY THAT ENGINEERED THEM! If you buy them you can do anything you want...they are yours. I agree, there are several subs that I have had better results with larger then recommended boxes, but i think your #s are a little to large. 
I LOVE 8s myself


----------



## rexroadj

These 8's are really built for small box. Correct me if I am wrong Jim, but the #s seem to lend itself to this theory and going larger will greatly change the power handling ability (as with most larger boxes= less power). I would go ported to take advantage of the lower range. They are going to have a **** ton of impact for 8s regardless!


----------



## Ferazzz

Well im going to look into the 8's because I have a thing for 8's lol but thanks for the info


----------



## Ferazzz

However this JL12w6 is so musical thats its hard to give it up........


----------



## rexroadj

w6 is a great sub!!!


----------



## usmcsoldriver

I am thinking of replacing my type x 10 with a pair of r 8s.
The ten is in the cabin in a sealed enclosure. A Honda Del Sol btw
The idea is to have the 8s in the cabin behind the seats with ports that go back through the rear fenders to the trunk. Further Seperating me from the back wave of the sub.

Thoughts?

I listen to many types of music and my focus is SQ. however i do enjoy alot of bass at times


----------



## Ferazzz

Would 8's be able to also hit those low notes? Dual 8's must be very nice for sq but what about getting loud and low..I guess it depends on the box..


----------



## rommelrommel

I don't think porting them into the trunk is going to do what you want, I would IB them if anything.


----------



## 91dime

I ordered my type r today from cruthfield, should be here Tuesday! I can't wait, I'm going into overdrive to get the box done.


----------



## jim walter

usmcsoldriver said:


> I am thinking of replacing my type x 10 with a pair of r 8s.
> The ten is in the cabin in a sealed enclosure. A Honda Del Sol btw
> The idea is to have the 8s in the cabin behind the seats with ports that go back through the rear fenders to the trunk. Further Seperating me from the back wave of the sub.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> I listen to many types of music and my focus is SQ. however i do enjoy alot of bass at times


I would not separate the ports into the trunk. 

A vented box does not send the back-wave of the woofer out of the port, so don't worry about that. 

Two 8s vented into the cabin would be a great setup for you. But, can you fit 2x 0.5-0.6 + vent boxes ?


----------



## Transfer Function

nineball,

My fault, I didn't mean to confuse you or anyone else with my post.

You're right, the TS parameters are posted on DIYMA (courtesy of Jim Walter of Alpine Electronics), but as an attachment that only DIYMA members can access. My intent was to re-list the provided parameters so that anyone who doesn't have a DIYMA membership, or would prefer to remain a guest to this forum, can view them.

As of right now, I still can't find a PDF document that lists the parameters, dimensional measurements, and recommended enclosures for these drivers. Crutchfield's product pages for these drivers links an owner's manual that is not up to date, and searches conducted on Alpine's website were fruitless. I figured maybe someone could find utility in my post until somebody updates their servers.


usmcsoldriver,

Have you thought about sacrificing some passenger legroom and putting the two eights in the foot-well? If your Del Sol's passenger foot-well dimensions are similar to that of a sixth-generation Civic's, you can probably squeeze a 0.45-0.50 cubic foot enclosure in there. Add a bit of boost in the sub-40 Hz region and you'd probably like how it sounds; that's basically what I'm working on in a two door 00' Civic. Cabin focused bass with minimized trunk rattling.

My 0.5 cubic foot test sealed enclosure with two JBL GTO804s (with 600 Watts on tap from a JL Audio XD600/1) positioned in the passenger footwell returned very good results, particularly in the midbass region. However, one of my JBLs developed a voicecoil defect and had to be sent in for an exchange. 300 Watts to each JBL was probably pushing it, but they had a nice punch to them. 

Two SWR-823Ds seem to fit the replacement bill but I'm still debating between these and some Polk MM840s, no disrespect Jim. I've been modeling a variety of eight inch subwoofers with WinISD Alpha and I might even consider a single SWR-843D in a 0.4 cubic foot passive radiator setup, even if there's a steep reduction in midbass.


----------



## jim walter

I have a copy of the O/M, but it is too large to upload here. I've passed it along to IT to upload to the website, but I'm sure that'll sit in the queue for a good week. Let me know if you need it and I can email it to you.

Jim


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> These 8's are really built for small box. Correct me if I am wrong Jim, but the #s seem to lend itself to this theory and going larger will greatly change the power handling ability (as with most larger boxes= less power). I would go ported to take advantage of the lower range. They are going to have a **** ton of impact for 8s regardless!


Correct. They are optimized for "typical" car audio bass (0.8-0.9 QTC) in very small boxes.

What the guy above heard when he went to the bigger box was a lower QTC, more like 0.6-0.7 ... more musical, but not as punchy as typical car audio customers like.

You'll lose a bit of power handling with a bigger box, but not too much ... its more of a sonic difference losing a little impact. In fact, during our CES Roadshow Trainings, we demonstrated what kind of real power handling these have with a PDX-M6 at full clip (~760W) free air with a 15Hz tone .. they'll take that for more than 20 minutes before making any magic smoke


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> In fact, during our CES Roadshow Trainings, we demonstrated what kind of real power handling these have with a PDX-M6 at full clip (~760W) free air with a 15Hz tone .. they'll take that for more than 20 minutes before making any magic smoke


Congrats!!!!!!!!!! You made a freak of nature 8" 
On behalf of the car audio world......THANK YOU


----------



## thelbz

I cant wait to start on a new box for my swr-823. I think im going to go with a box that extends my center console into the rear passenger area. The basket hits on the inside of the under seat box I have now. 
What direction would you face the port? UP into the headliner area, to the left or right towards the rear doors, or back to the rear wall of the cab? 
This is in a Double Cab tundra BTW


----------



## rexroadj

thelbz said:


> I cant wait to start on a new box for my swr-823. I think im going to go with a box that extends my center console into the rear passenger area. The basket hits on the inside of the under seat box I have now.
> What direction would you face the port? UP into the headliner area, to the left or right towards the rear doors, or back to the rear wall of the cab?
> This is in a Double Cab tundra BTW


Search out Clineselects dodge ram install/build log!!!!!!! It is absolutely amazing and he has done COUNTLESS designs for the center console and the ideas/concepts should easily pass for most trucks. I asked him the EXACT same question before I built my ported box in my truck (ram) and he said he had best results with it facing the dash. I did the same thing and have had excellent results...BUT I wish I had tried rear and bottom facing ports as well. I may build a scrap test box to try other options out myself...I suggest you do the same, but front facing is pretty damn good


----------



## rexroadj

Ahh hell, I'll just do it for ya....EVERYONE NEEDS TO SEE THIS!

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-member-build-logs/13527-dodge-ram-install-thread.html

Its a lot of pages but in my opinion this is in the top 5 most important, informative, and eye pleasing threads in the whole diyma website! If you own a truck you HAVE to see this. It will completely change what you thought was possible in a truck!! IMO of course


----------



## usmcsoldriver

I already sacrifice leg room but from the back. The box keeps the seat from going back all the way. You surely cant lean it back.

I guess i just need to wait for the day that my rear window stops working and i use that wall to mount 2 type x 10" ib into my trunk which ill seal off.


----------



## usmcsoldriver

I already sacrifice leg room but from the back. The box keeps the seat from going back all the way. You surely cant lean it back.

I guess i just need to wait for the day that my rear window stops working and i use that wall to mount 2 type x 10" ib into my trunk which ill seal off.


----------



## trojan fan

91dime said:


> I ordered my type r today from cruthfield, should be here Tuesday! I can't wait, I'm going into overdrive to get the box done.


Why did you do that? Al and Ed's has them for $108 shipped and a authorized dealer


----------



## 91dime

I didn't know that? I have no local dealers, ad I've had luck with Crutchfield. I know their overpriced, but I have their Sony financial card that's 6 Montserrat same as cash; which helps me out alot right now being fresh out of college. 

I got a thick gel coat on my box to get it close to being smooth. I'm going to sand it down today and get a layer of filler on it. I've decided on doing it in vinyl. 










My type R and my HAT image 6.5s should be here tomorrow! Can't wait!!!


----------



## trojan fan

Sounds good..... good luck with your build


----------



## 91dime

Thanks! 

I got the sub today;


----------



## rexroadj

I'm hoping I can get mine in this weekend! 
Let us know how yours works out


----------



## rexroadj

Going to see if I can get mine in tomorrow. Been on bedrest for a few days now because of a neck/back spinal injury and going stir crazy! Starting to feel a little more mobile and really want to get these puppies in! Going to cut the new baffles in the am. and hope that I can just paste the new baffle over the 10" one thats already there and the bolts that hold the center console in place are long enough? I really dont want to build another box 
Have to see how I feel?


----------



## 91dime

I hope you heal up quick so you can give us a good review on it!


----------



## rexroadj

Ok, I am in a TON of pain right now BUT!!!!!!!!!!! Review will be posted later today

Jim.....I would give you a hug if I were near you! The 8" game is OVER! Alpine just won it To summerize.....I have never touched, heard, seen, and 8" sub like this in my life and I have tried MANY! There are louder 8s (but they are very loud) there may be a sub or two that would test better in the sq arena (doubt it though) BUT I have not had one that does it all..... Its an idmax, w7, GTI, or more appropriate....Type X..........8" sub!!!! I am in love with my two already!!
THANK YOU JIM AND ALPINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> Ok, I am in a TON of pain right now BUT!!!!!!!!!!! Review will be posted later today
> 
> Jim.....I would give you a hug if I were near you! The 8" game is OVER! Alpine just won it To summerize.....I have never touched, heard, seen, and 8" sub like this in my life and I have tried MANY! There are louder 8s (but they are very loud) there may be a sub or two that would test better in the sq arena (doubt it though) BUT I have not had one that does it all..... Its an idmax, w7, GTI, or more appropriate....Type X..........8" sub!!!! I am in love with my two already!!
> THANK YOU JIM AND ALPINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


You just put a big smile on my face Rex!!  I'm going to share this around with some of our guys that helped with this project, who knows you may even be poster board material here at Alpine USA HQ. Let me know when you get some pics of it all installed and email them to me first letter of my name and full last name combined at alpine dash USA dot com.


----------



## EricP72

Rex you need to call me asap! Lol


----------



## rexroadj

manish said:


> Rex you need to call me asap! Lol


Give me a time to call tomorrow.
Today is not good


----------



## EricP72

rexroadj said:


> Give me a time to call tomorrow.
> Today is not good


Any time you feel up to it call.


----------



## rexroadj

I will do my initial write up in a little while and post the link to it here for anyone that wants to read my usual long winded nonsense?

I will warn you now...I didnt, and cant do the frequency range you asked for because of the limitation of xovers in my truck at this moment, add to that the low freq ported box...I wont get into it all here but I will have to build a new box to fit the center console brackets....The two 8s next to each other the way I have them right now wont fit properly....Its ok because I want to change the tuning frequency.....


----------



## EricP72

God knows I'm down for long winded reviews...


----------



## rexroadj

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...arisons/106292-alpine-swr-823d-game-over.html

You asked for it


----------



## DS-21

rexroadj said:


> Jim.....I would give you a hug if I were near you! The 8" game is OVER! Alpine just won it To summerize.....I have never touched, heard, seen, and 8" sub like this in my life and I have tried MANY!


Have you tried the Peerless SLS8 or CSS Trio8?

It sounds like you're just comparing them to car-fi marketed drivers. Few car-fi marketed drivers are very good. These particular drivers do seem to have some solid engineering behind them, though. 

A similar motor on a lighter cone would make a very interesting midbass, I think. Hint, hint, Alpine.


----------



## rexroadj

DS-21 said:


> Have you tried the Peerless SLS8 or CSS Trio8?
> 
> It sounds like you're just comparing them to car-fi marketed drivers. Few car-fi marketed drivers are very good. These particular drivers do seem to have some solid engineering behind them, though.
> 
> A similar motor on a lighter cone would make a very interesting midbass, I think. Hint, hint, Alpine.


You are correct! I did base my conclusions off of other car-fi marketed drivers for a few reasons.... First being that they are in that market so I found it fair. Second was because of the other drivers I have used in the past (of the 8s you mentioned I have used the peerless but as midbass drivers, but have used trio in other sizes in the past)
I have found a great deal of the diy drivers (I know I am going to catch hell for this but its just been my experience...and as a disclosure I like to REALLY use my stuff) are just delicate for my tastes. I couldnt see using the Peerless as dedicated subwoofers in my system without a larger sized ported box with several drivers....which is fine but not practical in my center console. I could be dead wrong though because I only used them as dedcated midbass and they were great, but I have prefered several over them.
I am probably way off here and you or Mr. Walter can get into it further but werent the original F#1 mids (blue cone with the pointy dustcap "vifa looking") similar?
Not gonna lie....just going cosmetics from the back side  Insert stupid here!


----------



## thelbz

I hope in this long weekend I will have the time to finish my console style enclosure, but I may not have the time. It sucks having to build my enclosure, build one for the old lady's sub, build rock slider/step bars for the old lady. But this sub seems to sound better and better even though its not in a enclosure built for it. 
I added some 6.5" Massive VK mids in the rear doors running on 100W. They seem to blend so well with the swr that it seems all most nonexistent. I am going to use a round port in the new enclosure so I can easily try different tuning, like to see how it performs with low 30hz tuning.


----------



## 96jimmyslt

I am thinking of buying the SWR-1043D

It required .5 cubic feet for a sealed box.

My question is: does it hit hard?

Ideal placement will be the passenger side cargo area, custom form fitting box over the wheel hump and behind it.

I have outgrown the SPL phase and now want SQ.

I've said this in another post: recent trade where I acquired a 15" sub and 4.1 ported box really made my mind up about sub woofers and the cubic footage they require.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Alpine+...18171550880&skuId=9775125&st=alpine&cp=3&lp=3


----------



## Problemhouston

Sorry wrong thread


----------



## Brian Steele

I ran the specs for the 4+4 version of the driver though HornResp. It might do quite well in a 30 litre (net) transmission line. For a starting point, S1=200 cm, S2=80 cm, length=213 cm, stuff about the first 1/4 or so (to deal with the response abberations above 100 Hz)...


----------



## Fricasseekid

Ok, just finished reading this entire thread and there isn't as much detailed info about using these for midbass drivers as I hoped for. 

I want some 843Ds in a pair of kicks for my GMC Sierra crew, hopefully I'll be able to get em big enough to net the recommended .25 cubes for sealed enclosures. I plan on running them of an MB Quart ONYX 4.125, wirin them at 2 ohms so they'll get 250 watts rms/each. I have a set of Phoenix Gold Ti comps in the doors now and I'd like to run them only down to the 250-400 hz range. 
Questions:
How much do these speakers displace? Would running them as midbass change the enclosure requirements? I plan on running them down to either 63 or 80 hz, what would you recommend I run them up to while still maintaining clean out put down near the 60-80 hz range. 

PS, I like things loud, real loud on occasion, but SQ is top priority.


----------



## EricP72

Fricasseekid said:


> Ok, just finished reading this entire thread and there isn't as much detailed info about using these for midbass drivers as I hoped for.
> 
> I want some 843Ds in a pair of kicks for my GMC Sierra crew, hopefully I'll be able to get em big enough to net the recommended .25 cubes for sealed enclosures. I plan on running them of an MB Quart ONYX 4.125, wirin them at 2 ohms so they'll get 250 watts rms/each. I have a set of Phoenix Gold Ti comps in the doors now and I'd like to run them only down to the 250-400 hz range.
> Questions:
> How much do these speakers displace? Would running them as midbass change the enclosure requirements? I plan on running them down to either 63 or 80 hz, what would you recommend I run them up to while still maintaining clean out put down near the 60-80 hz range.
> 
> PS, I like things loud, real loud on occasion, but SQ is top priority.


Same here. With my fullrange capable of going down to 250hz, I should be good with a pair of these. Now I gotta get more money up for a Hertz amp to push these.


----------



## Fricasseekid

Fricasseekid said:


> Ok, just finished reading this entire thread and there isn't as much detailed info about using these for midbass drivers as I hoped for.
> 
> I want some 843Ds in a pair of kicks for my GMC Sierra crew, hopefully I'll be able to get em big enough to net the recommended .25 cubes for sealed enclosures. I plan on running them of an MB Quart ONYX 4.125, wirin them at 2 ohms so they'll get 250 watts rms/each. I have a set of Phoenix Gold Ti comps in the doors now and I'd like to run them only down to the 250-400 hz range.
> Questions:
> How much do these speakers displace? Would running them as midbass change the enclosure requirements? I plan on running them down to either 63 or 80 hz, what would you recommend I run them up to while still maintaining clean out put down near the 60-80 hz range.
> 
> PS, I like things loud, real loud on occasion, but SQ is top priority.


Jim Walters I still around answering questions on this thread right?


----------



## rexroadj

Fricasseekid said:


> Jim Walters I still around answering questions on this thread right?


Yes, however I do know that his job/schedule takes him all over the world so he doesnt always have the time to chime, add to that the holiday weekend?

I thought the magazine article that spoke of the camaro discussed the use of the 8s as midbass drivers? I thought it said 300hz but I may have it confused with something else..... I also thought it said that they went down to 60 or 50 with a 15" taking over from there.....again I could be confused with something else?


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> Yes, however I do know that his job/schedule takes him all over the world so he doesnt always have the time to chime, add to that the holiday weekend?
> 
> I thought the magazine article that spoke of the camaro discussed the use of the 8s as midbass drivers? I thought it said 300hz but I may have it confused with something else..... I also thought it said that they went down to 60 or 50 with a 15" taking over from there.....again I could be confused with something else?


I'm around, down in Mexico actually for some RnR for the long weekend. 

Anyhow, we run the 8s up to 250Hz I believe. Very detailed and powerful with great control. They could go a bit higher, but with the 5.25" mids there is no need. You are right that the enclosure requirement for a midbass can be smaller, we are in the


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> I'm around, down in Mexico actually for some RnR for the long weekend.
> 
> Anyhow, we run the 8s up to 250Hz I believe. Very detailed and powerful with great control. They could go a bit higher, but with the 5.25" mids there is no need. You are right that the enclosure requirement for a midbass can be smaller, we are in the


Thank you good sir! Enjoy the R&R!!!!


----------



## Fricasseekid

jim walter said:


> I'm around, down in Mexico actually for some RnR for the long weekend.
> 
> Anyhow, we run the 8s up to 250Hz I believe. Very detailed and powerful with great control. They could go a bit higher, but with the 5.25" mids there is no need. You are right that the enclosure requirement for a midbass can be smaller, we are in the


in the...? Lol

So it can be smaller but does that mean that the 1/4 cube would be too large an enclosure for a midbass application? 

Does the setup I described a few threads back sound reasonable? What would you recommend? 

Thanks again for all this great info Jim. I feel very privileged to have such a valuble resource for knowledge right here at my fingertips.


----------



## Fricasseekid

@Rex. 
Input from you is valued too since you have so much experience with 8s. I hate to make the man work on his vacay.

@Jim Walter
Get off the computer and go drink a margarita for me Jim!


----------



## rexroadj

Fricasseekid said:


> @Rex.
> Input from you is valued too since you have so much experience with 8s. I hate to make the man work on his vacay.


I appreciate the vote of confidence! However I have not used these puppies in any sort of fashion to have a thought on the midbass capabilities (low freq. ported box)..... NOTHING would surprise me though! I would assume a 1/4 cube would be fine for your needs and everything else in your setup (imo) is great! 
No offense Jim....I dont feel bad for ya! You get to live out a dream that most of us would kill for (working at a high level in our favorite hobby) although I am sure the glammour disapears rather quick?
I still hope you have a great vacation though


----------



## jim walter

jim walter said:


> I'm around, down in Mexico actually for some RnR for the long weekend.
> 
> Anyhow, we run the 8s up to 250Hz I believe. Very detailed and powerful with great control. They could go a bit higher, but with the 5.25" mids there is no need. You are right that the enclosure requirement for a midbass can be smaller, we are in the


Woah, tapatalk error. 

That was a long winded reply explaining the demo car, and it's twin (system wise) we are building right now. 

Cliffs:


----------



## jim walter

And the cliffs don't even show up, LOL...that is the forum telling me to heed your advice and bail out for the rest of the weekend!


----------



## jim walter

To answer the question before I bail. .15-.2 is fine down to 50Hz, no problem same as the demo car


----------



## rexroadj

Stay thirsty my friend


----------



## Fricasseekid

jim walter said:


> To answer the question before I bail. .15-.2 is fine down to 50Hz, no problem same as the demo car


Thanks a bunch! Have fun!


----------



## Jsracing

I have a 0.33cf sealed gross volume box with an Infinity Ref860w right now. I like the box size but would like a bit more extension and better SQ at higher volumes. Can you provide opinions on the following setups? Available power is 180w into 4 ohms or 300w into 2 ohms.

1x 843d at 300w in 0.33cf sealed (direct drop in replacement...would it be an improvement?)

1x 843d at 300w in 0.5cf ported

2x 823d at 300w (150w per) in 0.55cf sealed

Thanks


----------



## rexroadj

Jsracing said:


> I have a 0.33cf sealed gross volume box with an Infinity Ref860w right now. I like the box size but would like a bit more extension and better SQ at higher volumes. Can you provide opinions on the following setups? Available power is 180w into 4 ohms or 300w into 2 ohms.
> 
> 1x 843d at 300w in 0.33cf sealed (direct drop in replacement...would it be an improvement?)
> 
> 1x 843d at 300w in 0.5cf ported
> 
> 2x 823d at 300w (150w per) in 0.55cf sealed
> 
> Thanks


As a dedicated sub for low end duty's in a vehicle I would say one ported with the 300 or so would yeild a little more output......although I have always been a "total cone area" guy? 
Have to see if Jim can chime in on that one?


----------



## 91dime

Ready for vinyl! Currently wrapping it as I type this lol.


----------



## 91dime

A few more boxes and I'll get the vinyl thing figured out. I can't wait to hear it!


----------



## rexroadj

Not bad at all! Cant wait to hear what you think?


----------



## 91dime

I got it in and had to go so I haven't had a chance to dial it in. Frow what I did hear I was very impressed! Very tight and responsive. I'm researching ways to set the gains. I've always done it by ear, but I dont feel comfortable doing that with this gear.


----------



## Transfer Function

I just ordered a pair of the dual 2-Ohm versions of these Type-Rs and can't wait to see/hear/feel (and hopefully not smell) what all the hype is about with these little monsters. My JBL GTO804s don't seem to like too much power from my XD600/1 so these Type-Rs should be a good replacement (the Polk MM840s were tempting). Time to make some measurements and cut some wood.


----------



## rexroadj

Hey Jim..... I know your on Vacation but when you get a free chance can you let me know if you think a 4" round port would be good or would two 2" ports be better? I am not going to go slot ported again since my last mathmatical error (what an idiot!!!!!!!!!) I have never had an issue with round ports in the past specifically 4"? I can go 2,3,6, what ever....
Thanks!


----------



## rexroadj

To add, Its going to be 1.4 total for the two 8s and will be tuned at 34hz (sound good?) My box now is more like 28 or maybe lower.....


----------



## subwoofery

rexroadj said:


> Hey Jim..... I know your on Vacation but when you get a free chance can you let me know if you think a 4" round port would be good or would two 2" ports be better? I am not going to go slot ported again since my last mathmatical error (what an idiot!!!!!!!!!) I have never had an issue with round ports in the past specifically 4"? I can go 2,3,6, what ever....
> Thanks!


If I'm not mistaken, 1x4"=4x2" of port area

Kelvin


----------



## Brian Steele

rexroadj said:


> To add, Its going to be 1.4 total for the two 8s and will be tuned at 34hz (sound good?) My box now is more like 28 or maybe lower.....


Just make sure and design the box so you can retune it if necessary.

Round vent - retune by removing the tube and cutting it to suit.

Slot vent - make part of the internal panel removable. Trim to suit.


----------



## rexroadj

subwoofery said:


> If I'm not mistaken, 1x4"=4x2" of port area
> 
> Kelvin


You are not mistaken. I was just wondering what would be the most likely to cut any chance of port noise.... I have never used 2" ports and the thought scares me a little but I have seen it recommended in this situation (8s). I have never had port noise in any box I have ever made but I know it exists and since I "try" not to make a ton of boxes I just want it done right.


----------



## Ganderson

rommelrommel said:


> What's the driver displacement on the 8?


Has this question been answered?

I would like to know as well.


----------



## EricP72

Jim any local dealers in it near detroit?


----------



## trojan fan

Use the dealer search on the Alpine site......LOL


----------



## EricP72

Oh you got jokes...lol I know that but all The places I went to didn't even know that they had shipped. God I miss Chicago audio shops.


----------



## jim walter

manish said:


> Oh you got jokes...lol I know that but all The places I went to didn't even know that they had shipped. God I miss Chicago audio shops.


I don't have visibility into local dealer stock, but I know we have them in stock in our warehouse so any authorized dealer could get them for you within a week. 

Hope that helps. 
Jim


----------



## Ganderson

Driver displacement anyone?


----------



## Ganderson

Application question:

I am wanting to replace the sub box I have in the rear cargo area of my Mazdaspeed3 hatch with a more stealth sub install... inside the spare tire under the cargo floor (where Mazda puts the stock Bose sub).

It just so happens that a .3 cu.ft. sealed box is what will fit and it will be powered by 350 class D watts so this little 8 seems like a good fit.

I listen to prog. rock, classic rock, metal, etc. and am not really an SPL guy but more SQ and like tight, musical bass rather than boom.

My question is do you think a single one of these subs will do much for me considering it's in a sealed box and under the floor like that?

Opinions?


----------



## trojan fan

manish said:


> Oh you got jokes...lol I know that but all The places I went to didn't even know that they had shipped. God I miss Chicago audio shops.



Here is a link for you.... then click on the compare price link

Subwoofers :: Car Subwoofers :: Home


----------



## resbret

These look amazing!!!!!!!!!

I am about to do my first audio install and these caught my eye for subwoofer duty. I am considering picking two of these up soon.

I want to try something unique though and am considering an infinite baffle setup on the rear deck. 

How would two of these do in an rear deck IB setup, SQ-wise?
Also, how would power handling be affected without a box?

Any tips and advice is much appreciated!!!


----------



## huckorris

resbret said:


> These look amazing!!!!!!!!!
> 
> I am about to do my first audio install and these caught my eye for subwoofer duty. I am considering picking two of these up soon.
> 
> I want to try something unique though and am considering an infinite baffle setup on the rear deck.
> 
> How would two of these do in an rear deck IB setup, SQ-wise?
> Also, how would power handling be affected without a box?
> 
> Any tips and advice is much appreciated!!!


Someone already asked about IB and I believe the answer was no.


----------



## Tonerl

huckorris said:


> Someone already asked about IB and I believe the answer was no.


Actually, the answer was a qualified yes. If I recall correctly, Jim recommended wiring only one coil to raise the Qts from a slightly "dry" .5 (or thereabouts) that wiring both would produce in an IB app.

Anyway...I'm going to try one in the same configuration (IB in the rear deck) before I decide if I want an enclosure in the cabin.


----------



## resbret

Thanks for the input guys 
These 8" Type-R's seem very interesting to try in IB, especially with the high Xmax and the decent Qts specs.

For IB, wiring only one voicecoil seems to be the route to go. If I understand correctly, the Qts should pretty much double, putting it well above the general requirement for IB of 0.7 Qts.

The only concern is the lowered power handling. Using only one voicecoil splits it in half so each woofer would only handle ~175w RMS.

Seems sort of a waste for such a beefy subwoofer! But if it has good bass output and good SQ, then I'm game 

Anymore opinions on this?
Has anyone tried it in IB yet?


----------



## huckorris

Tonerl said:


> Actually, the answer was a qualified yes. If I recall correctly, Jim recommended wiring only one coil to raise the Qts from a slightly "dry" .5 (or thereabouts) that wiring both would produce in an IB app.
> 
> Anyway...I'm going to try one in the same configuration (IB in the rear deck) before I decide if I want an enclosure in the cabin.


Accursed memory! Thanks for clearing that up. I hate spouting misinformation.


----------



## Transfer Function

Excuse this fifth post of mine, I just want to share some URL links.


----------



## Transfer Function

Why won't DIYMA let me post links? This is my sixth post. Let's hope my next post works.


----------



## Transfer Function

--------I don't know why I can't share links in my posts (this is my seventh), so please substitute the -DOT- appropriately if you want to access my links.--------


For those wanting to know more about these subwoofers, here are some links to camera phone quality photographs of the dimensional measurements, 'Enclosure Information' and 'Electro-Mechanical Parameters' from the seemingly elusive SWR-823D/SWR-843D manual:


Dimensional Measurements:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/transferfunction/5830622505/in/photostream

Enclosure Information:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/transferfunction/5831177102/in/photostream

Electro-Mechanical Parameters:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/transferfunction/5831176924/in/photostream



So after an hour of feeding these drivers 20-40 Hz sine waves set at ~30 volts...I saw the mechanical capabilities, heard the resonances, felt the vibrations, and smelled the fresh voicecoils heating up...I basically fiddled and poked around these things and noticed nothing out of whack, which is good. In order to get an idea of what these things were designed to do, I dropped them in my 0.5 cubic foot tester box and just listened. I thought it was fitting to play songs that contained lyrics like "Then I let the Alpine play" and "The Alpine bumpin' but I need the volume higher" so I did just that. In addition, I also played a wide collection of songs with varying bass content. It seems like these Alpines haven't really opened up yet and aren't digging that deep. I guess I'll have to give them a few more days of break-in time to let the suspension ease a bit more, then decide on enclosure options from there. From my few hours of listening experience with these subwoofers...I can protest that these put out much more midbass and can take quite a bit more beating that my JBLs. Kick drums are much more impactful than the JBLs, but these don't seem to get as low as the JBLs. A bit more output, but not as low. Perhaps this is an indication that these might need a bigger box to suit my preference?

For me, the 'best case scenario' would be to enclose them in a sealed and stuffed 0.4 cubic foot box built for the front passenger footwell. With this setup, I'm hoping to utilize my firewall, cabin floor, and windshield to get a much more efficient transfer function (and front-staged bass) than what my trunk can provide.

The 'worst case scenario' would be to enclose them in a ported 1.4 cubic feet box (tuned to 32~36 Hz) and place it in the trunk and let them bellow and breathe. I just know that they'll waste a lot of valuable energy rattling a bunch of flimsy panels.

I'm hoping that these Alpines will flex and open up over the next few days so that I can proceed with my 'best case scenario' option.


----------



## WLDock

Ganderson said:


> Application question:
> I am wanting to replace the sub box I have in the rear cargo area of my Mazdaspeed3 hatch with a more stealth sub install... inside the spare tire under the cargo floor (where Mazda puts the stock Bose sub).
> It just so happens that a .3 cu.ft. sealed box is what will fit and it will be powered by 350 class D watts so this little 8 seems like a good fit.
> I listen to prog. rock, classic rock, metal, etc. and am not really an SPL guy but more SQ and like tight, musical bass rather than boom.
> My question is do you think a single one of these subs will do much for me considering it's in a sealed box and under the floor like that?
> Opinions?


Having never heard your car's OEM system....nor having never heard the SWR, I can say from the specs alone that the SWR will out perform your stock setup...and a small hatch is a perfect vehicle for a single 8". The boost off the hatch is nice and a single won't resonate the panels as much....also you don't have a wall to play through as with a sedan.

I don't know that I would fart around with the BLOSE enclosure? Either do a custom fiberglass job in the spare tire location....or do one in the drivers side pocket with an 8" or 10".


----------



## Ganderson

WLDock said:


> Having never heard your car's OEM system....nor having never heard the SWR, I can say from the specs alone that the SWR will out perform your stock setup...and a small hatch is a perfect vehicle for a single 8". The boost off the hatch is nice and a single won't resonate the panels as much....also you don't have a wall to play through as with a sedan.
> 
> I don't know that I would fart around with the BLOSE enclosure? Either do a custom fiberglass job in the spare tire location....or do one in the drivers side pocket with an 8" or 10".


Thanks for the input.

I am definitely not doing anything with the Bose "sub"... I just meant my custom enclosure will sit in the same location as the Bose unit... inside the spare tire. A simple MDF & fiberglass cylinder should be really easy.

I think I'll give it a try, now I know I've asked in this thread several times, but someone MUST know the driver displacement on this sub?


----------



## WLDock

Ganderson said:


> now I know I've asked in this thread several times, but someone MUST know the driver displacement on this sub?


I am sure Jim from Alpine can chime in but he pretty much stated that the sub will wok in a pretty small box.


jim walter said:


> *Small Box Requirements: * In the CES Demo Camaro, we’ve got them in a plate steel enclosure roughly the size of the woofer’s magnet (0.1-0.2 cubes). For a QTC of 0.90, try a quarter cube. Essentially, they work in boxes smaller than the shipping container they come it.


So,.30 cu ft would be perfect if you have the space....if not no need to fret over driver displacement unless you are seriously cramped for space.


----------



## Transfer Function

Ganderson said:


> ... but someone MUST know the driver displacement on this sub?



Check out my 'Enclosure Information' link above. These drivers displace or add 0.05 ft3 or 0.035 ft3, respectively, if mounted to a 3/4 inch thick baffle.


----------



## EricP72

Jim how power did you guys put on the pair in the camaro being used as midbass drivers? I'm asking cause I'm ready to get a pair and trying figure out which Hertz amp to get. The hp2 puts out 700×2 @ 2 ohms rms vs a ep4 which is 340×2 bridged rms @ 4 ohms. See my problem, I need to figure out which amp so I can order either the 4 or 2 ohm.


----------



## Ganderson

Transfer Function said:


> Check out my 'Enclosure Information' link above. These drivers displace or add 0.05 ft3 or 0.035 ft3, respectively, if mounted to a 3/4 inch thick baffle.


I somehow missed your post. That is exactly what I needed.

It appears that the net enclosure volume should be .25 cu.ft. which makes a difference in my application.

THANK YOU!


----------



## trojan fan

Jim. when will the Alpine wed site be updated with owner's manuals for the new 8" subwoofers


----------



## 69cents

Transfer Function said:


> --------I don't know why I can't share links in my posts (this is my seventh), so please substitute the -DOT- appropriately if you want to access my links.--------
> 
> 
> For those wanting to know more about these subwoofers, here are some links to camera phone quality photographs of the dimensional measurements, 'Enclosure Information' and 'Electro-Mechanical Parameters' from the seemingly elusive SWR-823D/SWR-843D manual:
> 
> 
> Dimensional Measurements:
> www -DOT- flickr -DOT- com/photos/transferfunction/5830622505/in/photostream
> 
> Enclosure Information:
> www -DOT- flickr -DOT- com/photos/transferfunction/5831177102/in/photostream
> 
> Electro-Mechanical Parameters:
> www -DOT- flickr -DOT- com/photos/transferfunction/5831176924/in/photostream
> 
> 
> 
> So after an hour of feeding these drivers 20-40 Hz sine waves set at ~30 volts...I saw the mechanical capabilities, heard the resonances, felt the vibrations, and smelled the fresh voicecoils heating up...I basically fiddled and poked around these things and noticed nothing out of whack, which is good. In order to get an idea of what these things were designed to do, I dropped them in my 0.5 cubic foot tester box and just listened. I thought it was fitting to play songs that contained lyrics like "Then I let the Alpine play" and "The Alpine bumpin' but I need the volume higher" so I did just that. In addition, I also played a wide collection of songs with varying bass content. It seems like these Alpines haven't really opened up yet and aren't digging that deep. I guess I'll have to give them a few more days of break-in time to let the suspension ease a bit more, then decide on enclosure options from there. From my few hours of listening experience with these subwoofers...I can protest that these put out much more midbass and can take quite a bit more beating that my JBLs. Kick drums are much more impactful than the JBLs, but these don't seem to get as low as the JBLs. A bit more output, but not as low. Perhaps this is an indication that these might need a bigger box to suit my preference?
> 
> For me, the 'best case scenario' would be to enclose them in a sealed and stuffed 0.4 cubic foot box built for the front passenger footwell. With this setup, I'm hoping to utilize my firewall, cabin floor, and windshield to get a much more efficient transfer function (and front-staged bass) than what my trunk can provide.
> 
> The 'worst case scenario' would be to enclose them in a ported 1.4 cubic feet box (tuned to 32~36 Hz) and place it in the trunk and let them bellow and breathe. I just know that they'll waste a lot of valuable energy rattling a bunch of flimsy panels.
> 
> I'm hoping that these Alpines will flex and open up over the next few days so that I can proceed with my 'best case scenario' option.


Hi, please keep posting your result cause I have two 0.5 cubic foot sealed box . It's made from fibreglass and no room for port.

TQ.


----------



## jim walter

manish said:


> Jim how power did you guys put on the pair in the camaro being used as midbass drivers? I'm asking cause I'm ready to get a pair and trying figure out which Hertz amp to get. The hp2 puts out 700×2 @ 2 ohms rms vs a ep4 which is 340×2 bridged rms @ 4 ohms. See my problem, I need to figure out which amp so I can order either the 4 or 2 ohm.


We used the sub channels of the MRX-V60. Rated at 300RMS actually doing a tad over 400. That EP4 looks to be a nice match here. 

We just did another set in a Tacoma off of a bridged PDX-F6, again at a bit over 400RMSx2 and it sounds awesome.


----------



## Problemhouston

I got my second sub yesterday and am finishing up the enclosure. I read through the thread and got myself all confused so I am going to ask again.

Jim, two questions... 

What is the optimal cubic feet for a pair (sharing the same airspace) ported?

Port diam. and length?

I am looking for decent SQ and I want it to play low and pretty loud. That's not too much to ask of 8's is it?:laugh:


----------



## EricP72

jim walter said:


> We used the sub channels of the MRX-V60. Rated at 300RMS actually doing a tad over 400. That EP4 looks to be a nice match here.
> 
> We just did another set in a Tacoma off of a bridged PDX-F6, again at a bit over 400RMSx2 and it sounds awesome.


See Jim that's just it. I want unbridled power reserves for my midbass but if your telling me that 340 Watts is enough then ok. But it the laws of dimenishing returns don't apply here then I'm going to go and find a hp2!


----------



## rexroadj

Now that it has been cleared up that IB use is ok.....How bad would it be to attempt direct to custom doors (I have had eights in there before without issue, but not as "robust" as these?) They are about as heavy, deadend, and "sealed up" as possible. Of course I am asking this right after I got my Brax mids?
Had the f#1 mids in the doors prior so a little modding will be needed.....I still may go back to the F#1's as well though? Ya never know.....Its nice to know whats possible though? 
Still lovin' my 8s by the way


----------



## WLDock

manish said:


> See Jim that's just it. I want unbridled power reserves for my midbass but if your telling me that 340 Watts is enough then ok. But it the laws of dimenishing returns don't apply here then I'm going to go and find a hp2!


 600-800 watts just for midbass... plus 2 grand on four 12" subs. The Alpine Camaro is pushing 3200 watts total. You guys are heavy hitters!


----------



## jim walter

WLDock said:


> 600-800 watts just for midbass... plus 2 grand on four 12" subs. The Alpine Camaro is pushing 3200 watts total. You guys are heavy hitters!


 Gratuitous overkill is the bare minimum

We are putting together a new Tundra now with 3 F6 and 3 M12 PDXs. Best of all, its 100% stealth. Pics to come when its eventually done.


----------



## ErinH

Jim, I'm not going to derail this thread, but a lot of us are wondering if you can come in to the H800 thread and discuss the issues so many of us are having and the reason why I (and many others) are having to send theirs back to Alpine (of Asia). I'll leave this thread with that.

Thanks,
Erin


----------



## Pb2theMax

Thanks for all the great info on this sub. I just bought a 843D to put under the passenger seat of my E350 Ford van. I have a JL Audio XD300/1 to power it. I can fit a 5x14x16" enclosure under the seat. I know it'll be close on the depth, but I can shave out a little wood if I need to make room for the subs' motor.


----------



## trojan fan

Jim, any luck on a new owner's manual?


----------



## trojan fan

Pb2theMax said:


> Thanks for all the great info on this sub. I just bought a 843D to put under the passenger seat of my E350 Ford van. I have a JL Audio XD300/1 to power it. I can fit a 5x14x16" enclosure under the seat. I know it'll be close on the depth, but I can shave out a little wood if I need to make room for the subs' motor.



That was a nice looking Tacoma you sold


----------



## Problemhouston

Ok so now I have a pair of 823Ds and .70 cubic feet of airspace. Can I port this box or should I leave it sealed?


----------



## Jericho941

Pb2theMax said:


> Thanks for all the great info on this sub. I just bought a 843D to put under the passenger seat of my E350 Ford van. I have a JL Audio XD300/1 to power it. I can fit a 5x14x16" enclosure under the seat. I know it'll be close on the depth, but I can shave out a little wood if I need to make room for the subs' motor.


I just installed a 823 in my e350 work truck tonight. It's in a sealed, downfiring box with an internal volume around .5 cu ft (gross) and its being powered by a cheap Boss monoblock. The enclosure and amp are built inside a cheap plastic stanley toolbox and it sits between the two seats.

I was simply amazed at how good it sounded. I was using a VERY cheap sub that was more than 10 years old and it must have blown recently as the foam surround had a hole in it when I removed it (so that's why it only sounded medocre at low volume, and aweful if it had to performe at all)

After getting it back in I nearly went out in my truck for a joyride, but it was getting late and I can enjoy it more tomorrow. I was getting quite alot of clairity from the bass notes, and even in the sealed box it seemed to go quite deep. I can't wait to listen some more.


----------



## JoeHemi57

Got 2 on the way that will be sealed downfiring myself, probably around .8ft gross or so.


----------



## Pb2theMax

Jericho941 said:


> I just installed a 823 in my e350 work truck tonight. It's in a sealed, downfiring box with an internal volume around .5 cu ft (gross) and its being powered by a cheap Boss monoblock. The enclosure and amp are built inside a cheap plastic stanley toolbox and it sits between the two seats.
> 
> I was simply amazed at how good it sounded. I was using a VERY cheap sub that was more than 10 years old and it must have blown recently as the foam surround had a hole in it when I removed it (so that's why it only sounded medocre at low volume, and aweful if it had to performe at all)
> 
> After getting it back in I nearly went out in my truck for a joyride, but it was getting late and I can enjoy it more tomorrow. I was getting quite alot of clairity from the bass notes, and even in the sealed box it seemed to go quite deep. I can't wait to listen some more.


That's good to hear. I was thinking about doing 4 of these 8" subs in the rear of my van. I've got plenty of room. But Im kinda trying to restrain myself. I'll just try 1 sub first. We'll see how it does under the seat of this big ol van. Having the sub up front should help.


----------



## Jericho941

Pb2theMax said:


> That's good to hear. I was thinking about doing 4 of these 8" subs in the rear of my van. I've got plenty of room. But Im kinda trying to restrain myself. I'll just try 1 sub first. We'll see how it does under the seat of this big ol van. Having the sub up front should help.


Good luck! I hope you have as good results as I did. My truck is the kind with a utility truck rear, so my cabin space is very different from yours, though. I don't know how much differently that will play out for you.


----------



## jim walter

trojan fan said:


> Jim, any luck on a new owner's manual?


It alive!!!!

Sorry it took so long


----------



## nepl29

jim walter said:


> It alive!!!!
> 
> Sorry it took so long


Looks like you forgot to answer Bikinpunk question.


----------



## jim walter

I talked to him.


----------



## perfektj

Jim, 
I have been debating for awhile between one 15" or two or three 8s. I know that the larger sub will play lower but do you think that I would gain impact and response with the 8s. Also I see on the site that the only 15 is the Gen 3 model. Is Alpine planing on making a Gen 4 15? Like so many I listen to a little bit of everything and want a system that can impact my chest, and also take my breath away when I want to. I know you are a busy man and appreciate your time. 
Thank you,
John


----------



## HANGEMHI

I'm in the same boat as perfektj. I have fairly large car (g8), and wanting something that I can feel but still sound tight. I've always been partial to smaller subs, but still want it to crank when I want. Do you think 2 of these would be enough in that size car or be better of going with a larger sub?


----------



## subwoofery

perfektj said:


> Jim,
> I have been debating for awhile between one 15" or two or three 8s. I know that the larger sub will play lower but do you think that I would gain impact and response with the 8s. Also I see on the site that the only 15 is the Gen 3 model. Is Alpine planing on making a Gen 4 15? Like so many I listen to a little bit of everything and want a system that can impact my chest, and also take my breath away when I want to. I know you are a busy man and appreciate your time.
> Thank you,
> John


Get an 18" and use a PEQ to kill the 20Hz-30Hz range... You'll get the impact you're looking for. 

Same difference if you use 6 x 8" and boost the 20Hz-30Hz by 10dBs, you won't have the impact you're looking for. 

What I'm saying here is that impact is a tuning thing. First you need to work on planning your subwoofer's enclosure. 

Kelvin


----------



## perfektj

Kelvin,
I absolutely agree with you about the enclosure affecting the overall sound and impact, as will the quality of the midbass. Tuning is a great thing if done right, but I feel driver selection has a great deal to do with overall impact. Some have it and some don't. I wanted to know in Jim's experience, which of the setups would be overall the most musical while still moving some air when needed. And to reiterate, I also wanted to know if there will be a Gen 4 15". His recommendation will help me decide the driver, and then I can work on the enclosure.
John


----------



## Transfer Function

69cents said:


> Hi, please keep posting your result cause I have two 0.5 cubic foot sealed box . It's made from fibreglass and no room for port.
> 
> TQ.


69cents,

Are you trying to tell me that you _*also*_ have a 0.50 cubic foot sealed box? If that's the case, it should be OK if you just place the box in a location that will help transfer the bass efficiently.


I chose to build a sealed 0.35 cubic foot box (links are below) for my Alpines, it's smaller than the 0.40 cubic foot box that I was aiming for, but I had to make some adjustments and ended up with a smaller box. I've been listening to them for a couple of hours over the past few days and I really like the impact they produce. They don't play as deep as what I was hoping for but the impact more than makes up for it since most of the music that I really listen to don't have much deep bass. I like my current setup and don't plan on changing it anytime soon but it's nice to know that if I dropped them into a ported 1.4 cubic feet box, these drivers are capable of moving a respectable amount of air. The following are just a couple of pictures and plots of my Alpines:


Enclosure Photos:
Enclosure Panels | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Sealed Enclosure | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Loaded Enclosure | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Angled Enclosure | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Installed Enclosure | Flickr - Photo Sharing!


Frequency Responses:
Frequency Response Plot | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Frequency Response Plot Differential | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Frequency Response Data | Flickr - Photo Sharing!


It should be noted that my measurements are not professional by any means and were conducted with consumer level instruments by a hobbyist.

Haha, posting direct links work for me now!


----------



## Pb2theMax

I'm pretty happy with my SWR 843 so far. It can't take the place of a good 12" but it's impressive what it can do with .3 cu ft enclosure, under my passengers seat. It beats a JL Audio 8W6 for sure. I really like the build of the sub. Beefy spider. Nice terminals, and included jumpers. The rubber ring around the mounting holes makes a good seal. I also like the trim ring that hides the screw heads. I'll report back once the sub is broken-in. 









JL Audio XD 300/1 Amp barely fits. Its screwed to the back of the sub enclosure.


----------



## jim walter

perfektj said:


> Kelvin,
> I absolutely agree with you about the enclosure affecting the overall sound and impact, as will the quality of the midbass. Tuning is a great thing if done right, but I feel driver selection has a great deal to do with overall impact. Some have it and some don't. I wanted to know in Jim's experience, which of the setups would be overall the most musical while still moving some air when needed. And to reiterate, I also wanted to know if there will be a Gen 4 15". His recommendation will help me decide the driver, and then I can work on the enclosure.
> John


The R8s are going to be more musical than the 15 for sure. As far as overall output, we've got a Mustang here with a 15" @ ~30Hz and I've got a 3x8" box @ 32Hz in my Jeep this past week. Comparing them, the 15 can get lower and louder, but the SQ is just not up to the level of the 8s, not even close. 

They can still get very loud though. In comparison, a 12" in the same size ported box couldn't touch them .. and the 15" is in a box twice their size.

As far as future products, you know I can't comment on that but we can all look forward to an exciting CES this year


----------



## jim walter

Pb2theMax said:


> I'm pretty happy with my SWR 843 so far. It can't take the place of a good 12" but it's impressive what it can do with .3 cu ft enclosure, under my passengers seat. It beats a JL Audio 8W6 for sure. I really like the build of the sub. Beefy spider. Nice terminals, and included jumpers. The rubber ring around the mounting holes makes a good seal. I also like the trim ring that hides the screw heads. I'll report back once the sub is broken-in.


Awesome! What kind of vehicle is that in? 

Glad to hear you're liking it! I'd like to forward these photos around the office today to some of the guys here if you don't mind
Jim


----------



## Pb2theMax

Sure. It's a 2010 Ford E350 van.


----------



## RedMed427

That's a damn nice van!


----------



## JoeHemi57

The anticipation is killing me, can't wait for mine to get here i may have to buy some Type R components while i'm waiting on my H Audio's to get here.


----------



## Fricasseekid

JoeHemi57 said:


> The anticipation is killing me, can't wait for mine to get here i may have to buy some Type R components while i'm waiting on my H Audio's to get here.


If you die can I have your Type-Rs?


----------



## 69cents

Transfer Function said:


> 69cents,
> 
> Are you trying to tell me that you _*also*_ have a 0.50 cubic foot sealed box? If that's the case, it should be OK if you just place the box in a location that will help transfer the bass efficiently.
> 
> 
> I chose to build a sealed 0.35 cubic foot box (links are below) for my Alpines, it's smaller than the 0.40 cubic foot box that I was aiming for, but I had to make some adjustments and ended up with a smaller box. I've been listening to them for a couple of hours over the past few days and I really like the impact they produce. They don't play as deep as what I was hoping for but the impact more than makes up for it since most of the music that I really listen to don't have much deep bass. I like my current setup and don't plan on changing it anytime soon but it's nice to know that if I dropped them into a ported 1.4 cubic feet box, these drivers are capable of moving a respectable amount of air. The following are just a couple of pictures and plots of my Alpines:
> 
> 
> Enclosure Photos:
> Enclosure Panels | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> Sealed Enclosure | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> Loaded Enclosure | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> Angled Enclosure | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> Installed Enclosure | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> 
> 
> Frequency Responses:
> Frequency Response Plot | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> Frequency Response Plot Differential | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> Frequency Response Data | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> 
> 
> It should be noted that my measurements are not professional by any means and were conducted with consumer level instruments by a hobbyist.
> 
> Haha, posting direct links work for me now!


Yes, I already have a sealed 0.5 cubic foot box made 80% from fiber glass, at it in a odd shape as it taking the shape of the side panel in the trunk. It used to hold RF punch 8inch. I really hope the alpine can fit my box (mounting depth wise) I try to post some pictures if I have time. Anyway thx for your reply.


----------



## perfektj

jim walter said:


> The R8s are going to be more musical than the 15 for sure. As far as overall output, we've got a Mustang here with a 15" @ ~30Hz and I've got a 3x8" box @ 32Hz in my Jeep this past week. Comparing them, the 15 can get lower and louder, but the SQ is just not up to the level of the 8s, not even close.
> 
> They can still get very loud though. In comparison, a 12" in the same size ported box couldn't touch them .. and the 15" is in a box twice their size.
> 
> As far as future products, you know I can't comment on that but we can all look forward to an exciting CES this year


Jim, 

What size box are the 8's in?
Thanks


----------



## subiemax

So, like many before me, I am looking for great bass. Lol. My favorite sub I've used so far is the DIYMA 12. Loved it, just did not have quite enough output, as I would drive it too hard. So, my next install I decided to use 2 of them. Well I got one that was DOA and that put me off of them. So now I run 2 dayton audio HO12s sealed and the output is there, but the SQ is not quite what I want. Im pretty sure an Ultimo 12 would fit what I want nicely, but I just can't see spending that kind of money. 
My question is for anyone that might have heard both the DIYMA and these 8s and how they might compare on SQ and output. I could run 2 ported or 3 or 4 sealedto get the output I need. I have 2000 watts at my disposal.


----------



## huckorris

Convertibles do not benefit from cabin gain, which is a huge deal imo. I imagine one of those 8's would be fine in a closed cabin but with a convertible I doubt it will be much bass.

Also hifonics are notoriously unreliable and overrated on power.


----------



## Jsracing

Jim (or anyone else with experience):

I'm going to pick up a SWR-843D very soon and have the option of a 0.33cf or 0.43cf box. I've read the manual for the 843D that says 0.3cf is nominal.
Which would be a better match for the 843D: 0.33cf or 0.43cf?

I'm going to be purchasing the sub and enclosure very soon.

Thanks!


----------



## JoeHemi57

Jsracing said:


> Jim (or anyone else with experience):
> 
> I'm going to pick up a SWR-843D very soon and have the option of a 0.33cf or 0.43cf box. I've read the manual for the 843D that says 0.3cf is nominal.
> Which would be a better match for the 843D: 0.33cf or 0.43cf?
> 
> I'm going to be purchasing the sub and enclosure very soon.
> 
> Thanks!


If you are on the higher end of the rms power scale i would go with the smaller box, if you are on the lower end of watts get the bigger one.


----------



## Jsracing

At 2ohms, I'll have right around 350Wrms.

My current 8" (Infinity Ref860w) is in a 0.33cf box that I'll be selling to my friend. It has good bass down to about 40Hz, but would like a bit more lower extension (as close to 30Hz as possible with a sealed enclosure). Would the 0.43cf provide that extra extension? Would I lose too much impact by going that large?
Oh, the volumes are gross volumes.

Hoping Jim sees this first thing Monday morning as I'll be purchasing in the evening.


----------



## jim walter

I'd go with the bigger one, as you'll get some flexibility to add in some filler to tailor the amount of extension vs. punch you want. Stuff the box with a good 6-8oz of polyfill and tweak with it from there.


----------



## Jsracing

Thanks Jim! Wow you work sunday nights? Thats dedication.
So I'll pick up the 0.43cf box.
BTW, I work in torrance too. Would love to meet you sometime.


----------



## SiR_Dave

Great stuff in this thread


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Jim,

I've put together a tapped horn design for your woofer. Here's some sims of it:










The design is based off of one that the folks at AVS forum have been building. It's well documented, with a Google Sketchup layout and real-world measurements. All I did was mod it so that it would work with your woofer.

The advantage of your woofer is more output, the woofer is ubiquitous, and it's a better match for car audio amps than the woofer at AVS forum.

The advantage of a tapped horn over a vented box is more output, and reduced group delay. A tapped horn basically has better dynamis than a vented box, but doesn't suffer from the group delay that makes vented boxes sound "slow."

Enjoy!

Audio Psychosis • View topic - Cheap and Different Sub


----------



## [email protected]

Very nice Patrick. Have you made one already?


----------



## Patrick Bateman

BeatsDownLow said:


> Very nice Patrick. Have you made one already?


No, but I'm considering it highly.

I'm not very good at making "elegant" boxes. Most of the boxes that I've designed are hideously complex. I've made boxes that took a month to build because there were so many parts, and I nearly took off my right thumb building one once.

Many of my most successful boxes were straight-up clones, like my TH-Mini clone.

This box looks pretty awesome I think, and I *already* have a half-built tapped horn with dual eights, but Mike's box is a heck of a lot easier to build.

Another nice thing about Mike's box is that half a dozen people on AVS forum have already built it, so there's a good chance that you won't run into any surprises if you do it yourself.

The down-side to Mike's box is distortion - you can see in the graphs that he posted. The 2nd harmonic is just twelve dB down at 90hz:










Having said that, Mike is using a very nice woofer. You can only imagine how awful the distortion situation is if you were using a sealed box with a conventional woofer. This is why nearly no one publishes distortion curves for subwoofers - they're horrendous.

This is also why it sounds like the bass is 'coming from the back' with car subs. When you move the subs up front you're not making the distortion go away, you're just masking it because the midbasses cover it up. (IE, the distortion is still there, but now it's up front and it's not coming from the back, so it sounds like the bass is up front. The problem isn't the bass - it's the distortion produced by the subwoofer.)


----------



## jim walter

I'll try it ... I asked one of the guys here to build one for me.

Probably a week or so out, as I think he's tied up right now, but we'll try it out and let you know how it works.


----------



## onebadmonte

jim walter said:


> I'll try it ... I asked one of the guys here to build one for me.
> 
> Probably a week or so out, as I think he's tied up right now, but we'll try it out and let you know how it works.


In for results. Very interesting design.


----------



## Problemhouston

Patrick Bateman said:


> This is also why it sounds like the bass is 'coming from the back' with car subs. *When you move the subs up front you're not making the distortion go away, you're just masking it because the midbasses cover it up*. (IE, the distortion is still there, but now it's up front and it's not coming from the back, so it sounds like the bass is up front. The problem isn't the bass - it's the distortion produced by the subwoofer.)
> 
> [/font]


This must be what I am experiencing in my truck.


----------



## mires

So I'm thinking of doing 2 of these in 1.4 cubic ft. @ 37-38 hz. The problem is I only have 120 watts available for each. Should I even bother hooking them up with such little power or should I wait until I can afford more power?


----------



## jim walter

mires said:


> So I'm thinking of doing 2 of these in 1.4 cubic ft. @ 37-38 hz. The problem is I only have 120 watts available for each. Should I even bother hooking them up with such little power or should I wait until I can afford more power?


You'll be fine with that power. I ran a pair ported in a very similar box with an 150w each and was able to get sone pretty surprising output. These 8s are actually more efficient than the 10s, so they'll do quite well with minimal power.


----------



## mires

jim walter said:


> You'll be fine with that power. I ran a pair ported in a very similar box with an 150w each and was able to get sone pretty surprising output. These 8s are actually more efficient than the 10s, so they'll do quite well with minimal power.


Excellent to hear. I only have the option to do a round port in this setup. The box has an internal length of 22'' though. Can you recommend a port size for me? I'm not very savvy when it comes to port diameter and how it affects things.


----------



## Compressionfed

Just received my 8''s (3). Haven't had a chance to play with them yet but they look well designed. I'm "making a comeback" after being out of car audio for almost 15 years. There sure wasn't anything like this 8'' back in the day. I guess the JL micro boxes would have been the option then?

Jim, I will be installing these in an E46 325 sedan in an enclosure suspended right under the rear deck, subs facing down. 

1> I would like to keep the box as shallow as possible (6-7''), 36'' long, 14'' deep. Thats right under 2ft^3...will this work? 

2> Could you give me an idea of port size/length (probably round as there doesn't seem to be much room for slotted) 350watts each, mostly R&B, Rock, some rap. 

3> Really looking for some SQ that can play some lower notes.

Thanks for the help and congrats on some *BAD-ASS* products!


----------



## jim walter

Compressionfed said:


> Just received my 8''s (3). Haven't had a chance to play with them yet but they look well designed. I'm "making a comeback" after being out of car audio for almost 15 years. There sure wasn't anything like this 8'' back in the day. I guess the JL micro boxes would have been the option then?
> 
> Jim, I will be installing these in an E46 325 sedan in an enclosure suspended right under the rear deck, subs facing down.
> 
> 1> I would like to keep the box as shallow as possible (6-7''), 36'' long, 14'' deep. Thats right under 2ft^3...will this work?
> 
> 2> Could you give me an idea of port size/length (probably round as there doesn't seem to be much room for slotted) 350watts each, mostly R&B, Rock, some rap.
> 
> 3> Really looking for some SQ that can play some lower notes.
> 
> Thanks for the help and congrats on some *BAD-ASS* products!


My quick math using 3/4" wood puts that box at 1.4ft internal ... less 0.15 from the subs ... leaves 1.25cubes. So the box is a bit small .. but nothing we can't work with (I've done them in <0.3 ported and they still sound great, problem is the vent gets super long). I'd keep the tune around or below 35Hz. If you've got a parametric EQ or any processing, I'd tune even lower, closer to 30Hz to add some extension and then just put back in some extra kick at 50-60 with some boost to your liking. 

Dual 3" ports (which is the bare min on port size here, and accounting for displacement of the port) would be ~28" long. Think you could fit that into the box? This is a really small box for 3 ported 8s though, but it'll be fun to have a stealth box like this that just hammers


----------



## Compressionfed

jim walter said:


> My quick math using 3/4" wood puts that box at 1.4ft internal ... less 0.15 from the subs ... leaves 1.25cubes. So the box is a bit small .. but nothing we can't work with (I've done them in <0.3 ported and they still sound great, problem is the vent gets super long). I'd keep the tune around or below 35Hz. If you've got a parametric EQ or any processing, I'd tune even lower, closer to 30Hz to add some extension and then just put back in some extra kick at 50-60 with some boost to your liking.
> 
> Dual 3" ports (which is the bare min on port size here, and accounting for displacement of the port) would be ~28" long. Think you could fit that into the box? This is a really small box for 3 ported 8s though, but it'll be fun to have a stealth box like this that just hammers


Jim, sorry for the confusion, the dimensions I gave you were in fact internal. How would this change your opinion?

Again, thanks for your valuable time!


----------



## jim walter

Well .. that's a good thing, makes it a bit easier to build. Dual 3" ports end up around 16" long in that case. Triple 3" moves up to 25"


----------



## Compressionfed

jim walter said:


> Well .. that's a good thing, makes it a bit easier to build. Dual 3" ports end up around 16" long in that case. Triple 3" moves up to 25"


Thank you good sir, off to the drawing board!


----------



## GouRiki

I have a couple questions about the 843d. I currently have one and I love it. I'm planning on getting a second one; however, I have some questions about this driver's use in IB.

From what I gathered from going through this thread, the sub does well in an IB configuration and the thing to do would be wire only one of the voice coils to raise the QTS to around 1.

Is this correct? I modeled it in WinISD in IB with a qts of 1 and the graph looks great.

The only thing is, when wiring only one of the voice coils, the power handling of the sub is cut in half. So how much power could the sub handle? The problem would be if I used my Srx 1d to power both of them, the SWR-843d's (with only one voice coil wired) wired in parallel would be a 2 ohm load and they would be getting 850 watts @ 2ohms. Would that be too much for them?

Also since they are dual voice coil, would wiring only one of the voice coils cause any problems in the short/long term?

TIA


----------



## subwoofery

GouRiki said:


> I have a couple questions about the 843d. I currently have one and I love it. I'm planning on getting a second one; however, I have some questions about this driver's use in IB.
> 
> From what I gathered from going through this thread, the sub does well in an IB configuration and the thing to do would be wire only one of the voice coils to raise the QTS to around 1.
> 
> Is this correct? I modeled it in WinISD in IB with a qts of 1 and the graph looks great.
> 
> The only thing is, when wiring only one of the voice coils, the power handling of the sub is cut in half. So how much power could the sub handle? The problem would be if I used my Srx 1d to power both of them, the SWR-843d's (with only one voice coil wired) wired in parallel would be a 2 ohm load and they would be getting 850 watts @ 2ohms. Would that be too much for them?
> 
> Also since they are dual voice coil, would wiring only one of the voice coils cause any problems in the short/long term?
> 
> TIA


300RMS for both would pushing it IMO 

Kelvin


----------



## jim walter

Power handling isn't that greatly reduced...for a few reasons. 
1. The overall sensitivity is lower, so the mechanical power handling increases since it takes more power to move as far, but since your in IB the box no longer limits the excursion so it's a bit of a wash. 
2. The overall thermal mass and radiating surface area of the coil itself remains constant. Remember, a DVC sub is would over the top of itself, so the coil shares the heat pretty well with all of the coil mass even if one is shorted or open. Again, about a wash. 

In IB, I tried the pair with 600rms and then 1200. I could beat on it pretty good with the 600 without worrying, but at 1200 I could break things if I wanted to. Still, the suspension is pretty robust and your ears will tell you when to back off before you Hirt anything. 

Jim


----------



## subwoofery

jim walter said:


> Power handling isn't that greatly reduced...for a few reasons.
> 1. The overall sensitivity is lower, so the mechanical power handling increases since it takes more power to move as far, but since your in IB the box no longer limits the excursion so it's a bit of a wash.
> 2. The overall thermal mass and radiating surface area of the coil itself remains constant. Remember, a DVC sub is would over the top of itself, so the coil shares the heat pretty well with all of the coil mass even if one is shorted or open. Again, about a wash.
> 
> In IB, I tried the pair with 600rms and then 1200. I could beat on it pretty good with the 600 without worrying, but at 1200 I could break things if I wanted to. Still, the suspension is pretty robust and your ears will tell you when to back off before you Hirt anything.
> 
> Jim


You'd need a subsonic filter then coz when I modelled the Dual 4 with a Qts of 1 in a 4.5cuft box (a pair of 8" in 9cuft trunk), I get overexcursion around 32Hz with as little as 60 watts. 
Unless I did not do something right... 

Kelvin


----------



## GouRiki

jim walter said:


> Power handling isn't that greatly reduced...for a few reasons.
> 1. The overall sensitivity is lower, so the mechanical power handling increases since it takes more power to move as far, but since your in IB the box no longer limits the excursion so it's a bit of a wash.
> 2. The overall thermal mass and radiating surface area of the coil itself remains constant. Remember, a DVC sub is would over the top of itself, so the coil shares the heat pretty well with all of the coil mass even if one is shorted or open. Again, about a wash.
> 
> In IB, I tried the pair with 600rms and then 1200. I could beat on it pretty good with the 600 without worrying, but at 1200 I could break things if I wanted to. Still, the suspension is pretty robust and your ears will tell you when to back off before you Hirt anything.
> 
> Jim



Thanks Jim, I will try it out. 

I plan on running them from ~50-250hz, somewhere in there. I will figure it out once it happens. The 843d I have now is playing up to 200hz and it is doing great.


----------



## jim walter

subwoofery said:


> You'd need a subsonic filter then coz when I modelled the Dual 4 with a Qts of 1 in a 4.5cuft box (a pair of 8" in 9cuft trunk), I get overexcursion around 32Hz with as little as 60 watts.
> Unless I did not do something right...
> 
> Kelvin


One big thing that nearly everyone ignores, dynamics. That the compliance and motor force are not constant numbers. The compliance will be about 7x greater at 20mm while the BL will have dropped off to near 0. 

All the models in the world can tell us what may happen or what it should sound like, but these models just about jump off of a bridge as soon as we add that second watt


----------



## SSSnake

> All the models in the world can tell us what may happen or what it should sound like, but these models just about jump off of a bridge as soon as we add that second watt


Correct, they depend upon an assumption that the speaker paramters are linear and for the most part invariant. If the design minimizes these variances then the model is much more accurate in predicting performance. If the design and implementation does yield large variation with applied power (which is a largely undesirable trait) then you are absolutely correct - the models suck - or is it the design - kind of a chicken and egg situation isn't it?


----------



## Fricasseekid

SSSnake said:


> Correct, they depend upon an assumption that the speaker paramters are linear and for the most part invariant. If the design minimizes these variances then the model is much more accurate in predicting performance. If the design and implementation does yield large variation with applied power (which is a largely undesirable trait) then you are absolutely correct - the models suck - or is it the design - kind of a chicken and egg situation isn't it?


To what aspect of modeling are you referring? I've done alot of box modeling and the transfer function has never changed on me, from 1 watt to 1500 watts. Isn't transfer function the main reason we model boxes? Not that excursion, port velocities, group delay, and the like aren't important...
Enlighten me please?


----------



## Salami

Aren't there supposed to be grilles for these? When are they coming out? Did not see anything on the Alpine web site.


----------



## Art_Boy

I am looking at using 2 to put in the storage area in my 05 Tundra Double Cab (approximately 0.45 cu ft) powerd byt a PDX-5. Will this work?


----------



## rugdnit

Salami said:


> Aren't there supposed to be grilles for these? When are they coming out? Did not see anything on the Alpine web site.


x2 -- Jim care to chime in on this? I have 4 of these lil' bugga's!


----------



## Booger

No grills...


----------



## SSSnake

> To what aspect of modeling are you referring? I've done alot of box modeling and the transfer function has never changed on me, from 1 watt to 1500 watts. Isn't transfer function the main reason we model boxes? Not that excursion, port velocities, group delay, and the like aren't important...
> Enlighten me please?


You are absolutely correct in stating that "the transfer function has never changed on me, from 1 watt to 1500 watts" however it typically should change to better align with real world results (which is what Jim referred to). All other things being equal, the larger the deviation from the modeled response the worse a loudspeaker handles power while remaining in its linear operating range.


----------



## Problemhouston

I have had my pair of SWR-823Ds in my center console .70 cubic foot enclosure for about a month now and feel like I can comment on how they sound. I have had woofers that include Oz Audio, JL 10w6v2s, Alumapro, Boston, and Orion. In my 2006 F-150 Supercrew I have had a pair of the Oz subs, a single JL 10w1 (I think) 3 old school JL 8w6's and a single Type-R 10 (old version). Enclosures have all been under the rear seats and run between .80 and 1.10 cubic feet.

These 8's are something else. I absolutely love them. Sound quality is just short of the 10w6v2's but much better than anything else I have had. I thought I might be losing out on a lot of the low end stuff with both subs sharing .70 cubic feet so I really wanted to try and port them but just wasn't sure if the box was big enough. To my surprise they are working down low just fine. I am getting more output with these two 8's than with any other configuration I have had in the truck. The only set up that I have had that bests these 8's are the pair of 10W6v2s that I had ported in my PT Cruiser years ago. Since the 8's are sealed up front they blend with the front stage better than any other set up. The 10W6v2s of course had more output but also seemed to play a bit smoother. I did have EQ on the JL's and the 8's do not. Once I can figure out what is wrong with my H700 I will have eq on the 8's and we will see if I can smooth them out some. This is really not even a big deal as the difference between them is very very small. The most impressive thing about these is the output. I am running them at 4 ohms and then parallel for a 2 ohm load at the amp. They are getting power from my Audison LRx 400.1 which is supposed to do somewhere in the 600 watt range at 2 ohms. They easily over power the Dyns on 100x2 from my McIntosh MC427. Even with the output levels that I am getting from them and the fact that they are literally firing straight up 2 feet away from my face it is hard to locate them with regular music. With the best SQ tune I can get it is still hard to locate them on most Hip Hop songs.
With that said my thanks to Alpine for building these little things and to Jim for convincing me to get them. I can’t help but to keep thinking, if I replace the entire center section of the console I may be able to get another .50 cubic feet. Man 4 of these in 1.2 cubic feet… Hmmmmm


----------



## Fricasseekid

SSSnake said:


> You are absolutely correct in stating that "the transfer function has never changed on me, from 1 watt to 1500 watts" however it typically should change to better align with real world results (which is what Jim referred to). All other things being equal, the larger the deviation from the modeled response the worse a loudspeaker handles power while remaining in its linear operating range.


So how does one predict how much a speaker set up is likely to deviate from a model? Or should I say, how does one know just how usefull a particular model is?


----------



## rugdnit

^^^^ Can definitely be done. I had an 04 F150 Supercab shortbox that I built a custom center console for. I had 4 re8's ported @ 34 Hz. IIRC the box was 2.5 cu ft gross. I built a custom fiberglass bracket that bolted to the old center console mounts. The box then sat on top of the bracket and bolted in place from the sides. Ports were rear firing and subs downfiring. I used a lot of fiberglass to give it lots of shape, so it didn't look too obvious. It was killer-- would have loved to run the SWR-823d's in that. I miss that truck.


----------



## jim walter

Salami said:


> Aren't there supposed to be grilles for these? When are they coming out? Did not see anything on the Alpine web site.


Grills

We shipped out the first lot last week so they should be at your dealers any day now. If they haven't ordered any for their stock (or pre-order for you guys), give them a ring and they should be able to get them for you in less than a week.

Jim


----------



## thewatusi

At the risk of sounding like a cheap bastard, why is the retail price of the grill $30? Seems awfully high for what it is.


----------



## jooonnn

I've been following this thread a lot but was wondering if anyone has any finished pics of using these in doors IB and can comment on how they sound? I'm currently trying to A/B a pair of 6w3v3's in the doors that will drop fit or if its worth remolding my door panel to fit the pair of 8's.


----------



## jooonnn

I mocked one of the 8's in a test box with wood and fiberglass (~.17cuft) and i was honestly surprised at how loud just one of them gets sealed! The only pr7oblem I had was it sometimes it consciously made me think the stage was farther back due to it being so close and vibrating.


----------



## subwoofery

jooonnn said:


> I've been following this thread a lot but was wondering if anyone has any finished pics of using these in doors IB and can comment on how they sound? I'm currently trying to A/B a pair of 6w3v3's in the doors that will drop fit or if its worth remolding my door panel to fit the pair of 8's.


Don't think you'll see many if any door mounted subwoofers. 
Most hard core DIYers have a hard time getting rid of rattles with 8" midbasses... so a subwoofer IB in the door?  

Try to search for an install with 8" Phase Linear Aliante 
It's the only install I know that uses a subwoofer in the door HOWEVER they are not IB but sealed... 

Kelvin


----------



## rexroadj

subwoofery said:


> Don't think you'll see many if any door mounted subwoofers.
> Most hard core DIYers have a hard time getting rid of rattles with 8" midbasses... so a subwoofer IB in the door?
> 
> Try to search for an install with 8" Phase Linear Aliante
> It's the only install I know that uses a subwoofer in the door HOWEVER they are not IB but sealed...
> 
> Kelvin


X2! I had been asking about this same thing but the state my doors were in (prior to melt down) made them very capable for this setup..... I was actually in the process of building sealed pods for them to slide into the door from the outside of the door panel (about 7"s deep and 9"s around) and was then going to add a set of eton 3" drivers with some scan tweets  
Now I am looking at a restored jeep renegade and am trying to figure out how to implement them in kicks and still go three way or kicks as sub enclosures? I dont know....having a hard time shopping for a new vehicle? 
Restored international scout, jeep renegade (80s) or restored dodge ramcharger?????? The charger offers the best audio solution, jeep offers the most fun, and the scout offers the coolest cool factor? Hard to believe my truck can melt to the ground, ruin my center console enclosure, but those 8s are still ticking????? If thats not an advertisement then I dont know what is! New Alpine Type R's......Almost fireproof :laugh:


----------



## apercu

I want to now wich of these setups will have more outpout:

2 x swr-823d in a vented box 
1 swr-1243d vented 


the amp is an old Alpine V12 MRD-M605 (600 watts @ 2 ohm) the 823d will be underpowered by 50 watt each and the 12 will be powered 100%

i have a cda-9855 HU and one MRV-F545 4 channel amp, maybe i will go for the new Type-R Spr-60c and the Spr-69 for the rear, to make complete Alpine System.


----------



## jim walter

apercu said:


> I want to now wich of these setups will have more outpout:
> 
> 2 x swr-823d in a vented box
> 1 swr-1243d vented
> 
> 
> the amp is an old Alpine V12 MRD-M605 (600 watts @ 2 ohm) the 823d will be underpowered by 50 watt each and the 12 will be powered 100%
> 
> i have a cda-9855 HU and one MRV-F545 4 channel amp, maybe i will go for the new Type-R Spr-60c and the Spr-69 for the rear, to make complete Alpine System.


@600W, output is a toss up on paper, but I'd say the 12 would take it, while the SQ edge goes to the 8s for sure. As you add more power, the 12 will absolutely crush them in output.


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> X2! I had been asking about this same thing but the state my doors were in (prior to melt down) made them very capable for this setup..... I was actually in the process of building sealed pods for them to slide into the door from the outside of the door panel (about 7"s deep and 9"s around) and was then going to add a set of eton 3" drivers with some scan tweets
> Now I am looking at a restored jeep renegade and am trying to figure out how to implement them in kicks and still go three way or kicks as sub enclosures? I dont know....having a hard time shopping for a new vehicle?
> Restored international scout, jeep renegade (80s) or restored dodge ramcharger?????? The charger offers the best audio solution, jeep offers the most fun, and the scout offers the coolest cool factor? Hard to believe my truck can melt to the ground, ruin my center console enclosure, but those 8s are still ticking????? If thats not an advertisement then I dont know what is! New Alpine Type R's......Almost fireproof :laugh:


Good luck getting space in a Jeep, my test bed is a old Cherokee and there is NO space for 8s up front without putting a box through the floor (something I'm still seriously considering).


----------



## jooonnn

subwoofery said:


> Don't think you'll see many if any door mounted subwoofers.
> Most hard core DIYers have a hard time getting rid of rattles with 8" midbasses... so a subwoofer IB in the door?
> 
> Try to search for an install with 8" Phase Linear Aliante
> It's the only install I know that uses a subwoofer in the door HOWEVER they are not IB but sealed...
> 
> Kelvin


Ya i know rattles are a pain, but it wouldn't hurt to try before i go the full kick panel route. Do you have any tips for sealing the chamber in the door behind the woofer? My door doesn't really come apart besides the plastic panel.


----------



## jim walter

Don't seal the door, instead mount a small sealed box ON the door and build out/up to it to trim it in. Two of our guys here have done this (08 Tundra and Tacoma) and it's awesome. The boxes in the tundra are under 0.25 I believe. As a midbass, 50hz and up that is just fine.


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> Don't seal the door, instead mount a small sealed box ON the door and build out/up to it to trim it in. Two of our guys here have done this (08 Tundra and Tacoma) and it's awesome. The boxes in the tundra are under 0.25 I believe. As a midbass, 50hz and up that is just fine.


This is exactly what I was refering to. Its what I was building for my doors in my truck prior to meltdown


----------



## jooonnn

jim walter said:


> Don't seal the door, instead mount a small sealed box ON the door and build out/up to it to trim it in. Two of our guys here have done this (08 Tundra and Tacoma) and it's awesome. The boxes in the tundra are under 0.25 I believe. As a midbass, 50hz and up that is just fine.


Do you know where I can find pics on this? 

Also do you know how much power the PDX-F4 produces at 8ohms when bridged? Would it be just half the 200x2? I'm trying to figure out if it's worth it to go stereo for the 8's if i have time alignment capabilities for them. I appreciate the response Jim.


----------



## jim walter

jooonnn said:


> Do you know where I can find pics on this?
> 
> Also do you know how much power the PDX-F4 produces at 8ohms when bridged? Would it be just half the 200x2? I'm trying to figure out if it's worth it to go stereo for the 8's if i have time alignment capabilities for them. I appreciate the response Jim.


If you don't already have the woofers, get the 823D and series each one to be a 4ohm load for your amp. I don't think the 8ohms is 1/2, but I don't know the real number. 

I'll snap some pics at work tomorrow for you of those trucks.


----------



## jooonnn

jim walter said:


> If you don't already have the woofers, get the 823D and series each one to be a 4ohm load for your amp. I don't think the 8ohms is 1/2, but I don't know the real number.
> 
> I'll snap some pics at work tomorrow for you of those trucks.


thanks a lot i really appreciate the support! only problem is i already have a 843D but i guess i could try to sell it if i can fetch some 823d's.


----------



## jim walter

Nah, keep the D4's and run them at 2. The F4 at 2Ohms is still going to be cleaner than any other amplifier you can buy this side of some hyper-powered, high dollar A/B amp.


----------



## jooonnn

jim walter said:


> Nah, keep the D4's and run them at 2. The F4 at 2Ohms is still going to be cleaner than any other amplifier you can buy this side of some hyper-powered, high dollar A/B amp.


Is the F4 stable at 2 ohms bridged?


----------



## jim walter

Good catch! No, it is not. *stupid* 

Run it in stereo .. 4ohms to all 4 coils ... it'll give you >100W/coil and will do just fine.


----------



## m0sdef

jim walter said:


> Don't seal the door, instead mount a small sealed box ON the door and build out/up to it to trim it in. Two of our guys here have done this (08 Tundra and Tacoma) and it's awesome. The boxes in the tundra are under 0.25 I believe. As a midbass, 50hz and up that is just fine.


I'd love to see pics of this as well because I have an 08 tundra and would love to try and put these in my doors


----------



## jim walter

Here's those pics of the Tundra. 

Not trimmed in yet though, so no finished pics. 





































Enjoy!


----------



## XtremeRevolution

Out of curiosity, what did you use for the putty to seal the pieces together?


----------



## nineball

looks like duraglass. probably wood glue between the edges too.


----------



## GouRiki

XtremeRevolution said:


> Out of curiosity, what did you use for the putty to seal the pieces together?


^aw he beat me


----------



## jim walter

Duraglass and CA ... oops, the secret is out!

In all seriousness, it works great ... just jigsaw puzzle the box together with CA and duraglass it sealed, crazy strong and very workable. Not the cheapest, but neither are mat and resin.


----------



## thehatedguy

Duraglass and CA is an old Steve Brown technique. I swear he has been making boxes like that since the early 90s.


----------



## jooonnn

thehatedguy said:


> Duraglass and CA is an old Steve Brown technique. I swear he has been making boxes like that since the early 90s.


excuse me if i sound dumb but....what does CA stand for haha


----------



## Fricasseekid

jooonnn said:


> excuse me if i sound dumb but....what does CA stand for haha


Was wondering that myself.


----------



## nineball

Cyanoacrylate. it's super glue.


----------



## jim walter

thehatedguy said:


> Duraglass and CA is an old Steve Brown technique. I swear he has been making boxes like that since the early 90s.


.. and he still makes em like that today, these are from his truck


----------



## thehatedguy

I remember reading about him making dash kits in the early 90s in a tutorial in Auto Sound and Security....but I lost that knowledge for about a decade later until I started installing professionally.

I have the build log for his M3 and the Civic...done that way in there. I was always curious about how well such enclosures would hold up over time. I was scared to do something like that for a customer...but may have to try it out when I have to redo my center channel.


----------



## Arominus

Well this thread convinced me to pull the trigger. Im getting a SWR-843 for my 1988 Porsche 944S, its going into a .23 cu. ft box in the right rear storage cubby in the back hatch area. Im going to add a 3/4" MDF spacer or baffle plate to the top of the fitted box i ordered to get a little more volume in the box. It will be powered by a MBquart PAB2100 @2ohms for 400w rms. Im pretty excited! This will be replacing a fiberglass/mdf box that was fitted to the rear seat wells of the car and had 2 JL 10w3v2's in it. The box was sealed but never really did all that well IMO. I need a back seat so its getting sold. If i like the sub i may get my hands on a second box, or clone the first one...

Jim, did the grill ever become available? im looking around but not seeing it.


----------



## quality_sound

thehatedguy said:


> I remember reading about him making dash kits in the early 90s in a tutorial in Auto Sound and Security....but I lost that knowledge for about a decade later until I started installing professionally.
> 
> I have the build log for his M3 and the Civic...done that way in there. I was always curious about how well such enclosures would hold up over time. I was scared to do something like that for a customer...but may have to try it out when I have to redo my center channel.


I remember him coming to our shop and showing us that stuff in person. He still had the Acura at the time. The Ford with the rotating amp rack in the center console was one of the coolest things I'd ever seen.


----------



## 60ndown

why add CA? duraglass and bondo products are pretty tough as they are.


----------



## nineball

60ndown said:


> why add CA? duraglass and bondo products are pretty tough as they are.


the ca glue and activator are used to hold the wood in it's basic shape, like where the radius is in the corner, to make the form. once all pieces have dried you use the duraglass to actually hold everything together.


----------



## willdabear

So im thinking about using one or two of these in my corvette and most likely it or they will be in a sealed box. you said that you can run 2 of them with an m12 but is this something you would recomend for longevity? Im basically just wondering how much is a good daily rms for these subs. for example, would i be loosing a lot of the subs potential but driving 2 of them with an m6? also, my camaro had 2 type r's in a ported box but for the vette i want to save as muh weight as possible which is why im thinking of using the 8's. do you think one will b good for someone who like to occasionally crank it up with the windows down or should i stick with 2? my main focus is still SQ


----------



## Arominus

I get my stuff on monday or so Will, ill let you know how one does in the back of a 944 with a pdx1000.1 hooked up to it in a .23 cu ft sealed box. My dad has a 944 and with said pdx installed already so ill be able to listen to it.


----------



## IIdiceII

would an alpine mrp-m500 be enough power for two of these 8's?

i have a 12" type-r now and I wanted to try out a dual 8" setup.

edit: these would be going in the trunk of an 03 acura 3.2 TL and still undecided if I would be ported or sealed.

right now i have a 12" type r and in a vented enclosure and it gets louder than i would ever need but musically, it sounds like crap. it also takes up waaay to much space in the trunk.

in the meantime,i ordered a cheap sealed enclosure for the 12" to see if that helps out temporarily.


----------



## willdabear

how would 2 of these compare to a single 10w7


----------



## rexroadj

willdabear said:


> how would 2 of these compare to a single 10w7


w7 is probably going to rule the output section..... SQ? well thats subjective but aside from SUPER low end extension I think the type r's will hold there own to maybe a tad better IMO. I have always found the w7 to be a great sounding/performing sub when properly utilized. I do love my type R 8s though


----------



## jooonnn

rexroadj said:


> w7 is probably going to rule the output section..... SQ? well thats subjective but aside from SUPER low end extension I think the type r's will hold there own to maybe a tad better IMO. I have always found the w7 to be a great sounding/performing sub when properly utilized. I do love my type R 8s though


w7 does have beautiful low end extension even in sealed boxes. i've never heard subs play low so well (and look cool doing so as well). JL w7s tend to not get such a good rep on most DIY forums because of the "oh u can get so much better for the price" or "my sub sounds so much better than the w7 i heard" because who honestly wants to bash their own stuff right? Either way you'll never know which one you like until you try them both


----------



## jooonnn

Oops i meant to quote the other guy not rexor my bad!


----------



## TypeR

Hi Jim, I am looking to replicate the vented box you showed earlier. Did you make it 11"x8.5"x20" as per the specs in the manual? Getting that port length might be tricky for my install. I've been under the impression that it's better to point the port towards the back bumper of the car...would I lose the benefits of the port if I had the sub facing the back bumper and the port facing the left or right side?


----------



## jim walter

TypeR said:


> Hi Jim, I am looking to replicate the vented box you showed earlier. Did you make it 11"x8.5"x20" as per the specs in the manual? Getting that port length might be tricky for my install. I've been under the impression that it's better to point the port towards the back bumper of the car...would I lose the benefits of the port if I had the sub facing the back bumper and the port facing the left or right side?


I do not believe that "port myth" to be true, honestly. I'd rather a port be non-bent and firing at the side of the vehicle than bent 90* and compressing and getting turbulent as I crank up the volume.

My boxes from the Jeep are actually the boxes in the manual (starting with the 09 Type R's, every box in the manuals has been a box we've hand built and signed off on here in-house).

I've taken a screen capture of the box from our PRG that we handed out to dealers this year .. hopefully this helps.


----------



## jim walter

IIdiceII said:


> would an alpine mrp-m500 be enough power for two of these 8's?
> 
> i have a 12" type-r now and I wanted to try out a dual 8" setup.
> 
> edit: these would be going in the trunk of an 03 acura 3.2 TL and still undecided if I would be ported or sealed.
> 
> right now i have a 12" type r and in a vented enclosure and it gets louder than i would ever need but musically, it sounds like crap. it also takes up waaay to much space in the trunk.
> 
> in the meantime,i ordered a cheap sealed enclosure for the 12" to see if that helps out temporarily.


An MRP-M500 is just about perfect for these. Realize that these 8s are more efficient than the 10" Type R .. and a pair will be more efficient than a 12". 

I'd recommend that you port them, but do not put them in a pre-fab. 

Any chance you have the details of the vented box you R12 is currently installed in? Reason I ask (and request the 8s to go in a custom box) is that many pre-fab boxes these days are tuned anywhere from ~40-50Hz, which is great for output but can totally ruin an chance of SQ a sub ever had. An R12 is most happy tuned at 35Hz .. essentially a DD all-around performer, but I actually prefer them at 28-30Hz to clean things up a bit.


----------



## jim walter

willdabear said:


> So im thinking about using one or two of these in my corvette and most likely it or they will be in a sealed box. you said that you can run 2 of them with an m12 but is this something you would recomend for longevity? Im basically just wondering how much is a good daily rms for these subs. for example, would i be loosing a lot of the subs potential but driving 2 of them with an m6? also, my camaro had 2 type r's in a ported box but for the vette i want to save as muh weight as possible which is why im thinking of using the 8's. do you think one will b good for someone who like to occasionally crank it up with the windows down or should i stick with 2? my main focus is still SQ


A good match for a pair of these would be a PDX-M6, MRX-M50 or MRP-M500 (~500, 600 and 700W RMS from those guys, split to the pair is perfect). I really would not recommend using an M12 unless you just want to have that extra power in case you ever expand the system.

If you main focus is SQ but you are used to 2 ported 10s or 12s .. I'd say build to the spec box in the manual (posted above) for 2 ported 8s and you'll be extremely happy. SQ will be markedly better and you'll still have a nice amount of output should you want to get loud. The box should be smaller than a ported box for an R12 and two of these are lighter than 1 12", so you'll be saving some weight too.


----------



## IIdiceII

jim walter said:


> An MRP-M500 is just about perfect for these. Realize that these 8s are more efficient than the 10" Type R .. and a pair will be more efficient than a 12".
> 
> I'd recommend that you port them, but do not put them in a pre-fab.
> 
> Any chance you have the details of the vented box you R12 is currently installed in? Reason I ask (and request the 8s to go in a custom box) is that many pre-fab boxes these days are tuned anywhere from ~40-50Hz, which is great for output but can totally ruin an chance of SQ a sub ever had. An R12 is most happy tuned at 35Hz .. essentially a DD all-around performer, but I actually prefer them at 28-30Hz to clean things up a bit.


the box is an atrend e12sv. 

according to newegg, its tuned to 33hz.

i have the sealed box on the way (it was only 30 bucks). Im really new to car audio and its more of an experiment to see the difference in a sealed vs ported setup.


----------



## billg71

jim walter said:


> I do not believe that "port myth" to be true, honestly. I'd rather a port be non-bent and firing at the side of the vehicle than bent 90* and compressing and getting turbulent as I crank up the volume.
> 
> My boxes from the Jeep are actually the boxes in the manual (starting with the 09 Type R's, every box in the manuals has been a box we've hand built and signed off on here in-house).
> 
> I've taken a screen capture of the box from our PRG that we handed out to dealers this year .. hopefully this helps.


Jim,

How does your box compare with the preloaded enclosure Alpine is marketing? SBR-S83V Enclosed Type-R 8” Subwoofer

I got a quick listen to it at the local dealer when I ordered my driver, it sounded pretty good but I didn't have a lot of time to audition.

I could almost fit that one in my car, right now I've got one ordered to go in a .35 sealed box to see how it works. 

Thanks,
Bill


----------



## 3cyltrbo

has anyone built a box with a chimney port yet (port entirely outside of the box ?) 

I was thinking that for the install I'm working on, I might have to go with a 2.5" I.D. round chimney port that is entirely outside of the box


----------



## rexroadj

I have done this on a few occasions (couple inches in inside but mostly outside) for trunks to port directly through the rear deck. Make it rigid and its fine!


----------



## CGMMNY

Hey Jim 

I have 3 8 inch Type R's in a 1.17 cu ft sealed enclosure (so about .39 cu ft per sub before woofer displacement). I'll be pushing them with a Massive Audio N4 @ 2.66 ohms which means each sub will see between 300 to 325 watts each. 

I believe my setup will have plenty of punch, have decent low bass extension and play loudly without distortion. I'd like to hear your thoughts as to what I should expect. Is there anything else I need to take into consideration before finalizing and moving forward with a full install? 

Thanks


----------



## pwnt by pat

Jim,

Thanks for taking the time with this thread. 

I do have a question for you:
You say the subs will do alright dropped from a rear deck, ib, but to only hook up one of the coils. I have 600wms in 2 ohms, so I would need to use the do versions. do you know the ts parameters of the do with only one coil hooked up, so I can see how it would model vs the sls8's?


----------



## Scooby

Can anyone tell me how 2 of the 843D would compare to a 10" Ascendant Audio Arsenal. I already have the Arsenal but torn weather to use it due to space (depth) constraints. Either set up would be in recommended sealed box. Power will be from a Massive Audio N2 amp.


----------



## WLDock

Scooby said:


> Can anyone tell me how 2 of the 843D would compare to a 10" Ascendant Audio Arsenal. I already have the Arsenal but torn weather to use it due to space (depth) constraints. Either set up would be in recommended sealed box. Power will be from a Massive Audio N2 amp.


Did you see Page 2 where Jim compared two sealed 8's to a single sealed 12?

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...0729-alpine-swr-823d-843d-8-subwoofers-2.html

Should tell you what these can do. If depth is an issue then it is either 8's or shallow drivers like the SWR-T10.


----------



## Scooby

It's been awhile since I read through the whole post. Got it. Thanks


----------



## 3cyltrbo

Jim

Just ordered the grill through the Alpine website(Shopatron) order# 4961056

Would love to post some port diameter / length questions to you once I get a picture of my box

Cheers

Will


----------



## 3cyltrbo

Jim, 

gonna post my Port questions even without pictures of the box

So far I've got approx .53 - .55 cu-ft of air (sub would be deducted from that) and I've already installed a chimney port with 2" innner diameter and huge flared ends 

(one of the flared ends is flush mounted inside the box, so basically 100% of the port is chimney style on the outside of the box)

I was hoping to have as low a tuning frequency as possible (31 or 32 hz, and the SWR 843D will be getting a clean & reliable 250watts. 

The port length can be anything up to about 20 inches long (not including the flared ends), thats how much room the chimney can stick outside the box. 

This is the port I've already installed (I joined two centre sections to get the length up to 18 inches or I can have it as short as a couple inches). 



















Precision Port 2" Flared Port Tube Kit

What can I expect the result to be with only a 2" port diameter? (will I have massive port noise? / etc...) 

the box isn't totally finished, so technically speaking I could swap out the port (but I'd kinda rather not) 

my other port options that I have at home would be 

3" ID x 11" L with 5" Flared Ends (this one would be pretty messy to extend in length because it comes as one piece) 



















I also have this port which is 2-1/2" ID x 8-1/2" L with a slightly Flared opening (but I'm not sure I can extend it easily because I can't find 2.5" ABS locally. 










to sum up: 

-I've got approx .55cu ft total 
-I would really like a low 30s tuning frequency (ie 32hz) 
-Xtant 3150 will be powering it with a pretty clean 250watts
-I have room for almost 20 inches of chimney port

I've already installed a 2" ID port with huge flares that could be any length up to 18 inches

A-should I leave the current 2" ID (4" flares) port and trim to necessary length 
B-install the 3" ID, 11" long port (with 5" flares and try to alter it for a different length?)
B-install the 2.5" ID 8.5" long port and try to alter it for a different length?


----------



## jriggs

Just finished the enclosure for two 843's sealed. Each of them have .3 cubes after displacement + a little bit of polly-fill. just waiting for the PDX M6 to arrive next Friday.


----------



## SiB911

What is everyone paying for these little guys? Somewhere in the neighborhood of $100-$150??


----------



## rommelrommel

99 bucks from al and eds.


----------



## keanuration

jriggs said:


> Just finished the enclosure for two 843's sealed. Each of them have .3 cubes after displacement + a little bit of polly-fill. just waiting for the PDX M6 to arrive next Friday.


very nice, you must let us know how well it slams! I am wanting to seal up a pair but gotta convince my bank(wife) to dole out some funds?


----------



## jooonnn

I've got a excellent condition SWR-843D that I only tested for about 20 minutes that I am about to post up on the classifieds if anyone is interested in buying one. I couldn't fit it into my door with my fabrication skills and make it look decent


----------



## Patrick Bateman

TypeR said:


> Hi Jim, I am looking to replicate the vented box you showed earlier. Did you make it 11"x8.5"x20" as per the specs in the manual? Getting that port length might be tricky for my install. I've been under the impression that it's better to point the port towards the back bumper of the car...would I lose the benefits of the port if I had the sub facing the back bumper and the port facing the left or right side?


Because this sub moves a lot of air, you're going to need a big, efficient port.

Big ports aren't as important with older drivers, where excursion wasn't so huge. But these days, a lot of small subs can move a lot of air due to very high xmax.

Bottom line - uses a really big efficient port, or don't use one at all. ((IE, if you don't have room for a big port, use a sealed box.)


----------



## XtremeRevolution

If anyone needs help modeling a specific port size in a specific box requirement, please see the link in my signature.


----------



## BowDown

Heard one of these small ported and I was floored. It sounded pretty fricking sweet. 

I'm going to remove my 10" xtant in the dash sub box, and replace it with your SWR-823D. In 0.50ft^3 I should net a F3 around 30hz right? Sure beats my F3 of about 49hz now. 

Hope it gets here by the end of the week, otherwise next week it will be installed.


----------



## BowDown

jooonnn said:


> I've got a excellent condition SWR-843D that I only tested for about 20 minutes that I am about to post up on the classifieds if anyone is interested in buying one. I couldn't fit it into my door with my fabrication skills and make it look decent


Guess I should of checked this section before buying mine. If the deal was right I could of dealt with the different ohm config.


----------



## BowDown

3cyltrbo said:


> but I'm not sure I can extend it easily because I can't find 2.5" ABS locally.


Should of ran into Home Depot while you were in the states last Saturday. :laugh:


----------



## pamantea

Hey Jim, (this was actually posted back on page 7 but got overlooked unfortunately)

I need some advice. 
I have been patiently waiting to get ahold of these subs since they were announced earlier this year. My current setup:
2010 Toyota Tacoma Access Cab TRD
Alpine INA-900 (BT bought separetely)
Imprint Module
Sirius module
Alpine PDX F6 running Hertz component MLK (6.5" and tweeter)
Alpine PDX M12 running a temporary sub until i decide on what to do with the 8"s

So, the original plan was to cut out the storage units (for the jack etc.) under the back seats and build a box for 4 of the type R 8"s in a sealed enclosure. This would be great, except for it would be time consuming, high cost, and I would lose my storage area. I am now thinking of building an enclosure between the seats and put possibly 3 or 4 of the 8"s in there. I was thinking maybe 2 downfiring and 1 up? or all three up? 
What is your opinion and what should I am for for volume and anything else? Thank you in advance!
(I listen to rock such as Tool, Metallica, some alternative, and some mainstream stuff for the GF as well as Eminem)

Peter


----------



## 3cyltrbo

BowDown said:


> Should of ran into Home Depot while you were in the states last Saturday. :laugh:


actually there was 2.5" port in mine when you heard it (guessing mine was the one that made you decide to buy one?) 

For reference sake, mine is in approx .53 cu-ft with a chimney port (100% outside the box) and the port is 2.5" inner diameter and approx 17" long (should be a rough tuning of low 30"s) 

My box is 100% MDF (no fibreglass) 

Will


----------



## BowDown

3cyltrbo said:


> actually there was 2.5" port in mine when you heard it (guessing mine was the one that made you decide to buy one?)
> 
> For reference sake, mine is in approx .53 cu-ft with a chimney port (100% outside the box) and the port is 2.5" inner diameter and approx 17" long (should be a rough tuning of low 30"s)
> 
> My box is 100% MDF (no fibreglass)
> 
> Will


Ya, your sub impressed me enough to buy it. Curious how it's going to sound up front. 

I should end up with close to the same net volume as you (0.55ft^3). The port length I have come up with using WinISD is 18.75" long w/2.5" diameter. This will tune it to 37hz, and give me an F3 of 33hz w/a nice slope. My port will be coming off the passenger side of the box through the 1/2" birch ply.


----------



## jim walter

pamantea said:


> Hey Jim, (this was actually posted back on page 7 but got overlooked unfortunately)
> 
> I need some advice.
> I have been patiently waiting to get ahold of these subs since they were announced earlier this year. My current setup:
> 2010 Toyota Tacoma Access Cab TRD
> Alpine INA-900 (BT bought separetely)
> Imprint Module
> Sirius module
> Alpine PDX F6 running Hertz component MLK (6.5" and tweeter)
> Alpine PDX M12 running a temporary sub until i decide on what to do with the 8"s
> 
> So, the original plan was to cut out the storage units (for the jack etc.) under the back seats and build a box for 4 of the type R 8"s in a sealed enclosure. This would be great, except for it would be time consuming, high cost, and I would lose my storage area. I am now thinking of building an enclosure between the seats and put possibly 3 or 4 of the 8"s in there. I was thinking maybe 2 downfiring and 1 up? or all three up?
> What is your opinion and what should I am for for volume and anything else? Thank you in advance!
> (I listen to rock such as Tool, Metallica, some alternative, and some mainstream stuff for the GF as well as Eminem)
> 
> Peter


Hi Peter,

Sorry I missed it :blush:

My recommendation will all come down to how much airspace your new setup will have. Knowning what you can get out of a PDX-M12 and 4 of these vented, I say that should be your target and we can work backwards from there. 

Essentially, if you have room for 3 or 4 of these in 0.5 or greater each (plus port), I'd go that route. Once you have to step down to two vented (if you have less than 1.0cubes), I'd go to 4 sealed.

Up or down-firing: I'd prefer it all to be the same, especially when you are going vertical, as that will affect the perceived impact of the system if you are opposing them.

Hope that helps. Post up some pics or measurements of what you're working on and I'm sure either Xtreme or I can help you out to get something going.

Jim


----------



## pamantea

Thanks Jim, 

I truly appreciate your response. I am after SQ so whatever ends up working better for that then I will be happy. I sat inside my truck taking measurements and thinking up schematics for a long long time last night and cant seem to get something concrete. I will try to post pictures tonight with a few basic measurements. I am planning on starting construction tomorrow night with a friend so I do understand that this is very very last minute! 
The easiest measurement to toss out there right now is that the distance between the two rear seats is 11" (so 9.5" using 3/4") MDF. The height is undetermined. The length is goofy due to the floor and console. From the console to the base of the storage compartment is 14" then up 3 5/8" for the storage compartment then another 12" to the back wall. The box CANNOT be wider than 11" due to the seats because I do want them to be functional. The center console (between driver and passenger) height is about 12 1/2". It would be nice to have something that looked like a continuation of the console and not a gigantic piece of wood running up the back wall. I will try to put up a picture tonight to give a better idea of my numbers. Thanks!


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> Hi Peter,
> 
> Sorry I missed it :blush:
> 
> My recommendation will all come down to how much airspace your new setup will have. Knowning what you can get out of a PDX-M12 and 4 of these vented, I say that should be your target and we can work backwards from there.
> 
> Essentially, if you have room for 3 or 4 of these in 0.5 or greater each (plus port), I'd go that route. Once you have to step down to two vented (if you have less than 1.0cubes), I'd go to 4 sealed.
> 
> Up or down-firing: I'd prefer it all to be the same, especially when you are going vertical, as that will affect the perceived impact of the system if you are opposing them.
> 
> Hope that helps. Post up some pics or measurements of what you're working on and I'm sure either Xtreme or I can help you out to get something going.
> 
> Jim


So, I tried to use the easiest method I could think of. The distances are as follows:
Blue to Yellow - 13"
Yellow to Green - 3 5/8"
Green to White - 12"
Floor to top of console - roughly 12"
Bottom of console to where the tape measure is - 3 1/2"
Top of console to back - 22"
Width between seats - 11" (therefore box will have internal width 9 1/2". Using 3/4"MDF.

Thanks again!!!!!


----------



## jim walter

A rough calculation says thats maybe 20.5x9.5x8.5(avg) .. roughly 0.95 cubes. I'd say go with 3 sealed in a box like that. Get 16oz of polyfill to stuff it as well and you should have a very nice SQ setup with some nice SPL capability as well. I'd fire two woofers outward, directly behind the console and the third upfiring close to the back wall.

Hope that helps.

Jim


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> A rough calculation says thats maybe 20.5x9.5x8.5(avg) .. roughly 0.95 cubes. I'd say go with 3 sealed in a box like that. Get 16oz of polyfill to stuff it as well and you should have a very nice SQ setup with some nice SPL capability as well. I'd fire two woofers outward, directly behind the console and the third upfiring close to the back wall.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Jim



Hey Jim, 

Thanks again. We were thinking 3 sealed as well. What do you mean by having two firing outwards?
Also, what would I be looking at for crossover settings?

Thanks!


----------



## jim walter

Meaning one firing out the sides of the box at each of the doors. Having 11" width will allow the woofers to be placed back to back in the box.

As far as XO, it really depends on what you are running up front and if you have time correction available for the mains.


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> Meaning one firing out the sides of the box at each of the doors. Having 11" width will allow the woofers to be placed back to back in the box.
> 
> As far as XO, it really depends on what you are running up front and if you have time correction available for the mains.


Hey, 

I was hoping to shy away from that idea just because of putting suitcases, bagbacks etc back there. I would so choked if I ruined my sub that way. Do you think there are any other options? Would 1 firing into the back of the console and 2 upwards work?
Thanks!


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> Meaning one firing out the sides of the box at each of the doors. Having 11" width will allow the woofers to be placed back to back in the box.
> 
> As far as XO, it really depends on what you are running up front and if you have time correction available for the mains.


Hey Jim, 

I see the grills online and have decided that subs firing at the console I am guessing will cause far too many vibrations. If we built it to 3/4 inch above the console we end up with 1.146 cubes total. That would lead me to think 2 outfiring and 2 upfiring? what would you do?


----------



## jim walter

I don't think you'll be able to physically fit the magnets inside the box in that arrangement .... if you can mock it up to make it fit, go for it.

Still ... I'd probably stick with the 3 woofers in a bit larger airspace for each one.


----------



## Thechosenone74

Jim,

I have a 08 Toyota Tundra Doublecab and I was looking at putting 3 of these under the rear seats. I think I have enough room for a .75 sealed box that would be 4.75" high with subs firing into the bottom of the seats. I'd be running these off of an old MRV-1507. Does this sound like a good setup and does that box size sound right or should i go a little bigger? As far as music, I listen to a mix of everything but mainly heavier rock Metallica, Slayer, Pantera, but anything from Ice Cube to Country can be thrown in there. Thanks.


----------



## SWRocket

Hi Jim,
I'm really excited about these 8s and I'm going to replace my one Morel 12 with 2 of them.
I'm running in a 2010 Camaro and was thinking of running them ported through the rear deck (I was thinking 4th order bandpass originally as I used to run in the old days but not sure if that would work) . The amp I have is an ARC SE2300.
First, is the amp enough and should I get the 4ohm or 2ohm version of the subs? 
second, what box and port sizes should I use? 
P.S. I'm also waiting for the dash kit to come out so I can put in a 910


----------



## Zbebop

Does the seal box have to be the width height-length dimensions specified in the Alpine box (13x13x5.5)? I can fit a seal box that is 9x7x15. I am not sure if this size will be tuned sufficiency for the 8" sub. Is this size ok?


----------



## Zbebop

jooonnn said:


> I've got a excellent condition SWR-843D that I only tested for about 20 minutes that I am about to post up on the classifieds if anyone is interested in buying one. I couldn't fit it into my door with my fabrication skills and make it look decent


Still for sale?


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> I don't think you'll be able to physically fit the magnets inside the box in that arrangement .... if you can mock it up to make it fit, go for it.
> 
> Still ... I'd probably stick with the 3 woofers in a bit larger airspace for each one.


Hey Jim, 

So this is what we ended up building, and if my math was correct it will be about 0.93 cubic feet. You mentioned Polyfill. Sorry for the dumb question, but what exactly does that do and is it necessary? Also, is it possible to vinyl that box?

Also, I am running the INA900, imprint, F6, M12, Hertz MLK 165 (crossover at 2.2khz 12/12db) and I just bought the Voce 3.0" midrange speakers

I am thinking of running the following setup, please guide me into what is the best crossover setup.

Sub - 100hz 12db
6.5" - 125hz - 500hz - 12db/12db
3"/tweeter - 500hz crossover from the deck run to the Hertz crossover at 2.2kHz. 

Thanks for the help as always!


----------



## GouRiki

You could easily run the MLK midwoofers lower. I believe I have mine crossed at 63Hz with a 24db slope with no problems and plenty of up front bass.


----------



## XtremeRevolution

pamantea said:


> Hey Jim,
> 
> So this is what we ended up building, and if my math was correct it will be about 0.93 cubic feet. You mentioned Polyfill. Sorry for the dumb question, but what exactly does that do and is it necessary? Also, is it possible to vinyl that box?
> 
> Thanks for the help as always!


Polyfill makes the driver sound like its in a larger box. It flattens the frequency response a bit. In reality though, polyfill is mediocre at best. Fiberglass insulation works 10x better as fill.

If the box sounds too peaky or boomy, add some to smooth it out. 

You can vinyl anything. Whether or not its going to last depends on how well you vinyl it. I personally don't think it would look very good. You can get box carpeting at partsexpress for like $6.50-$8 per linear yard at 48-56" material width.


----------



## BowDown

823D in .58ft^3 net w/external port tuned to 33hz... Should I use some poly fill in the box? Box is a fairly complex fiberglass/birch ply construction.


----------



## pamantea

GouRiki said:


> You could easily run the MLK midwoofers lower. I believe I have mine crossed at 63Hz with a 24db slope with no problems and plenty of up front bass.


Would I want to run it that low considering I will have 3 8" subs? I want very little distortion and be able to listen to it at relatively high volume. Maybe something like a 100hz cutoff @ 12bd for the mille and 80hz for the type rs?
Or should I set them the same? (both at 100 or both at 80?)


----------



## pamantea

XtremeRevolution said:


> Polyfill makes the driver sound like its in a larger box. It flattens the frequency response a bit. In reality though, polyfill is mediocre at best. Fiberglass insulation works 10x better as fill.
> 
> If the box sounds too peaky or boomy, add some to smooth it out.
> 
> You can vinyl anything. Whether or not its going to last depends on how well you vinyl it. I personally don't think it would look very good. You can get box carpeting at partsexpress for like $6.50-$8 per linear yard at 48-56" material width.


Thank you for your input Xtreme. 
Should I listen to it before putting in the insulation? And what about imprinting?


----------



## UNFORGIVEN

pamantea said:


> Thank you for your input Xtreme.
> Should I listen to it before putting in the insulation? And what about imprinting?


To answer the question.
For best results listen to the setup with and without polyfill to compare and choose the best sounding for you.

As far as imprinting.. I personally would use this feature to fine tune AFTER you've made a decision about the polyfill


----------



## jim walter

Zbebop said:


> Does the seal box have to be the width height-length dimensions specified in the Alpine box (13x13x5.5)? I can fit a seal box that is 9x7x15. I am not sure if this size will be tuned sufficiency for the 8" sub. Is this size ok?


That size should work just fine. If possible, make the front baffle out of 3/4" material and the sides and back from 1/2" material.

That'll make the box just a tad bigger .32 --> .38 and should add just a bit more low end extension. If not, the 0.32 with some stuffing/fill will be well within the recommended range and should be a nice setup.

Jim


----------



## GouRiki

pamantea said:


> Would I want to run it that low considering I will have 3 8" subs? I want very little distortion and be able to listen to it at relatively high volume. Maybe something like a 100hz cutoff @ 12bd for the mille and 80hz for the type rs?
> Or should I set them the same? (both at 100 or both at 80?)


I was just throwing that out there since I also have the MLK 165's and I did use a 843d ported briefly. I also like to listen to music at very loud volumes and I have never had any problems with the MLK 165s. I do have them in my kicks though run active off a 5.1k so that could also add to the reason why I don't get distortion. It's mostly a personal preference and you should play with it once you have everything finished.


----------



## jim walter

pamantea said:


> Hey Jim,
> 
> So this is what we ended up building, and if my math was correct it will be about 0.93 cubic feet. You mentioned Polyfill. Sorry for the dumb question, but what exactly does that do and is it necessary? Also, is it possible to vinyl that box?
> 
> Also, I am running the INA900, imprint, F6, M12, Hertz MLK 165 (crossover at 2.2khz 12/12db) and I just bought the Voce 3.0" midrange speakers
> 
> I am thinking of running the following setup, please guide me into what is the best crossover setup.
> 
> Sub - 100hz 12db
> 6.5" - 125hz - 500hz - 12db/12db
> 3"/tweeter - 500hz crossover from the deck run to the Hertz crossover at 2.2kHz.
> 
> Thanks for the help as always!


Good job!

I'd start at 80Hz/12dB on the fronts (or 63Hz with a steeper slope if you have it available) and 100Hz on the subs (or at 80/18dB if you can run the fronts lower). With a nice 6.5" like that, you are more than fine to let them run down to 80Hz or even lower with good protection.


----------



## jim walter

BowDown said:


> 823D in .58ft^3 net w/external port tuned to 33hz... Should I use some poly fill in the box? Box is a fairly complex fiberglass/birch ply construction.


No need to.


----------



## jim walter

pamantea said:


> Thank you for your input Xtreme.
> Should I listen to it before putting in the insulation? And what about imprinting?


If you have the polyfill, throw it in there. If not, go ahead and install the box as is and give the woofers a day or two to break in. Ten make your judgement whether or not you feel the need to change the sound (adding the fill will basically take away a bit of snap and add more extension).


----------



## XtremeRevolution

jim walter said:


> If you have the polyfill, throw it in there. If not, go ahead and install the box as is and give the woofers a day or two to break in. Ten make your judgement whether or not you feel the need to change the sound (adding the fill will basically take away a bit of snap and add more extension).


Precisely what he said.


----------



## thehatedguy

I bet 5 of those on an open ended cube manifold loaded through an arm rest would be pretty fun.


----------



## Hertz5400LincolnLS

thehatedguy said:


> I bet 5 of those on an open ended cube manifold loaded through an arm rest would be pretty fun.


Will you please PM me to talk more about this type of enclosure? I have a 4th order ported thru the armrest but want to experiment with something else like what you mentioned, hopefully to save a little space. Seems as if that the type pf alignment you are suggesting would be similar to a 4th order though?

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> If you have the polyfill, throw it in there. If not, go ahead and install the box as is and give the woofers a day or two to break in. Ten make your judgement whether or not you feel the need to change the sound (adding the fill will basically take away a bit of snap and add more extension).


Having all of you help out is truly amazing and makes installing car audio so much more enjoyable! So, I have pondered vinyl, carpet and painting the box. I just spoke with my friend who helped build the box and suggested we just fiberglass it and paint it. I think I like that idea! Adding to that I am considering adding a little plexi glass piece in to see the magnets. The plexi piece will be on the top of the box. I was also considering adding some little red LEDs in there to light up the box. I like red because my dash and deck are both red and the Alpine logo is also red! 
Also, how would we go about finishing the inside of the box? (ex: Just paint over the silicone?) This wasn't taken into consideration and there is much silicone along all of the edges now haha. 
What do you think? 
I have the INA900 and imprint. I do believe I have Flat,6db,12db,18db and 24db slopes (cant remember if 36 is an option). Sorry for all the questions, but is it better to overlap the crossovers or leave a gap, also considering I will imprint later.
Front at 100Hz 12db and sub 80Hz 12db vs. front 80Hz 12db and sub 100Hz 12db?

Thanks again!!


----------



## jim walter

Glad to see you are having fun  this camaraderie is what keeps our niche industry alive ... having worked at a few of the big names in music and audio, I can tell you one thing: The culture in this industry is amazing ... most everyone here is a lifer and loves music and sound more than most anything (save for fast cars! )



pamantea said:


> Having all of you help out is truly amazing and makes installing car audio so much more enjoyable! So, I have pondered vinyl, carpet and painting the box. I just spoke with my friend who helped build the box and suggested we just fiberglass it and paint it. I think I like that idea! Adding to that I am considering adding a little plexi glass piece in to see the magnets. The plexi piece will be on the top of the box. I was also considering adding some little red LEDs in there to light up the box. I like red because my dash and deck are both red and the Alpine logo is also red!
> Also, how would we go about finishing the inside of the box? (ex: Just paint over the silicone?) This wasn't taken into consideration and there is much silicone along all of the edges now haha.


To finish the inside of the box, I'd use a spray on truck bed liner type material, it will adhere to most anything and has a heavy texture so that it will cover up any excess glue or gaps in the inside. The color is a satin black, and will allow the box to glow slightly, but your visual focus will be on the light hitting the reflective metal of the woofers.



pamantea said:


> I have the INA900 and imprint. I do believe I have Flat,6db,12db,18db and 24db slopes (cant remember if 36 is an option). Sorry for all the questions, but is it better to overlap the crossovers or leave a gap, also considering I will imprint later.
> Front at 100Hz 12db and sub 80Hz 12db vs. front 80Hz 12db and sub 100Hz 12db?
> 
> Thanks again!!


I have my system overlapped on the fronts, [email protected] and [email protected] ... but that's for my taste. Play around with the settings, saving a few different points in each of the presets and then you can "demo" them. Let you ears decide what you like.


----------



## thehatedguy

Take a 10x10x10 cube, remove one of the sides to make a 5 sided box. Put a sub on each of the sides of the box and fire the open end through the arm rest. You could then invert 2 of the subs to even further help lower distortion.

You could do something like that IB, sealed, or ported.

Would be expensive, and you would probably get more output from a pair of 12s, but this would certainly look cool.




Hertz5400LincolnLS said:


> Will you please PM me to talk more about this type of enclosure? I have a 4th order ported thru the armrest but want to experiment with something else like what you mentioned, hopefully to save a little space. Seems as if that the type pf alignment you are suggesting would be similar to a 4th order though?
> 
> Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk


----------



## Zbebop

jim walter said:


> That size should work just fine. If possible, make the front baffle out of 3/4" material and the sides and back from 1/2" material.
> 
> That'll make the box just a tad bigger .32 --> .38 and should add just a bit more low end extension. If not, the 0.32 with some stuffing/fill will be well within the recommended range and should be a nice setup.
> 
> Jim


Thanks for the quick reply! Please elaborate on what is meant by low end extension. 

Would the response of the sub be improved if the inside rear of the box is curved up towards the back of the sub?


----------



## quality_sound

Low end extension is how low the sub will play.


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> Glad to see you are having fun  this camaraderie is what keeps our niche industry alive ... having worked at a few of the big names in music and audio, I can tell you one thing: The culture in this industry is amazing ... most everyone here is a lifer and loves music and sound more than most anything (save for fast cars! )
> 
> 
> 
> To finish the inside of the box, I'd use a spray on truck bed liner type material, it will adhere to most anything and has a heavy texture so that it will cover up any excess glue or gaps in the inside. The color is a satin black, and will allow the box to glow slightly, but your visual focus will be on the light hitting the reflective metal of the woofers.
> 
> 
> 
> I have my system overlapped on the fronts, [email protected] and [email protected] ... but that's for my taste. Play around with the settings, saving a few different points in each of the presets and then you can "demo" them. Let you ears decide what you like.



First off, WOW!! I installed the subs last night but was only able to listen to them for about half an hour. These are truly incredible. I was worried about impact and SPL but they are far above and beyond what I was expecting. I also purchased the truck liner coating today to get ready for our fiberglass project. As for the red LEDs....where would I find these? and would it be best to run it off of aux power? Thanks!
(I cant wait to get the 3.0 av voce midrange installed in a couple days and the imprint done as well!)


----------



## Zbebop

jim walter said:


> That size should work just fine. If possible, make the front baffle out of 3/4" material and the sides and back from 1/2" material.
> 
> That'll make the box just a tad bigger .32 --> .38 and should add just a bit more low end extension. If not, the 0.32 with some stuffing/fill will be well within the recommended range and should be a nice setup.
> 
> Jim


I guess I am loss on your calculation. I believe it would be .54 cu.ft for a 9"x7"x15" (hxdxl) size box. This of course is outside measurements. Would it be better to lessen the length to 9" or? That would calculate to 567cu.in. or ,328cu.ft.


----------



## Hertz5400LincolnLS

> That size should work just fine. If possible, make the front baffle out of 3/4" material and the sides and back from 1/2" material.
> 
> That'll make the box just a tad bigger .32 --> .38 and should add just a bit more low end extension. If not, the 0.32 with some stuffing/fill will be well within the recommended range and should be a nice setup.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I am loss on your calculation. I believe it would be .54 cu.ft for a 9"x7"x15" (hxdxl) size box. This of course is outside measurements. Would it be better to lessen the length to 9" or? That would calculate to 567cu.in. or ,328cu.ft.
Click to expand...

You calculate airspace with the internal dimensions since you have to take into consideration the thickness of the wood. You also need to allow for driver displacement, which is minimal, but you should account for it considering the enclosure is small. If you build the enclosure too big to your liking you can add bracing to reduce airspace. If you make the enclosure a tad too small you can invert the driver, and/or you can use polyfill to trick the driver into thinking it is in a larger enclosure. The rule usually is 1lb/sq.ft, but again you can use less if you'd like, just be sure to try to keep it clear from the drivers suspension. 

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk


----------



## Zbebop

Thanks for the information. I will take Jim's and your information when constucting the sub box.


----------



## rexroadj

Hey Jim.....can you hit up my review......Got some ?s........Put your thinking cap on


----------



## fight4life28

I wonder how much better sounding the 8 inch sounds vs my 12 inch.


----------



## madweazl

Just about ready to start purchasing items but was curious as to what the realistic frequency response would be. I dont have the best vehicle for the system ('06 GTO) but I'm planning on mounting 2 in each rear side panel of the car. Will I see much output below 40hz in a sealed enclosure (looks like .35 is the sweet spot from what I've read in here). I was eyeballing the M12 but I'm thinking it may be a couple hundred watts short from ideal?


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Patrick Bateman said:


> Jim,
> 
> I've put together a tapped horn design for your woofer. Here's some sims of it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The design is based off of one that the folks at AVS forum have been building. It's well documented, with a Google Sketchup layout and real-world measurements. All I did was mod it so that it would work with your woofer.
> 
> The advantage of your woofer is more output, the woofer is ubiquitous, and it's a better match for car audio amps than the woofer at AVS forum.
> 
> The advantage of a tapped horn over a vented box is more output, and reduced group delay. A tapped horn basically has better dynamis than a vented box, but doesn't suffer from the group delay that makes vented boxes sound "slow."
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> Audio Psychosis • View topic - Cheap and Different Sub


I've decided to use the Alpine "subs" as the woofer in my new home speakers. I'll be posting information on the design here:

Audio Psychosis • View topic - an iPod Dock for the Psychotic

If you ever wanted the most ridiculous iPod dock in the world, you've come to the right place...


----------



## Patrick Bateman

fight4life28 said:


> I wonder how much better sounding the 8 inch sounds vs my 12 inch.


That depends. Do your twelves have a modern motor design, or is it conventional?

The secret sauce is the Alpine subs is a flat BL curve which reduces distortion at high excursion.

Basically, you should expect it to get loud cleanly.

I ordered two today, so I'll know if this works out soon.


----------



## madweazl

madweazl said:


> Just about ready to start purchasing items but was curious as to what the realistic frequency response would be. I dont have the best vehicle for the system ('06 GTO) but I'm planning on mounting 2 in each rear side panel of the car. Will I see much output below 40hz in a sealed enclosure (looks like .35 is the sweet spot from what I've read in here). I was eyeballing the M12 but I'm thinking it may be a couple hundred watts short from ideal?


Would there be much of a difference between the 4, 8" subs and a pair of 12" Alpine slims in terms of accuracy and output? Looks like either setup would be a good match for the M12 and my cars space constraints. Appreciate any input you guys/gals may have.


----------



## subwoofery

madweazl said:


> Would there be much of a difference between the 4, 8" subs and a pair of 12" Alpine slims in terms of accuracy and output? Looks like either setup would be a good match for the M12 and my cars space constraints. Appreciate any input you guys/gals may have.


The 2 x 12s will be louder and fit in a smaller sealed box than the 4 x 8s - unless you go towards the smaller recommended enclosure (0.15cuft per 8) 
Accuracy? Depends on the box 
The 4 x 8s should have less power compression too 

Kelvin


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> Good job!
> 
> I'd start at 80Hz/12dB on the fronts (or 63Hz with a steeper slope if you have it available) and 100Hz on the subs (or at 80/18dB if you can run the fronts lower). With a nice 6.5" like that, you are more than fine to let them run down to 80Hz or even lower with good protection.


Hey Jim, 

I love these subs and have the Voce 3" subs installed. I have now tried imprinting with little success. I have a windows Vista Laptop in which I installed a virtual machine with XP on it to run the imprint. I connected the mic, usb, turn key to acc, load up software, select front right, place the mic appropriately start measurement. Sometimes it gets to the rear right then gives me error 2, sometimes it will get to the next measurement, then error 2, always error 2. I have tried different sequences of plugging and unplugging things, but it doesn't seem to help. The furthest I have gotten was 3 mic placements (driver, rear, passenger) then error. Do you or anyone have any ideas on how I can fix this? I have spent far too many hours already being frustrated. Please help!
Thanks as always!!


----------



## jim walter

Pamantea,

Try tuning it manually, the H100 will be able to do all of the time alignment, EQ and crossovers for you.

Post up the measurements of the distance between the cone of each of your speakers and your head.

Example:
Left Front 6.5" Woofer - 27"
Right Front 3" midrange - 34" 

... and so on ...

From there, I can give you some suggestions of where to start with TA and your XO point as we can get it tuned up pretty nicely.

Regarding Imprint on Win7, I really don't know as I still run XP. I have read a lot of complaints on here with users having the same trouble as you though .. so you aren't alone. PC software and audio processors are out of my reach here internally, so I really can't be much help on fixing that side of things.

Jim


----------



## Zbebop

jim walter said:


> That size should work just fine. If possible, make the front baffle out of 3/4" material and the sides and back from 1/2" material.
> 
> That'll make the box just a tad bigger .32 --> .38 and should add just a bit more low end extension. If not, the 0.32 with some stuffing/fill will be well within the recommended range and should be a nice setup.
> 
> Jim


I could increase the lenght by one inch (i.e. 16" outside dimension). The sub box would be 7"x9"x16" or 810 cu. in. Would the additional inch in length be better?


----------



## madweazl

jim walter said:


> Pamantea,
> 
> Try tuning it manually, the H100 will be able to do all of the time alignment, EQ and crossovers for you.
> 
> Post up the measurements of the distance between the cone of each of your speakers and your head.
> 
> Example:
> Left Front 6.5" Woofer - 27"
> Right Front 3" midrange - 34"
> 
> ... and so on ...
> 
> From there, I can give you some suggestions of where to start with TA and your XO point as we can get it tuned up pretty nicely.
> 
> Regarding Imprint on Win7, I really don't know as I still run XP. I have read a lot of complaints on here with users having the same trouble as you though .. so you aren't alone. PC software and audio processors are out of my reach here internally, so I really can't be much help on fixing that side of things.
> 
> Jim


Not sure if you've explored it yet but Windows 7 supports Windows XP mode and it is a free download from Microsoft's website. Hope it helps out. It is a native XP installation and will allow you to do anything you would on a typical XP machine (vice just having a virtual machine running).


----------



## pamantea

jim walter said:


> Pamantea,
> 
> Try tuning it manually, the H100 will be able to do all of the time alignment, EQ and crossovers for you.
> 
> Post up the measurements of the distance between the cone of each of your speakers and your head.
> 
> Example:
> Left Front 6.5" Woofer - 27"
> Right Front 3" midrange - 34"
> 
> ... and so on ...
> 
> From there, I can give you some suggestions of where to start with TA and your XO point as we can get it tuned up pretty nicely.
> 
> Regarding Imprint on Win7, I really don't know as I still run XP. I have read a lot of complaints on here with users having the same trouble as you though .. so you aren't alone. PC software and audio processors are out of my reach here internally, so I really can't be much help on fixing that side of things.
> 
> Jim


Hey, 

I installed XP on my windows vista laptop via a virtual machine. I seemed to get it working by installing the software once everything is plugged in. I did three placements all in the drivers seat and uploaded both the reference and reference w/mid. It seems to have changed the crossover points on my mids because when playing one song I could hear them playing below what I would like them to. (over excursion?) Is there anyway to set the crossover points and keep them that way? 

I tried turning the imprint off and going back to manual, changing the crossovers to test it (take out the mid range by increasing high to 2.2khz or lowering mid high xo to 100hz to take out 6.5). Once i set this and saved to memory, I went back and selected imprint curve 1 and I could hear everything again. This leads me to believe you cannot set your own xo points. Would I be better off tuning manually? 

With the time alignment, there is front left, rear left, front right, rear right. Is front left the 6.5 and the rear left the 3" and tweeter? And if so do I measure the distance to the average between the 2?

Thanks again as always!
I tried to get measurements to the center of my head
Left 6.5" to head - 46"
Left 3" to head - 34"
Left tweeter to head - 35"
Right 6.5" to head 58"
Right 3" to head - 50"
Right tweeter to head - 53"
Sub Left and Sub right - there are three subs...Not sure what to put here?

Sub Active 80hz (all 12db slopes)
6.5" Active 80hz to 500hz
3" Active 500hz to passive 2.2khz
Tweeter Passive 2.2khz and up.
6.5 are powered on their own channel of F6 amp
3" and tweeters are on other channel of F6 amp
3 Alpine type R's are on M12 amp

Can my deck run the H800? If so, please sell me one. I want to get this imprinted haha
As a side note, I checked the calibration results in customer files and for channel 3 and 4 it says speaker not detected. Is my setup possible to imprint? Should I zero my xo points before imprinting?


----------



## onefaststang

Holy hijack.


----------



## jriggs

Getting back on track, its been a few weeks since I built a sealed enclosure for two 843. Well, in short they are very impressive. Blend extremely well with the front stage. I have found myself wondering if they were on a few times they blend so well, guess I wasn't used to that. They get pretty loud and low too - with out distorting. Very clean. In the end though I am left wanting more due to the lack of overall output in my Tahoe. Maybe two more and/or going ported would help? IDK, I am pretty sure that I am going to unload these and try out a couple of 12's - probably the Polk SR's. Anyone looking for a great deal on a pair of these amazing Type R 843's?


----------



## rexroadj

jriggs said:


> Getting back on track, its been a few weeks since I built a sealed enclosure for two 843. Well, in short they are very impressive. Blend extremely well with the front stage. I have found myself wondering if they were on a few times they blend so well, guess I wasn't used to that. They get pretty loud and low too - with out distorting. Very clean. In the end though I am left wanting more due to the lack of overall output in my Tahoe. Maybe two more and/or going ported would help? IDK, I am pretty sure that I am going to unload these and try out a couple of 12's - probably the Polk SR's. Anyone looking for a great deal on a pair of these amazing Type R 843's?


I wouldnt pull the plug yet! I would go ported, there is a huge difference! If you can fit more ported then I would absolutely go that route (assuming you have the power). You already own two of them so it seems like it would be easier and cheaper and get some insane results! If you could do 4 ported I would say you would be a REALLY happy camper


----------



## BowDown

I agree. From plotting on WinISD these subs look like ported monsters. If I had the room I would of went ported.


----------



## rexroadj

BowDown said:


> I agree. From plotting on WinISD these subs look like ported monsters. If I had the room I would of went ported.


Two ported with 900w was absolutely astounding to me (and others that listened to my truck) TONS of output and super clean sound. You cant seem to get them to show any signs of breakup or weakness (at least not with 900 to the pair..... I cant wait to get my 1k to them in my center console in the jeep


----------



## jim walter

jriggs said:


> Getting back on track, its been a few weeks since I built a sealed enclosure for two 843. Well, in short they are very impressive. Blend extremely well with the front stage. I have found myself wondering if they were on a few times they blend so well, guess I wasn't used to that. They get pretty loud and low too - with out distorting. Very clean. In the end though I am left wanting more due to the lack of overall output in my Tahoe. Maybe two more and/or going ported would help? IDK, I am pretty sure that I am going to unload these and try out a couple of 12's - probably the Polk SR's. Anyone looking for a great deal on a pair of these amazing Type R 843's?


Give us some space requirements (dimensions) and we'll give you a box that'll change your mind  Even with "just" two of them


----------



## jriggs

I have about 42" (w) X 20" (h) X 12" (d) space directly behind the middle row seats in the cargo area.


----------



## ///Audience

I havent read this entire thread, but I have noticed a huge turn around in the forums love for the Type ARGHHHH... im sure that this redesign has yielded a much better driver, but my question is why not rebrand it under a different name??

The Type R has such a reputable stigma for being a 'SPL sub or One note wonder". Why not create a new class for a new class of woofer? I am an authorized Alpine dealer and we have trouble pushing any alpine speaker off our shelves. Hell ive had some Type R's from years back that I cant move for $99 Bucks!! 

I definatley plan on putting some of these 8" on my next order and trying them out for myself, but its going to take a while for Alpine to recover the 'R' name.


----------



## rexroadj

BassBaller5 said:


> I havent read this entire thread, but I have noticed a huge turn around in the forums love for the Type ARGHHHH... im sure that this redesign has yielded a much better driver, but my question is why not rebrand it under a different name??
> 
> The Type R has such a reputable stigma for being a 'SPL sub or One note wonder". Why not create a new class for a new class of woofer? I am an authorized Alpine dealer and we have trouble pushing any alpine speaker off our shelves. Hell ive had some Type R's from years back that I cant move for $99 Bucks!!
> 
> I definatley plan on putting some of these 8" on my next order and trying them out for myself, but its going to take a while for Alpine to recover the 'R' name.



Interesting? Never heard of such an issue, certainly not up here in the northeast? Nor have I ever heard someone classify the type R as spl or one note wonder from any year??? Not that they were exacly my "favorites" thats for sure 
I think the proof with the new type R's is absolutely in the pudding. I have heard them all and the 8s and 15s are most impressive to me (I know....opposite spectrums indeed). My advice is setup some sort of blind listening environment for people to demo (car, room, etc....). NOTHING stronger then that to prove your point in audio (IMO). I dont see how anyone can say these new ones are one note wonders, to the point that I wouldnt even think twice about using them in an sq comp build!


----------



## Sonnie

Hi Jim...

I am running one of the 823D's off of a JL Audio HD900/5 ... so it is getting up to 500 watts. It is installed in a 2007 Ford Sport Trac in the factory sealed enclosure at .5ft³. When I get it at the highest volume I think it should sound about right, I seem to continuously bottom it out. If I turn it down any lower, it just ain't enough. I am wondering if I knocked that factory enclosure down to about .3ft³ if that would help with the power handling capabilities.

Thanks!


----------



## rexroadj

Scoobiedude said:


> Hi Jim...
> 
> I am running one of the 823D's off of a JL Audio HD900/5 ... so it is getting up to 500 watts. It is installed in a 2007 Ford Sport Trac in the factory sealed enclosure at .5ft³. When I get it at the highest volume I think it should sound about right, I seem to continuously bottom it out. If I turn it down any lower, it just ain't enough. I am wondering if I knocked that factory enclosure down to about .3ft³ if that would help with the power handling capabilities.
> 
> Thanks!


YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thats exactly the problem your having ......to large an enclosure!


----------



## subwoofery

Scoobiedude said:


> Hi Jim...
> 
> I am running one of the 823D's off of a JL Audio HD900/5 ... so it is getting up to 500 watts. It is installed in a 2007 Ford Sport Trac in the factory sealed enclosure at .5ft³. When I get it at the highest volume I think it should sound about right, I seem to continuously bottom it out. If I turn it down any lower, it just ain't enough. I am wondering if I knocked that factory enclosure down to about .3ft³ if that would help with the power handling capabilities.
> 
> Thanks!


Modelled it and you are going over Xmax @ 57Hz with a 0.5cuft box with 500 watts. Your sub needs half your box in order to take all of the 500 watts yet still keep Xmax below 14mm over the whole bandwith - aka 0.25cuft 

Kelvin


----------



## madweazl

Scoobiedude said:


> Hi Jim...
> 
> I am running one of the 823D's off of a JL Audio HD900/5 ... so it is getting up to 500 watts. It is installed in a 2007 Ford Sport Trac in the factory sealed enclosure at .5ft³. When I get it at the highest volume I think it should sound about right, I seem to continuously bottom it out. If I turn it down any lower, it just ain't enough. I am wondering if I knocked that factory enclosure down to about .3ft³ if that would help with the power handling capabilities.
> 
> Thanks!


The smaller enclosure will help prevent that from happening (.35' seems to be the sweet spot sealed) but based on what I've read, 500w is about the upper limit for continous use.


----------



## SWRocket

Anyone model a bandpass box for these and is willing to share dimensions? I'm thinking of replacing my Morel Ultimo 12 with 2 of these in a bandpass config with a round vent going through the rear deck.


----------



## rexroadj

SWRocket said:


> Anyone model a bandpass box for these and is willing to share dimensions? I'm thinking of replacing my Morel Ultimo 12 with 2 of these in a bandpass config with a round vent going through the rear deck.


X2!!!!!! Not sure how well they will model (probably well considering they do great in everything else and appear to be INSANELY versatile) I think a well designed bandpass box would be sick (again, done properly and in a situation like your after it would be great!)

If it was small enough I would consider it for home or jeep?


----------



## Sonnie

Thanks guys... I kinda figured as much, but wanted to be sure.


----------



## subwoofery

SWRocket said:


> Anyone model a bandpass box for these and is willing to share dimensions? I'm thinking of replacing my Morel Ultimo 12 with 2 of these in a bandpass config with a round vent going through the rear deck.


Ok... I modelled the 2 x 8s VS the sealed 12". 

SPL wise: 








*YELLOW* is Morel 12" in a 1.83cuft sealed box fed with 1000 watts - models strangely with overexcursion @ 60Hz  anyway I kept it like so... 
*ORANGE* is 2x8s in a 2cuft vented box tuned to 29Hz fed with 750 watts - Subsonic set to 30Hz 12dB/oct slope
*PINK* is 2x8s in a 1.8cuft rear chamber & 1cuft front chamber tuned to 50Hz (4th order bandpass) fed with 500 watts - Subsonic set to 25Hz 12dB/oct slope 
*RED* is 2x8s in a 1.5cuft rear chamber tuned to 24Hz & 1.05cuft front chamber tuned to 57Hz (6th order bandpass) also fed with 500 watts. 

As you can see, the 6th order seems like the best choice... But there's a "hick" - the port for the rear chamber needs to be an external one: 








57.33" long if you use a 5" round port  - smaller and you might experience port noise... 









How did I get those enclosure sizes and tuning? I went back and forth between the group delay and Xmax tab: 
















Please note a couple of things... I do believe that group delay is what makes 1 sealed box sound quotation marks "better" unquote marks than let's say a vented enclosure. 
Therefore I tried my best to have a smooth group delay in most of the passband for the 4th and 6th order bandpass - not possible to smooth out the group delay with the vented enclosure... 

I was chocked at how flat the group delay was for the 4th order bandpass - too bad it's low end is limited due to Xmax similar to the vented enclosure - please note how the SPL is the same @ 20Hz for both enclosures... 

IMO, if you can create an external port, I would go with the 6th order bandpass. 
Now, it's probably not the best alignments for each box type but I like it like that 

Kelvin


----------



## SWRocket

WOW! Thank you so much for the hard work subwoofery.
I'm surprised at 2 things; the length of the ports in the bandpass configs and the size of the sealed enclosure for the Morel. I'm running it in a 1.6 cu gross sealed right now fed by an ARC 2300SE in mono (~1300 W).
Sadly, there is no room in my Camaro for a 25" port needed to implement the 4th order config. Since the box is 1 cu that means that more than half the port will be outside and there is simply no room inside the trunk between the floor and the rear deck 
Oh well...back to the drawing board. Maybe 3 of these in a sealed enclosure


----------



## rexroadj

Yes, Thank you Kelvin!!! I could actually pull that 6th order off in my jeep......allow me to explain! Although I can think of about 1000 options that would make a lot more sense
I have been debating (since I have ZERO plans of putting in my back seat) a shallow box that runs the full size of the rear area of the jeep. Think of a false floor of sorts...being so shallow and with bracing etc.... I can really stretch out a 1cuft box and the great part about it is that I would never have to worry about the subs being exposed to **** tossed in the back of it? The greatest part about it is the WOW factor of course!
Wonder how the ppi art 8s would model in the same situation.... Being that output is there biggest downfall (IMO) but sound amazing, and dont need/take any significant power it could be an interesting scenerio? I will put some more thought into this..... Very COOL! 
Thanks again!


----------



## subwoofery

rexroadj said:


> Yes, Thank you Kelvin!!! I could actually pull that 6th order off in my jeep......allow me to explain! Although I can think of about 1000 options that would make a lot more sense
> I have been debating (since I have ZERO plans of putting in my back seat) a shallow box that runs the full size of the rear area of the jeep. Think of a false floor of sorts...being so shallow and with bracing etc.... I can really stretch out a 1cuft box and the great part about it is that I would never have to worry about the subs being exposed to **** tossed in the back of it? The greatest part about it is the WOW factor of course!
> Wonder how the ppi art 8s would model in the same situation.... Being that output is there biggest downfall (IMO) but sound amazing, and dont need/take any significant power it could be an interesting scenerio? I will put some more thought into this..... Very COOL!
> Thanks again!


Tried the A.8SQ and it doesn't work in 4th or 6th order bandpass... It wants 0.1cuft on the rear and 0.1cuft on the front - tuned low like 20Hz...  

Kelvin


----------



## rexroadj

subwoofery said:


> Tried the A.8SQ and it doesn't work in 4th or 6th order bandpass... It wants 0.1cuft on the rear and 0.1cuft on the front - tuned low like 20Hz...
> 
> Kelvin


???? Sounds like it works great? NICE AND SMALL!!!!! :laugh: Now how to fit a port tuned to 20hz in a .2 box:laugh:
Thanks buddy!!!!!!!!


----------



## Patrick Bateman

SWRocket said:


> Anyone model a bandpass box for these and is willing to share dimensions? I'm thinking of replacing my Morel Ultimo 12 with 2 of these in a bandpass config with a round vent going through the rear deck.


Bandpass boxes are pretty tough to implement when a woofer has a low VAS and a lot of excursion. That's because the port gets BIGGER as the VAS gets smaller! So all of that hard work that you've invested in reducing the box size is offset by the port!

Making things even more difficult, a sub with a lot of xmax needs a really huge port, in order to move all that air.

This is one of the problems with WinISD. It does not factor in the efficiency of the port. A program like Hornresp will show you what's REALLY going on, which is that the port loses efficiency if it's too small. Which means that you end up with a box that's unnecessarily complex and not very efficient, unless you use a really big port.

Long story short - bandpass boxes work a lot better with those woofers from the 80s and 90s, which didn't have a lot of excursion, and had a high VAS.

Here in the 21st century, tapped horns work very nicely. Bandpass boxes which use passive radiators instead of ports are great too.

I'm not the only one that's thinking this BTW. Geddes has a few bandpass patents, and he's switched from ports to passive radiators. Bose is in the same boat, and has switched from dual reflex (aka 6th order) bandpass to transmission line enclosures.

And just about everyone else is doing small sealed subs.

I have a tapped horn design for the Alpine on my web site, and I have purchased a set of the woofers which I intend to build soon.


----------



## SWRocket

Thanks for the feedback on this Patrick. You are obviously correct as subwoofery's modelling shows. 
I was looking at bandpass because in '94 I had 2 pioneer 8s (can't remember the model) in 4th order bandpass boxes and they were truly amazing; I was hoping for a repeat 
Sealed it will be. I just need to figure out the best volume to run 3 of them and whether my amp will be enough...


----------



## BowDown

My SWR-823D in 0.41ft^3 (sealed) lined with R13 fiberglass insulation sounds great! You have a great product here.  I'm running it in my dash w/only 160watts RMS. Going to try 300 on it later and see if there's a difference. 

So glad I found this sub.


----------



## Zbebop

BowDown said:


> My SWR-823D in 0.41ft^3 (sealed) lined with R13 fiberglass insulation sounds great! You have a great product here.  I'm running it in my dash w/only 160watts RMS. Going to try 300 on it later and see if there's a difference.
> 
> So glad I found this sub.


Is the 0.41 cu.ft. based upon overall interior cu.ft. dimensions (i.e. without reducing the space for the speaker)? If so, what is the sub box tuned at (hertz level)?


----------



## trojan fan

Patrick Bateman said:


> Bandpass boxes are pretty tough to implement when a woofer has a low VAS and a lot of excursion. That's because the port gets BIGGER as the VAS gets smaller! So all of that hard work that you've invested in reducing the box size is offset by the port!
> 
> Making things even more difficult, a sub with a lot of xmax needs a really huge port, in order to move all that air.
> 
> This is one of the problems with WinISD. It does not factor in the efficiency of the port. A program like Hornresp will show you what's REALLY going on, which is that the port loses efficiency if it's too small. Which means that you end up with a box that's unnecessarily complex and not very efficient, unless you use a really big port.
> 
> Long story short - bandpass boxes work a lot better with those woofers from the 80s and 90s, which didn't have a lot of excursion, and had a high VAS.
> 
> Here in the 21st century, tapped horns work very nicely. Bandpass boxes which use passive radiators instead of ports are great too.
> 
> I'm not the only one that's thinking this BTW. Geddes has a few bandpass patents, and he's switched from ports to passive radiators. Bose is in the same boat, and has switched from dual reflex (aka 6th order) bandpass to transmission line enclosures.
> 
> And just about everyone else is doing small sealed subs.
> 
> I have a tapped horn design for the Alpine on my web site, and I have purchased a set of the woofers which I intend to build soon.



Can you post a link to your web site?

Thanks


----------



## rexroadj

trojan fan said:


> Can you post a link to your web site?
> 
> Thanks


x2!


(and thank you for the info Patrick, as always....very educational)


----------



## BowDown

Zbebop said:


> Is the 0.41 cu.ft. based upon overall interior cu.ft. dimensions (i.e. without reducing the space for the speaker)? If so, what is the sub box tuned at (hertz level)?


0.41 was gross.. So 0.36ft^3 after sub displacement.


----------



## BowDown

Not exactly sure. It's a low 50's F3.. but being sealed tends to give you a larger F3... I bumped the 20-35hz a bit using EQ and it really does give a clean punch down low. Very surprising for the woofer diameter.


----------



## thehatedguy

I haven't modeled the 8, but I had a real nice bandpass for the T12 that used a 15" passive radiator rather than a port.


----------



## subwoofery

Do you know of any 8" passive radiator? 

Kelvin 

Edit: Found a few... Now to model them...


----------



## thehatedguy

You want your passive to be the next size up or two from the size of the active speaker you are using. And/or you will need to use multiple PRs. Your sole output will be from the passive so you want it to displace as much or more than the active speaker you are using.

With an 8" active speaker, I would want a 10 or 12" PR with a lot of excursion.


----------



## subwoofery

thehatedguy said:


> You want your passive to be the next size up or two from the size of the active speaker you are using. And/or you will need to use multiple PRs. Your sole output will be from the passive so you want it to displace as much or more than the active speaker you are using.
> 
> With an 8" active speaker, I would want a 10 or 12" PR with a lot of excursion.


Yeah I know but I was thinking about using 4 x 8" PR for 2 x 8" driver in order to keep the enclosure "shallower"... 

Kelvin 

PS: Do you know where I can download SPEAK? Tried a small search but did not find it yet... 

NVM, found it... Lucky there's web archive


----------



## thehatedguy

Speak

You can model bandpasses using PR as ports using winISD too.


----------



## thehatedguy

And if you can figure out how to use SPEAK, please let me know.


----------



## subwoofery

thehatedguy said:


> Speak
> 
> You can model bandpasses using PR as ports using winISD too.


Yeah found that page but couldn't find the download link :blush: 

Kelvin


----------



## thehatedguy

He has changed the website since I d/led it last month...


----------



## subwoofery

Crap... Seems like I need a registration number... Just e-mailed Gedlee... 
Guess I won't be playing with it tonight  

Kelvin


----------



## thehatedguy

PM me your email, I have it all zipped up with the global driver database.


----------



## ErinH

I downloaded it a while back and never did anything with it. Heck, I don't even know why I downloaded it in the first place.


----------



## Jonathan

When will these woofers be available in Sweden?
Its getting cold here, soon I will need something to fend off the polar bears.

BR
Jonathan


----------



## rexroadj

Jonathan said:


> I will need something to fend off the polar bears.


I suggest a .338 lapua magnum! Excellent range and stopping power! Will drop a polar bear with no problem from most any range


----------



## Neil_J

I'm looking to pick up 4x 843D's and can't find an authorized dealer selling them for less than $160. Any suggestions?


----------



## Zbebop

Neil_J said:


> I'm looking to pick up 4x 843D's and can't find an authorized dealer selling them for less than $160. Any suggestions?


BestBuys has them for $110 (special order)


----------



## Neil_J

Zbebop said:


> BestBuys has them for $110 (special order)


Wasn't able to find it on their website... Called the local store and spoke to a sales rep - after a few minutes on hold, they flat out told me that it's impossible for them to order it. I called two other regional stores, and got the same answer. I'm kinda bummed.. Par for the course from Best Buy, I suppose.

I really wish Al and Ed's still had it on sale. Classic forum-boner cause-and-effect (forum members find good+cheap product. product demand goes up. product is no longer cheap). Now to make the hard decision - pay close to MSRP now, or wait a few months with no bass for the price to come down? Or will it ever come down? Maybe I can catch a Black Friday sale next month?


----------



## Lymen

Sonic electronix


----------



## Zbebop

Neil_J said:


> Wasn't able to find it on their website... Called the local store and spoke to a sales rep - after a few minutes on hold, they flat out told me that it's impossible for them to order it. I called two other regional stores, and got the same answer. I'm kinda bummed.. Par for the course from Best Buy, I suppose.
> 
> I really wish Al and Ed's still had it on sale. Classic forum-boner cause-and-effect (forum members find good+cheap product. product demand goes up. product is no longer cheap). Now to make the hard decision - pay close to MSRP now, or wait a few months with no bass for the price to come down? Or will it ever come down? Maybe I can catch a Black Friday sale next month?


Check our Woofersetc


----------



## Neil_J

Lymen said:


> Sonic electronix


I'm looking to buy from an authorized dealer. I don't believe woofersetc is authorized either


----------



## Neil_J

Neil_J said:


> I'm looking to buy from an authorized dealer. I don't believe woofersetc is authorized either


Has anyone actually purchased these subs from sonic electronix or woofersetc? If so, did everything go smoothly?


----------



## trojan fan

I just checked AL & ED's and you can get them off their site for $99 shipped


----------



## Neil_J

trojan fan said:


> I just checked AL & ED's and you can get them off their site for $99 shipped


OK so long and short of it.. I went to their site yesterday and saw the $159.99 price. Went back a few minutes ago and still $159.99, was about to accuse you of trolling  I browse with Firefox/NoScript and decided for the hell of it to enable javascript, maybe they have some scripted trickery on their page. Enabled it and saw the price-match box asking for an e-mail address. Waited an hour and didn't get anything in my mailbox. Seriously thinking I got trolled at this point. Then check the spam folder, and see the price-match e-mail, they matched the SonicElectronix price of $99. Added four of them to the cart and clicked BUY NOW. I've got four 843D's headed towards my house now.

Trojan Fan, you just saved me $240.00. Thank you sir :bowdown:


----------



## Zbebop

Neil_J said:


> OK so long and short of it.. I went to their site yesterday and saw the $159.99 price. Went back a few minutes ago and still $159.99, was about to accuse you of trolling  I browse with Firefox/NoScript and decided for the hell of it to enable javascript, maybe they have some scripted trickery on their page. Enabled it and saw the price-match box asking for an e-mail address. Waited an hour and didn't get anything in my mailbox. Seriously thinking I got trolled at this point. Then check the spam folder, and see the price-match e-mail, they matched the SonicElectronix price of $99. Added four of them to the cart and clicked BUY NOW. I've got four 843D's headed towards my house now.
> 
> Trojan Fan, you just saved me $240.00. Thank you sir :bowdown:


Good to know!! Is Al&Ed a authorized Alpine dealer?


----------



## Neil_J

Zbebop said:


> Good to know!! Is Al&Ed a authorized Alpine dealer?


Yes, they're listed on Alpine's site

Alpine Electronics - Store Locator


----------



## trojan fan

Neil_J said:


> OK so long and short of it.. I went to their site yesterday and saw the $159.99 price. Went back a few minutes ago and still $159.99, was about to accuse you of trolling  I browse with Firefox/NoScript and decided for the hell of it to enable javascript, maybe they have some scripted trickery on their page. Enabled it and saw the price-match box asking for an e-mail address. Waited an hour and didn't get anything in my mailbox. Seriously thinking I got trolled at this point. Then check the spam folder, and see the price-match e-mail, they matched the SonicElectronix price of $99. Added four of them to the cart and clicked BUY NOW. I've got four 843D's headed towards my house now.
> 
> Trojan Fan, you just saved me $240.00. Thank you sir :bowdown:



PM sent


----------



## BowDown

I got mine from Sonic. Shipped fast and smooth..


----------



## Problemhouston

BowDown said:


> I got mine from Sonic. Shipped fast and smooth..


Me too. Ordered a pair of them at two different times and both transactions went well. I might be getting two more and have no worries about going with them again.


----------



## Coppertone

Just ordered one since I am intrigued by what a properly enclosed 8" subwoofer will sound like.


----------



## BowDown

Coppertone said:


> Just ordered one since I am intrigued by what a properly enclosed 8" subwoofer will sound like.


Sounds awesome. I would say the front mounted 8" Type-R is on part with the rear mounted IDQ12v2 with the same power.


----------



## Coppertone

Now I'm getting giddy, did I just type giddy, time for some sleep lol..


----------



## BowDown

Be sure to break it in for a good couple days before passing final judgement. Sounded good at first, but now sounds great!


----------



## Problemhouston

BowDown said:


> Be sure to break it in for a good couple days before passing final judgement. Sounded good at first, but now sounds great!



Agree 100%

It is now playing a bit lower from what I can hear.


----------



## trojan fan

BowDown said:


> I got mine from Sonic. Shipped fast and smooth..


Sonic = non-authorized....

Why not buy them through Al & ed's same price plus they are authorized...


----------



## Problemhouston

trojan fan said:


> Sonic = non-authorized....
> 
> Why not buy them through Al & ed's same price plus they are authorized...


I just checked and sonic is $99 and Al & Ed is $159. So if I buy from Sonic and something happens I can just use that $60 I saved and buy a new one. What I would get from paying the extra $60 to buy authorized isn't worth it in my opinion. Now if we were talking about a product that was $1k or more it might change my mind.


----------



## trojan fan

Problemhouston said:


> I just checked and sonic is $99 and Al & Ed is $159. So if I buy from Sonic and something happens I can just use that $60 I saved and buy a new one. What I would get from paying the extra $60 to buy authorized isn't worth it in my opinion. Now if we were talking about a product that was $1k or more it might change my mind.



You need to do some more homework


----------



## Neil_J

Problemhouston said:


> I just checked and sonic is $99 and Al & Ed is $159. So if I buy from Sonic and something happens I can just use that $60 I saved and buy a new one. What I would get from paying the extra $60 to buy authorized isn't worth it in my opinion. Now if we were talking about a product that was $1k or more it might change my mind.


As indicated in my previous post (and Trojan fan's), Al and Eds will price match the Sonic Electronix price, offer free shipping, and they're authorized.


----------



## trojan fan

Neil_J said:


> As indicated in my previous post (and Trojan fan's), Al and Eds will price match the Sonic Electronix price, offer free shipping, and they're authorized.


They can't seen to figure that out:laugh:

The blind leading the blind


----------



## Neil_J

trojan fan said:


> They can't seen to figure that out:laugh:
> 
> The blind leading the blind


Give them a break, I almost didn't figure it out. I'd never heard of Al and Eds before this thread.


----------



## Problemhouston

I didn't look hard enough to find out that Al & Ed would price match please forgive me. My bad.


----------



## trojan fan

Neil_J said:


> Give them a break, I almost didn't figure it out. I'd never heard of Al and Eds before this thread.


Fair enough...enjoy your new speakers


----------



## WLDock

trojan fan said:


> Sonic = non-authorized....
> 
> Why not buy them through Al & ed's same price plus they are authorized...


Wow, I was not familiar with these guys either until I started looking for an JL HD amp. Really thinking that I might want to buy Authorized. Looks like they will match Sonics price on the JL also.


----------



## yahoo

Looking for opinion. I have up to 2.2 cubes of space (gross) to spare, and I was thinking of getting two 12' type R's, in a sealed box. I think I prefer the sound of a sealed box, but it seems that a lot of people prefer ported boxes. They will be powered by an M12. Ther rest of my system consists of three ways, so the sub will be low passed from may be 60hz down. So, are two 12's in 2.2 cubes sealed the best option? Can someone here model that for me please?


----------



## rexroadj

yahoo said:


> Looking for opinion. I have up to 2.2 cubes of space (gross) to spare, and I was thinking of getting two 12' type R's, in a sealed box. I think I prefer the sound of a sealed box, but it seems that a lot of people prefer ported boxes. They will be powered by an M12. Ther rest of my system consists of three ways, so the sub will be low passed from may be 60hz down. So, are two 12's in 2.2 cubes sealed the best option? Can someone here model that for me please?


Well you could go with 3-4 8s ported which would be VERY VERY VERY impressive, 1 12" ported which would probably be my #2 choice....The two 12 sealed will also be great. I dont think your going to make a bad choice thats for sure.... The 8s will be tight and super clean (not that the others wont be!) and you will have the "cool" factor with the 8s (they will blow your mind
One 12 with a lot of power will create a lot of LOW energy in a 3way setup if you only need lowest of lows... The 12" pair will give you the most flexibility in my opinion (easy flexibility I should say...)
A well designed ported box will sound amazing in all aspects. People get turned off because 8-10 ported boxes you hear are probably not optimally designed for there intended drivers and installation/freq range. If you make it to FIT your setup you will likely never look back!


----------



## yahoo

Thanks. 8's aren't available where I am. The point you made about properly designed ported box is one of the reasons I prefer a sealed box, harder for the installer to stuff up. I used to have a DD in a ported box and didn't like the sound, but that might just be the box.

What is the optimal volume for a sealed 12? Is Alpine's recommendation of 1 cube on the mark? Sorry to go off topic, discussing 12 rather that 8.


----------



## rexroadj

I have found alpines specs to be extremely accurate for most situations.... I would hope for Jim to chime in seeing as how he probably designed it? Great subs though....all the sizes of the type r's


----------



## Neil_J

Got my four 843D's delivered via Fedex Saturday. I'm still weeks away from having a custom box built, and in the mean-time, I'm stuck here wondering how these little things are going to hit the low notes... They're so tiny, and I'm used to 12's... Did I make a $400 mistake? Are these things even capable of playing Dubstep, or will they just explode? It will be several weeks before I have answers to these important questions.


----------



## rexroadj

Neil_J said:


> Got my four 843D's delivered via Fedex Saturday. I'm still weeks away from having a custom box built, and in the mean-time, I'm stuck here wondering how these little things are going to hit the low notes... They're so tiny, and I'm used to 12's... Did I make a $400 mistake? Are these things even capable of playing Dubstep, or will they just explode? It will be several weeks before I have answers to these important questions.


Well if you have read anything about them you would know that the perform far beyond there size so playing low will not be an issue. BUT 8s are 8s and 12s are 12s and thats never going to change. 4 of the swr8s ported will play very loud and low. Will they compete with a pair of 12s? That depends on subs, power, and box. 
Not to sound cold or mean, but if you did make a $400.00 "mistake" it will only be because of the lack of research into what your "needs" are. Not because of the subs! That being said, I think you will be pretty shocked by the performance of these "little" babies


----------



## BowDown

Each day this little sub continues to impress.


----------



## Neil_J

rexroadj said:


> Well if you have read anything about them you would know that the perform far beyond there size so playing low will not be an issue. BUT 8s are 8s and 12s are 12s and thats never going to change. 4 of the swr8s ported will play very loud and low. Will they compete with a pair of 12s? That depends on subs, power, and box.
> Not to sound cold or mean, but if you did make a $400.00 "mistake" it will only be because of the lack of research into what your "needs" are. Not because of the subs! That being said, I think you will be pretty shocked by the performance of these "little" babies


My original comment wasn't to be taken too seriously. What I was trying to convey was that my brain says (thanks to this forum) they'll do everything I need, but my eyes say they're too damn small to do it  these are my first set of eights and I'm still getting used to how tiny they are. I'm just bummed it will be weeks before I hear them. It's like waiting for Christmas in October.

Back on topic.. I was going to run the four 843D's sealed, but I keep hearing how awesome they sound ported. I want them to dig as low as possible... I will be able to flatten the response with equalization if to keep it flat. Not sure I have the space for a larger ported box though.


----------



## cubdenno

Have not ran the Alpine 8's but I can say that my son started out with 4 Sundown E8'son 1000 watts. we used a PWK designed enclosure. He listens to mostly rap/hiphop. If you are afraid that the 8's won't hit low, you will be happily surprised! And to increase that low end output while also keeping excursion down, go ported.


----------



## trojan fan

Neil_J said:


> Got my four 843D's delivered via Fedex Saturday. I'm still weeks away from having a custom box built, and in the mean-time, I'm stuck here wondering how these little things are going to hit the low notes... They're so tiny, and I'm used to 12's... Did I make a $400 mistake? Are these things even capable of playing Dubstep, or will they just explode? It will be several weeks before I have answers to these important questions.



IMO to really get the most bang out them you need to run them ported....sealed will sound great, but ported takes them to the next level


----------



## rexroadj

Neil_J said:


> My original comment wasn't to be taken too seriously. What I was trying to convey was that my brain says (thanks to this forum) they'll do everything I need, but my eyes say they're too damn small to do it  these are my first set of eights and I'm still getting used to how tiny they are. I'm just bummed it will be weeks before I hear them. It's like waiting for Christmas in October.
> 
> Back on topic.. I was going to run the four 843D's sealed, but I keep hearing how awesome they sound ported. I want them to dig as low as possible... I will be able to flatten the response with equalization if to keep it flat. Not sure I have the space for a larger ported box though.


No prob! Comments made are not only responses to individual posts but to anyone out there looking so the statements I made were not only meant towards you, but could help others scrolling through (fyi...there was no indication that you were saying anything in jest?) 

I would not go sealed with them for what your after! MAKE ROOM and go ported! YOU WILL BE VERY HAPPY Do it, DO IT


----------



## Problemhouston

trojan fan said:


> IMO to really get the most bang out them you need to run them ported....sealed will sound great, but ported takes them to the next level


I have my pair in .80 and they sound really good. I was thinking of going 4 ported but don't know if I will have the room. I WANT THE NEXT LEVEL!


----------



## Coppertone

Sorry to but in but I have only one and I wanted it in my VW Gti. So I should port it and power it with how much? Just for a heads up I am going with Hertz HDP amps. Please advise, critique, lol, just provide a reason why you suggest what amount of power. Tia....


----------



## rexroadj

Coppertone said:


> Sorry to but in but I have only one and I wanted it in my VW Gti. So I should port it and power it with how much? Just for a heads up I am going with Hertz HDP amps. Please advise, critique, lol, just provide a reason why you suggest what amount of power. Tia....


I would shoot for 4-500 personally. That will give more then enough juice but not likely enough to do damage because of to much power. Bottom line, is it can handle that kind of power all day with no problem. Less is fine too! I would try and get at least 250 to it as a minimum IMO.
You will LOVE IT!


----------



## Coppertone

I just happen to have an Alpine PDX 600/1 amp. I see what I will be doing with that. Unless my wife comes off some money so that I can buy two Hertz amps lol.


----------



## Neil_J

rexroadj said:


> No prob! Comments made are not only responses to individual posts but to anyone out there looking so the statements I made were not only meant towards you, but could help others scrolling through (fyi...there was no indication that you were saying anything in jest?)


My humor can be REALLY dry sometimes ... 

As for going ported: SQ is #1 for me, output is #2. I want tight, punchy, non-flabby bass with zero distortion. XtremeRevolution was nice enough to model me up the sealed enclosure but never investigated other enclosure types.


----------



## cubdenno

Neil_J said:


> ...
> 
> As for going ported: SQ is #1 for me, output is #2. I want tight, punchy, non-flabby bass with zero distortion. XtremeRevolution was nice enough to model me up the sealed enclosure but never investigated other enclosure types.


Going ported should reduce distortion for you as it reduces cone travel around tuning. Just make sure you have a SSF to protect below tuning.

Give adequate vent area for the woofers to avoid port distortion, tune low enough to reduce excursion, give a bump in efficiency while more closely matching the cabin gain to roll off curves. What usually happens with ported and the SQ crown is tuned to high, the low end totally over powers the midbass response affecting that "tight punchy" feel.


----------



## rexroadj

Neil_J said:


> My humor can be REALLY dry sometimes ...
> 
> As for going ported: SQ is #1 for me, output is #2. I want tight, punchy, non-flabby bass with zero distortion. XtremeRevolution was nice enough to model me up the sealed enclosure but never investigated other enclosure types.


No prob man 

There is NOTHING about ported that would make it non "sq" or certainly not less "sq" then sealed. Its all about implimentation and design Done right a ported enclosure will be every bit as "sq" as a sealed of course, depending on the rest of the system. Having run these particular subs in a pretty well set up ported center console and now going to sealed I can safely say I am actually really dissapointed in them in comparison..... on all levels...I see no benefit of going sealed vs. ported having used them ported previously


----------



## titan06

hello everyone i am a noob at this and want to put some subs in my truck and these sound like they are the way to go. It is all factory -deck i have a kenwood ddx514 my problem is space i want to fit them under the rear seat firing up i can make two boxes for each side 6h 9d & 18w maby 19 or 20w. I want the best punch and deep response i can get is this enough? And for power i have a infinity 611a 456w rms at 4 ohm or 657w rms at 2 ohm should i go for the 2 or 4ohm sub? Thanks in advance for any help


----------



## hybridspl

Just got mine and they look great, but they have some stiff competition. Here are just a couple other choices from the closet.


----------



## trojan fan

^^^USD subs....nice ...how old are those bad boys?


----------



## hybridspl

Thanks. The USD's are from '99, the a/d/s/ is from '98 and the Illusion is from '97. My closet is like a time capsule!


----------



## therealdeal74

So I ordered this sub online and had it shipped to the local Al & Eds. I should mention that most Al & Eds will match the online price and you should support them by going in store to order this sub or buy it if they have it in stock. Otherwise I don't think they get a cut of the profit.

My setup is this, a Kenwood DDX812 head, Arc Audio xdi 804 with the rear channels bridged for 240w to a JBL GTO804 in a .4 cubic foot sealed box. I just swapped out the subs easily, the Alpine has a smaller mounting hole diameter by just a tad but dropped in perfectly but the overall diameter is a bit larger. 

The first thing I noticed when I cranked it up was it was a lot less efficient than the JBL. The JBL has quite a bit more output with the same amount of power. I was able to make the JBL distort at peak output. But overall, the sound was a lot cleaner especially down low. The JBL seemed to have what I think was a lot of cone noise when driven. I've always been impressed with the JBLs output but less impressed with the sound quality for my setup.

I probably need to break it in a bit more but really what I've learned is I need more power for this sub and the Arc Audio xdi's 240 watts is barely making it realize its potential. It really likes my box and I'll get an XDI6001 to make it happier.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

therealdeal74 said:


> The first thing I noticed when I cranked it up was it was a lot less efficient than the JBL. The JBL has quite a bit more output with the same amount of power. I was able to make the JBL distort at peak output. But overall, the sound was a lot cleaner especially down low. The JBL seemed to have what I think was a lot of cone noise when driven. I've always been impressed with the JBLs output but less impressed with the sound quality for my setup.
> 
> I probably need to break it in a bit more but really what I've learned is I need more power for this sub and the Arc Audio xdi's 240 watts is barely making it realize its potential. It really likes my box and I'll get an XDI6001 to make it happier.


Oddly enough, low distortion loudspeakers SOUND a lot quieter than high distortion loudspeakers. I noticed this when I bought my Summas*. I was discussing the design while the speakers were playing at what seemed a reasonable level. After a few minutes, I was hoarse.

Then I realized - *we were literally yelling at each other.*

The speakers were so clean, we had them playing about ten dB louder than a regular speaker. We just didn't notice how loud they were, until we realized we were shouting just to hear each other.

I could bore you with the technical details, but basically most loudspeakers produce a ton of distortion, and due to the fact that we can't hear low frequencies very well, *we often hear the harmonic distortion more than we hear the fundamental.*

* www.gedlee.com


----------



## takeabao

Pretty sure this is the most random question so far but...

Does anybody know of any 8" grills that fit over these things??

I'm getting a little rub on the back of seat in my single cab truck.

Incredible sub... have mine in about .4 cu ft with 200w and it gets LOUD yet maintains perfect composure. Absolutely phenomenal for 8" and $100.


----------



## Salami

How about the ones that Alpine sells that are made specifically for it?


----------



## trojan fan

^^^^A big 0 on the rep power meter....what did it take to earn that:laugh:


----------



## Salami

Got ONE negative rep from a mod that was worth 5000 negative points. Just because I made a comment on the wonderful new link bar. I guess the truth hurts.


----------



## therealdeal74

Salami said:


> How about the ones that Alpine sells that are made specifically for it?


It's the KTE-8G. It's hard to find on backorder and runs about $30!


----------



## Stoph

Wow, thanks for whoever posted about al and ed's! got mine price matched for 99.99 free shipping!

Now to design up a box that will fit under the ridgeline seat for the two 8's ported


----------



## pwhittle

I am up to page 8 of 21, and will read the rest, but I would like to post up the situation I am in and get some input to consider while I read the rest of the thread.

I am replacing the 8" sub in the system in my Motorhome. It is all original 1994 Sony equipment, and I believe a pretty nice set-up for it's time.

Head unit, CD changer, 9 channel Graphic Equalizer with Sub Woofer control, separate amps for fronts, rears and sub, and a monstrous enclosure for the sub.

I am replacing the head unit and all the speakers at a minimum. The amps as well I expect. I expect to use a head unit with built-in EQ so I can retire the Graphic Equalizer as well.

The existing enclosure measures 25" x 15" x 6" internally with a volume of 1.3 cu ft. The wood is 1/2" plywood. The existing cutout is for an 8" driver and the enclosure is sealed and installed with the driver firing down.

Even from only reading to Page 8 I realize this is way too large an enclosure, but I would still welcome your input on what to do. 

I am more interested in SQ than SPL so I do not think I need a solution with 4 or 6 drivers in it. I suspect that a single Alpine 8" will do just nicely for what I want from it.

Do I scrap this box or try to salvage it by reducing the internal volume? 

What about porting it?

Thanks in advance

Paul


----------



## rexroadj

my opinion would be a rebuild for 1 ported....or if you have the room for a slightly larger box.... might as well go two! better to have more and need less then the opposite


----------



## sundownz

I bet a small PR box would be wonderful for one of these -- been using one for my SA-8 in my car and I love it. Box is 11" cube internally -- bet something similar would do the trick for this guy


----------



## quality_sound

omegaslast said:


> Im comparing apples to oranges? im comparing an alpine type-r to an alpine type-r.. maybe its you who is confused? are you aware what a subwoofer is?
> 
> What a bizarre circle jerk.. not a type-r discussion, just the 8"!!!!! Im just letting people know that if they have 1 cu ft or more then buy a 1243D. If you for some reason dont want people doing this, you can explain it to them, simply saying "youre wrong" might work when your 5 years old but it doesnt work here much to your dismay.


Because, bonehead, the 8 _just came out_! Everyone knows what the 10", 12", and 15" Type-Rs will do. This thread was _specifically_ to discuss that new driver and all of it's different applications, not to debate the merits of it vs the larger Type-Rs. For ****'s sake...


----------



## subwoofery

omegaslast said:


> Well youre right about not getting support from people circle jerking over something i guess
> 
> Anyways i read the whole thread and nothing disproves what ive said. $120 for a 12" vs $100 for an 8" = buy the 12" unless you have space constraints. If the 12" was $200 id recommend the 8"s, but it isnt, so i dont. Its not an attack on the 8" woofer its simply a matter of fact due to the current pricing situation.


Price difference is really low, I give you that. 
However you did not talk about mounting depth... Almost a 2" difference between the 2 (1.85" exactly). That's a HUGE difference. 
I'm sure you need more facts... How about people that need a subwoofer to be placed in a center console in a cab? There aren't that many cars that have 14" (to fit a 12" sub) in between the front seats... 
And what if people want to hang subwoofers off the rear deck in an infinite baffle alignment (and still use Alpine ) would they choose the 12" or the 8"? I'll give you a hint: it's in the manual... 
Lastly, the Alpine demo car has been using the 8" in the kick panels as midbasses for 2 reasons: #1 It's smaller, I'd like to see you fit a 12" that deep in BOTH kick panels and #2 The inductance is much lower on the 8", therefore it will hit higher notes better and respond to the signal faster than its 12" brother... 

All good reasons to still keep an 8" in the line-up. 

Ohh... I almost forgot about the "WAOWWW" factor. People are MUCH MORE impressed when they listen to an 8" that hits like a 12" than a 12" that hits like an 18"... 

Kelvin


----------



## mires

I'm thinking about doing either 2 of these in 1 cube ported or 4 sealed in 1.4 cubes off of 500 watts. Which setup do you guys think would be the way to go?


----------



## jim walter

4 sealed will get very loud at all frequencies and be plain fun to listen too.

2 Ported will sound great, but won't have the impact or power that the 4 (read: double the cone area) will have. They might be able to eeke out a tad more 30-35Hz depending the tune though ...

Still, I'd go sealed 
jim (can't believe I recommend a sealed box!)


----------



## Zbebop

Hertz5400LincolnLS said:


> You calculate airspace with the internal dimensions since you have to take into consideration the thickness of the wood. You also need to allow for driver displacement, which is minimal, but you should account for it considering the enclosure is small. If you build the enclosure too big to your liking you can add bracing to reduce airspace. If you make the enclosure a tad too small you can invert the driver, and/or you can use polyfill to trick the driver into thinking it is in a larger enclosure. The rule usually is 1lb/sq.ft, but again you can use less if you'd like, just be sure to try to keep it clear from the drivers suspension.
> 
> Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk


My sealed sub box size is 0.29 cu.ft. (interior dimension) constructed out of fiberglass. I cannot enlarge the volume due to the space it is located. Looking at Alpine's spec sheet, the minimum interior dimension is 0.25 cu.ft. I guess the enclosure can be filled with polyfill. Where is can you obtain polyfill?


----------



## memphiskane

You should be able to get polyfill at any Walmart or craft store for a couple bucks a bag.


----------



## Zbebop

Thanks for the source...I will check it out!


----------



## mires

jim walter said:


> jim (can't believe I recommend a sealed box!)


Me neither lol. It will be easier for me to build though so that will be a plus. Do you think 1.4 cubes (after driver displacement) would be a good size for four of these?


----------



## quality_sound

I'm still REALLY thinking about replacing my BMs with 4 of these... Hmm...

Jim - How would 4 work in sealed boxes with 500 Watts available? I can also swap out my 600/4 for a second 900/5 and get 1000 Watts total (500 per pair). 

If I do the 900/5 and 600/4 I'll have 100 on each tweeter and mid, 300 on each midbass and 500 for all 4 subs. 

If I do dual 900/5s I'll have 100 for each mid and tweeter, 150 for each midbass and 1000 for the 4 subs. 

Thoughts?


----------



## Neil_J

Anyone who saw this post in the other SWR-823D thread, please disregard :laugh: It's 0.3 cubes per sub, btw

Finally got my box built... For anyone that wants to follow my build log, it's here:

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/build-logs-project-install-gallery/118147-2011-mini-cooper-s-sq-build-hat-jl-alpine-knu-secondskin-sds-pwk.html


----------



## quality_sound

As Jim said above, there is no reason to think that 2 ported won't outperform 4 sealed in every way. I can't imagine you'd be disappointed, especially in a MINI.


----------



## joemk69

jim walter said:


> You mean like this? Try [email protected]
> 
> It's painful


Is the 1.8 net or gross? What is the very lowest you would recommend tuning the enclosure?


----------



## Salami

quality_sound said:


> As Jim said above, there is no reason to think that 2 ported won't outperform 4 sealed in every way. I can't imagine you'd be disappointed, especially in a MINI.


Re read what Jim posted. He did not say that. Or did you word your post incorrectly? 







jim walter said:


> 2 Ported will sound great, but won't have the impact or power that the 4 (read: double the cone area) will have. They might be able to eeke out a tad more 30-35Hz depending the tune though ...
> 
> Still, I'd go sealed
> jim (can't believe I recommend a sealed box!)


----------



## quality_sound

Salami said:


> Re read what Jim posted. He did not say that. Or did you word your post incorrectly?


No, I said exactly what I meant to. Jim said, in no uncertain terms that two ported is good but four sealed will have more impact, it WILL sound better simply because you need less excursion for a given volume, and the only place the ported design MIGHT be better is 30-35Hz. And that's a pretty big might. If you have the space and power to run 4, I see no reason to run 2 ported, especially in a VERY small car like a MINI hardtop.


----------



## [email protected]

Thanks Neil for the info you shared. 

I'm curious what others think of my dilemma... I'm working on an 05 Ram QC center console. Would it benefit me at all or be worth the added expense to run 3 of these subs ported opposed to two ported or three sealed. I think I can achieve 1.5 cubes or even a bit more simply by changing my width and height of the box. I'm not sure however if I have enough depth for a long port. 

Anyone know what air apace works best for these subs or what hz they really shine at?

I have a dedicated amp for each sub approx 700 watts is available.


----------



## CJtech323

Alright so I've decided that I'm going to be running two 843d's wired to 4 ohm with a JL 500/1v2. First of all, how will they sound with this power? I should be looking at 250w to each right? 

Second, with this power being run to them, should I put them in a sealed box or in a ported box? Thanks


----------



## subwoofery

CJtech323 said:


> Alright so I've decided that I'm going to be running two 843d's wired to 4 ohm with a JL 500/1v2. First of all, how will they sound with this power? I should be looking at 250w to each right?
> 
> Second, with this power being run to them, should I put them in a sealed box or in a ported box? Thanks


Ok... Instead of focussing on the subwoofer, what do you have for front stage and how much power for it? 
If you care about SQ, it's all about balance. 

Kelvin


----------



## CJtech323

I've got a pair or Boston Acoustics Pro60se's with about 150w running to them


----------



## subwoofery

CJtech323 said:


> I've got a pair or Boston Acoustics Pro60se's with about 150w running to them


If you listen to a lot of Rap, Rock, Country, I'd go with ported enclosure tuned to around 35Hz-36Hz - this type of music doesn't have much content below 30Hz - ported will give you that thumb especially for Rock. 
If you listen to a lot of Electronic, Jazz, Acoustic, Orchestra , sealed would suit you well. 

Kelvin


----------



## CJtech323

Plan on running two of these in 0.35 ft^3 net each at 250w each. Should I worry about adding some polyfill or any problems with over-excursion at this wattage?


----------



## jim walter

That is a nice clean setup. With 250W RMS you should be fine on power. You can play with adding some polyfill to adjust the sound to your tastes. Start without it and then add ~0.5lbs if you feel you need some more extension.

I'll say that I think you'd be well served to build a spare box that is [email protected] and give it a listen with just one of them off of your 500W ... it'll sell you on the concept of a great SQ vented box ... and make you do one for the pair 

Jim


----------



## easy smeasy

first off im new here (Hi everyone) and i dont know as much as it seems all of you know on here about audio. im looking to put 1 SWR-823d under the seat of my 2010 f150 for now and will add another or 2 later on with a bigger amp. im gonna be pushing it with a memphis audio w/ about 200 watts. my question is about the box. im gonna build my own and i see the sub requires .15-.5 cu ft so i was thinking of going with about .35 with the sub accounted for in a sealed box. the measurements for under my seat is about 5.5" max height in the back, i believe it was 8" height in the front, i dont wanna go more then 11" in depth, and however long. what size do you recommend me on going with the box. i was thinking about 5.5" high, 11" deep, and 20" long but i have no clue when it comes to the tuning of the box. i listen to mosty rock metal and rap if that plays into it any.i figured i would build the box for just one, and when i add the 2nd i'll just build an identical box for it....i would like to go with 2 ported but im guessing i dont have the room for all that? criticism and help welcomed. thanks in advance lol


----------



## GouRiki

^ I just finished building a sealed box for my friend's Tacoma. It's about .22 cu ft and a swr-843d and fits behind the center console. The one thing about putting the box directly under your seat (I'm assuming you mean driverseat) is that you'll feel the sub underneath you and it will mess with the soundstage (your butt will be vibrating). So I would try to put it somewhere else if I were you.


----------



## easy smeasy

no im meaning under my rear seat lol, there's not enough room to put a sub under the front seats


----------



## GouRiki

Lol. Ok. You should be good then. I would go with ~.25 sealed and if you can squeeze .4 or more I would look into porting them. GL


----------



## easy smeasy

yea i can fit .4 and would like to port them, i just dont know how to configure the port for the box size. if i stuck with a 5.5" height, and a 11" depth, with how ever long im gonna need it, how long/wide should i make the port. i saw that a member named jim on here had alot of insight on the sub and was hoping he can help me. i always thought that the depth of the box would change how the sub sounds as well, but i read in another post that it doesnt matter how deep it is for this sub. so i would like to keep my 5.5" h and 11-10" depth, and make it how ever long i need for the right air space including the port. since my box will be shallow, i didnt think that i could run a port? any help would be great.


----------



## easy smeasy

ok so i found a port size calculator online and is it really that simple? from what ive seen here in a ported box, i should run the sub at 34-35 HZ at .5 cu ft. so at 35 HZ the port should be 4x0.75x11.4". that being said, does it matter about the exact sub/port location, or can i just put the sub on the opposite end/side of the port?...also calculating the right air space, how do i go about calculating it with the port? do i just subtract the wood and the air space in the port? after i find out the exact size i need my box, that'll be my deciding factor to go with ported or not. i want to be able to fit at least 2 in the future. if i cant then i guess i'll go with 3 sealed


----------



## CJtech323

jim walter said:


> That is a nice clean setup. With 250W RMS you should be fine on power. You can play with adding some polyfill to adjust the sound to your tastes. Start without it and then add ~0.5lbs if you feel you need some more extension.
> 
> I'll say that I think you'd be well served to build a spare box that is [email protected] and give it a listen with just one of them off of your 500W ... it'll sell you on the concept of a great SQ vented box ... and make you do one for the pair
> 
> Jim


Great thanks for the help Jim. I was planning on building a ported box for fun anyway just to see how it sounds. I'll report back on how it sounds 

Also thanks for the help subwoofery


----------



## CJtech323

Alright guys I have another question, this one has to do with amps. I decided on buying two 843d's after realizing that the shipping on a SD-2 10" I was planning on buying was around $100  and after I had already won a JL 500/1 v2 on ebay for a good price. I already have a Rockford Fosgate t1500-1bd from my old install that I realized I can now use with these subs.

My question is this, the rockford is rated for 500w at 4 ohms, but its actual power output can range up to 700 at 4 ohms. I can't find anything online for the details of the JL's actual power output at 4 ohms, so I'm guessing it is just at 500w. Should I run my 2 843d's off of the rockford (which I can safely bet will put out at least a little more than 500w total) or off of the JL? Would there be an advantage to having more settings to customize with the JL amp?



Here's an outline of my system if it will help:
Stock head unit
3sixty.1
Boston Acoustics Pro60se's running off of a Punch P400.2 amp


Thanks a lot for the help


----------



## quality_sound

You can't ever have too much power.


----------



## Coppertone

Need moar powerrrrrr, lol.


----------



## Neil_J

Jim Walter,

I stopped by this thread to harass you a bit, as I ran into a problem last night. It seems that the four banana jacks on my SWR-843D's are too small to fit standard-size banana plugs. I spent $23 on 16 jacks from Parts Express, only to find that they don't fit. Nor does any of my home lab's banana test leads fit, either. The included DVC jumpers work fine, but they seem to be non-standard, much skinnier than a normal banana plug. 

So for now I'm just going to go with bare wires in the spring-terminal route... which should work, but I'm still a bit bummed 

I'm wondering why they weren't just made to accept a standard-size banana plug? Is there a reason for this?


----------



## Coppertone

^^ I have a single SWR 823D and I have to wonder if I am going to have the same problem as listed above?


----------



## therealdeal74

Coppertone said:


> ^^ I have a single SWR 823D and I have to wonder if I am going to have the same problem as listed above?


Yes, and it's a simple problem to fix. Just don't use standard banana plugs. The bare wire is fine.


----------



## rexroadj

Neil_J said:


> Jim Walter,
> I'm wondering why they weren't just made to accept a standard-size banana plug? Is there a reason for this?


Simple......Its Alpine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They will come out with specific banana plugs that cost 4x what normal ones do that you will have to buy if you wish to connect that way.......

Sorry Jim, Your a great guy, but your company has built that rep over the years! 

You simply cant have X until you buy y and z first!


----------



## jim walter

Just insert your banana plug in the wire hole instead of the back of the plug. Problem solved.


----------



## Neil_J

jim walter said:


> Just insert your banana plug in the wire hole instead of the back of the plug. Problem solved.


Impossible with my box, the terminals are too close to the MDF for anything to stick out that far  Plenty of room in the vertical direction however. For now I'm using bare wires, and may try something called BFA speaker plugs which are a bit narrower than a banana plug.


----------



## rodburner

Neil,just hurry the heck up and play the 4 subs.lol I've just finished up the fiberglass well in my pickup,and I've always used sealed boxes,but with all the ruckus over 2 ported [I have 2 823's already] I need you to give your impressions of the 4 pack. [I'd like 2 more 823's for a 4 ohm load on my new HD1200]
Thanks


----------



## Neil_J

rodburner said:


> Neil,just hurry the heck up and play the 4 subs.lol I've just finished up the fiberglass well in my pickup,and I've always used sealed boxes,but with all the ruckus over 2 ported [I have 2 823's already] I need you to give your impressions of the 4 pack. [I'd like 2 more 823's for a 4 ohm load on my new HD1200]
> Thanks


I'm doing a write-up on my RTA analysis now... The short story is, when put in a 0.3 sealed enclosure, they play VERY cleanly down to the F3 frequency (53 Hz in my case). The farther down you go after that, harmonic distortion starts getting really ugly. The second harmonic at 30 Hz was about 14 dB down from the fundamental, and 20 Hz just plain sounded like crap. Part of my write-up is trying to understand just how all this will sound inside my car, after cabin gain and other filtering. My initial impressions are that for older music without much sub-bass (e.g. classic rock, blues, country, jazz, etc), they will sound positively great.... But try to play some Skrillex or Bassnectar (two of my favorite electronic producers of filth and noise), and the 8's have a hard time keeping up, at least in a small sealed enclosure such as mine. 12's or 15's are obviously superior if you need to get down to 20 Hz cleanly. If you're an old fart with a classic rock collection, they'll sound spectacular.


----------



## rodburner

Thanks for the impressions. I fit the old fart criteria,no problem. Mr.Jackson's "Dangerous" is probably my last purchased,most played CD with any major bass content. The new well liner came in at .78,so an "enclosure" of .42 with 4 8"er's should raise a few eyebrows with the young punks at work.


----------



## Neil_J

rodburner said:


> Thanks for the impressions. I fit the old fart criteria,no problem. Mr.Jackson's "Dangerous" is probably my last purchased,most played CD with any major bass content. The new well liner came in at .78,so an "enclosure" of .42 with 4 8"er's should raise a few eyebrows with the young punks at work.


If your newest audio purchase is by a dead guy, then you're A OK :laugh: Get your box built and post back here with pics!


----------



## Zbebop

Neil_J said:


> Jim Walter,
> 
> I stopped by this thread to harass you a bit, as I ran into a problem last night. It seems that the four banana jacks on my SWR-843D's are too small to fit standard-size banana plugs. I spent $23 on 16 jacks from Parts Express, only to find that they don't fit. Nor does any of my home lab's banana test leads fit, either. The included DVC jumpers work fine, but they seem to be non-standard, much skinnier than a normal banana plug.
> 
> So for now I'm just going to go with bare wires in the spring-terminal route... which should work, but I'm still a bit bummed
> 
> I'm wondering why they weren't just made to accept a standard-size banana plug? Is there a reason for this?


So what size banana plugs fit without any issues? Where can one purchase them?


----------



## Neil_J

Zbebop said:


> So what size banana plugs fit without any issues? Where can one purchase them?


BFA speaker plugs -may- fit, I will be trying them out.


----------



## quality_sound

Neil_J said:


> I'm doing a write-up on my RTA analysis now... The short story is, when put in a 0.3 sealed enclosure, they play VERY cleanly down to the F3 frequency (53 Hz in my case). The farther down you go after that, harmonic distortion starts getting really ugly. The second harmonic at 30 Hz was about 14 dB down from the fundamental, and 20 Hz just plain sounded like crap. Part of my write-up is trying to understand just how all this will sound inside my car, after cabin gain and other filtering. My initial impressions are that for older music without much sub-bass (e.g. classic rock, blues, country, jazz, etc), they will sound positively great.... But try to play some Skrillex or Bassnectar (two of my favorite electronic producers of filth and noise), and the 8's have a hard time keeping up, at least in a small sealed enclosure such as mine. *12's or 15's are obviously superior if you need to get down to 20 Hz cleanly. * If you're an old fart with a classic rock collection, they'll sound spectacular.


Nope. It's ALL about how much air you can move. You can hit 20Hz with a tweeter. Just not very loudly, and not for long but it WILL do it. Guess how I know. :surprised: Seriously though, low bass is about one thing, moving air. It doesn't matter if it's 15s or 4s. If you're moving the same amount of air you're moving the same amount of air. Also, your car's transfer function should be downright silly. I'd be surprised if it wasn't too much bass when you get it in the car.


----------



## Neil_J

quality_sound said:


> Nope. It's ALL about how much air you can move. You can hit 20Hz with a tweeter. Just not very loudly, and not for long but it WILL do it. Guess how I know. :surprised: Seriously though, low bass is about one thing, moving air. It doesn't matter if it's 15s or 4s. If you're moving the same amount of air you're moving the same amount of air. Also, your car's transfer function should be downright silly. I'd be surprised if it wasn't too much bass when you get it in the car.


As mentioned in my other write-up thread, the box WILL hit down to 20 Hz. The displacement is there (more surface area than a pair of 12's), it's just a matter of getting there cleanly, and I'm pretty sure I'm being more picky than most people would be. I will be rocking the 4 8's for a few months, and heck, I might even fall in love with them. They do play AWFULLY clean above 45 Hz


----------



## Lazerbeam323ci

Has anyone tried the Type Rs in an IB configuration? I'd be curious about what frequency they start rolling off at. Also what kind of power is recommended in IB format. 

Not looking to bash a brand, I have the JL 8IB4s which are old and probably have had their day. Want to modernize and get some better output. If I'm not mistaken these have nearly dbl the Xmax of what I have and I think if the lfe is decent I'd see notable improvement swapping my drivers. Would be curious if anyone has experience with both drivers in IB.


----------



## subwoofery

Lazerbeam323ci said:


> Has anyone tried the Type Rs in an IB configuration? I'd be curious about what frequency they start rolling off at. Also what kind of power is recommended in IB format.
> 
> Not looking to bash a brand, I have the JL 8IB4s which are old and probably have had their day. Want to modernize and get some better output. If I'm not mistaken these have nearly dbl the Xmax of what I have and I think if the lfe is decent I'd see notable improvement swapping my drivers. Would be curious if anyone has experience with both drivers in IB.


IB the Alpine 8" needs 100 watts to hit Xmax @ 20Hz - 110 watts and it goes over 14mm @ 20Hz. 

Kelvin


----------



## Lazerbeam323ci

Hmmm. So I actually can't really add any power, but I'd probably get more spl for the little power I got? I think Xmax on the JLs is like 8mm. I wouldn't need a larger amp afterall 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jimbno1

subwoofery said:


> IB the Alpine 8" needs 100 watts to hit Xmax @ 20Hz - 110 watts and it goes over 14mm @ 20Hz.
> 
> Kelvin


Is that with both coils in series or parallel? 

I am not a bass head, I am just some seeking some low end fill. My sub amp is rated for 300W at 4 ohms. The sub amp does have a subsonic filter. The subsonic is from 10-80 hz but not sure about the slope. I think it is 12 dB.

What utility are you using to figure the xmax? How do I figure max power handling for different subsonic filter settings? 

If I set the subsonic at 35 Hz would it improve the power handling much?


----------



## Lazerbeam323ci

Would appreciate some feedback from Jim at Alpine on this too


----------



## gnn60s

Hey guys, looking for a little advice. I just bought four of the swr-843D's and they are powered by a pdx-m12 @ 2ohms for 1200 watts. I'm wondering what gauge speaker wire to run from the m12 to the swr's? The length from the amp to the box is appr. 20 ft. of wire. Thanks in advance for the help. (I did a search but everybody's advice is kinda all over the place theory wise)


----------



## [email protected]

How much more output will I achieve running 3 of these ported verse 2 of them ported?
would it be worth giving up the extra space and mounting the additional amp under the seat? I can fit 3 amps on my back wall but 4 is a no go.


----------



## subwoofery

jimbno1 said:


> Is that with both coils in series or parallel? Doesn't matter much...
> 
> I am not a bass head, I am just some seeking some low end fill. My sub amp is rated for 300W at 4 ohms. The sub amp does have a subsonic filter. The subsonic is from 10-80 hz but not sure about the slope. I think it is 12 dB.
> 
> What utility are you using to figure the xmax? How do I figure max power handling for different subsonic filter settings? Power handling doesnt change if you go ported, sealed, IB, ISO, horn - only thing that matters in IB is not to overexcurt the driver... Just use WinISD and plot the driver. I use 15cuft to mimic a trunk.
> 
> If I set the subsonic at 35 Hz would it improve the power handling much? Subsonic set to 35Hz 24dB/oct slope, you can put 300 watts on 1 driver (600 on 2, etc...) which gets close to 14mm @ 40Hz


Kelvin


----------



## quality_sound

gnn60s said:


> Hey guys, looking for a little advice. I just bought four of the swr-843D's and they are powered by a pdx-m12 @ 2ohms for 1200 watts. I'm wondering what gauge speaker wire to run from the m12 to the swr's? The length from the amp to the box is appr. 20 ft. of wire. Thanks in advance for the help. (I did a search but everybody's advice is kinda all over the place theory wise)


16 is fine though some will say you HAVE to use 12. What kindo f car do you have that there is TWENTY feet of wire between the amp and enclosure???



bumplime said:


> How much more output will I achieve running 3 of these ported verse 2 of them ported?
> would it be worth giving up the extra space and mounting the additional amp under the seat? I can fit 3 amps on my back wall but 4 is a no go.


1.5dB, theoretically.


----------



## jim walter

bumplime said:


> How much more output will I achieve running 3 of these ported verse 2 of them ported?
> would it be worth giving up the extra space and mounting the additional amp under the seat? I can fit 3 amps on my back wall but 4 is a no go.


If you can fit them, more headroom is always better.


----------



## jim walter

gnn60s said:


> Hey guys, looking for a little advice. I just bought four of the swr-843D's and they are powered by a pdx-m12 @ 2ohms for 1200 watts. I'm wondering what gauge speaker wire to run from the m12 to the swr's? The length from the amp to the box is appr. 20 ft. of wire. Thanks in advance for the help. (I did a search but everybody's advice is kinda all over the place theory wise)


I use 8GA power wire .... but most people think I'm crazy


----------



## jim walter

jimbno1 said:


> Is that with both coils in series or parallel?
> 
> I am not a bass head, I am just some seeking some low end fill. My sub amp is rated for 300W at 4 ohms. The sub amp does have a subsonic filter. The subsonic is from 10-80 hz but not sure about the slope. I think it is 12 dB.
> 
> What utility are you using to figure the xmax? How do I figure max power handling for different subsonic filter settings?
> 
> If I set the subsonic at 35 Hz would it improve the power handling much?


While you hit the Xmax at that power, the subwoofer still has an additional 10mm of stroke in each direction, so you aren't bottoming or breaking it, just getting into the distortion area where things begin to become audibly distorted.


----------



## [email protected]

Jim, how does the SBR-S83V perform? I assume the box is based off the suggest enclosure recommendation?


----------



## jim walter

It's pretty awesome for its size, has blown everyone's mind that has heard it. 

It's actually a veeeery small box for the woofer and tuned super low <30Hz.


----------



## easy smeasy

ok i just purchased a swr-823d to put under the seat of my '10 f150. i want to add more subs later on, but for now i want to stick the one i just purchased in a ported box. my problem is that i cant figure out what size port i should use for my box. ive read on the thread that a .5 cu ft box tuned at 35 hz would sound great, so i figured that's what i would run. and since it doesnt matter about the depth for this sub, i want to keep the box slim rectagular instead of making the custom angles to match the seat. as far as dimensions, im looking at going 5.5" max in height, 11" max in depth, and how ever long it will need to be for the correct air space along with the port. can someone help me to figure out how long the box and port should be? im using 3/4" mdf and plan on running a slotted port. thanks in advance.


----------



## easy smeasy

guess ima go with a sealed then


----------



## rodburner

I've read this and read it again and keep coming up with questions. I'm going to build my first ported box [ever] for my pair of SWR 823's. They will be powered @2ohms [for now,will get 2 843's for a 4ohm load if the box sounds good] by a JL HD1200. 
Questions are, is 30hz too low to tune these and if NOT,then will my 1cf [net] box with an 8.5" x 1.5" x 35.25" port, be OK?
Will tapering or rolling the slot mouth [not just rounding over] help or hurt?
The slot will exit the side of the box and be flush with the factory,upholstered curved section of the cab,with about 4" to the cab side wall.Is this enough clearance?
The JL has a 30hz ssb at 24db/oct. Will using that at a 30hz tune,screw stuff up?
Oh,and can the port be any shape or size as long as the area stays the same,ie 1x12,2x6,3x4 etc?
Thanks for any insight.
Steve


----------



## subwoofery

rodburner said:


> I've read this and read it again and keep coming up with questions. I'm going to build my first ported box [ever] for my pair of SWR 823's. They will be powered @2ohms [for now,will get 2 843's for a 4ohm load if the box sounds good] by a JL HD1200.
> Questions are, is 30hz too low to tune these and if NOT,then will my 1cf [net] box with an 8.5" x 1.5" x 35.25" port, be OK?
> Will tapering or rolling the slot mouth [not just rounding over] help or hurt?
> The slot will exit the side of the box and be flush with the factory,upholstered curved section of the cab,with about 4" to the cab side wall.Is this enough clearance?
> The JL has a 30hz ssb at 24db/oct. Will using that at a 30hz tune,screw stuff up?
> Oh,and can the port be any shape or size as long as the area stays the same,ie 1x12,2x6,3x4 etc?
> Thanks for any insight.
> Steve


Hope you know how to set gains coz that HD1200 will put out double the RMS of the drivers. Headroom is great but you can easily bottom out or fry your drivers... 

To answer your question, yes you can tune it below FS and 30Hz sounds good. Round over the corners (inside the box) and the port exit too. 
Port can be any shape or size as long as the area stays the same but the closer to a square, the better. 

Kelvin


----------



## rodburner

Awesome,thanks. Yes,I did change up the port shape to fit better in my pickup. It will indeed be square at 3.5 x 3.5.
And I don't mess with gains AT ALL. I have them set all the way down,[have an HD 900/5 powering the system now,in 3 channel ] and have never wanted for more volume.. Also,it was mentioned several times by Jim that around 600w was ok with restraint.


----------



## jim walter

rodburner said:


> Awesome,thanks. Yes,I did change up the port shape to fit better in my pickup. It will indeed be square at 3.5 x 3.5.
> And I don't mess with gains AT ALL. I have them set all the way down,[have an HD 900/5 powering the system now,in 3 channel ] and have never wanted for more volume.. Also,it was mentioned several times by Jim that around 600w was ok with restraint.


An HD1200 is a very powerful amp, much like the M12 I have been running on these ported for over a year now. I'd say you'll smell things before they let go, but you are definitely in the "danger zone".

As far as your 30Hz tune, I guess I'd ask why so low? You'll sacrifice a good bit of impact and weight to get the last little bit of extension. I'd recommend taking that up to 33Hz at least.

Jim


----------



## jim walter

easy smeasy said:


> ok i just purchased a swr-823d to put under the seat of my '10 f150. i want to add more subs later on, but for now i want to stick the one i just purchased in a ported box. my problem is that i cant figure out what size port i should use for my box. ive read on the thread that a .5 cu ft box tuned at 35 hz would sound great, so i figured that's what i would run. and since it doesnt matter about the depth for this sub, i want to keep the box slim rectagular instead of making the custom angles to match the seat. as far as dimensions, im looking at going 5.5" max in height, 11" max in depth, and how ever long it will need to be for the correct air space along with the port. can someone help me to figure out how long the box and port should be? im using 3/4" mdf and plan on running a slotted port. thanks in advance.


Using 3/4" Material, the box should be 5.5" x 11" x 52" to get you the gross requirement for 1cuft + woofers + port.

Vent will be 4" (internal height of the box) by 2.5" at 13" Long. 

Change to 1/2" material and you reduce the length to 44" and the port is now 4.5" x 2.25"


----------



## rodburner

jim walter said:


> An HD1200 is a very powerful amp, much like the M12 I have been running on these ported for over a year now. I'd say you'll smell things before they let go, but you are definitely in the "danger zone".
> 
> As far as your 30Hz tune, I guess I'd ask why so low? You'll sacrifice a good bit of impact and weight to get the last little bit of extension. I'd recommend taking that up to 33Hz at least.
> 
> Jim


No problem Jim,thanks. Like I said,never had a ported box before,so just read a bunch of threads on here and picked a number. I'll try 33 and 35hz before screwing it down.


----------



## Dedicated_Joker

I always run type Rs, usally two 12's but I recently bought a truck so I dont have the room anymore so I bought a new 8, soon to have another. They are sick subs, compare this 8 to alot of others and they are monsters in compairison! Best 8 in my opinion.


----------



## Neil_J

Jim,

I took some distortion measurements of my 4x 0.3 cu.ft. sealed enclosure. Here is the link to the thread in which I posted them. In your experience, do these numbers look in the ballpark?


----------



## subwoofery

Neil_J said:


> Jim,
> 
> I took some distortion measurements of my 4x 0.3 cu.ft. sealed enclosure. Here is the link to the thread in which I posted them. In your experience, do these numbers look in the ballpark?


In order for Jim to answer, he needs to know what's the input voltage OR @ what SPL those measurements have been taken... 

Kelvin


----------



## easy smeasy

thanks jim, the only problem is your specs are for multiple subs. im gonna be running 1 for a good while and i want to put it in a ported box alone. i also decided to use the 1/2 mdf so take that into consideration. thanks


----------



## gnn60s

quality_sound said:


> 16 is fine though some will say you HAVE to use 12. What kindo f car do you have that there is TWENTY feet of wire between the amp and enclosure???
> 
> Thanks for the reply. We just installed four of the swr 843d's and the m12 into my 2dr tahoe. I overestimated the length of the distance of wire by 10 ft unintentionally. I found 12 gauge wire from a previous install and utilized that. The swr's sound tight, clean and loud especially for the amazing amount of minimal space they require and all this WITHOUT fine tuning the m12 yet! Awesome thread for an awesome little speaker!


----------



## jimbno1

Although it is colder than a witch's patootey outside I test fitted from the top of the deck last night. It might not fit unless I do a lot of modification to the cover.

If I do decide to mount below the deck instead of from the top, I assume I should just drill holes through the rubber mounting gasket on the frame. Any suggestions or cautions?

Also is additional sealing required other than the rubber gasket?


----------



## rodburner

Jim,just take off the beauty ring and the rubber gasket and mount it like any other sub that ain't got the pretty rings. I put closed cell foam weatherstripping on every sub,no matter what,to seal them better. Just make sure you have clearance for the surround to move.. Make sure the sub fits the right way up,then flip it over and screw it down.


----------



## jimbno1

Thanks I was afraid to try and pull it off. It fits much better without it.


----------



## Neil_J

jimbno1 said:


> Thanks I was afraid to try and pull it off. It fits much better without it.


Um... That's what she said?


----------



## jim walter

jim walter said:


> Using 3/4" Material, the box should be 5.5" x 11" x 26" to get you the gross requirement for 1cuft + woofers + port.
> 
> Vent will be 4" (internal height of the box) by 1.25" at 13" Long.
> 
> Change to 1/2" material and you reduce the length to 22" and the port is now 4.5" x 1-1/8"



Edited the above dimensions for 1 sub.


----------



## keanuration

Hey Jim,

I would like to swap out my JL 8w3v2 sub in my custom box for this gem of a sub. It looks like I may be able to just swap out the subs since my current box is spec'd at gross .8 cubes with a 3in round port tuned to the mid 30s. Would this be possible? or is that too big of a box. btw, I do like my music low, I listen to mainly hip-hop and rock. 

thanks!


----------



## jim walter

keanuration said:


> Hey Jim,
> 
> I would like to swap out my JL 8w3v2 sub in my custom box for this gem of a sub. It looks like I may be able to just swap out the subs since my current box is spec'd at gross .8 cubes with a 3in round port tuned to the mid 30s. Would this be possible? or is that too big of a box. btw, I do like my music low, I listen to mainly hip-hop and rock.
> 
> thanks!


That'll be just fine. You'll add a little emphasis on the lower frequencies with the bigger box. 

Jim


----------



## Jake the SSnake

Neil_J said:


> As mentioned in my other write-up thread, the box WILL hit down to 20 Hz. The displacement is there (more surface area than a pair of 12's), it's just a matter of getting there cleanly, and I'm pretty sure I'm being more picky than most people would be. I will be rocking the 4 8's for a few months, and heck, I might even fall in love with them. They do play AWFULLY clean above 45 Hz


Actually, 2 12's displace a little more unless I'm missing something. The surface area for one 8" is roughly 50.24 sq inches, 1 12" is 113.04 sq inches. 2 12's would be right around 12% more area, which really isn't all that much anyways. I used to do spl competitions with 2 12" type-Rs when I had my blazer and I absolutely loved them. Since buying a truck, I can barely fit 8's. I've been waiting a while to decide on what to do, and these are right up my alley. I'm hoping to be able to squeeze 4 of these in a 2.0 cu ft box ported in the mid to upper 30's. It might not be quite what my 12's were, but it should be pretty close, hopefully, since I'll be competing in the same class, should I decide to do so again.


----------



## Neil_J

Jake the SSnake said:


> Actually, 2 12's displace a little more unless I'm missing something. The surface area for one 8" is roughly 50.24 sq inches, 1 12" is 113.04 sq inches. 2 12's would be right around 12% more area, which really isn't all that much anyways


I stand corrected, I am close to flunking out of my calc class at the moment... :-/ I need to learn my maths better...


----------



## jim walter

If you're up for the speaker geek-challenge, lets try something: 

1) try a slightly larger box for two woofers. Maybe just build a proto at say 0.45 net each 

2) try a [email protected] box. 

See which one cleans up the LF more relative to each other at normalized output. 

I haven't done this before, but I think it'd be interesting. 

Jim


----------



## Zbebop

Neil_J said:


> Jim,


I constructed a fiberglass sub box of 0.29 c. ft. of interior volume for a single Alpine SWR84D sub due to install this weekend. I plan to add polyfill. If possible,I will let you know if I have similar results.

The crossover slopes may be different settings than your set-up. My system is using an Audison bitTen for the signal processor and the amp is an Hertz HDP-5 (5-channel). The interior volume of the vehicle is small (370Z)... not sure of the total cu.ft.


----------



## easy smeasy

jim walter said:


> If you're up for the speaker geek-challenge, lets try something:
> 
> 1) try a slightly larger box for two woofers. Maybe just build a proto at say 0.45 net each
> 
> 2) try a [email protected] box.
> 
> See which one cleans up the LF more relative to each other at normalized output.
> 
> I haven't done this before, but I think it'd be interesting.
> 
> Jim


well i decided to go with a bigger sealed box instead of the ported. the first one i built was .30 after sub displacement. i built the second the other day a hair under .46 cu ft after sub displacement and WOW what a difference! i dont know all the technical terms and what not but it definately reaches deeper in the low freaquencies and alot cleaner. overall, the .46 cu ft box works alot better for me and my taste in music. i listen to rock, metal, rap and what ever you consider skrillex to be lol. like to throw some of that in there every now and again lol


----------



## 1990tsi

Just installed my first type-r 8

Buddy had to fiberglass some holes in his floor of his cherokee, and through talking we decided to glass up a box in the passenger rear panel. cut out the cubby hole, made a panel and glassed a small sealed box, when we measured the volume we had just over .3 cubes and after trying a local used 8" that ended up having a dead VC, we decided on the Type-R 8 from this thread.

he's using a 300rms MTX jack hammer I had sitting around, and I lent him a spare 15" type-r in a huge ported box to use during shipping. the 15 didn't work for him, but once the 8 showed up in the mail he was happy.

I'm surprised at the output of this little guy, especially in such a small box, for his music it works great and sounds more musical than any sub i've heard. 

I turned the gain down and the bass boost off for break in, how many hours until it's safe to turn it up and properly tune it?


----------



## daedalus

Hi everyone,

I have an Alpine SWR-823D (Alpine Electronics of Australia)

I am going to build the sealed enclosure recommended by the manufacturer because it is the smallest.

My question is, what is the thinnest MDF wood can I use? is 5mm too thin? I would of course include bracing to strengthen the box


According to Alpine
Optimum Sealed Box:
External Box Dimensions 13" x 13" x 5.5"
Gross Internal Volume: 0.30 ft³
Net Internal Volume: 0.25 ft³
F³, Qtc: 53Hz, 0.80


Thanks


----------



## jim walter

5mm is far too thin unless you are heavily bracing it.


----------



## ninetysix

Hi

I have two of these babies sitting in a DHL van somewhere, can't wait 

I'm planning to run these as midbass drivers infront of the seats in sealed boxes on the floor (04 holden/opel astra) of around 0.2 cubic feet each, total. I was going to use 1/2" MDF with some minor bracing, and I hope to run the subs magnets-out. Is that going to be an issue with imaging seeing as the drivers are midbass and not subs? Headunit is a JVC arsenal with T/A.

The rest of the system is a RE audio se-x 12" sub and boston spz60 6.5" splits. Kenwood D class 900wrms amp for the sub, and I'm trying to work out how best to appropriate my two frontstage amps, both boston accoustics one a GT40 (2x240wrms @ 2ohm bridged) and a GT4100 (2x450wrms @ 2ohm bridged). I bought 843d subs and the spz60's are 3ohm. I had the spz60's on the GT40 amp previously and I always thought they needed a little more power, but I suppose they might be fine on ~200wrms with dedicated midbass drivers. Oh well I guess I'll start with a conservative 450 a side for the 8's 


Cheers


----------



## enigma

Just curious, recently picked up a pair of these and currently building a ported box for the pair designed by a friend, (1.10 net @ 35hz) but id really like to try a 4th order bandpass for the pair, any suggestions on box size and tuning?

BTW, subs are amazing well built, free air takes 300w like a champ, can't wait to see how they do in an enclosure! 

Sent from my Ally using Tapatalk


----------



## quality_sound

Run them in something like WinISD. That'll model up something that will work very well.


----------



## jp_over

Excellent thread - subscribed!


----------



## Offroader5

I picked up one of these in dual 4 ohm for my 4Runner. Had an enclosure designed for it and even though the final size is larger than what is suggested, this thing rocks HARD. I picked up a PPI Phantom 1000.1 to power it (500+ @ 12v & 700+ @ 14.4v). I have had so many people think I have several larger subs in the back and they are so shocked and do not believe all that output is coming from ONE 8" that they start looking for hidden subs.

I didn't think an 8" could slam so hard and go this low all in one box.


----------



## quality_sound

What are your enclosure dimensions/specs?


----------



## Offroader5

The enclosure is 1.4 cu. internal not accounting for driver displacement and not including the vent which is more or less the entire bottom. About twice what Alpine suggests in the manual as optimal 

I am thinking of building 2 other enclosures that match the Alpine recommendation for both sealed and vented just to see how they compare to what I have.

This enclosure was supposedly optimized to work in the 4Runner cabin and for the front seat listening position, so this exact size and vent dimension may not even sound right in a different vehicle. As far as actual dimensions, I paid a small fee to have this enclosure designed for me so forgive me if I don't come right out with exact build specs . However, here is the wireframe image showing the interior view:


----------



## jbrann

First post here! Ive read almost all of this thread and found it very helpful. On to the ? I'm lookiin to run 4 of these beauts. And im wondering if 4x 843Ds in 1.4 cuft sealed (shared chamber) with 600rms to each in a single cab be a nice setup. Lots of rock hip hop and electronic. I'm really hoping they can put out the lower notes with this setup.


----------



## rexroadj

jbrann said:


> First post here! Ive read almost all of this thread and found it very helpful. On to the ? I'm lookiin to run 4 of these beauts. And im wondering if 4x 843Ds in 1.4 cuft sealed (shared chamber) with 600rms to each in a single cab be a nice setup. Lots of rock hip hop and electronic. I'm really hoping they can put out the lower notes with this setup.



Welcome aboard!

My opinion would be to use two or if you can stretch the box a tad do three ported before 4 sealed...... especially with the music your listening too! You'll likely appreciate the extra energy


----------



## jbrann

Well I'm working with very limited space. I think the only way i could port is aeroport style. Any idea what diameter and length i'd be looking at?


----------



## jim walter

So I'm about to crap on literally everything i "stand" for as far as SQ is concerned as far as typical norms go ... 

but, the 8's have gotten the veritable boot...

After much A-B, I've decided that we have designed what I believe the best 15s this side of double-motored W1500H's I've ever touched.

While the S 15's were my pet project, I didn't ever believe they'd do as well as they do. Bye bye R8s vented. 2 x 15s @ 2 cubes each now own my jeep


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> So I'm about to crap on literally everything i "stand" for as far as SQ is concerned as far as typical norms go ...
> 
> but, the 8's have gotten the veritable boot...
> 
> After much A-B, I've decided that we have designed what I believe the best 15s this side of double-motored W1500H's I've ever touched.
> 
> While the S 15's were my pet project, I didn't ever believe they'd do as well as they do. Bye bye R8s vented. 2 x 15s @ 2 cubes each now own my jeep


WOW! now thats one hell of a statement!!! So S over R 15s too?


----------



## rexroadj

You realize the challenges that creates of course 8s, small and easy....15"...Ummmm Not so much!!!! Dont see to many of those going under seats or as center consoles


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> WOW! now thats one hell of a statement!!! So S over R 15s too?


No

Questions

Asked

- they went for a walk in the park, pooped twice and napped twice waiting for the 8s to catch up


----------



## jim walter

I exaggerate, but the R8s vented have a very welcomed challenger in the S15s sealed. It challenges norms, and also shocks the standard proponents of each camp.

R15s don't hold a candle to this outside of <25Hz


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> No
> 
> Questions
> 
> Asked
> 
> - they went for a walk in the park, pooped twice and napped twice waiting for the 8s to catch up


SWEET MOTHER OF PEARL!!!!!!!!!!!! Thats just mind numbing to hear!


Well, I guess another job well done to you and the crew over at Alpine. I'll have to get my hands on them. Its funny, I've always been a fan of 8s or 15s....... go figure?

Wish I could realistically use one in my new vehicle  Is the whole line up better (or should I say like the 15" or is the 15" just a freak?)


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> You realize the challenges that creates of course 8s, small and easy....15"...Ummmm Not so much!!!! Dont see to many of those going under seats or as center consoles


I'll send you some, shipping both ways  

You gotta build my spec boxes for each, and post reviews with gory acoustic details .... deal?


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> I'll send you some, shipping both ways
> 
> You gotta build my spec boxes for each, and post reviews with gory acoustic details .... deal?


You been drinking? 

Ummmmm Y E S!!!!!!!!!


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> SWEET MOTHER OF PEARL!!!!!!!!!!!! Thats just mind numbing to hear!
> 
> 
> Well, I guess another job well done to you and the crew over at Alpine. I'll have to get my hands on them. Its funny, I've always been a fan of 8s or 15s....... go figure?
> 
> Wish I could realistically use one in my new vehicle  Is the whole line up better (or should I say like the 15" or is the 15" just a freak?)


the 10s are jesus' sweet gift to bass. i had protos of them a few years back ... they are underhung 15mm clean, supersick overdamped 15mm one way awesomeness

edit - @$129 retail. they are a VERY interesting value prop in the whole brand/no-brand market


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> You been drinking?
> 
> Ummmmm Y E S!!!!!!!!!



Don't ask irrelevant questions !!


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> the 10s are jesus' sweet gift to bass. i had protos of them a few years back ... they are underhung 15mm clean, supersick overdamped 15mm one way awesomeness


Hmmm that may be just what the DR. ordered for my 81' Renegade!!!! 

I dont plan on using the backseat anytime soon and thought about a single 15 in the back but then I decided I could do a pair (or ideal a trio) of 10s facing the front seats and behind it could be a large locking storage box?


----------



## jim walter

where im at right now is dual 15s i 2 cubes and i got ice cube beatin down my block ....


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> where im at right now is dual 15s i 2 cubes and i got ice cube beatin down my block ....


AWESOME! F' around and get a triple double


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> AWESOME! F' around and get a triple double


I :beerchug: rex


----------



## Coppertone

Maybe I missed it but which model exactly of the 15" are you talking about please ?


----------



## rexroadj

Coppertone said:


> Maybe I missed it but which model exactly of the 15" are you talking about please ?


S15's I dont think they are on the "market" yet.....

Am I correct here Jim?


----------



## jim walter

Corrrect, they hit the market April-ish ....


----------



## Coppertone

Thank you for the heads up..


----------



## jim walter

as i read this, I felt too much a marketer-type.. not me.... so this is deleted.


----------



## jim walter

Honestly, I wanna geek out and explain the new stuff... but I don't wanna come off to markety .... the website will go live soon. If there's q's after that, I'll do the deal


----------



## Ray21

I'm impressed with Alpine's latest stuff... the 8s and the underhung Type-R thins. 

Now I'm VERY interested in the new stuff. Do tell....


----------



## quality_sound

rexroadj said:


> WOW! now thats one hell of a statement!!! So S over R 15s too?





jim walter said:


> No
> 
> Questions
> 
> Asked
> 
> - they went for a walk in the park, pooped twice and napped twice waiting for the 8s to catch up



So the S15 is better than the R15??? That's gonna make it tough to sell the R15 with it's higher price point.


----------



## rexroadj

quality_sound said:


> So the S15 is better than the R15??? That's gonna make it touch to sell the R15 with it's higher price point.


Yes and NO....... at some point power handling and return benefits has to come into play.....I have ZERO doubt the Type S sound amazing.... but I would be shocked if the Type R wouldnt take over at some point with higher power? At least in output?

I dont know? I'll find out real soon though


----------



## Dr.Telepathy SQ

jim walter said:


> I exaggerate, but the R8s vented have a very welcomed challenger in the S15s sealed. It challenges norms, and also shocks the standard proponents of each camp.
> 
> R15s don't hold a candle to this outside of <25Hz


I'm intersted....would love to listen to them vs. my collection of 15"s. JBL GTi's, AE 15"s, and the 2 Alpine 8's that you just came out with just for giggles.


----------



## ZAKOH

I am curious, does there exist on this thread a worked box design for a dual SWR-843D setup? Just curious. My only requirement is good SQ and the box can't be taller than 13 inches.


----------



## jim walter

Quick calculation on the phone says 24x12x13. Make the port ~12-15 sq inches. 

The target would be 1.2-1.4 cubes gross and tune it to 33-35 ish.


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> Quick calculation on the phone says 24x12x13. Make the port ~12-15 sq inches.
> 
> The target would be 1.2-1.4 cubes gross and tune it to 33-35 ish.


Jim,
Umbrella Drinks and sunshine! Not math!!

Although I can testify to the 1.4 at 34hz  Worked VERY well for me! Loved that setup!!!!


----------



## jonnyanalog

has anyone tried these in a transmission line enclosure yet?


----------



## JayinMI

Hey Jim,

I live in Flint, and work at an Alpine dealer near the Detroit area. The owner seems reluctant to bring in the Type-R 8's (not a ton of demand for 8's, really...but our location does a few). Would it be possible to demo your Jeep sometime? 

I recently built a ported box for a Lincoln Mark LT that ran a 10" RE Audio SXX downfiring on an M12 that made me decide I was going to go RE, but while planning I started thinking of running 2 5ch amps, and I don't have enough room for 2 10" SXX's, (and it would be WAY more than I ever need). I started thinking of 2 SWR843's, ported on 500W ea.

Obviously I'd like to hear them before I plunk down the cash...and our Rep doesn't make it out our way much (or with any product in his car to show us.)

Thanks.

Jay


----------



## slamdlsx

hi, i want to run 1 or 2 of these in my single cab truck. 

1 ported or 2 sealed? no amp yet. i do have a mrp-m350 right now which would drive 1 sub well i think. 

I am trying to save some space so max external box dimensions are 30x14x6. if ported it will be aeroport. 

any ideas?


----------



## [email protected]

slamdlsx said:


> hi, i want to run 1 or 2 of these in my single cab truck.
> 
> 1 ported or 2 sealed? no amp yet. i do have a mrp-m350 right now which would drive 1 sub well i think.
> 
> I am trying to save some space so max external box dimensions are 30x14x6. if ported it will be aeroport.
> 
> any ideas?


Maybe one of these then

ALPINE SBR-S83V CAR AUDIO 8" TYPE-R SUBWOOFER ENCLOSURE PORTED BOXED SUB WOOFER | eBay


----------



## slamdlsx

That looks good and so does the review. How would the output compare to 2 sealed? I know type r's generally handle more power any reccomendation on rms for one?

I use to run a 12" type r few years ago with about 1500 rms box to spec. im not looking for that kind of output. but dont want a entry level sound either.


----------



## rexroadj

slamdlsx said:


> That looks good and so does the review. How would the output compare to 2 sealed? I know type r's generally handle more power any reccomendation on rms for one?
> 
> I use to run a 12" type r few years ago with about 1500 rms box to spec. im not looking for that kind of output. but dont want a entry level sound either.


I would say your safe to get all you can out of one with 400-500 and still be safe! I ran 450 to each one and it was great! I ran 900 to one for ****s and giggles one day just to see.......No prob! It took it without a second thought. I wouldn't run it that way permanently but they can flat out handle the power!


----------



## jim walter

slamdlsx said:


> That looks good and so does the review. How would the output compare to 2 sealed? I know type r's generally handle more power any reccomendation on rms for one?
> 
> I use to run a 12" type r few years ago with about 1500 rms box to spec. im not looking for that kind of output. but dont want a entry level sound either.


The SBR-83V should not see more than 300-400W RMS. The tuning of that box is very low (upper 20s) and the box is very small (<.3). Compared to my typically recommended tuning, this puts quite a bit more stress on the driver. SQ and SPL are great in that box, but power handling (relative to my typical .55 - .70 @ 35Hz box) is limited.

Jim


----------



## jim walter

JayinMI said:


> Hey Jim,
> 
> I live in Flint, and work at an Alpine dealer near the Detroit area. The owner seems reluctant to bring in the Type-R 8's (not a ton of demand for 8's, really...but our location does a few). Would it be possible to demo your Jeep sometime?
> 
> I recently built a ported box for a Lincoln Mark LT that ran a 10" RE Audio SXX downfiring on an M12 that made me decide I was going to go RE, but while planning I started thinking of running 2 5ch amps, and I don't have enough room for 2 10" SXX's, (and it would be WAY more than I ever need). I started thinking of 2 SWR843's, ported on 500W ea.
> 
> Obviously I'd like to hear them before I plunk down the cash...and our Rep doesn't make it out our way much (or with any product in his car to show us.)
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Jay


Hi Jay,

I'd be happy to meet up. Right now, I've got the new S15s in the car .. but I can slap the 8s back in there for a demo for you.

I'm in and out of town a LOT in the next month ... can we push till maybe late June for a meetup?

Jim


----------



## jim walter

slamdlsx said:


> hi, i want to run 1 or 2 of these in my single cab truck.
> 
> 1 ported or 2 sealed? no amp yet. i do have a mrp-m350 right now which would drive 1 sub well i think.
> 
> I am trying to save some space so max external box dimensions are 30x14x6. if ported it will be aeroport.
> 
> any ideas?


That's ~.9 gross. Let me run it through a sim and see if I can fit a nice 3" aeroport with these in there.

I'll report back in a bit.

If you can squeeze out any more space, using .5" material for the box helps. I think your box will work well @ [email protected], performance-wise

A 3" port is 44cm long. A 4" port 78cm and would need to chimney out of the box.


----------



## slamdlsx

Thanks jim. Is that on one ported? Also I could expand in length some like max dimensions of 35x14x6.


----------



## JayinMI

jim walter said:


> Hi Jay,
> 
> I'd be happy to meet up. Right now, I've got the new S15s in the car .. but I can slap the 8s back in there for a demo for you.
> 
> I'm in and out of town a LOT in the next month ... can we push till maybe late June for a meetup?
> 
> Jim


Yeah, no real hurry....not really planning to do the install until July or August.
I've got a customer who wants me to install one of these in a small box under the rear deck in his Avalon. It'll probably be sealed (what he says he wants)...but he had 2 12 Type R's on an MRD-M1000 (I think that's the model number), so we'll see what he thinks dropping down to an 8".

I am aware that IB is an option for these, but he didn't mention it, and my previous experiences with IB lead me to believe that it'll be easier to get the sound he's after sealed...takes a lot of work to do IB right.

I appreciate you going out of your way for the demo. Thanks.

Jay


----------



## keanuration

hello again Jim,

I managed to put this 8 into my enclosure spec'd @ ~.8-.83 tuned to around 36hz and it performed well. I also have a 1243d and was thinking of modifying that enclosure to seal up that 12. My question is do you think that 12 will play lower and louder @ that size of an enclosure? I have 500 watts rms on tap for this. I really like the 8 but since I have this 12 lying around why not use it? I might put this 8 in my other car also!

thanks for you efforts!


----------



## jim walter

In theory, no. It will hit the upper bass harder (maybe) but that enclosure will likely choke the low end extension and there isn't enough power to over come it. Still, worth a shot though if it isn't too much work.


----------



## rape_ape

Jim Walter, I have to say I am impressed. I have the pair of 843Ds in a 1.1cu.ft. (.55 each) NET vented enclosure with a 3" Precision Port tuned to 35hz, as you suggested. The pair are wired in parallel/parallel to a 1.2kw Hifonics amp. Very very very very impressive output from these drivers. Very very clean and musical, and they blend VERY well with my front stage set at moderate levels. But they beg to be cranked, and with 600w on each I *did* start to smell "that smell" of warmed-up (cooking) voice coils. I backed off and let them cool down, and they continued to pound very convincingly and accurately in more of a "blend" mode with the front stage (active dayton/peerless running off 40x4 at the moment). I can't wait to break them in further. This twin-843 enclosure is a substitute for my regular 2cu.ft. 1243D enclosure (4" precision port) so that I can reclaim trunk space for a road trip we are taking this summer. The 843 enclosure is designed to be able to slot in right behind my driver's seat with the subs facing rearwards and the port opening facing up. What I am curious to try is using both the 12" and twin 8" enclosures together. I will have to run them in series for 3ohms total but that will just be a goof setup just to play with. Anyway, thanks to the whole Alpine crew for making these awesome little subs (along with their bigger brothers). Which reminds me, are you all coming out with a third-gen version of the 15" type R?


----------



## rape_ape

keanuration said:


> hello again Jim,
> 
> I managed to put this 8 into my enclosure spec'd @ ~.8-.83 tuned to around 36hz and it performed well. I also have a 1243d and was thinking of modifying that enclosure to seal up that 12. My question is do you think that 12 will play lower and louder @ that size of an enclosure? I have 500 watts rms on tap for this. I really like the 8 but since I have this 12 lying around why not use it? I might put this 8 in my other car also!
> 
> thanks for you efforts!


You could gain a bit of room by mounting it upside down, although the Alpine gasket I am guessing would be a lil funky if used in this manner. Also stuffing the box with fiberglass would help it appear bigger to the woofer.


----------



## keanuration

jim walter said:


> In theory, no. It will hit the upper bass harder (maybe) but that enclosure will likely choke the low end extension and there isn't enough power to over come it. Still, worth a shot though if it isn't too much work.


yep spot on with your theorizing. Upper bass thrashed my rear deck & rattled like hell. Lower extension hands down to the 8. Don't get me wrong the 12 hammered well, but that airspace choked it even w/polyfill. I simply love these 8's!


----------



## gsxr1300

I'm planning on using a.swr-t12 in a .7 sealed box powered by 500 watts from a hd900/5 in my 2011 f250 crew cab Behind the rear seat. Any idea show this will.sound?


----------



## Lucidpyro

After reading all 29 pages of this thread I've been convinced to try two of these subs in my 2005 Subaru WRX sedan. I listen to mostly alternative rock (Muse, Foo Fighers, etc) and electronic (vocal trance stuff) I'm planning on using a PPI P1000.1 amp with these, 580W @ 4 Ohm 725W @ 2 Ohm.

A couple questions for a newbie on his first build, what do you guys suggest, the 2 ohm (823D) or 4 ohm (843D)? Second, is a ported box recommended, if so, would this box be newbie friendly? 

Thanks,

Justin


----------



## BEAVER

I'd go for the D2's, series parallel for a 2 ohm final load. Might as well throw everything you can at 'em. 

Shouldn't be too hard to port 'em. Something like 1.4 to 1.5 cft, gross. Figure port length and volume and it should net down to where you need to be. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## quality_sound

Hey Jim,

How would 4 do off the sub channel of an HD900/5? I have at least 2cf available to go ported or sealed. I wish I could give you a better volume but the car won't be out of the port for a week or so. I might have more 3cf to work with. 

Thanks!
Paul


----------



## rexroadj

Lucidpyro said:


> After reading all 29 pages of this thread I've been convinced to try two of these subs in my 2005 Subaru WRX sedan. I listen to mostly alternative rock (Muse, Foo Fighers, etc) and electronic (vocal trance stuff) I'm planning on using a PPI P1000.1 amp with these, 580W @ 4 Ohm 725W @ 2 Ohm.
> 
> A couple questions for a newbie on his first build, what do you guys suggest, the 2 ohm (823D) or 4 ohm (843D)? Second, is a ported box recommended, if so, would this box be newbie friendly?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Justin


With the p1000.1 I would run a 1ohm load to the 8s and get the 1k on tap! I ran 900 to a pair (1.4cuft ported tuned to 34hz.....AWESOME!). These things love the power!! 
The ppi 1000.1 is great! I am running it at 1ohm to a single jbl p1022 ported with incredible results!


----------



## jim walter

quality_sound said:


> Hey Jim,
> 
> How would 4 do off the sub channel of an HD900/5? I have at least 2cf available to go ported or sealed. I wish I could give you a better volume but the car won't be out of the port for a week or so. I might have more 3cf to work with.
> 
> Thanks!
> Paul


The 900/5 has one of the strongest sub channels of any 5CH amp for sure. Count on an honest 600W out of it all day long. Still, that's not "enough" power to really run 4 woofers and get the most out of them, especially if those 4 are sealed. 

I'd recommend you try and squeeze out another ~.3 cubes to allow for a vented box for the three. Try for 20in^2 of port and >0.6 cubes per driver. My ideal box would be ~2.0 net @ 34Hz for them. Even with 200W, you'll be into silly output levels with excellent extension and sound quality.

Go with 3pcs of SWR-843D, each wired in series and then parallel the whole group.

Jim


----------



## jim walter

rexroadj said:


> With the p1000.1 I would run a 1ohm load to the 8s and get the 1k on tap! I ran 900 to a pair (1.4cuft ported tuned to 34hz.....AWESOME!). These things love the power!!
> The ppi 1000.1 is great! I am running it at 1ohm to a single jbl p1022 ported with incredible results!


Agreed. Give the some juice, they'll give off a nice stinky "eau de engineer" smell before you hurt them. So in a vented box, they self protect!

I think you'll really enjoy these in that exact enclosure that Rex had .. very versatile for all types of music.


----------



## ChrisB

Lucidpyro said:


> After reading all 29 pages of this thread I've been convinced to try two of these subs in my 2005 Subaru WRX sedan. I listen to mostly alternative rock (Muse, Foo Fighers, etc) and electronic (vocal trance stuff) I'm planning on using a PPI P1000.1 amp with these, 580W @ 4 Ohm 725W @ 2 Ohm.
> 
> A couple questions for a newbie on his first build, what do you guys suggest, the 2 ohm (823D) or 4 ohm (843D)? Second, is a ported box recommended, if so, would this box be newbie friendly?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Justin


You too? I have a 2012 WRX Sedan and I am thinking of going with a pair of these 8s over the single Digital Designs 1508 that I already have. I also have a Digital Designs 510 but I feel that a pair of 8s in roughly the same enclosure space will fit my needs better.

Oh well, knowing me I will probably change my mind 10 times before I finally start the install.


----------



## Lucidpyro

rexroadj said:


> With the p1000.1 I would run a 1ohm load to the 8s and get the 1k on tap! I ran 900 to a pair (1.4cuft ported tuned to 34hz.....AWESOME!). These things love the power!!
> The ppi 1000.1 is great! I am running it at 1ohm to a single jbl p1022 ported with incredible results!


Thanks Rex, I'm going to take a look at your build and see what i can come up with for a box. Sounds like a ported box should allow me to get the most out of the subs. Can't wait to start


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> Agreed. Give the some juice, they'll give off a nice stinky "eau de engineer" smell before you hurt them. So in a vented box, they self protect!
> 
> I think you'll really enjoy these in that exact enclosure that Rex had .. very versatile for all types of music.


Look at that!!!!!!!!!!! I'm like a broken clock!!!! Twice a day
Now I have to find something else I can answer..............hmmmmmm


----------



## Lucidpyro

ChrisB said:


> You too? I have a 2012 WRX Sedan and I am thinking of going with a pair of these 8s over the single Digital Designs 1508 that I already have. I also have a Digital Designs 510 but I feel that a pair of 8s in roughly the same enclosure space will fit my needs better.
> 
> Oh well, knowing me I will probably change my mind 10 times before I finally start the install.


I know the feeling but I think I've finally settled on 2 8's. truck space and doing something slightly different than the norm just really appeal to me.


----------



## quality_sound

jim walter said:


> The 900/5 has one of the strongest sub channels of any 5CH amp for sure. Count on an honest 600W out of it all day long. Still, that's not "enough" power to really run 4 woofers and get the most out of them, especially if those 4 are sealed.
> 
> I'd recommend you try and squeeze out another ~.3 cubes to allow for a vented box for the three. Try for 20in^2 of port and >0.6 cubes per driver. My ideal box would be ~2.0 net @ 34Hz for them. Even with 200W, you'll be into silly output levels with excellent extension and sound quality.
> 
> Go with 3pcs of SWR-843D, each wired in series and then parallel the whole group.
> 
> Jim


Sounds like a plan. I KNOW I've easily got 2cf. If I can get 3cf should I try the 4 ported or 3 ported in 2cf? 

What would be the volumes and port dimensions for the enclosures for 3 and 4? 

Danke!


----------



## Lucidpyro

Well, I just got a package dropped off today.. 2 Alpine 823Ds 

PPI 1000.1 is up next. Going to run them @ 2Ohms and build a sealed enclosure around .6 c ft for them. I'm planning on building a ported box later on but figure a sealed box would be easier and will be good experience for me.

Thanks for the recommendations guys.


----------



## rape_ape

Jim Walter: How much of this "cooking" smell should I tolerate? You said they work well at 600w, which is what I have them running at, but they REALLY stink up the car when pushed. I've seen older type-rs on youtube with smoke just POURING out of them, but they are always done with the intent of destroying the speaker (something I'd like to avoid).


----------



## jim walter

rape_ape said:


> Jim Walter: How much of this "cooking" smell should I tolerate? You said they work well at 600w, which is what I have them running at, but they REALLY stink up the car when pushed. I've seen older type-rs on youtube with smoke just POURING out of them, but they are always done with the intent of destroying the speaker (something I'd like to avoid).


If it is an overwhelming smell, you are riding the line of safety, that smell is them self-protecting and letting you know it's time to take it down a tick.

It's a double edged sword in that they don't make any mechanical noises to let you know they are at their limits, but thermally they can only do so much with a 40mm coil. You're at nearly double the rated power, so youre testing them for sure


----------



## schmiddr2

Either you like the output without killing the subs or you don't. No point in saying "but you said" when you should know that a power rating on an amp is not how you judge the correct amount of gain anyway. gl


----------



## rape_ape

jim walter said:


> If it is an overwhelming smell, you are riding the line of safety, that smell is them self-protecting and letting you know it's time to take it down a tick.
> 
> It's a double edged sword in that they don't make any mechanical noises to let you know they are at their limits, but thermally they can only do so much with a 40mm coil. You're at nearly double the rated power, so youre testing them for sure


So basically, any smell is bad. Right now the enclosure is in the trunk so its hard to smell the smell (I was testing them with the rear seats down, however). But the goal is to free up the entire trunk by putting the enclosure in the footwell behind my driver's seat. The subs will face backwards (enclosure is tall enough that they clear the back seat), with the 3" precision port facing upwards at the back of my head. That should fire the smell, if any, right at me so the "early warning system" should work as intended. 

The only downside with the behind-the-seat location is that it blocks the rear door speaker on that side. Not that I care about the rear door speakers. Only reason why I have speakers in there is for the rear seat passenger which is 99.9% of the time my 9 year old son. He rides in the other back seat so he'll at least have one driver near him giving him sound. On the rare ocassion that I have another rear passenger, moving the sub box back to the trunk solves that problem on its own. Rear door speakers are new SPR-60s, btw.


----------



## rape_ape

schmiddr2 said:


> Either you like the output without killing the subs or you don't. No point in saying "but you said" when you should know that a power rating on an amp is not how you judge the correct amount of gain anyway. gl


Well as it is, I can adjust "gain" from the driver's seat via various EQ settings on both the head unit and the two EQs I run between the passenger seat and the center console. (One of them is a normal graphic EQ and the other is an Epicenter clone with parametric). Point is, I was running the subs up to amp clipping (just a smidge, then backing off) and my amp is CEA-2006 certified so Im pretty sure they were getting the full 600w each. Running that way, they stank up the car pretty fast. I always by habit over-amp my speakers to ensure I have good dynamics, so I am always dancing with driver failure when I crank it. Haven't killed a speaker since my teens so I'm pretty familiar with detecting failure modes before actual failure. However, these new Alpines are a new and different kettle of fish so to speak. (No audible warning, just olfactory.)


----------



## rape_ape

BEAVER said:


> I'd go for the D2's, series parallel for a 2 ohm final load. Might as well throw everything you can at 'em.
> 
> Shouldn't be too hard to port 'em. Something like 1.4 to 1.5 cft, gross. Figure port length and volume and it should net down to where you need to be.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


With my 3" precision port at 12.5" long, and three 1.5" square braces + driver displacement, my box was at just 1.27 gross to come out at 1.10 net. With a slot port you would need a higher gross to account for the wall thickness of the slot port, however.


----------



## rape_ape

jim walter said:


> If it is an overwhelming smell, you are riding the line of safety, that smell is them self-protecting and letting you know it's time to take it down a tick.
> 
> It's a double edged sword in that they don't make any mechanical noises to let you know they are at their limits, but thermally they can only do so much with a 40mm coil. You're at nearly double the rated power, so youre testing them for sure


I do have to say, I *was* square-waving them a little bit as I looked for and found amp clipping, which definitely contributed to the initial heating (and smell generation). But they did take that abuse and still go very VERY strong when I want them to. But what I really like is their SQ when playing at "normal" levels, including a very nice bottom end running with an Epicenter clone (Soundstream BX-4EQ). For all the doubters, the Soundstream sounds excellent and does the "epicenter" role perfectly not to mention at a very agreeable price.


----------



## keanuration

Hello Jim another question,

I now have 2 of these R8s and I want to port them. I have a box with .9 cubes gross shared chamber and need to know dimensions for a port. I would like it tuned in the mid 30s. I appreciate your great help in this awesome thread, thanks a lot!


----------



## rexroadj

keanuration said:


> Hello Jim another question,
> 
> I now have 2 of these R8s and I want to port them. I have a box with .9 cubes gross shared chamber and need to know dimensions for a port. I would like it tuned in the mid 30s. I appreciate your great help in this awesome thread, thanks a lot!


Thats TINY your port is gonna be GIANT! To small imo! May want to come up with plan B? But hey....thats why Jim is on board?


----------



## ChrisB

rexroadj said:


> Thats TINY your port is gonna be GIANT! To small imo! May want to come up with plan B? But hey....thats why Jim is on board?


I don't know why this made me literally bust out laughing. Maybe it is because one of the local guys showed me his enclosure design for a single SA-8 v1. He ended up with .6 cubic feet for the enclosure and roughly .7 cubic feet for the port.:laugh:


----------



## rexroadj

ChrisB said:


> I don't know why this made me literally bust out laughing. Maybe it is because one of the local guys showed me his enclosure design for a single SA-8 v1. He ended up with .6 cubic feet for the enclosure and roughly .7 cubic feet for the port.:laugh:


hahaha glad I can be of service to someone! That box you mentioned sounds about right! Not saying it cant be done......just if its worth it or not? Your gonna need space one way or another? Plus you also add some interesting other things to the mix when you do that....


----------



## keanuration

rexroadj said:


> Thats TINY your port is gonna be GIANT! To small imo! May want to come up with plan B? But hey....thats why Jim is on board?


Oops, I did forget to mention this box will have the port on the outside. I have them 2 r's sealed and they sound great, just want to get more output with a ported enclosure.


----------



## rexroadj

keanuration said:


> Oops, I did forget to mention this box will have the port on the outside. I have them 2 r's sealed and they sound great, just want to get more output with a ported enclosure.


Oh....I know its gonna be outside LOL! Doesnt make it better. Port noise is gonna be an issue, physically fitting it is gonna be an issue etc........ If you can fit a larger box just do it right this go round.....it will be easier/more functional in the long run


----------



## keanuration

ok guys, I didn't want to do this but I will. I will go to "plan B" and take my 2 8's & add a 3rd for a sealed setup. I wanted more output but going ported seems a bit difficult & I have limited skills/patience. I have just over 1 cubes of space for my enclosure, it's a simple design long rectangular. My big question would be should I seal each sub up or could I keep all 3 in 1 chamber? Yes, I will brace that box if I don't seal each sub. Thanks for all your help Jim and/or members!


----------



## rugdnit

keanuration said:


> ok guys, I didn't want to do this but I will. I will go to "plan B" and take my 2 8's & add a 3rd for a sealed setup. I wanted more output but going ported seems a bit difficult & I have limited skills/patience. I have just over 1 cubes of space for my enclosure, it's a simple design long rectangular. My big question would be should I seal each sub up or could I keep all 3 in 1 chamber? Yes, I will brace that box if I don't seal each sub. Thanks for all your help Jim and/or members!



I don't think you need to seal each sub. 1 chamber should be fine. Have you considered contacting PWK for a ported box design?


----------



## rexroadj

keanuration said:


> ok guys, I didn't want to do this but I will. I will go to "plan B" and take my 2 8's & add a 3rd for a sealed setup. I wanted more output but going ported seems a bit difficult & I have limited skills/patience. I have just over 1 cubes of space for my enclosure, it's a simple design long rectangular. My big question would be should I seal each sub up or could I keep all 3 in 1 chamber? Yes, I will brace that box if I don't seal each sub. Thanks for all your help Jim and/or members!


One chamber is fine. Honestly I dont think adding a sub is going to be your best answer? How much power do you have on tap? I would strongly suggest figuring out how you can get a quality and proper ported box for the two first. Just my opinion of course. I do think it will do what your looking for.........loved mine


----------



## jim walter

Venting that box @ 0.9 will work, but like Rex said, it is a bit small. The fact that you will keep the port on the exterior of the box helps since we won't be reducing the volume of the box any further, but the port will be rather long.

If the 0.9 is after taking away the volume from the subwoofer being inside the box (0.1 for the both of them), then use:
10sq in @ 24.5"
If not, and the box is actually 0.8, use:
10sq in @ 27.5" 

Yes, 0.1L makes that much difference for a similar tune. Even with these long ports, your first resonance is well above the passband in the 250+ range, so no worries there.


----------



## keanuration

ok I spent most of my morning and afternoon doing a lil project. I had an old box that housed a Kicker L7 8" that has been sidelined. I figure why not and alter that bad boy. With a lil' cutting and plenty of glue I came up with a not so shabby box for my two R8's. Granted its not the sharpest looking thing and my calculations might be off a lil' bit but hey it works for me. I got about ~1.1 cubes in there & I'm sure it's tuned in the mid to low 30s. I loaded it up for a quick test with Usher and wow it rumbled better than my old L7! But it was a quick test and maybe later on tonight after the glue sets more I'll pump it up! 








[/IMG]


----------



## rexroadj

keanuration said:


> ok I spent most of my morning and afternoon doing a lil project. I had an old box that housed a Kicker L7 8" that has been sidelined. I figure why not and alter that bad boy. With a lil' cutting and plenty of glue I came up with a not so shabby box for my two R8's. Granted its not the sharpest looking thing and my calculations might be off a lil' bit but hey it works for me. I got about ~1.1 cubes in there & I'm sure it's tuned in the mid to low 30s. I loaded it up for a quick test with Usher and wow it rumbled better than my old L7! But it was a quick test and maybe later on tonight after the glue sets more I'll pump it up!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/IMG]


There ya go!!!!!!! Well done!!!! Now as great as you think that is......get something in the 1.4 cuft in the mid 30s range and hold your ankles and kiss your ass goodbye  These things are no joke and can really do it all!!! When I get things settled in my world (cluster ****!) I may end up going back to these in my new vehicle) since I wont have a 15" type S to play with .........JIM!


----------



## keanuration

jim walter said:


> Done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, closer than I thought it would be.
> 
> Power = PDX M12
> 
> 843D .55 @ 35Hz
> 1043D 0.48 sealed
> 
> Songs: Grove St Party, All of the Lights, Aston Martin Music
> 
> One thing to recognize is that these woofers are roughly the same efficiency, so they are very evenly matched at mid listening levels until you get into a track with solid 30-40Hz energy. The ported box walks away at that point, however, with enough power on tap, the extra excursion (read stronger motor at the same stroke, more efficient at SPL) the 10" catches up. I'm taking 800-1000W, but the 10 sealed surprised me that it could kind of "come back" as the volume increased, even if it gets a bit dirty at this ridiculous excursion level.
> 
> In the end, the 10 can get louder from 50Hz up and 25Hz down, but (just as with any) the ported box can wreck it in the 30-50 range.
> 
> As far as speed and accuracy, the 8 is more controlled than 10, even when ported, pretty awesome to my ears. The 10 sounds great though, not dogging it .. Instead I was surprised how well it could keep up in a tiny sealed box.
> 
> Hope that helps
> Jim


Now you guys got me thinking of getting another R8 but just 1 for my other car. The family car needs it's trunk space so that is why only 1 What are the dimensions of this box that Jim had made? This looks exactly what I'm shooting for. I'm trying to get the airspace, port, sub displacement, etc, all to agree with one another and it's not easy. I'm trying not to bend the port as well. I figure that box is about ~.7 cubes w/o sub and port displacement? and port length ~20? I probably wrong but hopefully Jim or Rex can lend another huge helping hand


----------



## Dadof3

I'm extremely limited on space here. My single holed sealed box is going to come out to .2

4ohm 300W? or 2ohm 500W?

I appreciate the help.


----------



## DESTROYERRACER

i just finished my box for my 8 inch type r in my regular cab truck.....im at
.307 cubes with around [email protected] 2 ohms and am pretty happy so far.....what kind of vehicle?


----------



## Safeway

I'm new to ported enclosures. Hopefully you guys can tell me if this will work or if it will flop.

This box that I designed to fit into a cubby in the back of my V50 is ...

*Net volume:* 0.35 feet^3 after port and subwoofer displacement are subtracted, possibly 0.40 feet^3 with 1/2" MDF and taller enclosure
*Port area:* 5.75 inches^2
*Port length:* ~14 inches if you trace an average path, ~15 inches if I use 1/2" MDF and taller enclosure

This is using 3/4" MDF. If it will be sturdy enough, I can use 1/2" MDF to gain quite a bit of internal volume. I can go a little bit taller, too. Each woofer will only see 250w RMS.

I'm not sure if this will work or, more importantly, if it will sound well. I'm not even sure what frequency it is tuned to. I just put this little design together based on som research and educated guesses and hoped for the best.

So, will this work?

(If you can't tell, the port is the triangular passage, venting at the top, on the left side of the enclosure. It is fed by the square opening.)


----------



## ZAKOH

How would two 8s sound in a 1.4cu ft sealed box? I could run to each 450watts at 2ohm or about 300watts at 4ohm. Would this box be too big? I looking for a balanced all around SQ setup, but the smaller box is preferred if it does not sacrifice SQ. 

PS: I could go with 0.3 or 0.5cu ft per chamber as well. Let me know what's best. The box will be in a sedan trunk.


----------



## rexroadj

ZAKOH said:


> How would two 8s sound in a 1.4cu ft sealed box? I could run to each 450watts at 2ohm or about 300watts at 4ohm. Would this box be too big? I looking for a balanced all around SQ setup, but the smaller box is preferred if it does not sacrifice SQ.
> 
> PS: I could go with 0.3 or 0.5cu ft per chamber as well. Let me know what's best. The box will be in a sedan trunk.


1.4 would be absolutely perfect for a pair........Ported! I think that 450 a piece at 1.4 sealed would be iffy? although they really seem to work just about any way with great results.....May be worth a try, not sure how much extra extension you would get out of .7 each over say.... .5 or so? 
Being as resilient as they are I'm sure you could try it with care? If I had 1.4 and 450 each......I would go ported all day long......Oh wait? Thats actually exactly what I did! I actually miss that sub stage like crazy!!!!! As soon as I get a new vehicle I am going right back to it! It was perfect all around IMO


----------



## ZAKOH

Just a little note.. the 1.4 cu ft box is 1.4cu ft gross, for both subs.


----------



## jim walter

That'll do the trick just fine. 

What are the dimensions you can work with. And where can the port exit with at least 4" of clearance in front of it?


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> That'll do the trick just fine.
> 
> What are the dimensions you can work with. And where can the port exit with at least 4" of clearance in front of it?


Pretty sure he said he wants sealed....at that size?


----------



## ZAKOH

The height and depth are limited (specially height), but width can be long, let's say up to 12Hx10Dx23W outer dimensions. So the box volume can be a 1 cube with change. Current amplifier PPI Phantom Class D 4-channel, [email protected] RMS with channels bridged. By the way, should I bridge the channels, or would it make sense to send mono signal to power each individual voice coil?

I don't know how design or build ported box, so if you can tell me where/how to put the port, etc, that would be helpful. I am also contemplating the idea of running two subs sealed, each in 0.33cu ft gross. I know this can result in recessed output and lows, but I am quite lured by the idea of using a very small sealed box.

This is more of a brainstorming session, as I haven't decided if I should spend money on these subwoofers. Perhaps if someone has a fire sale around holiday times. I am trying to decide if this will have any improvement over the current sub. Right now I have Infinity Kappa 120.w9 12 inch at 4ohm in a 1cu sealed running on 450watts of power, using just two channels of 4-channel amplifier, and I am quite happy with it. I do like the idea of being able to use the rest of channels of the 4-channel for the sub stage, but without giving up any space to add a second subwoofer. Dual-8 seems like the setup that could use all my amp channels and still not use that much space.

I have been also thinking of the new Alpine Type-S 15, but the box space requirement is probably too much. By the way, can the S15 really keep up with the speed of the R8s? I always thought that transient response, if such capability exists, requires a box with low qtc, so a very big box for a 15.


----------



## rexroadj

ZAKOH said:


> The height and depth are limited (specially height), but width can be long, let's say up to 12Hx10Dx23W outer dimensions. So the box volume can be a 1 cube with change. Current amplifier PPI Phantom Class D 4-channel, [email protected] RMS with channels bridged. By the way, should I bridge the channels, or would it make sense to send mono signal to power each individual voice coil?
> 
> I don't know how design or build ported box, so if you can tell me where/how to put the port, etc, that would be helpful. I am also contemplating the idea of running two subs sealed, each in 0.33cu ft gross. I know this can result in recessed output and lows, but I am quite lured by the idea of using a very small sealed box.
> 
> This is more of a brainstorming session, as I haven't decided if I should spend money on these subwoofers. Perhaps if someone has a fire sale around holiday times. I am trying to decide if this will have any improvement over the current sub. Right now I have Infinity Kappa 120.w9 12 inch at 4ohm in a 1cu sealed running on 450watts of power, using just two channels of 4-channel amplifier, and I am quite happy with it. I do like the idea of being able to use the rest of channels of the 4-channel for the sub stage, but without giving up any space to add a second subwoofer. Dual-8 seems like the setup that could use all my amp channels and still not use that much space.
> 
> I have been also thinking of the new Alpine Type-S 15, but the box space requirement is probably too much. By the way, can the S15 really keep up with the speed of the R8s? I always thought that transient response, if such capability exists, requires a box with low qtc, so a very big box for a 15.


Well if your current situation is not broken????? I can appreciate having some extra channels and it making you go "hmmmmm" If you cant find a way to add to your front stage or rears etc.....then why not loose the 4channel and get say the p600.2 (cheap) and then your get 600x1 on your sub (little extra juice in case). Its smaller, and can save you some room and money and no more worries? 
If you can go ported with the 8s then I wouldnt even contemplate sealed imo!
Having had a ton of experience with the 8s.........I was told I was going to be getting the S15 for review a long while back that apparently never happened............So unfortunately I cant comment on them as a comparison........Speed? Not relevant to size! Folk lure.....nothing more!


----------



## Safeway

Can someone list a few good tracks to test these subwoofers? Rap based test tracks? Or just rap with a seriously heavy baseline?

I'm going to post some pictures of my box setup. It is a 1.1 cf box tuned to 31 or 32 hz. I built and carpeted it myself, so go easy on me!


----------



## Booger

I use all of the Focal discs which have plenty different types of tracks.
The 8s handle all of them very well!!!


----------



## RobTT

I will be buying two of these subs. The maximum volume I can get is 0.50 each.

Is it possible to build a ported enclosure with this amount of volume or should I just go with a sealed box.

I am planning on buying a Alpine MRX-F65 and bridging it, so will be 320W RMS going to each sub, or can anyone recommend me a different amp?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Cheers
Rob


----------



## quality_sound

Yes, you can port with .5cf each.


----------



## ZAKOH

RobTT said:


> I will be buying two of these subs. The maximum volume I can get is 0.50 each.


A lot of people recommended using 0.55 cubes or so. I can't imagine that 5/100s of a cube will noticeably change the sound. However, note that the 0.5 cu ft volume is for the box volume only not including the port. The port will also use up some space. It might be worth checking with box modeling software how well things would work out with 0.5cu ft box overall. It might be worth to PM Walter to see what he thinks about this. Of course, you can always try the sealed box, but I suspect the SPL and lower sub bass will not have as much authority as with ported. Some people have been happy with these in a sealed box. 




> I am planning on buying a Alpine MRX-F65 and bridging it, so will be 320W RMS going to each sub, or can anyone recommend me a different amp?


I'd consider PPI Phantom P900.2 4 channel amplifier. With channels bridged, you have 450watts for each subwoofer. This is what I do with mine. I wouldn't be surprised if MRX-F65 is slightly cleaner amplifier, but for subwoofer application, who cares?

If you want something even cheaper, consider PPI P600.2. Run each channel at 2ohms. This will give you 300watts per subwoofer. These amps are very cheap ($150 is normal price online) and decent reputation.


----------



## RobTT

Cheers for the replies.

I will build a sealed box for now and see how that sounds.

With the amp, I am from Australia and will be buying everything from the states as everything is about double the price over here, even with shipping the cost is still about 30-40% less when buying from the states.

The cheapest store I have found with decently priced shipping to Australia is Audio Savings.

So if you can recommend me an amp from there or another store that offer decent international shipping prices, that would be great.


----------



## Offroader5

I see a lot of talk about 1.4 cu vented for a pair of these. The enclosure I built for a single is 1.4 gross. It is way big for a single 843D, but it does sound awesome. What it doesn't do well is handle power with that much air space. Right now I have a Phantom 1000.1 wired 2 ohm, but may be picking up an MRX-M55 along with an F65.

I just realized how easy it would be to add a second 843 to the same enclosure. There's plenty of room on the baffle next to the other one. I am wondering what if any modifications I'd need to do to the vent after adding the second 843. Here's my enclosure:









Think the vent need to be lengthened on the inside or shortened?


----------



## quality_sound

I'd leave it as is. The sub displaces what? .05cf? You could model it but I doubt you'd see more than a 1Hz change in the tuning frequency.


----------



## rexroadj

quality_sound said:


> I'd leave it as is. The sub displaces what? .05cf? You could model it but I doubt you'd see more than a 1Hz change in the tuning frequency.


Ditto! Leave the box as is.....add second sub! Whats it tuned too?
Should be good to go! You'll love it! That P1000.1 would be PERFECT for a pair! I had about 900 on my pair (1.4 tuned to about 34)......one of my fav sub stages of all times....center console of my truck ported......Awesome!


----------



## Patrick Bateman

quality_sound said:


> I'd leave it as is. The sub displaces what? .05cf? You could model it but I doubt you'd see more than a 1Hz change in the tuning frequency.


True.

Here's why:

1) The efficiency of the port is mostly dictated by the volume of the port. Which means that if you add a second woofer, it won't be any louder unless you also increase the volume of the port.

2) Due to Hoffman's Iron Law, low frequency efficiency will be largely dictated by box size.


What all of this means is that if you add a second sub to the same box, chances are good that it will be no louder at low frequency, and the only significant bump in efficiency will be above the xover frequency.

About the only real advantage of adding a second sub to a box that's the same size is if you're exceeding xmax on the sub.


----------



## Offroader5

Thats the main reason I was thinking of doing it. With that much volume, the single sub reaches xmax on the power I am feeding it. I figured since I already have the enclosure and it's the right size, and I have the room on the baffle...might as well do it.

It allows me to try different wiring configurations with the 1000.1 also by adding the second sub.



Patrick Bateman said:


> True.
> 
> Here's why:
> 
> 1) The efficiency of the port is mostly dictated by the volume of the port. Which means that if you add a second woofer, it won't be any louder unless you also increase the volume of the port.
> 
> 2) Due to Hoffman's Iron Law, low frequency efficiency will be largely dictated by box size.
> 
> 
> What all of this means is that if you add a second sub to the same box, chances are good that it will be no louder at low frequency, and the only significant bump in efficiency will be above the xover frequency.
> 
> About the only real advantage of adding a second sub to a box that's the same size is if you're exceeding xmax on the sub.


----------



## jim walter

Definitely add in the second woofer. 

The box will be perceptibly louder at nearly every frequency except right at tuning. 

That, and it'll ensure you don't blow things up with that much power.


----------



## rexroadj

Hey Jim.....how bout that S15? Bought a Range Rover I'm going to be doing a mid/high level sq setup! Of course the 10 would fit better I'm thinking R8s pair ported or S ?


----------



## Offroader5

The box is tuned to 33 hz. The vent is 1.5" x 10.5" x 24.75". Here are a couple plots. The blue/grayish line is with two subs:









Here's an SPL plot. The point where the lines cross is at 38 hz. So I would gain sound level above 38 hz...correct? At the tuning frequency it looks like I'd only lose a couple DB, but the overall plot seems more flat...which is what would be considered better...correct?:









And here is an excursion plot. Confirms that having two in there would help control the cone movement a bit:


----------



## quality_sound

So everything smooths out when you add the second sub? I'm not seeing a downside at all.


----------



## thomasluke

The added sub looks better all around. Less excursion=less distortion. Unless port velocity goes way up too. 
But it looks to be a pretty decent sized port.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Patrick Bateman said:


> Jim,
> 
> I've put together a tapped horn design for your woofer. Here's some sims of it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The design is based off of one that the folks at AVS forum have been building. It's well documented, with a Google Sketchup layout and real-world measurements. All I did was mod it so that it would work with your woofer.
> 
> The advantage of your woofer is more output, the woofer is ubiquitous, and it's a better match for car audio amps than the woofer at AVS forum.
> 
> The advantage of a tapped horn over a vented box is more output, and reduced group delay. A tapped horn basically has better dynamis than a vented box, but doesn't suffer from the group delay that makes vented boxes sound "slow."
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> Audio Psychosis • View topic - Cheap and Different Sub


after going to one dubstep show too many, I started building a tapped horn for these Alpines. Will document my progress here:

Tapped Horn for the Lazy and Impatient - diyAudio

It's not the same design as posted above, but similar.


----------



## lilredsammy

rexroadj said:


> actually I might be able to toss 3 in there


I know this is an old post but did u do the center console? How did it turn out?


----------



## rexroadj

lilredsammy said:


> I know this is an old post but did u do the center console? How did it turn out?


http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...arisons/106292-alpine-swr-823d-game-over.html


----------



## enduro

I just got one of the Alpine SBR-S83V sub/ prefab box combo.  . The sub is being powered by an Alpine PDX-5 (birth sheet - 92w x4 + 417 x1 @14.4v). Do I need to run a subsonic filter on this setup? The PDX5 has a 15 hz filter, Alpine recommends a 30 hz filter if used with amps over 300w.


----------



## jim walter

enduro said:


> I just got one of the Alpine SBR-S83V sub/ prefab box combo.  . The sub is being powered by an Alpine PDX-5 (birth sheet - 92w x4 + 417 x1 @14.4v). Do I need to run a subsonic filter on this setup? The PDX5 has a 15 hz filter, Alpine recommends a 30 hz filter if used with amps over 300w.


Ideally, I would use the HPF. It depends in what music you play, but if you are playing some


----------



## tknude

Could a box for a single r8 be combined with a passive radiator? If this would give similar effects as porting, what would the volume be. 

As well I am looking at using one between the front seats of a mini van. Which direction would be best for the speaker to face?


----------



## Neil_J

I changed my crossover frequency from 80 Hz to 150 Hz the other day, and WOW!!! No more door rattles from my L6SE's, and so much more transparency and musicality by letting the 8's do what they do best. Sure, my stage has been pulled back, but so what, it sounds better. 

Listening to Bassnectar right now and I'm really glad I didn't opt for the sunroof at the dealer; it might just blast into the upper atmosphere


----------



## quality_sound

Neil,

Did you try overlapping the XO points? Say 100+ on the 6s? What about a matched XO around 100-120 Hz?


----------



## Neil_J

quality_sound said:


> Neil,
> 
> Did you try overlapping the XO points? Say 100+ on the 6s? What about a matched XO around 100-120 Hz?


I was always told that overlapping the crossover points was a no-no, but I don't see why I couldn't try it and see what happens.


----------



## quality_sound

There are different schools of thought but it might help keep the sound while bringing it back up front.


----------



## rexroadj

I'm not a fan of overlap but I completely understand the reasoning here..........
Do you have T/A for the sub?


----------



## quality_sound

I think he does since he's not using the MS-8 anymore. 

I agree about overlapping. For me it's always a last resort and I rarely use it, but who knows. This might be one of those cases. Then again, in my Clubman I never got around to putting my subs in and with JUST the QSD160s I almost never wanted one. I got CRAZY good bass out of them in that car.


----------



## rexroadj

quality_sound said:


> JUST the QSD160s I almost never wanted one. I got CRAZY good bass out of them in that car.


THANK YOU!!! At least someone knows how to use them! Talk about install dependent!!!! 

I also agree.....it could be one of those cases where it just "works"
I would try T/A first if its an option....if not? Why not! Give it a whirl.....certainly not going to damage anything......


----------



## Neil_J

quality_sound said:


> I think he does since he's not using the MS-8 anymore.
> 
> I agree about overlapping. For me it's always a last resort and I rarely use it, but who knows. This might be one of those cases.


I've got T/A, but it ain't correct because I haven't had time to set it up properly. My current plan is to get the CarPC up and running and do it correctly there. I'm not going to spend forever tuning a DSP that's getting ripped out, I guess. 

As for the overlapped crossover, I might try it out with the 6to8, but when I get the CarPC in, I've got a crazy DSP idea that's insane enough to work. I'll be documenting it in the CarPC build log.


----------



## quality_sound

Neil_J said:


> I've got T/A, but it ain't correct because I haven't had time to set it up properly. My current plan is to get the CarPC up and running and do it correctly there. I'm not going to spend forever tuning a DSP that's getting ripped out, I guess.
> 
> As for the overlapped crossover, I might try it out with the 6to8, but when I get the CarPC in, I've got a crazy DSP idea that's insane enough to work. I'll be documenting it in the CarPC build log.


Give this a whirl. I'm going to try it out this week but the reults look pretty good from the people that have tried it. 

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...5069-better-technique-ear-time-alignment.html


----------



## Offroader5

I went ahead and added the second 8 to my current enclosure. Holly cow!

Much more of a thunderous pound in the gut than with just the one. Just as modeled, it toned down the excursion so they are not reaching xmax even at high volumes, and if I did lose some DB at the tuning freq....I can't tell. I may have gained a tiny bit of port noise, but it seems only audible at VERY high volumes.

Totally worth the $108 for the second sub :thumbsup:


----------



## tnbubba

any response curves on these dudes.. was thinking about using them in a home system up to about 300


----------



## Patrick Bateman

tnbubba said:


> any response curves on these dudes.. was thinking about using them in a home system up to about 300


You can use these waaaaaay past 300hz. Here's why:

1) The main thing that prevents a subwoofer from playing high in frequency is inductance
2) There's a few things you can do to reduce inductance. You can use a small voice coil, or shorting rings. The Alpine has a shorting ring, and a voice coil that's about average in size.
3) If you want to play a subwoofer high in frequency, the next problem you'll run into is a reflection from the discontinuity of a fat surround. For instance, a lot of subwoofers have a big fat surround. The Alpine *does not.* It's surround is practically flat, because it has a "W shape"

Long story short -

You can play these waaaaay past 300hz. Heck, you could probably run them to 1500hz, give or take half an octave.

For $100, you could do a lot worse for a midbass, or even a midrange.


I've measured my SWR-843Ds in a tapped horn, and there was output up to 2khz. Admittedly, there were peak and dips, but that's mostly due to horn loading, not due to the driver.


----------



## jim walter

If someone will remind me in another week, I can slap one in the chamber and measure it. 

I'm out of town for the holidays, but this question deserves answering for you guys. 

I used them to 250Hz before and Steve Brown is using them well into the 2xxHz so I'm curious to see the first breakup mode in the cone (what I would say is the determining limit on these guys). 

As Patrick said, we've done everything possible to clean up these guys for accuracy and SQ ... But that cap is what I think will be the first thing to bark on these guys. 

Jim


----------



## tnbubba

thanks jim! 
yea I realize what all partrick said but i want to see a curve..
all the engineering n tech n stuff is great but it the cure looks like sharp chainsaw blade i may not want to mess with it esp above 80 hz.. rising response, falling, peaking, etc..
want to see how it will blend in with my projected and current drivers.. don't use digital eq in the home system all analog downstream to amps... man if they would up the sensitivity 3 db and cut back the power handling a bit.. it would fill a huge void in the home market right now.. not many medium sensitivity high quality 8" drivers that will work in reasonable size boxes with decent xmax and power handling..


----------



## Orion525iT

jim walter said:


> If someone will remind me in another week, I can slap one in the chamber and measure it.
> 
> I'm out of town for the holidays, but this question deserves answering for you guys.
> 
> I used them to 250Hz before and Steve Brown is using them well into the 2xxHz so I'm curious to see the first breakup mode in the cone (what I would say is the determining limit on these guys).
> 
> As Patrick said, we've done everything possible to clean up these guys for accuracy and SQ ... But that cap is what I think will be the first thing to bark on these guys.
> 
> Jim


Very interested in this too. Thanks ahead of time!


----------



## tnbubba

its been a week
while ur at it how about the 10" version too???


----------



## jim walter

Here you go. 

I don't have any R10's out here in Detroit to test, sorry. 

Jim


----------



## quality_sound

Holy ****


----------



## 94VG30DE

quality_sound said:


> Holy ****


Ditto. Man I love crossing subwoofers "high". This is just one more item that makes me like this driver. Thanks for posting the info Jim


----------



## rexroadj

I have a distinct feeling that the entire S line looks VERY similar.........Care to show any of those Jim......am I close?


----------



## chevbowtie22

Amazing. I really need to get my hands on a pair of them. 

Rex- I'm betting your pretty close on your type-s assumption. Jim I'd love to see the response of a 10 or 12" type s.


----------



## tnbubba

thanks Jim about what i expected...
now time to do some modeling..


----------



## Patrick Bateman

jim walter said:


> Here you go.
> 
> I don't have any R10's out here in Detroit to test, sorry.
> 
> Jim


A couple things to consider -

1) as noted in my post from a couple weeks ago, as long as you can keep inductance low and the geometry is 'correct', *you can use 'subwoofers' well into the midrange.*

2) Geometry is the tricky part; if you look at Jim's measured response, you'll notice that the peak and the dip in the midrange are harmonically related. (IE, there's a dip at 900hz and a peak at 1800hz; they're likely due to some type of reflection, as they're multiples of each other.)

3600 hz is 3.75" long, and dips are generally caused by reflected energy coming back towards the cone, out of phase.










So if you want to fix that peak and that dip, I'd look for something that's 3.75" from the center of the cone. Perhaps Jim measured the subwoofer without recessing it in the baffle? That would cause a 'step' between the lip of the sub and the baffle, and that may be causing the dip.

Long story short:

You might be able to get these to play up to 2000hz, if you can figure out what's causing the dip at 900hz and fix it. My educated guess is that the dip is caused by diffraction off the edge of the woofer frame.










(If you look at speakers from Kef and B&W, you'll notice the edge blends into the baffle perfectly, and this is why they do that.)


----------



## Golfntob

New to site. Lots of great info but a little overwhelming. Need help designing a box for 2-SWR-823D. I bought one of these (based mostly on what I read here) in the hopes up putting it under my 2011 Nissan Armada drivers seat. But in order to get the box big enough I had to jack the seat all the way up, and still sounded like the box was too small, and at 6'-2" I felt like I needed a sunroof to see out. So I'm looking at putting 2 of these ported in the back cargo area. I download WinISD to help but I have never built anything but sealed boxes so I'm not sure if I'm reading everything right. My outside box size is 48"l x 14"w x 7"d using 3/4 mdf I get about 1.42 ft^3 . WinISD says with a 2 1/2" dia port it needs to be 8.5" long. Does this sound right? Is my port dia to small? I will be putting about 450 watts to both subs together so 225ea. Any help or ideas would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Golfntob said:


> New to site. Lots of great info but a little overwhelming. Need help designing a box for 2-SWR-823D. I bought one of these (based mostly on what I read here) in the hopes up putting it under my 2011 Nissan Armada drivers seat. But in order to get the box big enough I had to jack the seat all the way up, and still sounded like the box was too small, and at 6'-2" I felt like I needed a sunroof to see out. So I'm looking at putting 2 of these ported in the back cargo area. I download WinISD to help but I have never built anything but sealed boxes so I'm not sure if I'm reading everything right. My outside box size is 48"l x 14"w x 7"d using 3/4 mdf I get about 1.42 ft^3 . WinISD says with a 2 1/2" dia port it needs to be 8.5" long. Does this sound right? Is my port dia to small? I will be putting about 450 watts to both subs together so 225ea. Any help or ideas would be greatly appreciated.


I simmed the box that's recommended by Alpine in the PDF at their site, and it looked like a excellent combination of output and extension. If I were you, I'd just build that.

(If you use a perfectly 'flat' box for this sub, it will be too 'boomy' in the car due to cabin gain. Even worse, the 'flat' box will have lower power handling and take up more space. Which is why I'd go with what Alpine recommends in their literature.)

The file is named "OM_SWR_S06212011.pdf"


----------



## Golfntob

1. If I understand correctly that would make my box 22"x17"x40", since the insert calls for 11"x8.5"x20" for one. This will not fit behind my back seat as the box will be to wide at the top since the seats lean back. Was hoping to keep it long and flat so I can still put a few items on top of the box as needed also. Could I perhaps do a trapezoidal shape? Wider at the bottom and narrower at the top. This would require me to make it longer than the 40" to get the proper volume. Also can I use a round port since I'm not to sure of my wood working skills making a flat port correctly.

2. Would perhaps more subs in a sealed box perform well in a long flat box? As the insert for the sealed design shows 11"x11"x5.5" as optimum....

Just FYI I'm not looking to shake the doors off the truck just wanting more output and deeper bass than the single 8. Also was trying to go ported to get more output since I'm under powering the subs a little.


----------



## Golfntob

Correct you are cajunner sorry for the bonehead post as that would make my box have an internal volume of around 8 cu ft.


----------



## Golfntob

So would it be acceptable to extend the 20" dimension to get to the 1.4 cu ft volume needed? I can live with the 8.5" depth and mount the subs so they fire toward the back hatch or into the back seats. I can just mount a piece of covered MDF to the top to give me a shelf to set things on as needed. Any help on the prefab round port? Alpine insert shows 5.25 sq in. Would I just double that to the amount of area need in a round port? Thinking 2.5" or 3" dia. with flared ends.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

If anyone is curious how the Alpine's big brothers work in a tapped horn, or curious what Jim looks like, check out the thread here:

Alpine SWR-12d2 Tapped Horn + Audio Memorial BBQ get together?


----------



## jim walter

That was a heck of a weekend! So much sawdust ... So much bass.


----------



## SaturnSL1

That house has some tall ceilings!


----------



## hpilot2004

Patrick Bateman said:


> If anyone is curious how the Alpine's big brothers work in a tapped horn, or curious what Jim looks like, check out the thread here:
> 
> Alpine SWR-12d2 Tapped Horn + Audio Memorial BBQ get together?


Which one is Jim?


----------



## rexroadj

Blue Alpine marine shirt


----------



## Offroader5

Whoa...for some reason I was picturing Jim a bit older :surprised:

Looks like a ton of screws in those boxes


----------



## Ray21

Fantastic response!


----------



## rugdnit

Offroader5 said:


> Whoa...for some reason I was picturing Jim a bit older :surprised:
> 
> Looks like a ton of screws in those boxes


The name WALTER can bring that kind of baggage.


----------



## jim walter

Offroader5 said:


> Whoa...for some reason I was picturing Jim a bit older :surprised:
> 
> Looks like a ton of screws in those boxes


We killed a box of 500 screws on these ... and actually added more on the front during high power testing as we found some rattles. The forces inside these boxes is incredible.


----------



## jim walter

Ray21 said:


> Fantastic response!


Here it is processed with the miniDSP.










Mike has some of the 1m and 3m measurements, but iirc we were in the high 120s and 130s from 15-100Hz


----------



## Golfntob

Help on vent size for two 823d's. Please. Was going to use prefab round port but can't find the length needed. So I'm going to just build a slot. 

Box 10.5"x40"x9.5" outside dims will be using 3/4" mdf. Gross volume =1.5 cu ft
Vent 8"x1 9/16" x 23.5"
Net volume = 1.3 cu ft. 

Power 300 per sub from alpine mrd-m605
Going in back of Nissan Armada suv. 

Listen to most all kinds of music but rock mostly. Would this be to boomy in an suv? No idea what the transfer function of the vehicle is. I am used to sealed boxes this will be my first ported.


----------



## Orion525iT

Impressive response curve. I am getting very good results pushing my kick mounted SWR-8 to 200hz mono. Makes me wish I had picked up two monoblocks to run them stereo and push them higher. But I never thought I would be in the 200hz range with them. Oh well, maybe someday .


----------



## TotDoc

I'm wanting to replace my sub in my 2012 Jeep Wrangler with one of these. I am hoping to reuse the stock enclosure, which is about 0.3-0.35cuft sealed. I have a Rockford Fosgate PBR300-1 amp to run a single 8. Birth sheet on the amp shows 99W RMS @ 4 ohm, 185 RMS @ 2 ohms, 320 at 1. I was thinking of the DVC 2ohm to present a 1 ohm load to the amp. Does this sound like a workable setup? Thanks!


----------



## rexroadj

TotDoc said:


> I'm wanting to replace my sub in my 2012 Jeep Wrangler with one of these. I am hoping to reuse the stock enclosure, which is about 0.3-0.35cuft sealed. I have a Rockford Fosgate PBR300-1 amp to run a single 8. Birth sheet on the amp shows 99W RMS @ 4 ohm, 185 RMS @ 2 ohms, 320 at 1. I was thinking of the DVC 2ohm to present a 1 ohm load to the amp. Does this sound like a workable setup? Thanks!


Yes it does!


----------



## jim walter

The Jeep Wrangler enclosure is exactly 9.3L, however, it will require some rather significant reinforcement if you want to use an R8 in there. If you're willing to put in a little sweat equity to build up the inside of the enclosure a bit, I'd say go for it!


----------



## rexroadj

jim walter said:


> The Jeep Wrangler enclosure is exactly 9.3L, however, it will require some rather significant reinforcement if you want to use an R8 in there. If you're willing to put in a little sweat equity to build up the inside of the enclosure a bit, I'd say go for it!


Excellent point! Yes, reinforcement with the R's will absolutely be a necessity! 


Hey Jim.....I was at a local shop a few weeks ago and we got talking about the R8......he mentioned he wished Hertz had a better 8"....not liking hertz at all I laughed and said why? to be second to that one? Pointing at the R8. He agreed it was a great sub but went on to show me 3 blown R8s from the alpine ported enclosures....said he has had to rma tons of them. The three on tap at that moment were very recent. I took a pick of them. They all looked exactly the same. Know anything about this? Enclosure issue? If you want to see the pic.....pm me your email and I will send it....or I could post it? Thought it was odd seeing as how I absolutely beat the snot out of mine and they were laughing at me the entire time?


----------



## TotDoc

jim walter said:


> The Jeep Wrangler enclosure is exactly 9.3L, however, it will require some rather significant reinforcement if you want to use an R8 in there. If you're willing to put in a little sweat equity to build up the inside of the enclosure a bit, I'd say go for it!


Hmmm...I guess I never thought of that part. Being such a small box, I didn't figure reinforcement would be necessary. I was just going to dynamat it and call it a day. What else should I do to reinforce it properly? I can't say I have much experience in this department


----------



## 94VG30DE

TotDoc said:


> Hmmm...I guess I never thought of that part. Being such a small box, I didn't figure reinforcement would be necessary. I was just going to dynamat it and call it a day. What else should I do to reinforce it properly? I can't say I have much experience in this department


The reinforcement is to strengthen the box so that it can withstand the high pressure levels of a small enclosure with high power/excursion.


----------



## takeabao

rexroadj said:


> Excellent point! Yes, reinforcement with the R's will absolutely be a necessity!
> 
> 
> Hey Jim.....I was at a local shop a few weeks ago and we got talking about the R8......he mentioned he wished Hertz had a better 8"....not liking hertz at all I laughed and said why? to be second to that one? Pointing at the R8. He agreed it was a great sub but went on to show me 3 blown R8s from the alpine ported enclosures....said he has had to rma tons of them. The three on tap at that moment were very recent. I took a pick of them. They all looked exactly the same. Know anything about this? Enclosure issue? If you want to see the pic.....pm me your email and I will send it....or I could post it? Thought it was odd seeing as how I absolutely beat the snot out of mine and they were laughing at me the entire time?


Is this a reputable shop?
Were these woofers beat on with total disregard?

I, too, have been absolutely BEATING on my Type R 8" (daily driver) and I have a close friend with the Alpine-made ported enclosure who REALLY cranks it, and neither of us have had issues.

As a statistician (and car audio nut), 3 dead in a row from the same shop seems highly improbable unless there were some other factors -- especially given Alpine's QC track record.


----------



## rexroadj

takeabao said:


> Is this a reputable shop?
> Were these woofers beat on with total disregard?
> 
> I, too, have been absolutely BEATING on my Type R 8" (daily driver) and I have a close friend with the Alpine-made ported enclosure who REALLY cranks it, and neither of us have had issues.
> 
> As a statistician (and car audio nut), 3 dead in a row from the same shop seems highly improbable unless there were some other factors -- especially given Alpine's QC track record.


Well I dont work for the shop so your questions are unanswerable from me. It was said that it was WAY more then 3 though! He just happened to have 3 sitting right there. I strongly doubt that its shop related.......Actually as funny as it sounds....because they have had that many issues with them and they all looked exactly the same.....kinda leads me to believe in a faulty box issue. Sounds like they have sold a TON of them! 

As a statistician......given the GIGANTIC # of these that are sold daily.....3 (didnt say in a row either...he just happened to have 3 waiting RMA's at that time) really isnt that unbelievable now is it?


----------



## Booger

Given the current "state of retail"..... Many customers are being sold the wrong thing....
Alpine did make a running change during the year with the 8 inch box. There now are 2 different models, 2 ohm and 4 ohm. Sounds like your "dealer" is selling the 2 ohm version and they are getting killed. Shows their level of knowledge, if they are "KILLING" more than 1. sad... Also keep in mind the dealer cost on that box is little over 100 dollars for a BAD-ASS TYPE R AND A GREAT BOX, But its a 8 inch cone!!!!!!!!!


----------



## rexroadj

Booger said:


> Given the current "state of retail"..... Many customers are being sold the wrong thing....
> Alpine did make a running change during the year with the 8 inch box. There now are 2 different models, 2 ohm and 4 ohm. Sounds like your "dealer" is selling the 2 ohm version and they are getting killed. Shows their level of knowledge, if they are "KILLING" more than 1. sad... Also keep in mind the dealer cost on that box is little over 100 dollars for a BAD-ASS TYPE R AND A GREAT BOX, But its a 8 inch cone!!!!!!!!!


#1. its not my "dealer"
#2. how exactly is it your place to judge there competence? Do you know anything about them? I dont? how do you?
#3. What your missing here is that because of the high # of issues.....all with the prefab alpine box (never had an issue with one of them outside of it), all of them having the exact same look? Its actually less likely that its the shops doing then it is some sort of design issue in the box or perhaps just a bad batch (that does happen). 
If you know anything about dealing with companies (especially alpine) its not going to take to many Rma requests before they start to investigate themselves! 

I found it odd that knowing what I did to my pair over the time I owned them they didnt bat an eye. Of course its a #s game, as far as odds of things happening. A busy shop is going to have a better idea of whats happening out there then "some guy" that has one in his daily driver! Lets be realistic here! I'm not saying there is something that has been some sort of an epidemic with the preloaded setups.......but to blame the shop that no one knows anything about is shear ignorance and a waste of typing so lets keep it at Jim or someone from alpine to see if there is anything about it. The shop didnt imply that it was more dead then not so lets not take that out of control either!


----------



## jim walter

The way to increase the rigidity of the enclosure in the Jeep would be to reinforce the weld seam in the enclosure. Couple that with a layer of fiberglass or some heavy damping on te back of the enclosure and you should be good.


----------



## jim walter

Compared to the O/M recommended box, the SBR is both smaller and tuned quite a bit lower (


----------



## Golfntob

Golfntob said:


> Help on vent size for two 823d's. Please. Was going to use prefab round port but can't find the length needed. So I'm going to just build a slot.
> 
> Box 10.5"x40"x9.5" outside dims will be using 3/4" mdf. Gross volume =1.5 cu ft
> Vent 8"x1 9/16" x 23.5"
> Net volume = 1.3 cu ft.
> 
> Power 300 per sub from alpine mrd-m605
> Going in back of Nissan Armada suv.
> 
> Listen to most all kinds of music but rock mostly. Would this be to boomy in an suv? No idea what the transfer function of the vehicle is. I am used to sealed boxes this will be my first ported.


Any help on the port and box size? I Posted it earlier but I think it was overlooked with it being the holidays.


----------



## ZAKOH

Golfntob said:


> Any help on the port and box size? I Posted it earlier but I think it was overlooked with it being the holidays.


One recommendation I heard is 0.55 cu ft per sub. If you use 1.1cu ft net volume for two subs tuned to 30Hz, you need 17 inch long vent with 3-inch diameter. If you tune to 35Hz, WinISD recommends a 12 inch long port approximately. If you use a square port with different port are, the recommendation will be different. Basically, use a port that's as long as you can fit.


----------



## jpswanberg

Jim, first of all a big thank you for being active on this (and the other 8" thread). After having read through all of the pages, I have a dilemma. I have ordered a 2013 Honda Accord Sport. In the rear parcel shelf I have 2 openings (6.5 inch) and one ready to be cut out (8"). I would like to run 3 SWR-842/822's IB firing up through where the old 6.5" speakers were and the (nonexistent) 8" would have been. My first question is concerning wiring up the subs. Using 3 SWR-842's, and only using 1 of the voice-coils per sub, I can get a final resistance (nominal) of 1.33 ohms. Using 3 SWR-822's, and again only using 1 voice-coil per sub, I can get a final resistance (nominal) of 6 ohms. Which do you suggest? I realize that neither load is a typical amp load. The second question is power. I realize that the max recommended power is 350 watts per sub (roughly 1000 watts for the trio). I have also read that a sub run in IB only needs a portion of that power to reach x-max. I also read about you running one the subs IB on one of the mono blocks Alpine sells. How much power do you recommend per sub, and which Alpine mono block would be appropriate? Thank you in advance, JPS.


----------



## 94VG30DE

jpswanberg said:


> Jim, first of all a big thank you for being active on this (and the other 8" thread). After having read through all of the pages, I have a dilemma. I have ordered a 2013 Honda Accord Sport. In the rear parcel shelf I have 2 openings (6.5 inch) and one ready to be cut out (8"). I would like to run 3 SWR-842/822's IB firing up through where the old 6.5" speakers were and the (nonexistent) 8" would have been. My first question is concerning wiring up the subs. Using 3 SWR-842's, and only using 1 of the voice-coils per sub, I can get a final resistance (nominal) of 1.33 ohms. Using 3 SWR-822's, and again only using 1 voice-coil per sub, I can get a final resistance (nominal) of 6 ohms. Which do you suggest? I realize that neither load is a typical amp load. The second question is power. I realize that the max recommended power is 350 watts per sub (roughly 1000 watts for the trio). I have also read that a sub run in IB only needs a portion of that power to reach x-max. I also read about you running one the subs IB on one of the mono blocks Alpine sells. How much power do you recommend per sub, and which Alpine mono block would be appropriate? Thank you in advance, JPS.


Why would you only wire 1 VC per sub? Check this out: JL Audio » header » Support » Tutorials » Tutorial: Wiring Dual Voice Coil (DVC) Subwoofer Drivers 

With IB you don't NEED a ton of power, so it seems like it would make more sense to run the higher impedance load to keep the amps happier.


----------



## Golfntob

ZAKOH said:


> One recommendation I heard is 0.55 cu ft per sub. If you use 1.1cu ft net volume for two subs tuned to 30Hz, you need 17 inch long vent with 3-inch diameter. If you tune to 35Hz, WinISD recommends a 12 inch long port approximately. If you use a square port with different port are, the recommendation will be different. Basically, use a port that's as long as you can fit.


ZAKOH, Thanks so much for the info. I modeled in Winisd as well but came up with a much longer port needed. Since it was my first time using it I was not very confident in my results. Not sure where I went wrong.


----------



## jpswanberg

94VG30DE said:


> Why would you only wire 1 VC per sub? Check this out: JL Audio » header » Support » Tutorials » Tutorial: Wiring Dual Voice Coil (DVC) Subwoofer Drivers
> 
> With IB you don't NEED a ton of power, so it seems like it would make more sense to run the higher impedance load to keep the amps happier.


I don't remember which thread it was in, this one or the other one dedicated to the SWR-8, but Jim suggested running only one vc to raise the Q(?) of the system. Sorry but I am too lazy to go back through 40+ pages that I read last night to find the quote. If I was to use both both vc's, then my issue would be simple: get three SWR-843's and wire them series/paralell for a final resistance of 2.66 and use an alpine pdx-m600 or an alpine mrx-m110.


----------



## TotDoc

jim walter said:


> The way to increase the rigidity of the enclosure in the Jeep would be to reinforce the weld seam in the enclosure. Couple that with a layer of fiberglass or some heavy damping on te back of the enclosure and you should be good.


Perfect! That is exactly the info I needed. I am going to go ahead and order one of these up today!


----------



## jim walter

jpswanberg said:


> I don't remember which thread it was in, this one or the other one dedicated to the SWR-8, but Jim suggested running only one vc to raise the Q(?) of the system. Sorry but I am too lazy to go back through 40+ pages that I read last night to find the quote. If I was to use both both vc's, then my issue would be simple: get three SWR-843's and wire them series/paralell for a final resistance of 2.66 and use an alpine pdx-m600 or an alpine mrx-m110.


You are correct. 

Doing so raises the Q, by lowering the BL and dropping SPLo. However, the higher q with the same resonance results in a natural bump in the low end response, which gives a better balance to the overall sound (this was tested in separate ~5 cube enclosures each in an SUV. 

It also affords a bit of mechanical protection by better balancing motor force vs compliance without the air spring of the box. 

You'll be able to test both ways and choose based on your tastes. 

I'd go for the MRX-M110. It is a lot of power, but headroom is never a bad thing to have in the hands of a responsible tuner.

Let me know how it goes

Jim


----------



## rexroadj

Jim....any word on any known issues with the alpine preloaded 8s?


----------



## jpswanberg

Thank you very much. Will do. JPS


----------



## jim walter

I answered that a few days ago. 

The SBR is much smaller and tuned lower, which results in lower power handling. There is a label on the terminal plate of the enclosure that clearly indicates that.


----------



## rexroadj

Sorry....didnt understand that as an "answer"?


----------



## CVD55

Hello, I have 4 SWR-823D's sitting here and a PDX-M12 on the way and I have no idea how to design a box for them I tried WinIsd but wasnt really sure what I was doing.

So can you guy recommend a box design for me. I can read a tape measure and cut some wood but beyond that I'm lost. Space isnt a issue really as long as it isnt longer than 48" going into the back of a Tahoe. I'd like it to get loud but still sound good if it's possible.
Thanks,
Chuck


----------



## ZAKOH

jim walter said:


> I answered that a few days ago.
> 
> The SBR is much smaller and tuned lower, which results in lower power handling. There is a label on the terminal plate of the enclosure that clearly indicates that.


Can you explain how this box design affects power handling? Is this because of mechanical excursion limits? If yes, can this be addressed at least partially using a subsonic filter?


----------



## subwoofery

ZAKOH said:


> Can you explain how this box design affects power handling? Is this because of mechanical excursion limits? If yes, can this be addressed at least partially using a subsonic filter?


Thanks... Saves me from writting lol  Also wanted to ask.

Kelvin


----------



## K-Mike

Sorry this is really off topic but it seemed the best place to ask it. It seems that Alpine did not redo the 15" SWR, and if they did not, why?


----------



## Booger

K-Mike said:


> Sorry this is really off topic but it seemed the best place to ask it. It seems that Alpine did not redo the 15" SWR, and if they did not, why?


At current rate of sale on 15's.... I doubt you will see much 'change" from the current design.

Remember ROI = "Return on Investment" is KING....


----------



## K-Mike

So I'm guessing the 15's don't sell well? But If it receives no upgrades won't that just further decrease sales because the upgraded twelve is just that much more appealing over the older 15? Why not cancel them?


----------



## quality_sound

15s in general don't sell well. Even without upgrades the 15 will still move more air.


----------



## thomasluke

quality_sound said:


> 15s in general don't sell well. Even without upgrades the 15 will still move more air.


And MOST of the time....Not always the guy looking for a couple of 15's is looking to get loud. Something that the typer's do really well to begin with.
From what i understand all the "upgrades" were for lowering distortion and the like anyway.


----------



## Offroader5

Jim,
I'll be building a f'glass enclosure for the back corner of my 4Runner and have a couple questions. I have thought about just leaving the new enclosure sealed. Right now I have two of these in 1.3 cu. vented @ 33hz. I like the volume I get out of them now, and knowing I won't get the same volume out of the two in a sealed enclosure...I thought of trying to cram another one or even two more and netting about 1.6 cu. total in the new enclosure.

One of the things I wonder about. What (if any) difference will there be if I had all four in the same volume vs. separate volumes. I think that separating the f'glass enclosure into 4 equal volumes will be interesting just due to the fact that simply fitting 4 of these on the face of the new enclosure in one corner of the vehicle will be challenging.


----------



## ZAKOH

K-Mike said:


> Sorry this is really off topic but it seemed the best place to ask it. It seems that Alpine did not redo the 15" SWR, and if they did not, why?


Alpine also did not redo the R8 that's discussed on this thread. Perhaps those two have reached perfection?

Jim mentioned that new S15 sounds very good SQ wise, in a 2cu ft sealed box. This might be an interesting subwoofer to try, and they're inexpensive.


----------



## Drumagician

I have read through this entire post twice now in hopes of assuring myself that my course of action for installing these Type-R 8's is going to yield the results I'm looking for. I'm pretty sure I have it nailed down but am left with a few questions that I did not see addressed. 
First of all, basic info... music=only Metal, Hard rock, and Alternative. Amp= JL 1000/1 V2 (500 watts/speaker). Speaker location= trunk of Pontiac G6. Sound=40% extension to 60% SQ impact 
So I figure (2) 8's ported at 0.55 ft3 net each and a 34 Hz tune should work nicely. 
Questions:
1) Should I even consider these 8's for a trunk of a sedan? Seems like everyone is using them in cabs and many installers telling me not to use 8's in trunks ever. 
2) Would there be any difference between using 1 enclosure (shared air space/1 port) and (separate air spaces/1 port per speaker)? 

Any other thoughts are welcome too. Thanks... first time poster.


----------



## quality_sound

1) yes
2) no


----------



## Angrywhopper

Drumagician said:


> I have read through this entire post twice now in hopes of assuring myself that my course of action for installing these Type-R 8's is going to yield the results I'm looking for. I'm pretty sure I have it nailed down but am left with a few questions that I did not see addressed.
> First of all, basic info... music=only Metal, Hard rock, and Alternative. Amp= JL 1000/1 V2 (500 watts/speaker). Speaker location= trunk of Pontiac G6. Sound=40% extension to 60% SQ impact
> So I figure (2) 8's ported at 0.55 ft3 net each and a 34 Hz tune should work nicely.
> Questions:
> 1) Should I even consider these 8's for a trunk of a sedan? Seems like everyone is using them in cabs and many installers telling me not to use 8's in trunks ever.
> 2) Would there be any difference between using 1 enclosure (shared air space/1 port) and (separate air spaces/1 port per speaker)?
> 
> Any other thoughts are welcome too. Thanks... first time poster.


I've used tons of 8" woofers in the trunks of my car, including an 8" W7 right now, and I have always been happy.


----------



## rexroadj

I would personally go a little larger per sub cuft ported...tuning sounds about right!


----------



## 94VG30DE

< has an 8" in his trunk, and likes it


----------



## minbari

Drumagician said:


> I have read through this entire post twice now in hopes of assuring myself that my course of action for installing these Type-R 8's is going to yield the results I'm looking for. I'm pretty sure I have it nailed down but am left with a few questions that I did not see addressed.
> First of all, basic info... music=only Metal, Hard rock, and Alternative. Amp= JL 1000/1 V2 (500 watts/speaker). Speaker location= trunk of Pontiac G6. Sound=40% extension to 60% SQ impact
> So I figure (2) 8's ported at 0.55 ft3 net each and a 34 Hz tune should work nicely.
> Questions:
> 1) Should I even consider these 8's for a trunk of a sedan? Seems like everyone is using them in cabs and many installers telling me not to use 8's in trunks ever.
> 2) Would there be any difference between using 1 enclosure (shared air space/1 port) and (separate air spaces/1 port per speaker)?
> 
> Any other thoughts are welcome too. Thanks... first time poster.




The difference in sound is zero! but here are some things to consider when deciding to go common chamber or seperate.

Common chamber:
1) 1 sub blows the other sub sees the blown sub as a passive radiator. this will re tune the enclosure to god know what. possibility of damaging the good sub.
2) the smaller the chamber, the longer the port. if you are looking at puting these in 1/2 cuft each(1cuft total), tuned to 30hz (as an example.) then (1) 3" port will need to be 19.25" long.

seperate chamber:
1) safer for each sub for reason mentioned above.
2) 1/2 cuft for each will require (2) ports (one for each box) and EACH 3" port will need to be 40.3" long!


----------



## Drumagician

rexroadj said:


> I would personally go a little larger per sub cuft ported...tuning sounds about right!


rexroadj,
I appriciate your feedback, as well as everyone else here but in an effort to better educate myself here, your recomending going larger for what reason? My type of music, the trunk location, my personal sound preference...

Also, after thinking about installation a bit more, with being in a trunk, is there any preference on firing direction? Usually, its toward the rear bumber but does that theory hold true with my proposed setup? ie: 8"s


----------



## rexroadj

Drumagician said:


> rexroadj,
> I appriciate your feedback, as well as everyone else here but in an effort to better educate myself here, your recomending going larger for what reason? My type of music, the trunk location, my personal sound preference...
> 
> Also, after thinking about installation a bit more, with being in a trunk, is there any preference on firing direction? Usually, its toward the rear bumber but does that theory hold true with my proposed setup? ie: 8"s


I believe they are recommended for .7 each ported.......I know I ran my pair at 1.4 (shared) tuned to around 33 if memory serves.....I had 900 to the pair......it was a beautiful thing


----------



## quality_sound

Jim has repeatedly recommended .5 to .55 cf vented.


----------



## Drumagician

I suppose I should just stop over thinking it and just do it. Sometimes my engineer side gets the best of me  Thanks for the help guys.


----------



## Drumagician

My brother just installed a sealed 12" Kicker L5 with a Kicker ZX750.1 pushing it and is praising it up and down. You don't suppose he will be jumping on the 8 train after hearing my setup do you?? LoL


----------



## Serieus

Drumagician said:


> My brother just installed a sealed 12" Kicker L5 with a Kicker ZX750.1 pushing it and is praising it up and down. You don't suppose he will be jumping on the 8 train after hearing my setup do you?? LoL


for sq? probably. for volume? most likely not, the square cones just have a ton of surface area for extra displacement


----------



## ZAKOH

Drumagician said:


> rexroadj,
> I appriciate your feedback, as well as everyone else here but in an effort to better educate myself here, your recomending going larger for what reason? My type of music, the trunk location, my personal sound preference...
> 
> Also, after thinking about installation a bit more, with being in a trunk, is there any preference on firing direction? Usually, its toward the rear bumber but does that theory hold true with my proposed setup? ie: 8"s


It is commonly believed that the SPL difference between forward and rear-firing subwoofers comes from the fact that when firing rear, the wave that gets reflected from the back of car is more in phase with the wave that travels directly from the cone towards the front of car, compared to firing forward. If this theory is correct, and your box has great depth, then the direction of firing the sub gets more important. On the other hand, if the box is thin, then the direction of firing the cone will not matter as much. If both depth is like 10 inches or less, I don't see why not let the sub simply fire up.


----------



## rexroadj

quality_sound said:


> Jim has repeatedly recommended .5 to .55 cf vented.


I guess I didnt pay attention to those? He helped me design mine..... .7 was the per sub mark. .5 seems really tiny to me for them? But if thats whats been said or tried then go for it! If I could do it again I would use another pair in a 1.4 enclosure without hesitation!


Not saying he didnt say that .5 I am pretty sure if he did it was for the "well if you have too" and probably had an external port? If you can fit a 1.4 box then I think the person asking will appreciate the results......


----------



## Drumagician

rexroadj said:


> I guess I didnt pay attention to those? He helped me design mine..... .7 was the per sub mark. .5 seems really tiny to me for them? But if thats whats been said or tried then go for it! If I could do it again I would use another pair in a 1.4 enclosure without hesitation!
> 
> 
> Not saying he didnt say that .5 I am pretty sure if he did it was for the "well if you have too" and probably had an external port? If you can fit a 1.4 box then I think the person asking will appreciate the results......


I think the confusion here is net or gross volume. 0.7 gross and 0.55 net (per sub) are the same size enclosure. You guys are probably actually agreeing with each other and not know it.


----------



## jim walter

Drumagician said:


> I think the confusion here is net or gross volume. 0.7 gross and 0.55 net (per sub) are the same size enclosure. You guys are probably actually agreeing with each other and not know it.


There we go. 

Quoting vented box volumes is never trivial, some quote gross while others net. I prefer net, but have to change my tune when talking to a few of our specialists.


----------



## quality_sound

As I do. I never quote gross, even with sealed enclosures. I don't think anyone ever should quote gross.


----------



## kIRGHIZ

I'm looking at one or two of these to help out the door speakers with midbass, probably 80 hz to 250 hz or so, and I think I saw somewhere in this thread that 0.2 or 0.3 sealed is fine for that. What I never ran across was if there was an upper end of a power limit for a midbass application. If I ran one I would be looking at bridging 2 channels to 300 watts rms, or if I ran two I would just leave them stereo and send 100 watts rms a piece to them, or I guess could bridge and send 150 to each. 

Which way should I go on that? If I had my druthers I'd run a single and send it 300 watts if it'd work.


----------



## Booger

BE AWARE!!!!

WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, THE NEW ALPINE TYPE R 8INCH DRIVERS ARE COMING SOON:

NEW MODELS ARE :

>>>SWR-8D2 - NEW RETAIL IS $159.95!!!!!
>>>SWR-8D4 - NEW RETAIL IS $159.95!!!!!

GET READY.


----------



## rugdnit

Booger said:


> BE AWARE!!!!
> 
> WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, THE NEW ALPINE TYPE R 8INCH DRIVERS ARE COMING SOON:
> 
> NEW MODELS ARE :
> 
> >>>SWR-8D2 - NEW RETAIL IS $159.95!!!!!
> >>>SWR-8D4 - NEW RETAIL IS $159.95!!!!!
> 
> GET READY.


Sorry if I missed this-- any changes / tweaks?


----------



## thomasluke

Booger said:


> BE AWARE!!!!
> 
> WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, THE NEW ALPINE TYPE R 8INCH DRIVERS ARE COMING SOON:
> 
> NEW MODELS ARE :
> 
> >>>SWR-8D2 - NEW RETAIL IS $159.95!!!!!
> >>>SWR-8D4 - NEW RETAIL IS $159.95!!!!!
> 
> GET READY.



Hold on...How soon? I was about to place an order on two of these. Not good at waiting but...


----------



## Sulley

^Sub'd for this.

Obviously they are being updated to look like the rest of the Type-R line but it will be Interesting to see if any real performance "upgrades" are done. I can't see them changing much tho...


----------



## ZAKOH

stockley.rod said:


> ^Sub'd for this.
> 
> Obviously they are being updated to look like the rest of the Type-R line but it will be Interesting to see if any real performance "upgrades" are done. I can't see them changing much tho...


Well, the last 10 and 12 inch SWR have considerable improvement in linear stroke and power handling. I hope this will not be done at the expense of low inductance and overall sq potential in the R8.


----------



## Booger

Sorry everybody... Info is coming real soon on changes. 

Delivery is Start of April!!!


----------



## captainobvious

Booger said:


> Sorry everybody... Info is coming real soon on changes.
> 
> Delivery is Start of April!!!


 
Anxiously awaiting....


Thanks


----------



## thomasluke

Booger said:


> Sorry everybody... Info is coming real soon on changes.
> 
> Delivery is Start of April!!!


So a year huh?


----------



## ZAKOH

I wonder how the R8s would compare to Dayton HO8. Apparently, there exist 8 inch Dayton HO versions. One 4ohm SVC, the other 8 ohm SVC.

Dayton Audio RSS210HO-4 8" Reference HO Subwoofer 4 Ohm 295-458
Dayton Audio RSS210HO-8 8" Reference HO Subwoofer 8 ohm 295-459


----------



## thomasluke

ZAKOH said:


> I wonder how the R8s would compare to Dayton HO8. Apparently, there exist 8 inch Dayton HO versions. One 4ohm SVC, the other 8 ohm SVC.
> 
> Dayton Audio RSS210HO-4 8" Reference HO Subwoofer 4 Ohm 295-458
> Dayton Audio RSS210HO-8 8" Reference HO Subwoofer 8 ohm 295-459



Ya those have been out a while.


----------



## ZAKOH

thomasluke said:


> Ya those have been out a while.


Yeah, but seemingly no one is using them. They actually model pretty similar in WinISD. Start with the same box design, and frequency response and sensitivity look similar.


----------



## Drumagician

Well guys, I hate to be a nay-sayer, but I just got my dual type-r 8's in my custom ported enclosure (to manual recommended specs!) installed today (professionally) and was very disappointed!! I was so excited to hear these things based on all the hype in this thread and that it was going to be the ultimate for metal music ie: high impact kick drum at the very least. I REALLY want high impact kick drums!!! and these won't do it; at least in the trunk of my G6 with 500 watts (JL 1000/1 V2) going to each of them. I do have to admit that the low bass [rap music; I was just testing  ] was pretty impressive for 8's until both speakers burnt up in smoke after listening for about 20 minutes. So the speaker blowing reason could be up for debate and we could go into the details of amp setup but the fact remains, that i would not recommend these speakers for metal music which requires an even mix of noticeable excursion output and accurate high impact (in my humble opinion). Anyway, I'm having a sealed box made for the JL 10W7AE-3 I bought today and will be pushed with the above amp at 1000watts. If that don't give me sledge hammer to the back type kick drum impact, I'm just going to have to give up and sell everything. I ain't got the money for this S**T!!


----------



## quality_sound

You need more cone area.


----------



## Orion525iT

Drumagician said:


> Well guys, I hate to be a nay-sayer, but I just got my dual type-r 8's in my custom ported enclosure (to manual recommended specs!) installed today (professionally) and was very disappointed!! I was so excited to hear these things based on all the hype in this thread and that it was going to be the ultimate for metal music ie: high impact kick drum at the very least. I REALLY want high impact kick drums!!! and these won't do it; at least in the trunk of my G6 with 500 watts (JL 1000/1 V2) going to each of them. I do have to admit that the low bass [rap music; I was just testing  ] was pretty impressive for 8's until both speakers burnt up in smoke after listening for about 20 minutes. So the speaker blowing reason could be up for debate and we could go into the details of amp setup but the fact remains, that i would not recommend these speakers for metal music which requires an even mix of noticeable excursion output and accurate high impact (in my humble opinion). Anyway, I'm having a sealed box made for the JL 10W7AE-3 I bought today and will be pushed with the above amp at 1000watts. If that don't give me sledge hammer to the back type kick drum impact, I'm just going to have to give up and sell everything. I ain't got the money for this S**T!!


Mmmm, what freq are you crossing them and where are the Rs located?


----------



## Drumagician

They are in the trunk facing the rear bumper, butted up to the back seat. They were crossed over at 115 hz.


----------



## 94VG30DE

Drumagician said:


> They are in the trunk facing the rear bumper, butted up to the back seat. They were crossed over at 115 hz.


I don't know what you have available for processing, but unprocessed that spot is the orientation I have had the worst luck with in all the vehicles I've tried. It just never blends well and results in phase issues. 
Especially if you are crossing your midbass down around 80Hz (i.e. significant overlap between sub/mid) then I would look seriously into phase issues and destructive interference.


----------



## ZAKOH

Drumagician said:


> They are in the trunk facing the rear bumper, butted up to the back seat. They were crossed over at 115 hz.


Did you turn on the subsoonic filter? Most subs in a ported box will run out of physical excursion pretty fast without it. For these guys 25Hz 2nd order subsonic is probably a good idea. Another issue is the power handling. My understanding they don't handle much power beyond their rated. I'd cap the power source at about 400watt RMS a pop using a DMM and a test tone. My understanding, they're not particularly loud anyways. An R8 in a ported box will probably just barely match the output of a 12 in a sealed box, while hitting better lows but only up to about 400watts of power. Then the 12 will take off if it can handle more power. Walters mentioned that the R10 in a small sealed box sounds louder with >500watts of power.


----------



## Drumagician

Thanks for the responses. I had the subsonic set at 30hz. Also, I thought i read that Walters had the 2 ported and running the M12. He must have had the input sensitivity WAY down. I won't be giving these speakers a second chance. The JL 10W7AE will be installed by Monday. Although I am still a bit Leary about it as well. I've heard sometimes they don't do well with rock kick drum impact. Will be sealed at 1.25ft^3 and 1000 watts, so hopefully I'll be alright.


----------



## Offroader5

I have a PPI Phantom 1000.1 powering a pair of these 8's @ 1 ohm. Everything I've read says these amps put out rated power. That's a minimum of 785 watts @ 12v...and could be as high as 1000 watts @ 14v. They have no problem with that power in 1.4 shared cubes vented @ 33hz.

But....in terms of sound output, I'm running them in an SUV. A bit different than in a trunk.



ZAKOH said:


> ....Another issue is the power handling. My understanding they don't handle much power beyond their rated. I'd cap the power source at about 400watt RMS a pop using a DMM and a test tone...





Drumagician said:


> ....Also, I thought i read that Walters had the 2 ported and running the M12. He must have had the input sensitivity WAY down...


----------



## Drumagician

Yeah, I suppose the JL 1000/1 V2 is too much of a bad a**. It is at least 1000 watts regardless of voltage; some say 20-25% more but I'm not too sure. I also suppose that I put too much faith in the installer to properly adjust the gain. Oh well, just like with mechanic type work, I'll just do it myself from now on.


----------



## rexroadj

Offroader5 said:


> I have a PPI Phantom 1000.1 powering a pair of these 8's @ 1 ohm. Everything I've read says these amps put out rated power. That's a minimum of 785 watts @ 12v...and could be as high as 1000 watts @ 14v. They have no problem with that power in 1.4 shared cubes vented @ 33hz.
> 
> But....in terms of sound output, I'm running them in an SUV. A bit different than in a trunk.


I had almost the exact scenario except it was in my center console. I had just under 1000w to them (may have crested that in actual output as the amp was underrated).

If you blow a sub its not from the "power" something was clearly wrong here.......Its just that simple!

Would it have been enough output for you? Who knows. Did the subs blow because of failure? Maybe but they are great about that crap.....

What really happened? Who knows? Clipped signal, poor box, could be a lot....power is not one of them. 

Lets all keep that in mind here.


----------



## subwoofery

Bass boost below subsonic filter freq maybe? 

Kelvin


----------



## Orion525iT

Drumagician said:


> Yeah, I suppose the JL 1000/1 V2 is too much of a bad a**. It is at least 1000 watts regardless of voltage; some say 20-25% more but I'm not too sure. I also suppose that I put too much faith in the installer to properly adjust the gain. Oh well, just like with mechanic type work, I'll just do it myself from now on.


Dont get offended by this suggestion. Three things have stood out to me. 1) Box placement may not have been ideal 2)You have stated you were not getting the kick drum output you so desired. 3)You have made the assertion that Jim must have had his gains (input sensitivity) turned down, as you put it, WAY down to handle the M12. 

Perhaps you had your gains turned WAY up to get the output you so badly desired. Clip and fail.

On another note, I dont seem to get much kickdrum impact out of my Rs at anything below 150hz. I cant tell you I know what frequency kick drums produce, but I dont feel like I perceive much until my xover is above 150hz.

My Rs are mounted in the kick panels


----------



## 94VG30DE

Orion525iT said:


> Dont get offended by this suggestion. Three things have stood out to me. 1) Box placement may not have been ideal 2)You have stated you were not getting the kick drum output you so desired. 3)You have made the assertion that Jim must have had his gains (input sensitivity) turned down, as you put it, WAY down to handle the M12.
> 
> Perhaps you had your gains turned WAY up to get the output you so badly desired. Clip and fail.
> 
> On another note, I dont seem to get much kickdrum impact out of my Rs at anything below 150hz. *I cant tell you I know what frequency kick drums produce*, but I dont feel like I perceive much until my xover is above 150hz.
> 
> My Rs are mounted in the kick panels


I can  Interactive Frequency Chart - Independent Recording Network 

I think any further discussion of this point is silly without a discussion on phase.


----------



## keanuration

What's up ppl? I was wondering if anybody knew if these bad boys have been discontinued? I know crutchfield isn't the most cost friendly place to buy, but I was on their site and noticed they have discontinued selling them? Does this mean a new version is on the horizon or what? I am eagerly interested in a new version if that's the case. Thanks for all your input people!


----------



## jim walter

The SWR-xxx3D series is discontinued. For the 8's, the SWR-8D2/D4 replace them. 

Jim


----------



## Brian Steele

jim walter said:


> The SWR-xxx3D series is discontinued. For the 8's, the SWR-8D2/D4 replace them.
> 
> Jim


Somewhat OT Jim - I just put in an order for the Type R 12D2s to replace my Infinity 122.7Ws (the surrounds are becoming unstuck). Any Klippel results available for them? I'll be driving them with the PDX-M12.


----------



## tknude

I have a SWR-843D and am going to build a ported box and drive it with a JL 500/1 amp. I am planning on making my sub down firing between the front seats of my minivan. This is my first sub enclosure build, so I am looking for a bit of help.

Jim, or anyone else for that mater, I have figured on internal dimensions of my box to be 10" wide x 19.5" long x 6.5" high, giving me 0.734 cubes gross. Have a look at my rough design idea.

1. Is this a good volume? I could change the 6.5 to 6.25" to get closer to the manufactures recommendation of 0.7 gross volume.

2. What should my port size be if I made it slotted on the 10 inch side of the box? 

3. According to the spec sheet it says a port of 7" x .75" x 15.5" in length. Does this mean I should narrow my port and go with these sizes?

Thanks for your help.


----------



## esbyrd

hey guys i asked this question on another thread and it wasnt answered so ill try it hear. im trying to fit a alpine type r 8 under my passenger seat of my 2011 dr wrangler and ive designed the box now but i was wondering if one all yall would plug it into yalls google sketchup and see if its a ok design? if i can figure out home to send it  i have to us 1/2 mdf but there isnt any long spans so im sure it will be fine. i would give the dimensions but its a odd shape

gross= 0.659
speaker displacement= 0.05
port volume= 0.105
net= 0.503
port tune= 35.1885
port area= 6.75 (4.5x1.5)
port length= 27


----------



## jim walter

Brian Steele said:


> Somewhat OT Jim - I just put in an order for the Type R 12D2s to replace my Infinity 122.7Ws (the surrounds are becoming unstuck). Any Klippel results available for them? I'll be driving them with the PDX-M12.


PM me and we can exchange an email with the data.

Jim


----------



## jim walter

esbyrd said:


> hey guys i asked this question on another thread and it wasnt answered so ill try it hear. im trying to fit a alpine type r 8 under my passenger seat of my 2011 dr wrangler and ive designed the box now but i was wondering if one all yall would plug it into yalls google sketchup and see if its a ok design? if i can figure out home to send it  i have to us 1/2 mdf but there isnt any long spans so im sure it will be fine. i would give the dimensions but its a odd shape
> 
> gross= 0.659
> speaker displacement= 0.05
> port volume= 0.105
> net= 0.503
> port tune= 35.1885
> port area= 6.75 (4.5x1.5)
> port length= 27


As I read it, that should work well. My only caveat is to try and keep the port bends to a minimum and relatively smooth. Allow for at least 3-4" in front of the vent for clearance to atmosphere (ie - don't fire it into a hard plastic part).

Jim


----------



## jim walter

tknude said:


> I have a SWR-843D and am going to build a ported box and drive it with a JL 500/1 amp. I am planning on making my sub down firing between the front seats of my minivan. This is my first sub enclosure build, so I am looking for a bit of help.
> 
> Jim, or anyone else for that mater, I have figured on internal dimensions of my box to be 10" wide x 19.5" long x 6.5" high, giving me 0.734 cubes gross. Have a look at my rough design idea.
> 
> 1. Is this a good volume? I could change the 6.5 to 6.25" to get closer to the manufactures recommendation of 0.7 gross volume.
> 
> 2. What should my port size be if I made it slotted on the 10 inch side of the box?
> 
> 3. According to the spec sheet it says a port of 7" x .75" x 15.5" in length. Does this mean I should narrow my port and go with these sizes?
> 
> Thanks for your help.


Looks good (not the drawing, but the box  )

The added volume is a never a bad thing, I'd build it as drawn.


----------



## esbyrd

jim walter said:


> As I read it, that should work well. My only caveat is to try and keep the port bends to a minimum and relatively smooth. Allow for at least 3-4" in front of the vent for clearance to atmosphere (ie - don't fire it into a hard plastic part).
> 
> Jim


Thanks for the reply


----------



## tknude

tknude said:


> I have a SWR-843D and am going to build a ported box and drive it with a JL 500/1 amp. I am planning on making my sub down firing between the front seats of my minivan. This is my first sub enclosure build, so I am looking for a bit of help.
> 
> Jim, or anyone else for that mater, I have figured on internal dimensions of my box to be 10" wide x 19.5" long x 6.5" high, giving me 0.734 cubes gross. Have a look at my rough design idea.
> 
> 1. Is this a good volume? I could change the 6.5 to 6.25" to get closer to the manufactures recommendation of 0.7 gross volume.
> 
> 2. What should my port size be if I made it slotted on the 10 inch side of the box?
> 
> 3. According to the spec sheet it says a port of 7" x .75" x 15.5" in length. Does this mean I should narrow my port and go with these sizes?
> 
> Thanks for your help.


Thanks Jim. For the last question, should I go with the port as stated? Thanks again. Ted.


----------



## jim walter

Ported. I only use the sealed as a midbass or front subs. 

Jim


----------



## Offroader5

Hey Jim, I know the MRX-M110 has been mentioned somewhere in previous pages of this thread. I'm wondering if it'll be too much amp for a pair of the 843's if I run them series parallel.

The amp rating being at 1100 watts @14.4 seems like a lot of power for these. Right now I have them powered off a PPI 1000.1 and they are getting right around that 1k mark @ 14.4 now...but will this extra little bit be too much for them? They'll be in 1.2-1.4 cubes shared vented at 33hz.


----------



## jpsandberg

jim walter said:


> The SWR-xxx3D series is discontinued. For the 8's, the SWR-8D2/D4 replace them.
> 
> Jim


Hi Jim,

Any idea when these will be out? I couldn't even find anything on the Alpine website for them..

Thanks!


----------



## jim walter

http://www.alpine-usa.com/product/view/swr-8d4

They're here!


----------



## rexroadj

wonder if they sound as good as the 15" type S you were sending me


----------



## keanuration

I am totally a follower with these R8's, but now I am intrigued by these updated R8's. What are the improvements that have been rendered. I would like to get a bit more info on these before I pull the trigger on these. Thanks Jim!


----------



## esbyrd

I wonder if there is any improvements as well. I have a 83d4 in a sealed .3 net and its handling 700rms with no problem


----------



## hammondc

bookmarked


----------



## tnbubba

Alpine SWE-10S4 any specs and story on this cheapo dude??
looks good for economy build?


----------



## Sulley

Anybody got a updated R8 yet?


----------



## keanuration

Somebody has to chime in on this new R8, anybody?


----------



## meantaco

bump


----------



## aztec45

I might buy it. I have two sbr-s83v, I might have to see how they compare. I saw on alpine website that the new sbr-S8 are 50 more then the s83v first came out..


----------



## Sulley

I ordered an SWR-8D2, should be here this week. I plan to run it in the factory subwoofer enclosure of my Wrangler but I might build a quick vented box to try it out. 

I assume the vented box recommendations are the same for the D2 as the 823D? [email protected]~34hz? What size port tube, 2"?


----------



## Brian Steele

*Two by Four...*










A quick pic - one of my friends built a subwoofer for his car consisting of a two MLTLs mounted side by side, each using two of the SWRd-823D subwoofers. The result was some pretty impressive output. 8" drivers - who knew?


----------



## subwoofery

Like we wouldn't see the big ass woofer on the side... pff... 

Kelvin


----------



## Brian Steele

subwoofery said:


> Like we wouldn't see the big ass woofer on the side... pff...
> 
> Kelvin


It's not connected, LOL. I did ask the owner why didn't he remove it, and he said it would be too much trouble to address the hole that would be left with its removal.


----------



## thewatusi

Got an swr-8d4 on the way. Going to put it in .295 cuft sealed downfiring between the console and rear seat over the floor hump in the wife's Hyundai Santa Fe. Power will be a pdx 1.600

Can't wait to get it set up.


----------



## keanuration

Here's something to debate about guys:

I've been a follower of these killer subs for a while now. I absolutely love these things ported and hands down they will hang with the best. I've read and heard that these subs lose a bit of ground when it comes to sealed. Well, I decided to venture into the sealed realm with these babies with the recommended .3 cubes/sub and they do lose a bit of low end. I realize the fact that ported will almost always crush in output but in my opinion they lose quite a bit of impact. So I decided to put them to a little comparison with a pair of JL's 8W3's spec'd at .3 cubes/sub as well. I was astonished to hear that these W3's actually dug lower than the R8's. There was a bit more impact as well with the W3's. Both were given 500 watts RMS since this is the borderline for the W3's. The R8's however can swallow a bit more power up to 700 RMS for the pair. Do you all think these extra 200 watts could really make a difference and bring these R8's back into the limelight with the W3's? I don't have any amps that go beyond 500 watts, so should I invest in something bigger and expect the R8's to regain supremacy?


----------



## cajunner

keanuration said:


> Here's something to debate about guys:
> 
> I've been a follower of these killer subs for a while now. I absolutely love these things ported and hands down they will hang with the best. I've read and heard that these subs lose a bit of ground when it comes to sealed. Well, I decided to venture into the sealed realm with these babies with the recommended .3 cubes/sub and they do lose a bit of low end. I realize the fact that ported will almost always crush in output but in my opinion they lose quite a bit of impact. So I decided to put them to a little comparison with a pair of JL's 8W3's spec'd at .3 cubes/sub as well. I was astonished to hear that these W3's actually dug lower than the R8's. There was a bit more impact as well with the W3's. Both were given 500 watts RMS since this is the borderline for the W3's. The R8's however can swallow a bit more power up to 700 RMS for the pair. Do you all think these extra 200 watts could really make a difference and bring these R8's back into the limelight with the W3's? I don't have any amps that go beyond 500 watts, so should I invest in something bigger and expect the R8's to regain supremacy?


250 watts per 8" in sealed boxes, sounds a little low for what they are capable of.

spending the money for an 800 watt sub pusher, sounds like a good idea.

and, if the W3's are still the heavy duty in sealed, let the Type-R's go, if need be. No harm, no foul.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

keanuration said:


> Here's something to debate about guys:
> 
> I've been a follower of these killer subs for a while now. I absolutely love these things ported and hands down they will hang with the best. I've read and heard that these subs lose a bit of ground when it comes to sealed. Well, I decided to venture into the sealed realm with these babies with the recommended .3 cubes/sub and they do lose a bit of low end. I realize the fact that ported will almost always crush in output but in my opinion they lose quite a bit of impact. So I decided to put them to a little comparison with a pair of JL's 8W3's spec'd at .3 cubes/sub as well. I was astonished to hear that these W3's actually dug lower than the R8's. There was a bit more impact as well with the W3's. Both were given 500 watts RMS since this is the borderline for the W3's. The R8's however can swallow a bit more power up to 700 RMS for the pair. Do you all think these extra 200 watts could really make a difference and bring these R8's back into the limelight with the W3's? I don't have any amps that go beyond 500 watts, so should I invest in something bigger and expect the R8's to regain supremacy?


If you have a couple speakers that are evenly matched as far as sensitivity goes, and they're both getting equal power, and one sounds louder, there are two possibilities:

1) the one that sounds 'quieter' is suffering from power compression 

Or

2). The one that sounds 'quieter' has lower distortion

If I'm not mistaken, the W3 has a conventional motor. (Type S and type R have split gap)

So my hunch is that the distortion in the JL is making it sound louder.


----------



## cajunner

Patrick Bateman said:


> If you have a couple speakers that are evenly matched as far as sensitivity goes, and they're both getting equal power, and one sounds louder, there are two possibilities:
> 
> 1) the one that sounds 'quieter' is suffering from power compression
> 
> Or
> 
> 2). The one that sounds 'quieter' has lower distortion
> 
> If I'm not mistaken, the W3 has a conventional motor. (Type S and type R have split gap)
> 
> So my hunch is that the distortion in the JL is making it sound louder.



not sure if Type S is split gap, or Type R for that matter. DDDrive was split gap, though.

The W3 has the perforated pole that gives the eddy current control (or back EMF) without the wider gap from a pole shield.

I think Alpine uses Faraday rings, which could reduce sensitivity at the ends of stroke.

So the JL can maintain the narrow gap geometry without the performance penalty of the Alpine's faraday, if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## keanuration

I might have to agree with possibility #2, as these subs reside in the trunk of my sedan. after comparing the W3's and R8's, I decided to pop the trunk and listen from there. I think the W3's are really working hard and may be distorting a bit more than the R8's. Man, you guys know your stuff after trying to follow what you were picking apart about the make-up of these drivers. So all in all, these W3's are reaching it's limit and I should reconsider my R8's with more power, if my goal is more impact?


----------



## Patrick Bateman

keanuration said:


> I might have to agree with possibility #2, as these subs reside in the trunk of my sedan. after comparing the W3's and R8's, I decided to pop the trunk and listen from there. I think the W3's are really working hard and may be distorting a bit more than the R8's. Man, you guys know your stuff after trying to follow what you were picking apart about the make-up of these drivers. So all in all, these W3's are reaching it's limit and I should reconsider my R8's with more power, if my goal is more impact?


If you like the sound of distortion, perhaps just use the sub that distorts more?

I know it's a bit taboo to suggest using the high distortion sub, but distortion *does* make something sound louder. And pushing a low distortion sub hard may just blow it up.

Plenty of people like the sound of harmonic distortion; it's the whole reason guitarists use distortion pedals. Changes the sound of the guitar, often in a pleasant way. Some might argue that harmonic distortion is the reason that people like tube amps. (I'm not stepping into THAT argument lol)

Distortion (music) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Does anyone remember the 90s, when bandpass boxes were all the rage? One reason they sounded weird was that their group delay sucks, but another reason is that bandpass boxes filter out second and third harmonic distortion, *and* they reduce excursion.









For instance, the bandpass sub above is tuned to about 60hz. The second harmonic at 120hz is down about 8dB, and the third harmonic is down by almost 20dB. *So the third harmonic distortion of the fundamental note is just NUKED.* And no electronic crossover or DSP can do this. But a bandpass box can do it acoustically.

Put these two things together, and a lot of people were in the habit of cooking their woofers in bandpass boxes. Because the subs would be getting killed by high power, but the box often filtered out the sounds of the driver dying. Basically the harmonic distortion wasn't always audible, and this also encouraged people to crank up the bass. So it was basically a big feedback loop of woofer detonation.


----------



## Offroader5

Jim, I have a somewhat on topic question...

Was wondering if you guys had done any testing with these subs in a tapped horn design. Not sure if maybe you've just given it a try and have info to share 

I have two of these that I was using in my 4Runner, but have moved up to a single 15 and now have these two 8's sitting around. I've been wanting to build myself a new home audio sub, and was wondering if these would be a good option to use...either both of them together or by themselves.

Have you done any such "fooling around"? If so, would you mind sharing dimensions/drawings for my personal use?


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Offroader5 said:


> Jim, I have a somewhat on topic question...
> 
> Was wondering if you guys had done any testing with these subs in a tapped horn design. Not sure if maybe you've just given it a try and have info to share
> 
> I have two of these that I was using in my 4Runner, but have moved up to a single 15 and now have these two 8's sitting around. I've been wanting to build myself a new home audio sub, and was wondering if these would be a good option to use...either both of them together or by themselves.
> 
> Have you done any such "fooling around"? If so, would you mind sharing dimensions/drawings for my personal use?


The 'insubnia' tapped horn subwoofer works with the Alpine Type R eights. The only difference is the *depth*; you have to increase it to accommodate the larger woofer. There's a thread on this somewhere on my forum. (forum.audiopsychosis.com)

Also, Jim demo'd some MONSTER tapped horns with Type Rs on another forum. IIRC, he used the twelves or the fifteens, so the horn was BIG.

IMHO, if you can spare the additional space the Type R is a better choice than the Exodus, due to the higher output potential.

I built an insubnia for my car, with the Alpines in it, but it's been sitting there, about 90% finished, for the past nine months.

As mentioned in another thread, I'm not 100% convinced that THs are worth the trouble below 80hz in a car, so the sub may end up in my home theater instead.


----------



## Offroader5

Patrick Bateman said:


> The 'insubnia' tapped horn subwoofer works with the Alpine Type R eights. The only difference is the *depth*; you have to increase it to accommodate the larger woofer. There's a thread on this somewhere on my forum. (forum.audiopsychosis.com)
> 
> Also, Jim demo'd some MONSTER tapped horns with Type Rs on another forum. IIRC, he used the twelves or the fifteens, so the horn was BIG.
> 
> IMHO, if you can spare the additional space the Type R is a better choice than the Exodus, due to the higher output potential.
> 
> I built an insubnia for my car, with the Alpines in it, but it's been sitting there, about 90% finished, for the past nine months.
> 
> As mentioned in another thread, I'm not 100% convinced that THs are worth the trouble below 80hz in a car, so the sub may end up in my home theater instead.


Hmm, I will have to go check out your site and that design. I remembered seeing the posts on the other forum about the group getting together and building that huge one with the larger Type R's...that's kinda why I was hoping he'd done a bit of fooling around with the little brother versions.

Ha, you must have read my mind. It was the recent Anarchy thread that got me thinking about using the drivers I had to build a tapped horn


----------



## jim walter

Never used the 8s in a TH, but I'll back Patrick's design for sure. 

The AlpineGeists were 2x12" Type Rs, two towers. With an EP4000 to each tower, they were astounding, basically limitless bass in a living room. 

We've also done the Type S 15", which is honestly a better bang for the buck and nearly matches the performance of the 12s. 

If you do make one for the 8s, I'd love to see some real world measurements. 

Jim


----------



## DS-21

The dual-2Ω coil ones look very interesting for a nearfield monitor project I'm working on. (I assume there isn't a single-coil 4Ω variant I missed.) 

Project is a pair of ~15L closed boxes, bass drivers each driven by their own amp channel rated 300W/4Ω, with the 8" drivers' passband likely to be 250Hz or so and down.

These woofers seem to offer lots of throw, reasonable Q in a 15L box, low enough inductance to have extended bandwidth (I never use a bass driver that isn't clean at least an octave above my intended passband!), and native F3 low enough to not require too much EQ, good powerhandling. Also, the surrounds are multirolls like the midbasses on my Pioneer EX (baby TAD) main system speakers, so that helps.  

But two questions.

First, is the dustcap logo removeable? I really, really dislike visible logos on anything.

Second, I don't think anyone has discussed differences between last year's model and this year's. It seems that the throw on the current one is rated slightly less, and T/S seem slightly different, but I wonder if those differences are material or just revamping of the spec sheet to better reflect actual production units (as opposed to early prototypes). So, thoughts on "old" vs "new," considering that there seems to be a healthy supply of both on the market right now?


----------



## thewatusi

It's been in for a few weeks so I thought I would leave my impressions.

I've got an 843D in .29cuft sealed downfiring on the floor between the console and rear seat in my wife's '08 Santa Fe. Power is a ppi 900.5 feeding ~440wrms @ 2ohms

Sounds great! Very tight and musical and blends well. Despite being a single 8" in an suv, there is plenty of kick for my taste.

Awesome little sub.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

DS-21 said:


> The dual-2Ω coil ones look very interesting for a nearfield monitor project I'm working on. (I assume there isn't a single-coil 4Ω variant I missed.)
> 
> Project is a pair of ~15L closed boxes, bass drivers each driven by their own amp channel rated 300W/4Ω, with the 8" drivers' passband likely to be 250Hz or so and down.
> 
> These woofers seem to offer lots of throw, reasonable Q in a 15L box, low enough inductance to have extended bandwidth (I never use a bass driver that isn't clean at least an octave above my intended passband!), and native F3 low enough to not require too much EQ, good powerhandling. Also, the surrounds are multirolls like the midbasses on my Pioneer EX (baby TAD) main system speakers, so that helps.
> 
> But two questions.
> 
> First, is the dustcap logo removeable? I really, really dislike visible logos on anything.
> 
> Second, I don't think anyone has discussed differences between last year's model and this year's. It seems that the throw on the current one is rated slightly less, and T/S seem slightly different, but I wonder if those differences are material or just revamping of the spec sheet to better reflect actual production units (as opposed to early prototypes). So, thoughts on "old" vs "new," considering that there seems to be a healthy supply of both on the market right now?


There's a frequency response measurement somewhere in this thread.
IIRC, these play well past 250hz, possibly as high as 1khz

Due to the large surround and the large 'lip' on the driver, the actual cone area is smaller than most 8" subs, so beaming won't happen until 2khz or so

I'd love to see someone try using these as midbasses and see how that works out


----------



## DS-21

Patrick Bateman said:


> There's a frequency response measurement somewhere in this thread.
> IIRC, these play well past 250hz, possibly as high as 1khz
> 
> Due to the large surround and the large 'lip' on the driver, the actual cone area is smaller than most 8" subs, so beaming won't happen until 2khz or so
> 
> I'd love to see someone try using these as midbasses and see how that works out


Yeah, I noticed Sd was about 20cm^2 smaller than many 8's, though I wonder if more of the surround should count towards Sd on these multiroll surrounds than on a traditional half-roll. 

Jim's post of the FR got my attention, too.

Not too worried about beaming, though, as the driver above it will be a 5" concentric driver.

I'm more worried about whether or not I'd be able to remove the logo!


----------



## bassfromspace

DS-21 said:


> Yeah, I noticed Sd was about 20cm^2 smaller than many 8's, though I wonder if more of the surround should count towards Sd on these multiroll surrounds than on a traditional half-roll.
> 
> Jim's post of the FR got my attention, too.
> 
> Not too worried about beaming, though, as the driver above it will be a 5" concentric driver.
> 
> I'm more worried about whether or not I'd be able to remove the logo!


I'm not sure what's on the magnet of the Alpine, but if it's just a simple sticker, why not reverse-mount the woofer? It would limit how high you could play the driver, but a 5" driver above it would make it more than feasible.


----------



## DS-21

bassfromspace said:


> I'm not sure what's on the magnet of the Alpine, but if it's just a simple sticker, why not reverse-mount the woofer? It would limit how high you could play the driver, but a 5" driver above it would make it more than feasible.


A motor sticking out 5" from the baffle would be unsightly, in addition to creating diffraction issues. (Concentric driver and woofer will both be in a .75 cubic foot Parts Express box, with the concentric obviously in a sealed subchamber.) 

Also, then I'd have to run wires on the outside of the box!


----------



## rugdnit

DS-21 said:


> I'm more worried about whether or not I'd be able to remove the logo!


That level of OCD must be a tremendous burden.


----------



## 94VG30DE

DS-21 said:


> First, is the dustcap logo removeable? I really, really dislike visible logos on anything.


Paint the whole cone with something very lightweight, yet opaque?


----------



## ChrisB

rugdnit said:


> That level of OCD must be a tremendous burden.


He has CDO... It's a condition like OCD, but the letters are in alphabetical order, just as they should be!:laugh:


----------



## The Baron Groog

Patrick Bateman said:


> I'd love to see someone try using these as midbasses and see how that works out


I thought they already had, in Alpine's Camaro? I'm sure it's mentioned in this thread.


----------



## DS-21

rugdnit said:


> That level of OCD must be a tremendous burden.


Keep in mind I'm not looking for something to stick in a trunk, but rather to use in a pair of nearfield monitors about 40" from my face. And obviously no grills, because of diffraction issues.


----------



## The Baron Groog

Spray the cone, may alter the TS, very slightly


----------



## rugdnit

DS-21 said:


> Keep in mind I'm not looking for something to stick in a trunk, but rather to use in a pair of nearfield monitors about 40" from my face. And obviously no grills, because of diffraction issues.


Understood.... but it's a logo.... You either have a severe case of CDO  or are easily distracted. 

Nice to see you back btw.


----------



## Mack

The Baron Groog said:


> Spray the cone, may alter the TS, very slightly


If you can find an airbrush artist...the possibilities are endless. Custom piece of art.


----------



## ChrisB

I'm still wondering if I would be happy with a pair of these ported in the trunk of my 2012 WRX? It's either that or wait for winter to see what I can put in the spare tire well.

Regardless, the dd1508 is no longer doing it for me now that I listen to more non-electronic material. It's impressive for an 8, but it is loud where it shouldn't be and quiet where it should be loud. I tuned it low on purpose and it is too bloated near the tuning frequency, even with EQ correction.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

DS-21 said:


> Keep in mind I'm not looking for something to stick in a trunk, but rather to use in a pair of nearfield monitors about 40" from my face. And obviously no grills, because of diffraction issues.


I'll take a look at my Type S woofers and see if the logo is removable. (My Type Rs are still in storage.)


----------



## Patrick Bateman

ChrisB said:


> I'm still wondering if I would be happy with a pair of these ported in the trunk of my 2012 WRX? It's either that or wait for winter to see what I can put in the spare tire well.
> 
> Regardless, the dd1508 is no longer doing it for me now that I listen to more non-electronic material. It's impressive for an 8, but it is loud where it shouldn't be and quiet where it should be loud. I tuned it low on purpose and it is too bloated near the tuning frequency, even with EQ correction.


DD1508s are a nice woofer.
Have you measured the frequency response?
The situation you describe sounds like it may be fixed with a simple EQ cut or boost.


----------



## ChrisB

Patrick Bateman said:


> DD1508s are a nice woofer.
> Have you measured the frequency response?
> The situation you describe sounds like it may be fixed with a simple EQ cut or boost.


I tuned it low to smooth out the modeled bump near 50 Hz. As it turns out, I kind of need that bump to overcome the exhaust drone. The system sounds awesome with the car off, but with the car running, it is tough to hear the higher bass notes over the exhaust drone.

This is what I have to overcome:


----------



## Offroader5

Going to bring this thread back to the top.

Hoping Jim will check in and advise. Without having to go through this whole thread, what would be the MINIMUM enclosure size you would put these into sealed? I have about 400-500 available to power each and the ability to EQ the low end if I need to tweak a bit more out of it.

I'm trying to see if I could possibly install one (maybe even two) in the passenger front footwell/glovebox location without sacrificing too much foot room or the entire glove box area.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

If you were so inclined, you could put a subwoofer designed for a ten cubic foot box into a box that's 0.1 cubic feet, *and it will still work.*

Making the box too small doesn't hurt the sub or anything; in fact it protects it, because the smaller volume of air acts as a stronger 'spring' on the diaphragm.









Taken to the extreme, you could make a gap of a fraction of an inch between the cone and the enclosure, *and it will still work fine.*

Obviously, some one is going to reply and say "a tiny enclosure will have no bass."

But that's only partly true.

A very very small enclosure will raise the F3 of the sub, but you also get some low bass "for free" due to cabin gain. So what you lose by shriking the enclosure you get back for free via cabin gain.

So, can you put it in the footwell? IMHO, the answer is "yes", as long as you're prepared to use EQ to raise the low end if necessary, and to 'cut' the peak which will be created as the box gets smaller and smaller and smaller.

BTW, this is how the Carver sunfire subs work.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

ChrisB said:


> I tuned it low to smooth out the modeled bump near 50 Hz. As it turns out, I kind of need that bump to overcome the exhaust drone. The system sounds awesome with the car off, but with the car running, it is tough to hear the higher bass notes over the exhaust drone.
> 
> This is what I have to overcome:


When you have a peak and a dip next to each other, it can really sound terrible. If a bass note 'hits' in the dip all you're going to hear are harmonics, and if a note 'hits' another octave higher, the peak will exaggerate the sound.

Rather than replacing the sub I'd look into a way to smooth out the response of what you have.

But that's a big peak and dip! It's going to be tricky. That peak at 50hz is almost 20 decibels!! That's like pumping 10 watts into the sub at 40hz, and a THOUSAND watts at 50hz! Yowza.

Some things to try:

1) stuff the port with a tshirt, so it's sealed off. Now re-measure it. If that flattens the response, you're done
2) Try moving it around the trunk, if that's an option. Not just an inch or two, but as far as you can. Moving it a couple feet will change the response.
3) EQ will definitely help, but with a peak and a dip that severe, you're definitely running into some type of resonance in the car. Which is why moving it around should help. The box tuning may also be way off, which often happens with small ported boxes. (Big ported boxes are fairly predictable, but as boxes get smaller and smaller the tuning gets less predictable. You can end up in a situation where a port that's supposed to tune the box to 30hz ends up tuning the box to 20hz, and then there's a 'depression' between the output of the box and the output of the port.)


----------



## bassfromspace

Patrick Bateman said:


> If you were so inclined, you could put a subwoofer designed for a ten cubic foot box into a box that's 0.1 cubic feet, *and it will still work.*
> 
> Making the box too small doesn't hurt the sub or anything; in fact it protects it, because the smaller volume of air acts as a stronger 'spring' on the diaphragm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taken to the extreme, you could make a gap of a fraction of an inch between the cone and the enclosure, *and it will still work fine.*
> 
> Obviously, some one is going to reply and say "a tiny enclosure will have no bass."
> 
> But that's only partly true.
> 
> A very very small enclosure will raise the F3 of the sub, but you also get some low bass "for free" due to cabin gain. So what you lose by shriking the enclosure you get back for free via cabin gain.
> 
> So, can you put it in the footwell? IMHO, the answer is "yes", as long as you're prepared to use EQ to raise the low end if necessary, and to 'cut' the peak which will be created as the box gets smaller and smaller and smaller.
> 
> BTW, this is how the Carver sunfire subs work.


You'd probably need to jam a ton of power into it for decent output, no?


----------



## Patrick Bateman

bassfromspace said:


> You'd probably need to jam a ton of power into it for decent output, no?


You're gonna tempt me to do sims huh? 

Give me 20 minutes, I'll throw something up.


----------



## Offroader5

Patrick Bateman said:


> If you were so inclined, you could put a subwoofer designed for a ten cubic foot box into a box that's 0.1 cubic feet, *and it will still work.*
> 
> Making the box too small doesn't hurt the sub or anything; in fact it protects it, because the smaller volume of air acts as a stronger 'spring' on the diaphragm.
> 
> Taken to the extreme, you could make a gap of a fraction of an inch between the cone and the enclosure, *and it will still work fine.*
> 
> Obviously, some one is going to reply and say "a tiny enclosure will have no bass."
> 
> But that's only partly true.
> 
> A very very small enclosure will raise the F3 of the sub, but you also get some low bass "for free" due to cabin gain. So what you lose by shriking the enclosure you get back for free via cabin gain.
> 
> So, can you put it in the footwell? IMHO, the answer is "yes", as long as you're prepared to use EQ to raise the low end if necessary, and to 'cut' the peak which will be created as the box gets smaller and smaller and smaller.
> 
> BTW, this is how the Carver sunfire subs work.


Hmm, has me interested enough to throw together a .25-.30 sized box and give it a go.



bassfromspace said:


> You'd probably need to jam a ton of power into it for decent output, no?


I run a PPI 1000.1 for sub duties. I have the dual 4 ohm versions of the 8's, so if I use just one...I can get about 700+ @ 2 ohms. If I use both 8's I can pull 1000+ out of the amp which lessens power to each sub, but the added cone area should offset that.

If I can get two of them to sound good in .5 cubes, I can't imagine NOT being able to fit them far forward in the passenger well, and still have plenty of floor left for passengers to sit comfortably.


----------



## ChrisB

Patrick Bateman said:


> When you have a peak and a dip next to each other, it can really sound terrible. If a bass note 'hits' in the dip all you're going to hear are harmonics, and if a note 'hits' another octave higher, the peak will exaggerate the sound.
> 
> Rather than replacing the sub I'd look into a way to smooth out the response of what you have.
> 
> But that's a big peak and dip! It's going to be tricky. That peak at 50hz is almost 20 decibels!! That's like pumping 10 watts into the sub at 40hz, and a THOUSAND watts at 50hz! Yowza.
> 
> Some things to try:
> 
> 1) stuff the port with a tshirt, so it's sealed off. Now re-measure it. If that flattens the response, you're done
> 2) Try moving it around the trunk, if that's an option. Not just an inch or two, but as far as you can. Moving it a couple feet will change the response.
> 3) EQ will definitely help, but with a peak and a dip that severe, you're definitely running into some type of resonance in the car. Which is why moving it around should help. The box tuning may also be way off, which often happens with small ported boxes. (Big ported boxes are fairly predictable, but as boxes get smaller and smaller the tuning gets less predictable. You can end up in a situation where a port that's supposed to tune the box to 30hz ends up tuning the box to 20hz, and then there's a 'depression' between the output of the box and the output of the port.)


That was the measured exhaust drone, not the frequency response of the sub. I no longer own that vehicle, so it is kind of moot now.


----------



## jim walter

We did 8" on the kicks of the CES Camaro in


----------



## Offroader5

jim walter said:


> We did 8" on the kicks of the CES Camaro in


in.....

Please continue.


----------



## jim walter

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V5FNV_jF9Fo&desktop_uri=/watch?v=V5FNV_jF9Fo


----------



## Decible

Where's Jim when you need him LOL


----------



## Salami

jim walter said:


> My preferred setup for IB was running only one coil to raise the qts a bit to get the type if car audio bass most of us like. A qts of 0.50 is a little too dry for most peoples tastes.



To anyone. 


Is there anything that needs to be done with the other unused coil? Do I simply just wire up one coil and ignore the other one?


----------



## quality_sound

I'd short it. 

Sent from my Moto X using Tapatalk


----------



## ChrisB

quality_sound said:


> I'd short it.
> 
> Sent from my Moto X using Tapatalk


Remember that old theory of putting a potentiometer on the unused coil to vary the Q of the woofer? I think that would be cool to try in this situation too!


----------



## cajunner

Salami said:


> To anyone.
> 
> 
> Is there anything that needs to be done with the other unused coil? Do I simply just wire up one coil and ignore the other one?


anyone here.

you can do several things, each of which will have a subtle change in response.

you can short the coil, you can leave it open, or you can add a resistor/pot.

if you want to see what happens in a general sense, 

this thread can help:

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...482-questions-ascendant-audio-atlas-12-a.html


----------



## ZAKOH

What the difference between the last generation 823/843D and the 8D4/8D4 subwoofers? Looking at the spec sheet, the new ones seem to have less linear xmax, 12mm instead of 14mm. How come?


----------



## trojan fan

Bump!


----------



## Patrick Bateman

ZAKOH said:


> What the difference between the last generation 823/843D and the 8D4/8D4 subwoofers? Looking at the spec sheet, the new ones seem to have less linear xmax, 12mm instead of 14mm. How come?


My crystal ball says "cost cutting" but that's just a guess.
I've noticed that JBL is in the habit of refining drivers, year after year after year. And many of the refinements are designed to reduce the cost.

For instance, the 2408H-1 has more BL than the driver it's based on. But the driver it's based on was built in Germany, whereas the 2408H-1 is made in Mexico. So the new driver is a bit more powerful, but they also moved the manufacturing to a cheaper locale.


----------



## ninetysix

Just to bring this thread back from the dead...

Over 2 years after buying my set of swr-843d's I finally got around to installing them. Car is a 2004 Holden astra (aka Voxhaul astra, made by Opel).

I'm using them as dedicated midbass drivers in sealed boxes a little over 0.2cuft, on the floor in front of the seats. I used 16mm MDF with no bottom, screwed to the floor with brackets and sealed with nearly a tube of acrylic "no more gaps" sealant.

As you can see the install is pretty ghetto, I cut two squares out of the carpet and removed the ducts that provide air to the rear passengers feet. I painted the boxes with a can of grey high temp spray paint I had kicking around, and plan to cover them with carpet or felt to match the cars carpet (Nah, I probably won't bother) and tidy up the cut lines in the carpet (who am I kidding).

The coils are wired in parallel (2ohm) and hooked up to two channels of a Boston acoustics GT4100 amp, the other two channels powering a set of Boston SPZ60 components running passive. Tuning is a work in progress, I'm using the crossovers on the amp (comps hpf slightly above 250, mids slightly below) and have the mids high passed at about 70hz 24db and the sub low passed about the same via the head unit. TA set so the two mids are about 2" closer than the comps (tape measure says otherwise). So that's about 150 a side to the mids and 125ish to the components. Underpowered, true, but for the moment it's....

AWESOME!!! I used to have hertz 8s in my car about 14 years ago and I forgot how much I missed them. 

Pic attached, yes my car is filthy.


Cheers


----------



## captainscarlett

If all you're doing is using them for midbass, duties, you could have gone with the likes of Peerless SLS 8 and saved yourself a whole load of money. like owning a Ferrari and drive it at 20 .....


----------



## ninetysix

captainscarlett said:


> If all you're doing is using them for midbass, duties, you could have gone with the likes of Peerless SLS 8 and saved yourself a whole load of money. like owning a Ferrari and drive it at 20 .....


Peerless aren't widely available in Australia unfortunately, I can only see the 8ohm version for about 90 bucks Australian. I think I only paid a little over 100 each for the alpines back when our exchange rate was through the roof. I mainly bought these on Jim Walters testimony that they work well in tiny enclosures.

If anybody can suggest a different 8" driver that would work even better in these 0.2cuft enclosures in 2 or even preferably 1 ohm I'm all ears


----------



## Patrick Bateman

captainscarlett said:


> If all you're doing is using them for midbass, duties, you could have gone with the likes of Peerless SLS 8 and saved yourself a whole load of money. like owning a Ferrari and drive it at 20 .....


The Alpine includes the following improvements over the Peerless:

1) more output
2) more xmax
3) a patented method of cooling the voice coil leading to (you guessed it) more output
4) a composite cone that may be more resistant to flex at high power leading to (you guessed it) more output
5) shorting rings allowing the Alpine to play cleaner at high output

For $100, it's about as good as it gets. The SLS 8 isn't bad if you need to save $35.

I replaced my MCM 55-2421s ($25) with a pair of the SWR 8s.


----------



## DS-21

Patrick Bateman said:


> The Alpine includes the following improvements over the Peerless:***
> 
> 
> 
> 5) shorting rings allowing the Alpine to play cleaner at high output



The SLS8's have shorting rings too. Otherwise I agree. I think the Alpines have larger diameter voicecoils, which also helps with thermal issues.


----------



## captainscarlett

Patrick Bateman said:


> The Alpine includes the following improvements over the Peerless:
> 
> 1) more output
> 2) more xmax
> 3) a patented method of cooling the voice coil leading to (you guessed it) more output
> 4) a composite cone that may be more resistant to flex at high power leading to (you guessed it) more output
> 5) shorting rings allowing the Alpine to play cleaner at high output
> 
> For $100, it's about as good as it gets. The SLS 8 isn't bad if you need to save $35.
> 
> I replaced my MCM 55-2421s ($25) with a pair of the SWR 8s.


Point is, for that duty, it seems to be a lot of driver, that's not being utilised anywhere near its capability! I bet its fun, but still I stick by my Ferrari analogy. And with all due respect to shortening rings, more xmax and greater output claims, I've heard and installed speakers in the £100,000+ range, and marketing bumf aside, i still let my ears have the final say! Not saying the SLS will top the Type R's in normal subwoofer duty, but in this case i can't help but think one could have decent performance and save a good stroke of cash in the process. 


https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-8-woofers/silver-flute-w20rc38-04-ohm-8-wool-cone/



ninetysix said:


> Peerless aren't widely available in Australia unfortunately, I can only see the 8ohm version for about 90 bucks Australian. I think I only paid a little over 100 each for the alpines back when our exchange rate was through the roof. I mainly bought these on Jim Walters testimony that they work well in tiny enclosures.
> 
> If anybody can suggest a different 8" driver that would work even better in these 0.2cuft enclosures in 2 or even preferably 1 ohm I'm all ears


OK .... whilst needing 0.3 - 0.4 preferably, this is a better option! 

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/2869921-post13.html


----------



## ninetysix

Cool, thanks for that. So is the lack of power the biggest issue with the alpine 8, or is it just never going to be ideal as a mid in .2 sealed?

I'm thinking of going back to plan A, using my gt4100 bridged just for the alpines for 2x450w @ 2 ohm stereo and another 2x200ish amp for the comps.


----------



## ninetysix

So I was shopping for a new amp and the sales guy inadvertently convinced me to use my Boston GT2200 for the astra (bought a hertz hdp4 and mille mlk 165.3 comps for the other car) so I've got that on the mids for 2x350w and the GT4100 for a similar power figure to the passive comps. Still using on amp crossovers and I could swear I'm getting a phase issue with the mids, or a weird high spot that seems to go away with sub off and mids only high passed around 230hz on the amp. The moment I turn hpf on via the deck even 30hz 24db I get this weird peak somewhere around 70hz. Either way, I have a minidsp on the way.


----------



## EricP72

ninetysix said:


> Just to bring this thread back from the dead...
> 
> Over 2 years after buying my set of swr-843d's I finally got around to installing them. Car is a 2004 Holden astra (aka Voxhaul astra, made by Opel).
> 
> I'm using them as dedicated midbass drivers in sealed boxes a little over 0.2cuft, on the floor in front of the seats. I used 16mm MDF with no bottom, screwed to the floor with brackets and sealed with nearly a tube of acrylic "no more gaps" sealant.
> 
> As you can see the install is pretty ghetto, I cut two squares out of the carpet and removed the ducts that provide air to the rear passengers feet. I painted the boxes with a can of grey high temp spray paint I had kicking around, and plan to cover them with carpet or felt to match the cars carpet (Nah, I probably won't bother) and tidy up the cut lines in the carpet (who am I kidding).
> 
> The coils are wired in parallel (2ohm) and hooked up to two channels of a Boston acoustics GT4100 amp, the other two channels powering a set of Boston SPZ60 components running passive. Tuning is a work in progress, I'm using the crossovers on the amp (comps hpf slightly above 250, mids slightly below) and have the mids high passed at about 70hz 24db and the sub low passed about the same via the head unit. TA set so the two mids are about 2" closer than the comps (tape measure says otherwise). So that's about 150 a side to the mids and 125ish to the components. Underpowered, true, but for the moment it's....
> 
> AWESOME!!! I used to have hertz 8s in my car about 14 years ago and I forgot how much I missed them.
> 
> Pic attached, yes my car is filthy.
> 
> 
> Cheers


Funny back when these were introduced, i was convinced i would replace my sls8's with a pair of these. Esp since Jim informed me that in .01 cubic ft of space my mid-bass issues would be over. Well never got around to it and sold that car. Now i have a daily driver that i would like to do a 3 way set up again. I have a 99 durango, and i haven't pulled the doors off yet, but i'm wondering if i used a 6" pvc cap, in the door and mount the driver into that, it would give me a small sealed enclosure i need. so i'm looking forward to how your 8" sound to u as mid-bass drivers. 


as for the peerless sls 8". i liked them over anything else that was out at the time, but i was always disappointed with the SQ of the driver. just no detail. and yes my doors were sealed correctly.


----------



## EricP72

here is are 2 pics of the pvc cap i'm thinking of using.
the beauty of this is i can stuff poly in the cap if i wanted to increase the perceived airspace, albeit marginally. This idea came to me when jim said all you need is a cylinder to just cover the the driver and no space is needed behind the driver since its not vented. Am i crazy for trying this?
Also can any one


----------



## EricP72

Anybody have the outer dimension seen in the pic


----------



## fish

manish said:


> Anybody have the outer dimension seen in the pic


No, but are you putting them in your doors?


----------



## ninetysix

The alpine manual says 175mm and from memory that sounds about right. So that might be a bit tight, although with a baffle on it you might just make it?

Are you sure Jim said .01 and not 0.1? I seem to remember the demo car he had them in were 0.1, and I'm running about .23 I think. I can't really comment on how they would work in much smaller boxes.

As for sound, they are great! I've only has minimal time for Tuning in the 4 weeks I've had off work  but they are working out well. Only trouble I'm having is integrating the 12" sub and having it actually contribute much to the sound.

I've had best results so far with the minidsp crossing the 8s and the components at somewhere around 200-250hz 24dB Linkwitz-Riley and they play very happily down to 50hz. With the 12" out of the car they seem to be almost good enough with no hpf at all. Almost. 

They definitely needed a lot more than 150w a side, really came alive with 350w and sweeter still with 450w. Both sides had a nasty peak at about 90hz (left about 6dB and the right about 8dB) but easy to correct. Imaging is quite good too, tho I had to get the components a little more on axis to forget the 8s were on the floor.


Cheers


----------



## EricP72

fish said:


> No, but are you putting them in your doors?


Yes...but thinking about under the seat now as well.


----------



## EricP72

ninetysix said:


> The alpine manual says 175mm and from memory that sounds about right. So that might be a bit tight, although with a baffle on it you might just make it?
> 
> Are you sure Jim said .01 and not 0.1? I seem to remember the demo car he had them in were 0.1, and I'm running about .23 I think. I can't really comment on how they would work in much smaller boxes.
> 
> As for sound, they are great! I've only has minimal time for Tuning in the 4 weeks I've had off work  but they are working out well. Only trouble I'm having is integrating the 12" sub and having it actually contribute much to the sound.
> 
> I've had best results so far with the minidsp crossing the 8s and the components at somewhere around 200-250hz 24dB Linkwitz-Riley and they play very happily down to 50hz. With the 12" out of the car they seem to be almost good enough with no hpf at all. Almost.
> 
> They definitely needed a lot more than 150w a side, really came alive with 350w and sweeter still with 450w. Both sides had a nasty peak at about 90hz (left about 6dB and the right about 8dB) but easy to correct. Imaging is quite good too, tho I had to get the components a little more on axis to forget the 8s were on the floor.
> 
> 
> Cheers


Yes .1 my bad. I wonder if I can do them under the seats as well in my durango and then run a 2 way in the factory door locations. Say a 5.25 and tweeter. Hmmm


----------



## ninetysix

I doubt there's a car you can't put 8s on the floor of. But when your holding a knife to the carpet, you've gotta ask yourself one question... "Do I feel lucky?"

You've gotta have a DSP and a few weeks off work to get it working tho (and I ain't there yet). So far the Mrs Subaru with hertz mille mlk165.3 6.5" components and an old MB quart sub is proving very difficult to compete with. Running passive with lots of power. Xover and TA from head unit and it's awesome. Makes me sick.

5.25 would probably match nicely, my 6" Boston SPZs seem a little out of their efficiency range only running down to 200hz


----------



## EricP72

ninetysix said:


> I doubt there's a car you can't put 8s on the floor of. But when your holding a knife to the carpet, you've gotta ask yourself one question... "Do I feel lucky?"
> 
> You've gotta have a DSP and a few weeks off work to get it working tho (and I ain't there yet). So far the Mrs Subaru with hertz mille mlk165.3 6.5" components and an old MB quart sub is proving very difficult to compete with. Running passive with lots of power. Xover and TA from head unit and it's awesome. Makes me sick.
> 
> 5.25 would probably match nicely, my 6" Boston SPZs seem a little out of their efficiency range only running down to 200hz


I have a dodge durango, its a suv. And i will be using a rockford fosgate 360.3 to handle eq and t/a. the under the seat location allows me to grab a nice set of 5.25 driver with more emphasis on a set that can play the mid-range and highs better with little regards to how much mid-bass a set would provide.

OK just checked..yeah not gonna happen with my vehicle. so back to the door install.


----------



## ninetysix

quick update... 

my plan of using these for midbass drivers has kind of backfired, as it turns out they are awesome as front subs. After improving the install of my SPZ60s (the painted MDF spacers had turned to mush) I've got good strong midbass. I've currently got them crossed high & low at 80hz 24dB LR

I've taken the 12" out of the trunk as I just wasn't happy with it.

Seeing as these 8s are now my subs I've made the boxes a little bigger, from .21 up to about .3

Heres a chart from REW, blue line .21 and green .3


----------



## ninetysix

Me again with some quite possibly useless info.

So I went back to using my SWR-843Ds as midbass drivers and added a SWR-12D4 in the trunk, but instead of the rear firing ported box I previously had I went with a sealed box of about 0.9ft3 net firing through the ski-pass and sealed up against it with polystyrene. No more -20dB dip at 40Hz, and plays flat down to 10Hz, if you can hear that.

I've spent countless days and evenings endlessly tweaking the setup, the Mrs is pretty sick of it and I have to thaw my own frozen hotdogs in the sink at night when I come in.

I'm powering the two 8s up front from a pair of soundstream picasso nano 450w monoblocs, which unfortunately have a LPF you can't turn off that maxes out at 250Hz (BW-2 I believe). With the 0.25ft3 net sealed boxes I'm pushing the alpines way too hard to get good output above 120Hz or so, crossed 70-200ish the amps are burning hot after a tweak session... But run them as subs with 80 to 100hz LPF and they have good output and the amps don't get hot. I appreciate the fact that I probably bought the wrong amps for this application. But not much changed running them through my Boston GT-4100 4x100 amp that I use for my active comps which can do 2x450 bridged 2x2ohm. Both amps caused the woofers to make some nasty mechanical noises when pushed hard above 100Hz, making me think these just aren't the drivers for the task.

So I figured with nothing to lose, I'd try porting them with a fairly high tuning frequency which somebody here suggested to me a while back. Only did the one box so far, and I messed up with my calculations... I was gonna try 2x50mm PVC electrical conduit ports (~43mm ID, 1.7") which boxtunecalc on my phone said they would need to be 12" long. Then I thought I'll just try one 50mm port to see what the output is like regardless of port noise... But I forgot to switch to 1 port instead of 2, so one 12" port it was.

Playing test tones the woofer looked and felt like excursion was at its lowest around 38Hz, and the mic looks to agree with that with a nearfield measurement. Port noise down low is atrocious as expected, but by about 60Hz its pretty much inaudible. Really impressed at the high end boost considering the tuning frequency is almost half what I was planning!

Attached is a nearfield measurement from the sealed 8 that I haven't modified (and they both measured basically identically previously), nearfield from the newly ported 8 showing both woofer (blue) and port (red) measurements, a sweep with the sealed 8 and a sweep from the ported 8. All 5-500Hz, set the volume so all measurements came up at about -29 when clicking check levels in REW. Port measurement is as is, I haven't factored in the difference in diameter. The volume setting was basically the same for all measurements, although I turned the gain on the ported 8 amp down quite a bit. Sealed 8 had no XO set, the ported 8 had a 30Hz BW-4 high pass to limit over excursion. Mic was in the same spot for both sweeps, about 12" away from the rear vision mirror.


Not sure i'll change the port length straight away, but I found the results very interesting and I think it shows these 8s really are happier in a ported box, even if way too small. Still might be in the market for different drivers, but we'll see.

Cheers


----------

