# Anyone run/heard JL Audio W7 Subwoofers Infinite Baffle?



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

I just bought a 13w7AE, and shall i also say i ordered it authorized from a very reasonable dealer. I have been running 2 Hertz HX300's on my rear deck in the infinite baffle position for a few months and fell in love with the Infinite Baffle configuration. The only reason I picked up a 13w7AE was out of curiosity and pure admiration of the design of the w7, and my brother wanted to buy my Hertz woofers. I will be mounting the single 13w7AE  behind the back seats with a 1.5" baffle (two .75" mdf sheets). 

Does anyone have any experience with the w7 woofers in the IB configuration? I tried searching and only have read about the w6's performing very nicely in IB.

Jon


----------



## south east customz (Jan 17, 2011)

W7 a no no IB, the w6 is also according to JL but it works quite well!


----------



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

south east customz said:


> W7 a no no IB, the w6 is also according to JL but it works quite well!


have you used the w7 in IB, if so what made it so bad?


----------



## south east customz (Jan 17, 2011)

I had a customer with a 13w7 and we tried it.
And it sucked. So he used some DLS OA12's


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

I ran a 12W6 in IB, sounded amazing. Much better than when I had it sealed, ported, or bandpassed. I loved that setup.

Can't say if the W7 will sound good or not. Back when I did the W6 I got an e-mail straight from JL that said not to do it, it wouldn't work. Many of the people on the forums said it probably wouldn't work. All you can do is try it and see what it sounds like.


----------



## south east customz (Jan 17, 2011)

I never doubted the w6 IB


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

south east customz said:


> I never doubted the w6 IB


Would you mind giving a little more detail as to how the W7 sounded bad? I didn't see your post above when I posted last. I have a friend that's about to try it and I want to stop him if there's no chance of it sounding good, especially since I gave him the idea to try it.


----------



## south east customz (Jan 17, 2011)

It farted and had very little cone control. 
He sold the w7, and paid for the 2 oa12's and 1/4 of the install with the cash


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

south east customz said:


> It farted and had very little cone control.
> He sold the w7, and paid for the 2 oa12's and 1/4 of the install with the cash


Really, as in bottoming out? That sucks.


----------



## Syaoran (Jun 27, 2011)

^Maybe he should've given it less power?

As you should know, a sub in a box takes more power than in IB...


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Vas on the W7s is a bit on the low side. Maybe that's it?

But it's something that I have wondered about as well too...cause everything else seems to be really good for IB.


----------



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

thehatedguy said:


> Vas on the W7s is a bit on the low side. Maybe that's it?
> 
> But it's something that I have wondered about as well too...cause everything else seems to be really good for IB.


Ya maybe a pair would be optimal but my roommate and I have tested Hertz Subwoofers, 10" and 12" in pairs, both on rear deck and behind the seats, sealing and without sealing and they've sounded REALLY good despite Hertz saying they wouldn't.

Maybe a pair is needed? Although that would be hugely expensive, I think the looks of the W7's, especially during excursion, is hard to beat.


----------



## south east customz (Jan 17, 2011)

Vas and qtc
Yea well when it's only got about 200
Watts going to it and it distorts it's useless.
I did this car almost 3 years ago. And like I told the owner then, some speakers just won't work in IB, some will and not sound bad, but very few
Do it with great attack and decay, accurate deep extension and a generous output


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> Vas on the W7s is a bit on the low side. Maybe that's it?
> 
> But it's something that I have wondered about as well too...cause everything else seems to be really good for IB.


They market them for small enclosures, right? Probably need it to help compliance. If distortion comes primarily from suspension issues then it makes sense they'd be troublesome IB. Buy two and limit Xmax but spend a few gold bars to do it. 

Elsewhere I've seen guys say they work great IB. Until I did it myself, the verdict would be out.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

For what it's worth I hope the OP goes through with it just for the heck of it. Maybe 200w is the limit in IB. I know my W6 was getting pretty crazy on me at probably 100w but it sure did sound good. Now I wish I would've tried my friend's 12W7 when I had the 12" baffle in the car. It's just been collecting dust on his pool table for a couple years.


----------



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

BuickGN said:


> For what it's worth I hope the OP goes through with it just for the heck of it. Maybe 200w is the limit in IB. I know my W6 was getting pretty crazy on me at probably 100w but it sure did sound good. Now I wish I would've tried my friend's 12W7 when I had the 12" baffle in the car. It's just been collecting dust on his pool table for a couple years.


Ya I'd be glad to post a hugely subjective writeup (i know those are the most authoritative ) on all the different woofers I've tried IB, whether IB or behind the seats, and to what degree of "sealing" i did for each. I've sort of fell in love ever with IB ever since I saw how cool bikinpunk's car looked with those AE's.

That being said, I should have the woofer in by wednesday. I plan on driving "subless" to the shop I ordered from in Georgia, about a 2 hour drive, and mounting it immediately on my baffle I'll make this week with my impact driver for the drive back.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

dakine said:


> Sounded horrible when I heard it.


Which one?


----------



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

Safe to say, the 13w7 sounds a-m-a-z-i-n-g IB. Just tried it with the one I got today. Simply built a baffle with two 3/4" mdf together and not even close to sealed on the sides. Just as punchy as any sub I've ever heard. I'll update more with pics soon.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

jooonnn said:


> Safe to say, the 13w7 sounds a-m-a-z-i-n-g IB. Just tried it with the one I got today. Simply built a baffle with two 3/4" mdf together and not even close to sealed on the sides. Just as punchy as any sub I've ever heard. I'll update more with pics soon.


That's awesome! Looking forward to pics and another review after the full install and more listening time.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

I figured it would sound good. It seems to spec out pretty good for IB, plus a well respected member's used a w7 ib.

What midbass are you using?


----------



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

bassfromspace said:


> I figured it would sound good. It seems to spec out pretty good for IB, plus a well respected member's used a w7 ib.
> 
> What midbass are you using?


Audison Thesis 6.5 in sealed kicks


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Should swing by Spartanburg this Saturday at the Expo...Elite Summer Nationals is happening. I will be there and would be curious to hear this beast IB.


----------



## south east customz (Jan 17, 2011)

That's awesome it works. What kind if car is it and what kind of power are you giving it?
Maybe the volume of the trunk I tried ours in was too large


----------



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

thehatedguy said:


> Should swing by Spartanburg this Saturday at the Expo...Elite Summer Nationals is happening. I will be there and would be curious to hear this beast IB.



Definitely am planning to attend to check some cars out, only problem is the rain this week is messing up my progress! I've still got huge gaps on each side of my baffle. I also have two giant holes on the top of my rear deck from my previous IB setup.




south east customz said:


> That's awesome it works. What kind if car is it and what kind of power are you giving it?
> Maybe the volume of the trunk I tried ours in was too large



It's a 2005 Toyota Corolla CE. My sub channel on my Audison 5.1k gives 750 @4, and 1150 @ 2, but the gains are set super low. I don't really know how big my trunk is but i'd assume 16-20 cuft. One thing to note is that I just know phase wise, switching them back and forth made night and day difference, just like with my rear deck IB setup.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

I know you say it's punchy, but how's the low end?


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

bassfromspace said:


> I know you say it's punchy, but how's the low end?


The low end is great. Overall it was fairly amazing when we put it in the car and started driving back home. Definitely very surprising and after about 20 minutes we had to start turning the volume down because we realized we couldn't hear anymore :laugh:


----------



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

GouRiki said:


> The low end is great. Overall it was fairly amazing when we put it in the car and started driving back home. Definitely very surprising and after about 20 minutes we had to start turning the volume down because we realized we couldn't hear anymore :laugh:


Yea i think we further proved the idea that IB really isn't that technical on the whole sealing of every little nook and cranny.


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

jooonnn said:


> Yea i think we further proved the idea that IB really isn't that technical on the whole sealing of every little nook and cranny.


Yea. I think as long as the baffle that the subs are mounted on is sealed, it'll be enough. I have my baffle sealed behind the rear seats but the rear deck has lots of little holes in it and an 8.3" diameter hole in the middle. Then if you look at Jon's he still has two big holes were his HX300's where mounted on the rear deck and random holes everywhere.

I only sealed around the baffle and my 250d's sound better than in a box and ported, though not as loud as ported but still loud.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

GouRiki said:


> The low end is great. Overall it was fairly amazing when we put it in the car and started driving back home. Definitely very surprising and after about 20 minutes we had to start turning the volume down because we realized we couldn't hear anymore :laugh:


Great to hear!


----------



## jooonnn (Jul 26, 2009)

Met thehatedguy this weekend! Great helpful guy!

Did a lot of work on the IB setup, will post the subjective comments this week

Pics here:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...00-subwoofers-thesis-2-way-2.html#post1434881


----------



## fahrfrompuken (Apr 24, 2010)

bassfromspace said:


> I know you say it's punchy, but how's the low end?


Resurrecting this thread from the dead. 

I would like to hear that as well. I have a 13W7 and just ordered a IDMAX12v3. I will be trying them both IB to see what results I can achieve. They are in a 2007 Camry with a passthrough. I was thinking of building a baffle and firing it forward through the passthrough. Any ideas?


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

fahrfrompuken said:


> Resurrecting this thread from the dead.
> 
> I would like to hear that as well. I have a 13W7 and just ordered a IDMAX12v3. I will be trying them both IB to see what results I can achieve. They are in a 2007 Camry with a passthrough. I was thinking of building a baffle and firing it forward through the passthrough. Any ideas?


I can't speak for the OP but the 12W6 had a ton of detailed, rich, smooth low end. I'm sure the 13W7 surpasses it. It got very low effortlessly.


----------



## chithead (Mar 19, 2008)

I got to hear this car, and it is nothing short of amazing. If you are a fan of the low lows with great detail, this is the way to do it.


----------



## Thrill_House (Nov 20, 2008)

Oh my goodness this thread is getting me excited to get my dual IDMAX12's installed IB in my own vehicle!


----------



## fahrfrompuken (Apr 24, 2010)

Well I am still going to try the IDMAX12 IB after I try the 13W7 this weekend. The IDMAX won't be here until next week and I don't want to waste a beautiful weekend in the 70's and not work on my car. I just wonder if I will need 2 subs or if I can get the amount of output I want with 1.


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

fahrfrompuken said:


> I just wonder if I will need 2 subs or if I can get the amount of output I want with 1.


Depends on the sub in question and how large your trunk space is. With the 13w7, one is too much.


----------



## shortydoowop138 (Oct 15, 2011)

My friend left his car with me (in Cali) while he went home (GA) for IDK how long.. He has a pair of ID 12's in his trunk & a pair of JL W7's on his back seat.. I'm gonna leave his trunk set~up alone but I think it'll be best if I took the JL's outta his car so it won't attract da wrong ppl.. I'll let ya know how they sound in da back of my Regal.. ;-)


----------



## fahrfrompuken (Apr 24, 2010)

GouRiki said:


> Depends on the sub in question and how large your trunk space is. With the 13w7, one is too much.


Too much is ok. I can adjust that with gain. Then when i want to crank it i can. The reason i want to do IB with the 13W7 is to have the best of all worlds: tight and fast bass for drums, digs low for bass guitar, and still have my trunk space. From what you guys are saying, it will do just that.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

fahrfrompuken said:


> Too much is ok. I can adjust that with gain. Then when i want to crank it i can. The reason i want to do IB with the 13W7 is to have the best of all worlds: tight and fast bass for drums, digs low for bass guitar, and still have my trunk space. From what you guys are saying, it will do just that.


That's exactly what it will offer. Again, I had the 12W6 but I had it in sealed, ported, and bandpass before going IB and I was amazed. It played everything perfectly. I was told it wouldn't work in IB so I sold both of them and ordered my IB15s. It took 5 months to get them so my friend I sold the W6 to let me use one so I could have a sub during the wait. I figured what the hell and installed it IB. In the first 5 minutes I was so pissed I had sold them. They sounded just perfect on anything you could throw at them. I love my IB15s but if I had it to do over again I would have just bought a 3rd 12W6 and run them IB.

The 13W7 displaces about 30% less air than my pair of IB15s. I wouldn't say it's too much. It's more than you could ever need for the most demanding music for SQ listening but the headroom is nice when you want to bass out and bury the front stage or listen to music with 15-20hz material loudly. As you said, you can control it with the gain. 

I wonder what the mechanical limits of the 13W7 are. The 12W6 offers 16.5mm xmax but 25mm until mechanical damage. The 12W7 sounded very nice out past it's xmax without a hint of suspension noise. I would guess the W7 will do the same. I wonder if the W7 could offer that kind of headroom as well. It would be nice if it had 40-50mm total excursion.


----------



## chithead (Mar 19, 2008)

How much does the RE XXX have? Wonder how well it would sound IB.


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

what you guys think about a w7 10 ib in 1988 honda accord coupe? with a kicker zr360 pushing it? i have it in one pro wedge box with top forward facing vent on it and it sounds great but want trunk space back.


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

It's worth a try, just be aware you may lose some output and it will most likely increase any rattles if you have not deadened your rear deck. You will gain trunk space back but, unless you hang it from your rear deck, you will lose the ability to fold your rear seats down to transport large/long things in your trunk


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

i might try it not really looking for any crazy out i run the amp about half up, and with it being 3 ohm sub the power is not to bad on it. seats never fold down i transport the kids !!!


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

GouRiki said:


> It's worth a try, just be aware you may lose some output and it will most likely increase any rattles if you have not deadened your rear deck. You will gain trunk space back but, unless you hang it from your rear deck, you will lose the ability to fold your rear seats down to transport large/long things in your trunk


That's one of the myths if IB. You're not going to lose any output especially down low.


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

well when i get some time gonna try it. wonder if i should rear deck it or behind the seat.


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

BuickGN said:


> That's one of the myths if IB. You're not going to lose any output especially down low.


Well, for me, I started with sealed, then ported, then IB with the same subs at the same power and going from ported to IB, there was a loss in output in some frequencies. The main reason I stayed with IB was because the subs blended much better with the frontstage without tuning, than compared to recommended sealed and ported enclosures.


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

i meant 1998 honda accord coupe !!!


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

GouRiki said:


> Well, for me, I started with sealed, then ported, then IB with the same subs at the same power and going from ported to IB, there was a loss in output in some frequencies. The main reason I stayed with IB was because the subs blended much better with the frontstage without tuning, than compared to recommended sealed and ported enclosures.


I definitely agree. I should have specified I was talking about sealed vs IB.


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

any pics of the jl all ib up in the car?


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

Check jooonnn's build thread. There should be some pictures. If not I just took a couple I can post up later.


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

Anything in particular you wanted to see? It's real simple. The hardest part is just cutting the baffle and putting it in the space (actually in this case the hardest part was holding the sub in place while it was screwed in LOL).




Here's my 10"s. I'll probably be replacing them in a couple weeks. I have pics of my install steps too.
































































HTH


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

GouRiki said:


> Anything in particular you wanted to see? It's real simple. The hardest part is just cutting the baffle and putting it in the space (actually in this case the hardest part was holding the sub in place while it was screwed in LOL).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In the places you spray foamed, did you trim it out in some type of material to prevent damage to the trunk trim?


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

Yea I covered it all with masking tape then spray foamed on top of that so when I wanted to change it out (for bigger subs or just something new) I would just need to pull it off the carpet and be fine.

You can see the tape in the last two pics. I did it to Jon's car too.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

GouRiki said:


> Yea I covered it all with masking tape then spray foamed on top of that so when I wanted to change it out (for bigger subs or just something new) I would just need to pull it off the carpet and be fine.
> 
> You can see the tape in the last two pics. I did it to Jon's car too.


Ok. I figured you did, but wanted to make sure.


----------



## Oblivi0us (Oct 29, 2008)

Does orientation matter? I've seen some IB setup where the sub is facing the rear of the car and others where it is facing the front. I have a civic coupe that I'm looking to try this in with a 10w7


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

Oblivi0us said:


> Does orientation matter? I've seen some IB setup where the sub is facing the rear of the car and others where it is facing the front. I have a civic coupe that I'm looking to try this in with a 10w7


Maybe, maybe not. 

We have them orientated like this because it looks better in my opinion (open up your trunk, have all that excursion, person says "wow that's a small box", you say "there is no box...").

There was just enough space to have them orientated like this. I'm considering getting a JBL w15gti at the moment so if I had that sub, I would turn it the 'normal" way that most people have IB with the cones facing the back of the seats because the sub has a 10" mounting depth (and looks cool).


----------



## Oblivi0us (Oct 29, 2008)

GouRiki said:


> Maybe, maybe not.
> 
> We have them orientated like this because it looks better in my opinion (open up your trunk, have all that excursion, person says "wow that's a small box", you say "there is no box...").
> 
> There was just enough space to have them orientated like this. I'm considering getting a JBL w15gti at the moment so if I had that sub, I would turn it the 'normal" way that most people have IB with the cones facing the back of the seats because the sub has a 10" mounting depth (and looks cool).


Ok cool. Thanks!


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

Oblivi0us said:


> Ok cool. Thanks!


You never know til you try. It could be great, it could suck. There are a lot of things in this hobby that you need to try it yourself to see how it works. It should sound good though. Post up your results when you finish.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

I mounted mine with the cone facing the inside of the car because that gave me the most trunk space. Plus I knew I might be using mine up higher in frequency than some and it starts to make a difference in sound with a higher sub lowpass. It's said if you plan on crossing 80-100hz or higher, you want to face the subs toward the cabin. In my car I didn't have that dead space between the baffle and the seat so it made no sense to face them the other way.


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

looks pretty sweet! dumb question coming up here if have the sub facing to rear of the truck did you seal up the rear deck to? how does sound get through if it sealed up? is the sub wired out of phase to get sound in cab?


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

post corrected!!


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

optimaprime said:


> looks pretty sweet! dumb question coming up here if have the sub facing to rear of the truck did you seal up the rear deck to? how does sound get through if it sealed up? is the sub wired out of phase to get sound in cab?


It comes from the back of the sub. From what I read, the basket won't inerfere in the lower frequencies but supposedly it can interfere with the higher frequencies which is why they recommend facing them forward if you plan to use a higher lowpass.


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

gotta ya! i thinking from rear deck. but it might be easier behind the seat. just that my kids ride with me and i got two car seats so the seat never ever ever gets folded down. i run my sub at 80hz on down. sometimes up to 100hz.


----------



## ousooner2 (Jan 6, 2011)

BuickGN said:


> It comes from the back of the sub. From what I read, the basket won't inerfere in the lower frequencies but supposedly it can interfere with the higher frequencies which is why they recommend facing them forward if you plan to use a higher lowpass.


We/I need pics of your setup ASAP lol


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

ya pics asap!!


----------



## Miniboom (Jul 15, 2010)

I've had both two 10W7's and a RE XXX-12 mounted IB in different cars. I was happy with both installs. I've even tried (3) Morel Elate SW10's IB, and that's a pretty low xmax driver. Still worked great when matched to a low power amp with subsonic filter. 

However - if you got the room for the box and the power to drive it, I think a well built box will do a better job almost no matter the sub. Off course, if you're set on doing dual 15's in a sedan, you're probably much better off with IB due to the insane enclosure space needed.

In my opinion, the pure "sub-bass monsters" like W7's and XXX's really need the upper bass boost created by getting the higher Qtc in an appropriate enclosure to sound more accurate and not just blast out the low frequency mud. I tried EQ'ing it to a more "high Q"-sound, but it never did sound quite as perfect as I hoped for when reading all the IB hype.

So again, unless you have a huge coned, high xmax, high Q driver that will require the whole trunk anyway, you're better off with a good enclosure. IMHO, off course.


----------



## GouRiki (Apr 9, 2010)

Which freqs do you mean when you say upper bass?

I have my mids crossed down to 63hz and I don't think I have a problem in that upper region.


----------



## Miniboom (Jul 15, 2010)

D'oh. Sorry. I meant _my_ upper _subwoofer range_, which was a tad lower than that. Maybe 50hz, don't quite remember the exact frequencies. I had a 12dB/50hz LPF on the W7's, and adjusting it up didn't help anything but making the sub easy to localize... I don't know - I've never felt comfortable with a rear sub crossed over any higher than 50hz anyway, even though I've tried it many times.

So, I tried different x-over frequencies on the front speakers, and adjusting the phase on the subs... but no change. There was just a dull sound to it all, and since my midbass drivers were adequate to handle it, I just turned the HPF off. Problem solved. The kick drums were kicking like they should.

Later, with a proper enclosure, I think my W7's sounded a bit tighter and cleaner, and did blend much better with the front speakers too. 

The increase in roll off down low/slight peak in mid- to upper bass region is not a problem with the W7 drivers as I see (hear) it, nor is it a problem with the XXX. 

In fact, it's their big (and expensive) advantage over cheaper/lesser subs, many of which are merely midbass drivers that extend a bit further into the sub range.

After testing the drivers both enclosed and IB, I do realize it's probably smarter to listen to the manufacturer's advice when it comes to using such woofers that are the result of very specific and time consuming engineering.

Experimenting with El-Cheapo-subs that have inaccurate or very varying parameters and enclosure recommendations based on pure guessing is another story. More chance of getting it right on your own then.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

Miniboom said:


> D'oh. Sorry. I meant _my_ upper _subwoofer range_, which was a tad lower than that. Maybe 50hz, don't quite remember the exact frequencies. I had a 12dB/50hz LPF on the W7's, and adjusting it up didn't help anything but making the sub easy to localize... I don't know - I've never felt comfortable with a rear sub crossed over any higher than 50hz anyway, even though I've tried it many times.
> 
> So, I tried different x-over frequencies on the front speakers, and adjusting the phase on the subs... but no change. There was just a dull sound to it all, and since my midbass drivers were adequate to handle it, I just turned the HPF off. Problem solved. The kick drums were kicking like they should.
> 
> ...


You needed more midbass.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Miniboom said:


> I've had both two 10W7's and a RE XXX-12 mounted IB in different cars. I was happy with both installs. I've even tried (3) Morel Elate SW10's IB, and that's a pretty low xmax driver. Still worked great when matched to a low power amp with subsonic filter.
> 
> However - if you got the room for the box and the power to drive it, I think a well built box will do a better job almost no matter the sub. Off course, if you're set on doing dual 15's in a sedan, you're probably much better off with IB due to the insane enclosure space needed.
> 
> ...


A box is a mechanical highpass filter. It makes the sub less efficient in the lower frequencies. I would rather have an IB setup with very high efficiency and use a SS filter to limit power down there than to make it power hungry. The end result is the same but one is way more efficient.

IB doesn't need a high xmax driver any more than a sealed box does, it's just easier to get full xmax out of IB than sealed. The end result is the same SPL, one requires much less power to achieve it. 

If you run no subsonic in IB, you'll have to limit power to limit over excursion down low. This can limit the upper sub frequency SPL that requires very little excursion. The cure is a subsonic filter where you can send a ton of power to the sub with a filter that allows it to roll off down low similar to a sealed box. Or you can do like many of us do and take advantage of IB's efficiency and run a ton of cone area with moderate to high excursion. I run a [email protected] subsonic. It's enough to allow the subs to bury the front stage at any frequency and keeps them just a hair over xmax at 20hz with the power I have available. If I wanted to simulate a sealed box or go for SPL, I would throw a [email protected] filter on there and crank up the gains.


----------



## Miniboom (Jul 15, 2010)

bassfromspace said:


> You needed more midbass.


I thought so, but allthough extra midbass drivers helped, it didn't do the trick when the subs were playing. 

In addition to the 10W7's, I had (4) 6.5" midbass drivers up front; in the front doors (stock locations) through passive Hertz HSK163-kit filters, driven by a bridged Kicker ZX850.4 (2 x 500W RMS), and a set of TB W6-1139SI's in sealed enclosures under each front seat, driven by the bridged front/rear channels on a ZX700.5 (2 x 150W RMS). The midbass in that particular car was actually both heard and felt.

"Too little midbass" also doesn't explain why it sounded better in the midbass range with the subs _off_. A possible phase issue could explain it, but I tried inverting and adjusting without ever getting it 100%. I did sound good though, I just never felt it was anything near perfect.

When the subs were put in boxes, the problem disappeared. Still crossed over at <50hz. No extra midbass drivers any other mod done.

I'm just saying IB isn't some divine way to get perfect bass, allthough it does sound good, is efficient and rather easy to install.

And currently most certainly a forum boner.


----------



## Miniboom (Jul 15, 2010)

BuickGN said:


> A box is a mechanical highpass filter. It makes the sub less efficient in the lower frequencies. I would rather have an IB setup with very high efficiency and use a SS filter to limit power down there than to make it power hungry. The end result is the same but one is way more efficient.


Don't mean to come off as an ******* here, but... we can all read. Yes. IB is efficient, hooray! It's all over the forum, in a bunch of threads.

Like I said, I do understand going IB (sometimes there's no other way) when using BIG subs that need a BIG box not to yield a peaky response. Or you have very little power, and "need" every last bit of excursion from the subs you've got. That's why I tried IB with my W7's!

Efficiency alone does not get you loud.

I see how it's difficult to relate to the difference between sealed and IB when simulating, but while IB is efficient in the low frequencies compared to a little sealed box with a lot of back pressure, there are other reasons why one would want a box; not only for porting it, but also optimizing its position and/or aiming, and thereby getting more SPL/different response/better blending with the rest of the speakers, than you get from the same sub stuck in a huge wood plate behind your rear seats.

It's funny how mounting other speakers generally are considered a time consuming job including a lot of testing, refitting and experimenting, while some obviously lives by the rule that subs can be put in a baffle and just sound perfect. It's not that easy.

Besides, power come rather cheap these days. I think SPACE and WEIGHT are the most sensible reasons for choosing IB.



BuickGN said:


> IB doesn't need a high xmax driver any more than a sealed box does, it's just easier to get full xmax out of IB than sealed. The end result is the same SPL, one requires much less power to achieve it.


Uhm. English isn't my native language.  Didn't mean that IB _need_ high excursion drivers, but as you surely know, when there's no back pressure, the woofers are easily driven very far. And high xmax drivers handle it much better.

Anyhow. I've used both 5mm and 25mm xmax drivers for IB. The high xmax ones did a much, much better job at 30hz (but there was also many other differences between the two drivers except xmax, off course). 

I personally think that low xmax woofers are better suited for ported enclosures or pure midbass duty - and most preferably in another person's car. :laugh:



BuickGN said:


> If you run no subsonic in IB, you'll have to limit power to limit over excursion down low. This can limit the upper sub frequency SPL that requires very little excursion. The cure is a subsonic filter where you can send a ton of power to the sub with a filter that allows it to roll off down low similar to a sealed box. Or you can do like many of us do and take advantage of IB's efficiency and run a ton of cone area with moderate to high excursion. I run a [email protected] subsonic. It's enough to allow the subs to bury the front stage at any frequency and keeps them just a hair over xmax at 20hz with the power I have available. If I wanted to simulate a sealed box or go for SPL, I would throw a [email protected] filter on there and crank up the gains.


You compare apples to oranges.

This thread is about "(...) JL Audio W7 Subwoofers Infinite Baffle". That's a sub that has been carefully engineered and designed for enclosures that fit in a car. I've tried them both IB and boxed, and I think they're better suited for boxes. I think they sound good IB, but like Dracula, I much rather prefer that they stay in a box! 

This thread is not about comparing my, or anyone elses, IB experiences with your "ton of cone area with moderate to high excursion".

But now that you mention it, what subs and how much power are you running - and do you have a measured SPL number?

I once did a 144.4dB @ around 50hz - legally on the TermLAB with a single RL-p 15" in a 3 cu.ft ported enclosure tuned @ 34hz. With 6-700 watts. Now that's efficient, AND it was damn musical!


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Miniboom said:


> Don't mean to come off as an ******* here, but... we can all read. Yes. IB is efficient, hooray! It's all over the forum, in a bunch of threads.


You did come across that way but you meant to so that's ok. Many people see the lower power requirements of IB and don't realize that IB gets as loud as sealed, it just requires less power due to that extra efficiency down low. You did not seem like the brightest person so I explained it for you just in case.


Miniboom said:


> Like I said, I do understand going IB (sometimes there's no other way) when using BIG subs that need a BIG box not to yield a peaky response. Or you have very little power, and "need" every last bit of excursion from the subs you've got. That's why I tried IB with my W7's!


Yep, those are _some_ of the benefits of IB, good job.


Miniboom said:


> Efficiency alone does not get you loud.


Ok? Glad you figured it out.


Miniboom said:


> I see how it's difficult to relate to the difference between sealed and IB when simulating, but while IB is efficient in the low frequencies compared to a little sealed box with a lot of back pressure, there are other reasons why one would want a box; not only for porting it, but also optimizing its position and/or aiming, and thereby getting more SPL/different response/better blending with the rest of the speakers, than you get from the same sub stuck in a huge wood plate behind your rear seats.


My posts pertained to sealed vs IB.. . How exactly is it difficult to "relate to the difference between sealed and IB when simulating"? IB in the automotive environment acts as a very large sealed box especially when you have a pair of 15s in the trunk.

Why are you throwing ported into the mix? Are you the defender of all boxes lol.


Miniboom said:


> It's funny how mounting other speakers generally are considered a time consuming job including a lot of testing, refitting and experimenting, while some obviously lives by the rule that subs can be put in a baffle and just sound perfect. It's not that easy.


I see very few people "aiming" their subs for better SQ, I'm sure some do. You're grasping at straws. I do remember reading that having the subs directly coupled with the cabin is a good thing.


Miniboom said:


> Besides, power come rather cheap these days. I think SPACE and WEIGHT are the most sensible reasons for choosing IB.


So because power is relatively cheap, we should lower the efficiency of our systems to raise power compression, distortion, and tax the vehicle's electrical system more? Maybe it's so you can claim you have more power than the next guy. I'm not sure I follow your logic. 


Miniboom said:


> Uhm. English isn't my native language.  Didn't mean that IB _need_ high excursion drivers, but as you surely know, when there's no back pressure, the woofers are easily driven very far. And high xmax drivers handle it much better.


And? So we've figured out that higher xmax drivers handle higher excursion better.... now that's a revelation. Those "woofers easily being driven very far" is a good thing. You raise the efficiency of the system, you get more excursion and SPL at the same power.


Miniboom said:


> Anyhow. I've used both 5mm and 25mm xmax drivers for IB. The high xmax ones did a much, much better job at 30hz (but there was also many other differences between the two drivers except xmax, off course).


Again, I'm impressed that you figured out a high excursion driver handles low frequencies better where the extra excursion is needed. If you haven't figured it out, the same is true in a sealed box assuming you have the power to hit full excursion.


Miniboom said:


> I personally think that low xmax woofers are better suited for ported enclosures or pure midbass duty - and most preferably in another person's car. :laugh:


Ok? So do I.




Miniboom said:


> You compare apples to oranges.


Who brought up ported enclosures?


Miniboom said:


> This thread is about "(...) JL Audio W7 Subwoofers Infinite Baffle". That's a sub that has been carefully engineered and designed for enclosures that fit in a car. I've tried them both IB and boxed, and I think they're better suited for boxes. I think they sound good IB, but like Dracula, I much rather prefer that they stay in a box!


So you don't like great SQ and effiency, I get it. 

Name one way the W7 was better in a sealed box. Are you saying the W7 is so highly optimized for an exact sized sealed box that putting it in a very large box could not possibly work?


Miniboom said:


> This thread is not about comparing my, or anyone elses, IB experiences with your "ton of cone area with moderate to high excursion".


Ok, thanks for not mentioning your experiences... Wait, you did that already. Feel free to not do it again.


Miniboom said:


> But now that you mention it, what subs and how much power are you running - and do you have a measured SPL number?


In my sig. A pair of IB15s on 500w (max). Haven't put them on a meter. They will bury the front stage so that's good enough for my SQ system that gets fairly loud. Maybe I'll meter them one day.


Miniboom said:


> I once did a 144.4dB @ around 50hz - legally on the TermLAB with a single RL-p 15" in a 3 cu.ft ported enclosure tuned @ 34hz. With 6-700 watts. Now that's efficient, AND it was damn musical!


Congrats retard, you hit a 144 with a PORTED 15, that must be some sort of record. Again, why are we talking about ported enclosures again? Musical? I guess I'll have to take your word for it.

Next time I enter an SPL contest I'll keep all of this in mind. In fact, take that ported setup and we'll meter both of ours at 18hz. I bet I win.


----------



## Miniboom (Jul 15, 2010)

BuickGN said:


> (...)Next time I enter an SPL contest I'll keep all of this in mind. In fact, take that ported setup and we'll meter both of ours at 18hz. I bet I win.


You go, girl! Measure that 18hz burp in your car, and come brag on the interwebz with your score. I'm sure everyone will really envy you that subsonic SPL that's not good for anything when playing 99.99% of all music material.

Of course, we'll also envy you those ripped spiders/surrounds from when your friend accidentally opened your trunk with the subs at full tilt. J/K. 

Dude, I used ported enclosures as an example of why one would NOT choose IB when wanting efficiency alone, because there are alternatives that are MORE efficient. Most people are probably using their subs withing the audible frequency range, and don't care much about sub 30hz.

Allthough I do love some good quality sarcasm - and you delivered nicely both in that _and_ really making an effort to be the bigger a-hole - I'd rather not waste more time multi-quoting your rants, except this last one:



BuickGN said:


> How exactly is it difficult to "relate to the difference between sealed and IB when simulating"? IB in the automotive environment acts as a very large sealed box especially when you have a pair of 15s in the trunk.


Obviously, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You can't be that experienced in real life experimentation with simulated enclosures, nor can you even have simulated your own drivers.

Again, to remind you, this thread is about W7's. 

Just to pick one, let's simulate the 10W7 in a sealed, "too big" (IB-sized), enclosure and gradually make it smaller. You'll see that the low (subsonic) frequency efficiency gradually turn into a small boost in higher frequencies as the box gets smaller. When you have a Qtc of 0.77, let's say you have +1dB @ 50hz, 0db @ 40hz, -1dB @ 30hz, and -3dB @ 20hz vs the SPL from the same sub in IB.

That's a small difference in efficiency, and the 3dB drop @ 20hz is totally uninteresting to most people, unless they really enjoy live-level reproduction of subsonic ranging pipe organs. Now you may argue that this also means the IB is equally loud to a sealed box, but a sealed box can better utilize cabin gain by being aimed and placed correctly. Hence, it can get much more efficient - and louder - than the IB, when they are compared against one another in the real world.

Like I said, I've tried both - with the 10W7's!

*HOWEVER,* if you do the same simulation with your IB15's, the result is different, because your speakers have a very high VAS, meaning they're NOT made for small box applications (obviously, by their name), and therefore they won't model like a "regular" sub built for such usage either.

For YOUR subs, a 20cu.ft trunk IS really a SMALL sealed box, and the frequency response is accordingly peaky, not rolling off like a appropriately sized sealed enclosure will (and _should_, which is the reason people tend to like sealed boxes and the Qtc of 0.707 is considered optimal).

But obviously you think this peaky sound is what sounds good, and there's nothing wrong with that. With the big box and the low FS driver, the peak probably IS a good thing, as it's not very steep and in the "right" frequencies. BUT, you should notice that the response is closer to what one would normally expect from a properly built and tuned ported enclosure (except for the low freq roll off), and NOT what typically seen with a sealed box or an ordinary car subwoofer mounted IB.

If I remember correctly, true IB requires something like total VAS x 10, which - if my math is right - in your case would mean a 300cu.ft trunk if you have the 4 ohm version of the IB15. Even with as little as 4 x VAS, you're looking at a 120cu.ft trunk, and even then your Qtc is just below 0.8, meaning it's just getting _closer_ to the response generally considered optimal for a sub enclosure. Not saying it IS the optimal response for all listeners preference, but it's the general idea.

Depending on the VAS of your drivers, as I explained, you have a very small sealed box, not an install that's IB per definition. So to me it looks like you, my friend, have two 15's in a peaky sealed box, and use that as a reference when recommending others to go IB without considering the drivers in question.

I also think it's appropriate to point out that if you think having two 15's in a baffle in your trunk automatically makes it an IB install, it just _might_ be YOU being the retard here.


Edit:

Red = 2 x AE IB15 in 20 cu.ft
Green = 2 x 10W7 in 20 cu.ft
Yellow = 2 x 10W7 in 4 cu.ft tuned to 28hz.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

I somehow missed this excellent post lol.



Miniboom said:


> You go, girl! Measure that 18hz burp in your car, and come brag on the interwebz with your score. I'm sure everyone will really envy you that subsonic SPL that's not good for anything when playing 99.99% of all music material.


18hz can be heard...barely but IMO it's important for the "whole" experience. There's an energy there, something that can be sensed and it adds a lot to your musical enjoyment.


Miniboom said:


> Of course, we'll also envy you those ripped spiders/surrounds from when your friend accidentally opened your trunk with the subs at full tilt. J/K.


Why would I have ripped spiders? Why would anyone randomly open my trunk? Why would opening the trunk have any effect unless I was pushing it right up to the absolute mechanical limit? I guess if they can fight their way past me and get it open, I deserve to end up with "ripped spiders".


Miniboom said:


> Dude, I used ported enclosures as an example of why one would NOT choose IB when wanting efficiency alone, because there are alternatives that are MORE efficient. Most people are probably using their subs withing the audible frequency range, and don't care much about sub 30hz.


Ok, the thread was about IB so silly me, I thought we were talking about IB. Everyone knows ported is a whole different ballgame, however, sealed and IB are very similar.

I was also one of those who didn't care about sub 30hz music until I had a system that would play it. There's more music than you think out there with material in that range and without a system capable of playing it (most ported setups) you're missing out. Unfortunately I can never go back to a system that won't play down to 20hz with a fair amount of authority now that I'm used to it. I suggest you keep your crappy system, ignorance is bliss. 


Miniboom said:


> Allthough I do love some good quality sarcasm - and you delivered nicely both in that _and_ really making an effort to be the bigger a-hole - I'd rather not waste more time multi-quoting your rants, except this last one:
> 
> 
> Obviously, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You can't be that experienced in real life experimentation with simulated enclosures, nor can you even have simulated your own drivers.


Ok, the 5 subs I've run in IB, the countless subs I've run sealed plus the fact that I've run the same subs in the same car on the same amp in a sealed box, ported box, bandpass box, and infinite baffle doesn't mean anything. Neither do the hours spent on WinISD and comparing to what it sounds like installed in the car. Sure, I'm a beginner compared to some. That's why I do a lot more reading than posting and I qualify most of my statements with things such as "I think" when I'm not completely sure of something.


Miniboom said:


> Again, to remind you, this thread is about W7's.


Yup. W7s infinite baffle. So why are you talking about your 15s in a ported box hitting a million deebees? Why are you talking about my 15s?


Miniboom said:


> Just to pick one, let's simulate the 10W7 in a sealed, "too big" (IB-sized), enclosure and gradually make it smaller. You'll see that the low (subsonic) frequency efficiency gradually turn into a small boost in higher frequencies as the box gets smaller. When you have a Qtc of 0.77, let's say you have +1dB @ 50hz, 0db @ 40hz, -1dB @ 30hz, and -3dB @ 20hz vs the SPL from the same sub in IB.


You nailed it. You gain +1 db over IB in a very narrow band only to kill efficiency in the lower bass. So is that +1db difference at 50hz which requires little power that you will never be able to hear with human ears worth having to double the power to get the same output down low? There is absolutely no logic there.


Miniboom said:


> That's a small difference in efficiency, and the 3dB drop @ 20hz is totally uninteresting to most people, unless they really enjoy live-level reproduction of subsonic ranging pipe organs. Now you may argue that this also means the IB is equally loud to a sealed box, but a sealed box can better utilize cabin gain by being aimed and placed correctly. Hence, it can get much more efficient - and louder - than the IB, when they are compared against one another in the real world.


Again, you don't get it. Some music does extend to 20hz, you're speaking just like most people who have never had a system that would play under 30hz. You're just ignorant, no other way of saying it. Second, why would you use the box as a mechanical high pass filter, doubling your power requirements when you can slap on a subsonic filter and adjust the frequency and slope to give you the exact same sound as a sealed box but with much, much, much less power required down low?


Miniboom said:


> Like I said, I've tried both - with the 10W7's!


Would you like a cookie? As I said, I used the 12W6s in every popular configuration for about 7 years. I'm sorry you don't like efficiency and good sound.


Miniboom said:


> *HOWEVER,* if you do the same simulation with your IB15's, the result is different, because your speakers have a very high VAS, meaning they're NOT made for small box applications (obviously, by their name), and therefore they won't model like a "regular" sub built for such usage either.


The IB15s don't defy Hoffman's Iron law. They will model just the same as any other sub.


Miniboom said:


> For YOUR subs, a 20cu.ft trunk IS really a SMALL sealed box, and the frequency response is accordingly peaky, not rolling off like a appropriately sized sealed enclosure will (and _should_, which is the reason people tend to like sealed boxes and the Qtc of 0.707 is considered optimal).


 Get off the crack. I have around a .68 Qtc with the pair in a leaky trunk. You have the balls to tell me my sub response is peaky when you've never been in my car? This is the first setup I've owned where zero eq is required. Think before you type. I'm not the only person on this board running this setup. I'm sure they can chime in that the IB15s are anything but peaky.


Miniboom said:


> But obviously you think this peaky sound is what sounds good, and there's nothing wrong with that. With the big box and the low FS driver, the peak probably IS a good thing, as it's not very steep and in the "right" frequencies. BUT, you should notice that the response is closer to what one would normally expect from a properly built and tuned ported enclosure (except for the low freq roll off), and NOT what typically seen with a sealed box or an ordinary car subwoofer mounted IB.


Again, in car it's within 1db from 20hz to 100hz with no eq. It's flat out the flattest response of any sub setup I've ever owned. You can do all of the ricer math and guessing you want but in real life it's as close to perfect as you're going to get. 


Miniboom said:


> If I remember correctly, true IB requires something like total VAS x 10, which - if my math is right - in your case would mean a 300cu.ft trunk if you have the 4 ohm version of the IB15. Even with as little as 4 x VAS, you're looking at a 120cu.ft trunk, and even then your Qtc is just below 0.8, meaning it's just getting _closer_ to the response generally considered optimal for a sub enclosure. Not saying it IS the optimal response for all listeners preference, but it's the general idea.


Who said car IB is true IB? Sure, trunk closed vs open shows a small difference. However, in my experience (something you do not have), the IB15 has much less of a change from trunk open vs closed than the 12W6 did. Explain that one. You may want to remember that the trunk is not a sealed box, it's a leaky box and it has vents to the outside world. In my case, it has large vents to the outside world.


Miniboom said:


> Depending on the VAS of your drivers, as I explained, you have a very small sealed box, not an install that's IB per definition. So to me it looks like you, my friend, have two 15's in a peaky sealed box, and use that as a reference when recommending others to go IB without considering the drivers in question.
> 
> I also think it's appropriate to point out that if you think having two 15's in a baffle in your trunk automatically makes it an IB install, it just _might_ be YOU being the retard here.


You're the only one arguing with yourself here, retard. In fact, you're repeating yourself in the same post. You come on here, invent your own topics, argue with yourself, and pretend I'm the one who said them. However, there is very, very little change with the trunk open vs closed so that tells me that one of two things are happening. I actually am very close to true IB or the cabin is effecting the Qtc as much or more than the trunk. The cabin is more sealed than the trunk after all. Model 20 cubic feet and then model 100 cubic feet. Very, very little difference, meaning this is very close to true IB.


----------

