# Elemental Designs 13Av.2 Subwoofer



## BlueAc (May 19, 2007)

Production pics are up on eD's website... she looks sexy if I may say so myself!!! 

http://www.edesignaudio.com/edv2/product_info.php?t=1&products_id=554


----------



## unpredictableacts (Aug 16, 2006)

Not to shabby, but I am not a fan of the chorome on the motor...so if I ever pick one up that will be painted.


----------



## BlueAc (May 19, 2007)

I'm so tempted right now... $350 seems like a sweet price!


----------



## CMR22 (Feb 10, 2007)

It was $295 just a couple of weeks ago.


----------



## BlueAc (May 19, 2007)

CMR22 said:


> It was $295 just a couple of weeks ago.


Oh... scratch that then!


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

I am not liking the design or look. It just looks like the market norm bigger the better concept. It has some good reviews though. I like the TC Sounds stuff better when they where around but the Audio Pulse stuff still looks better.

I think I would rather save up more money and get something like an IDMAX, Aura or wait for the new IDQ12v3 to hit the market. Now if SI would just bring back the last version MAG 12. What was I thinking when I sold the one I had.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Sundownz is pretty close with the "Mass 12", too !


----------



## BlackLac (Aug 8, 2005)

It was announced the $295 price was temporary. "pre-production" price bascally. eD does those sales. I think when it first came out, like a year ago, it was announced full price at $350.


----------



## JayBee (Oct 6, 2006)

I got mines for way cheaper than $295

i'm not sure if that's chrome or polished stainless steel.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

I'm in on the preorder. The tentative date for arrival is mid December. I can't wait! I have to get to work on designing/building a box in the mean time.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

JayBee said:


> I got mines for way cheaper than $295
> 
> i'm not sure if that's chrome or polished stainless steel.


How did you set it up, sealed?
How much power do you have on tap?


----------



## JayBee (Oct 6, 2006)

Hic said:


> How did you set it up, sealed?
> How much power do you have on tap?


i'm paid for, but i have to wait for the unit to ship. The first 25 units were sold at a discounted price though.


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

Hic said:


> Sundownz is pretty close with the "Mass 12", too !


Yessir... proto is almost ready (finally).


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Is it just me or does it look awfully similar to a JL Audio W7?

Av2









w7


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

Originally it looked more like a W7... as they had infringed on JLs "elevated frame" cooling technology. Notice they are using more conventional basket "windows" now.

IMHO... it only looks as much like a W7 in that it's a big ol' sub now. Only so many ways to make a basket with huge clearances. The W7 is drastically overhung and this is underhung, so thats quite different as well. ED also has far less cone area.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

sundownz said:


> Originally it looked more like a W7... as they had infringed on JLs "elevated frame" cooling technology. Notice they are using more conventional basket "windows" now.
> 
> IMHO... it only looks as much like a W7 in that it's a big ol' sub now. Only so many ways to make a basket with huge clearances. The W7 is drastically overhung and this is underhung, so thats quite different as well. ED also has far less cone area.


Do you think the made it _similar_ as a marketing tactic?


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Megalomaniac said:


> Is it just me or does it look awfully similar to a JL Audio W7?


That's not the first time I've heard that. I remember Ben actually taking the time to explain the differences between the two, but I can't recall what exactly he said.

I've heard several reviews on the unit from people who got the prototype versions to test out. Everyone had nothing but great things to say about it. Powered anywhere from 500 watts RMS all the way up to 1400 watts RMS in both sealed and ported. I've talked to a total of 6 people who have reviewed the subs. A good friend of mine got in on the "first 25 special order" so I'll get to review it once she gets it installed. I believe that she's going to Bing in San Jose for the install.

The motor assembly is blah to me, but I think that the cone is dead sexy! And I prefer the new eD logo over the old "Elemental Designs" script that adorns the Ov and Kv lines.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Megalomaniac said:


> Do you think the made it _similar_ as a marketing tactic?


Here's what it looked like before JL intervened:


----------



## JoeHemi57 (Mar 28, 2006)

not impressed


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> Here's what it looked like before JL intervened:
> http://www.softwork-orange.com/_forum_images/jl.jpg


it appears they did _slight_ modifications to it so it doesnt infringe the patent, but still looks close even on current version. I dont know about you all but that seems like a shady business practice to do something like that IMHO.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Megalomaniac said:


> it appears they did _slight_ modifications to it so it doesnt infringe the patent, but still looks close even on current version. I dont know about you all but that seems like a shady business practice to do something like that IMHO.


Maybe. It was a great story. Here's ED's side. JL's side here. What's fascinating is that ED somehow got a design patent for a basket that is visually indistinguishable from JL's when JL had a patent on the same design beforehand. I don't think we've heard the last of this drama, but it is the only time I have ever seen a patent holder (ED) not mention the existence of a patent when called out for infringement.


----------



## johnson (May 1, 2007)

Megalomaniac said:


> it appears they did _slight_ modifications to it so it doesnt infringe the patent, but still looks close even on current version. I dont know about you all but that seems like a shady business practice to do something like that IMHO.


I dont see how they look remotely similar.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

At the end of the day, any possible similarities seem to be purely cosmetic. And unless you are in the minority group that enjoys looking at wooferporn, once the speaker is mounted, one will not see the basket. To me this seems like a large corporation attempting to run the small guy out of the game because they are bringing a solid competitor to the field for a fraction of what their comparable product costs.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

bryanwescoe said:


> At the end of the day, any possible similarities seem to be purely cosmetic. And unless you are in the minority group that enjoys looking at wooferporn, once the speaker is mounted, one will not see the basket. To me this seems like a large corporation attempting to run the small guy out of the game because they are bringing a solid competitor to the field for a fraction of what their comparable product costs.


I have no idea how this sub will turn out, but I can say that you are repeating ED's marketing pitch verbatim. Cosmetic issues are the only ones that matter when considering design patents. For ED's patent application not to be a crime, we would have to believe that ED had never seen JL's basket before filing the copy cat application. We know that's not true because ED has old JL catalogs on their Web site. This is why I say there will probably be more to this story.

I really hope this sub is everything you want it to be, but it is wrong to criticize one company for protecting their intellectual property from theft by another - small or not.


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

bryanwescoe said:


> At the end of the day, any possible similarities seem to be purely cosmetic. And unless you are in the minority group that enjoys looking at wooferporn, once the speaker is mounted, one will not see the basket. To me this seems like a large corporation attempting to run the small guy out of the game because they are bringing a solid competitor to the field for a fraction of what their comparable product costs.


Not at all. JL didn't care about the "look" of the basket per-se. But they DO have a patent on "elevated frame cooling" -- which ED was using on the original iteration of the basket.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> I have no idea how this sub will turn out, but I can say that you are repeating ED's marketing pitch verbatim. Cosmetic issues are the only ones that matter when considering design patents. For ED's patent application not to be a crime, we would have to believe that ED had never seen JL's basket before filing the copy cat application. We know that's not true because ED has old JL catalogs on their Web site. This is why I say there will probably be more to this story.
> 
> I really hope this sub is everything you want it to be, but it is wrong to criticize one company for protecting their intellectual property from theft by another - small or not.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but a design patent is a patent on the actual mechanical aspects of the driver? For example, when I was in Aruba this summer, I saw lots of Chinese designed and produced Cherry automobiles. They looked strikingly similar to US, German and Japanese designs. However, I'm willing to be that none of them held a candle to the fit and finish, reliability and safety ratings of the "real" designs. I guess how I look at it, just because it looks the same, doesn't mean it is the same.



sundownz said:


> Not at all. JL didn't care about the "look" of the basket per-se. But they DO have a patent on "elevated frame cooling" -- which ED was using on the original iteration of the basket.


Again, looking the same and performing the same are two different beasts. I highly doubt eD could effectively copy the design and gain all the benefits just by looking at a picture. If they dismantled an actual woofer and copied JL's design that would be a separate issue. There are still some holes in JL's argument though. The vast differences in the magnet mounting would certainly have an effect on how JL's cooling design worked. I think the fact that eD willingly changed the basket design shows that they weren't intentionally stealing the technological aspects of the design. Personally I think the W7 basket is more aesthetically appealing. However, looks were on the bottom of the list when deciding on what woofer to purchase. As a college student, it was all about the bang for buck for me and I feel that in that aspect, the 13Av.2 is impossible to beat.

As a disclaimer, when I turned 16 (2002) I got a 1987 Jeep Wagoneer with a completely blown stereo. A quick trip to walmart yielded a Jensen MP3 deck and 4 Sony XPLOD 5.25" speakers. I got run off the road in that car and nothing survived. 5 years later, I picked up a VW Passat this summer and am looking to replace the stereo in it. This will be my first foray into car audio since the $150 trip to walmart to replace the 15 year old factory stereo. I have messed around with home audio for several years and have a fairly nice HT and bedroom stereo setup. I am looking for a nice setup in my car now. The reason I say this is because I have no loyalties, no prior bad experiences, no preconceived notions and no particular leanings. The only constraints I have for this instal are a budget and the desire to maintain a stock look in the cabin.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

sundownz said:


> Not at all. JL didn't care about the "look" of the basket per-se. But they DO have a patent on "elevated frame cooling" -- which ED was using on the original iteration of the basket.


Utility patent on the cooling aspect, design patent on the appearance of the basket. They care about both. I think there is a second utility patent as well.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

bryanwescoe said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but a design patent is a patent on the actual mechanical aspects of the driver? For example, when I was in Aruba this summer, I saw lots of Chinese designed and produced Cherry automobiles. They looked strikingly similar to US, German and Japanese designs. However, I'm willing to be that none of them held a candle to the fit and finish, reliability and safety ratings of the "real" designs. I guess how I look at it, just because it looks the same, doesn't mean it is the same.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Design patents cover appearance issues. Utility patents cover functionality. I believe one of the utility patents was in question, but the design patent on the basket was the first issue that never was addressed.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> Design patents cover appearance issues. Utility patents cover functionality. I believe one of the utility patents was in question, but the design patent on the basket was the first issue that never was addressed.


Ok well IMHO looks of a basket means nothing for a speaker....I know some people invert mount but I think its ugly and personally would never do it. I also don't think many (educated/enlightened)people would purchase a speaker based on its basket design (looks alone).

JL does have some footing on the elevated cooling nature of their basket issue. However the fact that eD changed it willingly says to me that it a. was unintentional or b. even if intentional on some level, didn't add any measurable performance gains to the driver.


----------



## Daishi (Apr 18, 2006)

So eD is continuing their trend of releasing products based on other designs they've stolen. Good to know they at least are consistent in their thefts of intellectual property.


----------



## Sex Cells (Jul 21, 2007)

I cannot imagine eD infringing upon another companies designs. Next you're going to tell me that Ben is some kind of scam artist...


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Sex Cells said:


> I cannot imagine eD infringing upon another companies designs. Next you're going to tell me that Ben is some kind of scam artist...


Tang Bang is a scamming too?


----------



## Sex Cells (Jul 21, 2007)

Megalomaniac said:


> Tang Bang is a scamming too?


I bet they stole one of eD's own shallow mount designs. Or have been trying to sell eDead under the name peel and seal. Those scam artists need to be stopped at once!


----------



## audioman42 (Oct 20, 2006)

That sub weighs as much as my entire system.


----------



## hawkfan (May 1, 2006)

Throwing ED's "controversial" past out of the window, what if this thing is the real deal? Business practices are one thing, but ED seems to make a pretty decent product at the end of the day. If the 13Av.2 performs anywhere near the W7 at a fraction of the cost, wouldn't that make this a good buy? I currently own an ID Max 12, and got it at a great price. That sub costs $450 as does the SI Mag. If this thing performs as well as it's hyped to, $350 would be a steal. Wouldn't it???:blush:


----------



## BlueAc (May 19, 2007)

hawkfan said:


> Throwing ED's "controversial" past out of the window, what if this thing is the real deal? Business practices are one thing, but ED seems to make a pretty decent product at the end of the day. If the 13Av.2 performs anywhere near the W7 at a fraction of the cost, wouldn't that make this a good buy? I currently own an ID Max 12, and got it at a great price. That sub costs $450 as does the SI Mag. If this thing performs as well as it's hyped to, $350 would be a steal. Wouldn't it???:blush:


I would say yes to that question... and maybe it'll make other companies rethink their pricing i.e. JL !!! That would be good.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

BlueAc said:


> I would say yes to that question... and maybe it'll make other companies rethink their pricing i.e. JL !!! That would be good.


I have always thought JL was rediculously overpriced. If it lives up to the hype (which I hope it does), I think it'll force some change. JL (and others) will either have to rethink their pricing schemes or push the envelope even further in sub design to justify their astronomical prices. Either way, I think the consumer wins in the end.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

bryanwescoe said:


> I have always thought JL was rediculously overpriced. If it lives up to the hype (which I hope it does), I think it'll force some change. JL (and others) will either have to rethink their pricing schemes or push the envelope even further in sub design to justify their astronomical prices. Either way, I think the consumer wins in the end.


That's not how business works. JL has brand recognition coupled with a quality product which spells success.


----------



## Sex Cells (Jul 21, 2007)

bryanwescoe said:


> I have always thought JL was rediculously overpriced. If it lives up to the hype (which I hope it does), I think it'll force some change. JL (and others) will either have to rethink their pricing schemes or push the envelope even further in sub design to justify their astronomical prices. Either way, I think the consumer wins in the end.


Or Ben will simply raise the prices.


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

bassfromspace said:


> That's not how business works. JL has brand recognition coupled with a quality product which spells success.


Exactly. And name one product that is even close to the same as the W7.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

bassfromspace said:


> That's not how business works. JL has brand recognition coupled with a quality product which spells success.


IF it comes out that the 13Av.2 is a blatant ripoff of the W7 then eD is clearly in the wrong. Otherwise, this is exactly how business works. eD is offering a better product for a lower price simply because they have lower overhead. eD does not have competition teams, they don't have a multimillion dollar advertising campaign....they don't do a lot of the stuff JL does. This means they can offer a better product to the consumer for a lower price than the competition. 

This happens in many industries, not just car audio products. Look at bicycles. Felt is taking the industry by storm, offering better bikes for lower prices than Trek, Cannondale, Gary Fisher, Giant, LeMond and many others. They simply don't invest money into the huge advertising campaigns and pass the savings along to the consumer. The same thing happens in home audio. You have companies like Axiom, Ascend Acoustics, Onix and AV123 offering far superior products at a given price point because it is factory direct distribution. They do not invest money in advertising and dealer networks. They use word of mouth to sell their products. 

Say what you will about eD. The only real issue I see them having is the eDead problem. I agree this is wrong, but does not ruin them as a company. Just because the 13Av.2's basket LOOKS the same as the W7, does not mean it IS the same, sounds the same or performs the same. When the final product ships, the market will be sure to determine which is the superior sub.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

bryanwescoe said:


> IF it comes out that the 13Av.2 is a blatant ripoff of the W7 then eD is clearly in the wrong. Otherwise, this is exactly how business works. eD is offering a better product for a lower price simply because they have lower overhead. eD does not have competition teams, they don't have a multimillion dollar advertising campaign....they don't do a lot of the stuff JL does. This means they can offer a better product to the consumer for a lower price than the competition.


It's not quite that simple, although I understand the general jist of your argument. JL could have infinite overhead costs but it only hurts them if they're not able to bring in revenue that covers their costs. As I said earlier, JL has a VERY rare commodity which is brand recognition combined with a good product. Not the BEST, but good. They know their customer. I'd be willing to wager that 90% of this board has ran a JL sub at some point in there audio career. 

As far as best is concerned, I don't see a product with off the shelf parts besting the W7. Many would agree that the Adire Audio Brahma came close but even Dan Wiggins conceded that the W7 was a superior product. It's hard to beat good engineering, minimal price restraints, and big R&D money.



bryanwescoe said:


> This happens in many industries, not just car audio products. Look at bicycles. Felt is taking the industry by storm, offering better bikes for lower prices than Trek, Cannondale, Gary Fisher, Giant, LeMond and many others. They simply don't invest money into the huge advertising campaigns and pass the savings along to the consumer. The same thing happens in home audio. You have companies like Axiom, Ascend Acoustics, Onix and AV123 offering far superior products at a given price point because it is factory direct distribution. They do not invest money in advertising and dealer networks. They use word of mouth to sell their products.
> 
> Say what you will about eD. The only real issue I see them having is the eDead problem. I agree this is wrong, but does not ruin them as a company. Just because the 13Av.2's basket LOOKS the same as the W7, does not mean it IS the same, sounds the same or performs the same. When the final product ships, the market will be sure to determine which is the superior sub.


Again, your point is valid. These new companies are able to offer a good product due to the elimination of traditional distribution channels. These companies are also subject to the laws of those same distribution channels (word of mouth) and a couple bad reviews (intentional or not) can kill them. I've seen it happen before with numerous car audio companies. It's a give or take like anything.

I don't think eD is ruined as a company but they may be headed that way. They definately don't have the fanbase they once had and what they do have seems to dwindle by the day. I have no real issues with them and I'd still find it hard to purchase product from them just based on the way I've seen them handle themselves on the forums. In the end, the market does determine the winner but you have to have a market first and foremost.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

bassfromspace said:


> It's not quite that simple, although I understand the general jist of your argument. JL could have infinite overhead costs but it only hurts them if they're not able to bring in revenue that covers their costs. As I said earlier, JL has a VERY rare commodity which is brand recognition combined with a good product. Not the BEST, but good. They know their customer. I'd be willing to wager that 90% of this board has ran a JL sub at some point in there audio career.
> 
> As far as best is concerned, I don't see a product with off the shelf parts besting the W7. Many would agree that the Adire Audio Brahma came close but even Dan Wiggins conceded that the W7 was a superior product. It's hard to beat good engineering, minimal price restraints, and big R&D money.
> 
> ...


Fair enough, I just like to see the "underdog" produce a product that at least comparable to a company with an almost bottomless R&D budget. While JL has put out quality products for a LONG time, I'd wager to bet they have never been associated with a superior cost benefit ratio. And in the DIY world, bang for your buck is generally what most people are after. 

I agree with you about eD though. Continued poor business decisions will spell certain death for them. However, look at companies such as SV Subwoofers. They built a very strong niche market by offering an unbeatable product for a great price. They backed these prices up with great customer support. eD certainly has the opportunity to repair their image and continue bringing great products to the market for an unbeatable price.

As much as I would like to see eD continue as company that produces quality products at great prices, I really have no vested interest in eD. However, I have preordered this sub and would like to be satisfied because no one wants to throw $300 down the drain. But, if, despite many reviews suggesting otherwise, it doesn't live up to the bar set by the W7, IDMAX, RE XXX etc, it wont really bother me. All these subs cost twice what the 13AV.2 cost. I don't think anyone is really going to make an argument that it isn't worth $300 I spent or the $350 it is selling for now.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

bryanwescoe said:


> Fair enough, I just like to see the "underdog" produce a product that at least comparable to a company with an almost bottomless R&D budget. While JL has put out quality products for a LONG time, I'd wager to bet they have never been associated with a superior cost benefit ratio. And in the DIY world, bang for your buck is generally what most people are after.
> 
> I agree with you about eD though. Continued poor business decisions will spell certain death for them. However, look at companies such as SV Subwoofers. They built a very strong niche market by offering an unbeatable product for a great price. They backed these prices up with great customer support. eD certainly has the opportunity to repair their image and continue bringing great products to the market for an unbeatable price.
> 
> As much as I would like to see eD continue as company that produces quality products at great prices, I really have no vested interest in eD. However, I have preordered this sub and would like to be satisfied because no one wants to throw $300 down the drain. But, if, despite many reviews suggesting otherwise, it doesn't live up to the bar set by the W7, IDMAX, RE XXX etc, it wont really bother me. All these subs cost twice what the 13AV.2 cost. I don't think anyone is really going to make an argument that it isn't worth $300 I spent or the $350 it is selling for now.


Agreed.

Or, you could've saved your money and purchased a used 12w7 for $350.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

bassfromspace said:


> Agreed.
> 
> Or, you could've saved your money and purchased a used 12w7 for $350.


Still more than the $295 I paid and I'm getting a brand new sub with a full warranty and a known history


----------



## Inferno333 (Mar 29, 2006)

Rudeboy said:


> Here's what it looked like before JL intervened:


FYI: This is the LFR prototype. Completely separate driver from the 13av.2.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Inferno333 said:


> FYI: This is the LFR prototype. Completely separate driver from the 13av.2.


OK, did the 13av.2 prototype being discussed use a different basket? Are you saying the 13av.2 prototype used a completely different looking basket, or are you trying to distract from the controversy by pointing out a difference without a distinction? Please post a picture of the 13av.2 prototype basket to support your claim.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

bryanwescoe said:


> This means they can offer a better product to the consumer for a lower price than the competition.


The better product part of this is purely assumption. It would be equally logical and wrong to say that by designing and manufacturing their own products, JL can offer their products for less.

Quality will be judged in time. Price is only relevant as a factor in value. Paying $20 for something worth $1 isn't better than paying $25 for something worth $25. Put another way, paying $20 for an item that costs the seller $1 isn't better than paying $25 for something that costs the seller $20 - in most cases.

I love an underdog too, but to get my support they need to behave like decent people.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

I guess in the end, will this work for you


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

all that surround on it wouldnt that bring the cone area down a bit? it cant possibly be a 13 anymore


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> The better product part of this is purely assumption. It would be equally logical and wrong to say that by designing and manufacturing their own products, JL can offer their products for less.
> 
> Quality will be judged in time. Price is only relevant as a factor in value. Paying $20 for something worth $1 isn't better than paying $25 for something worth $25. Put another way, paying $20 for an item that costs the seller $1 isn't better than paying $25 for something that costs the seller $20 - in most cases.
> 
> I love an underdog too, but to get my support they need to behave like decent people.


Agreed, however the value judgments aren't complete shots in the dark. All the preliminary reviews are amazing and its likely that the final production unit will be the same, if not better. I am also willing to bet that JL fits in the paying $20 for something that costs the seller $1 while eD is in the $25 for something that costs the seller $20.


----------



## JayBee (Oct 6, 2006)

Off the shelf parts, custom toolings, ripped off basket, less sd to accomodate the surround( i liked the original proto surround better, but it didn't work as well), Ben Milne eats babies...whatever, the list goes on. 

The facts are that everyone who has had their hands on one has flat out said that it is a big time performer for the money. If i can get 80% of W7 for 50% of the cost then i am on it. say what you will.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

bryanwescoe said:


> Agreed, however the value judgments aren't complete shots in the dark. All the preliminary reviews are amazing and its likely that the final production unit will be the same, if not better.


I hope you're right. At this oint I wouldn't walk across the street to piss on Milne if he were on fire, but I always hope to see customers treated well by any business. Do bear in mind that ED has a tradition of releasing production products with completely different specs than the prototypes they circulate so the "if not better" part of your statement isn't supported by history. Let's hope the kid who uses the squeeze bottle to glue on the dust caps does them all the right way this time instead of alternating techniques because he wasn't sure how he was supposed to do it (as documented in one of their videos).

The reviews have been amazing, but I haven't seen any that were from outside of the cult, so until I see something we can take as reasonably objective, I'll withhold judgment. Just for reference, neither you or I can be considered objective at this point. The reviews for the asphalt eDead were amazing too.



bryanwescoe said:


> I am also willing to bet that JL fits in the paying $20 for something that costs the seller $1 while eD is in the $25 for something that costs the seller $20.


I wish there was a way to prove it. If there were, I'd take that bet in a heart beat.

When thinking about these things, particularly your notion that JL is trying to put the squeeze on ED, imagine what might have happened if JL had decided to sit back and wait for ED to sell a bunch of the original designs before challenging the design. Hard to imagine how ED could have survived that. It really looks like JL cut ED a major break and ED decided to cry about it instead of being grateful.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

JayBee said:


> Ben Milne eats babies


I see you are following ED's hyperbolic description of the criticism. Funny really. I see things on a much smaller scale - Ben Milne has proven himself to be a petty, dishonest little troll (the little troll part is unproven and added for fun).



JayBee said:


> If i can get 80% of W7 for 50% of the cost then i am on it. say what you will.


That seems like a more reasonable expectation than much better product for much less money.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> That seems like a more reasonable expectation than much better product for much less money.


From my point of view the Av.2 is a much better product if it offers 80% of the performance for less than half the cost. I'm a budget minded college student with rather shallow pockets. Sure, if I had an unlimited bank account, I could go out today and buy the best of the best equipment, the best of the best installation and be assured that I had one damn fine system. However, as part of the DIY community, I think all of us here are rather conscious of the bang for the buck factor. Otherwise why would we search for OEM driver sources and such. Anyone can go plunk down a brick of cash and get the best equipment. We look for ways to maximize return on every dollar we spend.


----------



## chadillac3 (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanwescoe said:


> From my point of view the Av.2 is a much better product if it offers 80% of the performance for less than half the cost. I'm a budget minded college student with rather shallow pockets. Sure, if I had an unlimited bank account, I could go out today and buy the best of the best equipment, the best of the best installation and be assured that I had one damn fine system. However, as part of the DIY community, I think all of us here are rather conscious of the bang for the buck factor. Otherwise why would we search for OEM driver sources and such. Anyone can go plunk down a brick of cash and get the best equipment. We look for ways to maximize return on every dollar we spend.



Honestly, I'd wait until some more objective reviews are out there before making any kind of judgement. The people who were able to review them so far have been what I would call "friends" of eD who were sent a sample to try. You don't send such a product to people who might be critical of it. 

Time will tell. It's on the ugly side to me, but mounted in a normal fashion, it would look nice from the front.

Edit: I would also add that this forum is no longer strictly tied to the DIY market, but over time has turned into more of a SQ biased forum. So we have people getting installs done for them, buying brand name equipment, and it doesn't seem out of place.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

bryanwescoe said:


> From my point of view the Av.2 is a much better product if it offers 80% of the performance for less than half the cost. I'm a budget minded college student with rather shallow pockets. Sure, if I had an unlimited bank account, I could go out today and buy the best of the best equipment, the best of the best installation and be assured that I had one damn fine system. However, as part of the DIY community, I think all of us here are rather conscious of the bang for the buck factor. Otherwise why would we search for OEM driver sources and such. Anyone can go plunk down a brick of cash and get the best equipment. We look for ways to maximize return on every dollar we spend.


Thanks for out of context explanation of what value means. At this point we are just throwing around phony numbers so there isn't much more to be gained until somebody gets their hands on a production model. Are these things actually shipping?


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> Thanks for out of context explanation of what value means. At this point we are just throwing around phony numbers so there isn't much more to be gained until somebody gets their hands on a production model. Are these things actually shipping?


Wasn't really out of context.....you brought it up. Anyhow, I was informed they should be shipping early to mid December. I'm hoping to have it by Christmas.

BTW, I don't know where in MD you are but I'm in Towson and my parents live in Southern Maryland. I'm there from time to time. If you're interested in hearing it in person let me know. I'd be more than happy to let you have a listen.


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

bryanwescoe said:


> Agreed, however the value judgments aren't complete shots in the dark. All the preliminary reviews are amazing and its likely that the final production unit will be the same, if not better. I am also willing to bet that JL fits in the paying $20 for something that costs the seller $1 while eD is in the $25 for something that costs the seller $20.


Everybody thinks JL Audio just charges whatever they feel like....perhaps forgetting some of the costs that are incurred through extensive R&D, industry leading engineering, custom tooling, and strict quality control.

eD does a very small fraction of what JL Audio does in every respect. Of course their products are less expensive.


----------



## chadillac3 (Feb 3, 2006)

Punk0Rama said:


> Everybody thinks JL Audio just charges whatever they feel like....perhaps forgetting some of the costs that are incurred through extensive R&D, industry leading engineering, custom tooling, and strict quality control.
> 
> eD does a very small fraction of what JL Audio does in every respect. Of course their products are less expensive.


I'd also think that back 4-5 years ago (or more) when the W7 came out there was definitely a premium to owning it as JL would need to recoup R&D/tooling costs up front, and that premium has stayed there. I don't think the W7 would EVER be called a value, however, until someone actually makes a better subwoofer and with the W7 still selling well, why would JL even consider dropping the price? 

It's all fairly subjective, but I can't think of a better woofer to recommend for someone wanting a real loud SQ setup, or even a setup that gets damn loud but still sounds good. I really like those woofers.


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

Punk0Rama said:


> Everybody thinks JL Audio just charges whatever they feel like....perhaps forgetting some of the costs that are incurred through extensive R&D, industry leading engineering, custom tooling, and strict quality control.
> 
> eD does a very small fraction of what JL Audio does in every respect. Of course their products are less expensive.


I acknowledge the R&D expenses and such. However, I feel a lot of what drives the cost of mainstream products is advertising. If eD can create a sub that performs on par with the W7 for considerably less money, and JL doesn't pursue patent infringement anymore (suggesting it IS an original eD design), it just shows that the process of R&D and bringing the product to market can be done way cheaper than most companies are doing it. This is the best possible scenario for the consumer.

And if it does come out that eD is ripping this speaker design off from JL, this is wrong and I won't continue to support the company. However, I feel this whole thing is mere coincidence and in the end there will be two solid products produced by two different companies. One will cost significantly less than the other. This speaks volumes for how the internet is providing a new channel for factory direct companies to compete with some of the longstanding giants, not only in car audio, but in many other markets as well.


----------



## chadillac3 (Feb 3, 2006)

It was DEFINITELY not mere coincidence. Ben and Manville have done quite a bit of business in the past, and eD uses JL as a benchmark.


----------



## CMR22 (Feb 10, 2007)

With respect to the very positive reviews of the 13Av.2, is the production model substantially similar (T/S specs-wise) to the pre-production model that was sent out? Is the only thing different the basket or were the reviews conducted on a version of the sub which is not the same as the version currently being sold?


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

chadillac3 said:


> It was DEFINITELY not mere coincidence. Ben and Manville have done quite a bit of business in the past, and eD uses JL as a benchmark.


As Ben said himself, the W7 is the standard. When they were doing "testing" on a collection of subs a few years back, he gushed about the W7 incessantly. I think he even said it was the sub he wanted to make.

Someone will have to dig up the link to prove me right/wrong.

edit: An example of the custom tooling on the W7:



> Everything on the W7 is custom tooled except for 4 bolts used to connect the basket to the top plate


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

Punk0Rama said:


> As Ben said himself, the W7 is the standard. When they were doing "testing" on a collection of subs a few years back, he gushed about the W7 incessantly. I think he even said it was the sub he wanted to make.
> 
> Someone will have to dig up the link to prove me right/wrong.


R.C. even gushed over the sub.

1 db of power compression at 1000watts and 48,000 watts without blowing.

What's not to love?


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

bryanwescoe said:


> I acknowledge the R&D expenses and such. However, I feel a lot of what drives the cost of mainstream products is advertising. If eD can create a sub that performs on par with the W7 for considerably less money, and JL doesn't pursue patent infringement anymore (suggesting it IS an original eD design), it just shows that the process of R&D and bringing the product to market can be done way cheaper than most companies are doing it. This is the best possible scenario for the consumer.
> 
> And if it does come out that eD is ripping this speaker design off from JL, this is wrong and I won't continue to support the company. However, I feel this whole thing is mere coincidence and in the end there will be two solid products produced by two different companies. One will cost significantly less than the other. This speaks volumes for how the internet is providing a new channel for factory direct companies to compete with some of the longstanding giants, not only in car audio, but in many other markets as well.


It is very likely that ED spends a higher percentage of its revenues on advertising/marketing than does JL. Beyond that, It is a fine thing if ED produces a product that suits your needs and budget. Where you are going off the track is when you insist that the processes ED and JL use to bring a product to market are in any way comparable. 

ED either buys existing products and puts their nameplate on them or at the very most tells a build house what they want in very general terms. There is nothing wrong with this, but it would not be possible if other companies like JL hadn't done the R&D and engineering and released similar products to the market. The state of the art would never move forward if everybody operated the way ED does. Do you honestly think that anybody at ED is capable of engineering anything they sell?


----------



## selftc (Jan 22, 2007)

let me start off by making it clear that i am not defending either side here. purely making statements regarding my own observations.

if you take a look at almost any line of business, there's always someone on top. for everyone else, they have to find a way to catch up, meet, or surpass. does anyone not think that other driver manufacturers (jl included) don't buy other 'reference' drivers and tear them down and analyze them ? maybe incorporate some of those technologies in their own product. same for automotive manufacturers, one company comes out with prized pony, next thing you know another manufacturer comes out w/ a near identical vehicle using similar or same technologies. its competition, if you don't learn from not only yourself, but your competition as well, you'll likely never make it. i'm not saying that elemental deisgns is or is not trying to perfect or match a jl technology, but if they were and could do it legally, could you not blame them ? this kind of thing happens everyday, in literally every industry.

for those non-functional guys that bark about cosmetics (or what i consider non functional aspects), take a look at the new AA cone.... strike a resemblence to the w3 ? also, i believe the '07 RE SE cone is identical as well. i haven't seeen (nor have i purposely searched for) any AA bashing about their new cone design in every single thread where AA is mentioned.

jl w3









AA


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

Probably because nothing on the AA Havocs or the RE SE's (or the SX's, which also have the oversized dustcap) is a copy of a patented product.


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

JL is a competitor to me... but let me say this about JL -- they make a fine product. The amount of money they spend on tooling is extremely high, and for good reason... JL pushes the envelope for accurate and consistent driver assembly. They come up with some really great stuff.

Take a look at some of the things they do... like "VRC" and "Floating Cone Attachment" -- they use a LASER to align the parts on the W7. I am impressed by how they do things there. Sure, that results in an expensive product... but JL doesn't target people with a budget on most of their lines.


----------



## selftc (Jan 22, 2007)

Punk0Rama said:


> Probably because nothing on the AA Havocs or the RE SE's (or the SX's, which also have the oversized dustcap) is *a copy of a patented product.*


once again, i'm not taking sides here, but trying to determine if this is assumption or fact. i take opinions w/ a grain of salt, but i'm a person where i want hard evidence, if it exist. has anyone actually _proven_ the prototype basket was a copy and/or there was an actual patent infringment ? or is it all speculation based off a few published pictures ? someone educate me please... i will agree from camera angle, they do look very similar.


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

selftc said:


> once again, i'm not taking sides here, but trying to determine if this is assumption or fact. i take opinions w/ a grain of salt, but i'm a person where i want hard evidence, if it exist. has anyone actually _proven_ the prototype basket was a copy and/or there was an actual patent infringment ? or is it all speculation based off a few published pictures ? someone educate me please... i will agree from camera angle, they do look very similar.


The intent and appearance was extremely similar to that of a patented product. Whether it is an actual copy or not is up to a patent lawyer, but the intent is there.

If eD had nothing to worry about, they would have gone ahead with the basket as planned.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

ED's video on it...http://www.icixsound.com/iv/view_video.php?viewkey=4aa3ad78bdd6b366cc17


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Anybody who doubts the infringement or questions JL's generosity in this matter should read this thread on ECA.


----------



## chadillac3 (Feb 3, 2006)

selftc said:


> once again, i'm not taking sides here, but trying to determine if this is assumption or fact. i take opinions w/ a grain of salt, but i'm a person where i want hard evidence, if it exist. has anyone actually _proven_ the prototype basket was a copy and/or there was an actual patent infringment ? or is it all speculation based off a few published pictures ? someone educate me please... i will agree from camera angle, they do look very similar.


You mean other than JL threatening to sue eD if they didn't change it? And then eD changing the basket?


----------



## selftc (Jan 22, 2007)

chadillac3 said:


> You mean other than JL threatening to sue eD if they didn't change it? And then eD changing the basket?


i'm curious, how much money do you think eD would have been out if this truly went to court ? even if eD could prove it wasn't an infringement, would it have been worth it financially ? also considering it would have delayed its release by no telling how long... 6 months, a year, who knows.... loss of potential revenue. probably just cheaper to change the basket and move on...

based off the comparo pictures, i will agree with everyone else that says that they look nearly identical, but i'm not knowledgable enough w/ design attributes nor the details of the patents to form my own best guess.

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

my only involvement in this thread is to try and seperate assumption vs. proven fact. unless i hear what jl has to say, or see a lawsuit stemmed by jl, i'm not going to turn the assumption into fact. that's just me though... flame if you will, i don't care.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Out of the few of you that pre-ordered one of these subs, are any of you willing to send that sub to NPdang for testing? That would answer some questions right there.


----------



## JayBee (Oct 6, 2006)

Boostedrex said:


> Out of the few of you that pre-ordered one of these subs, are any of you willing to send that sub to NPdang for testing? That would answer some questions right there.


considering the size and weight of the thing there is no way i would pay for to ship it. If doubters want to chip in for it, i'll do it.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

selftc said:


> i'm curious, how much money do you think eD would have been out if this truly went to court ? even if eD could prove it wasn't an infringement, would it have been worth it financially ? also considering it would have delayed its release by no telling how long... 6 months, a year, who knows.... loss of potential revenue. probably just cheaper to change the basket and move on...
> 
> based off the comparo pictures, i will agree with everyone else that says that they look nearly identical, but i'm not knowledgable enough w/ design attributes nor the details of the patents to form my own best guess.
> 
> ...


Here's the relevant JL patent

Here's ED's patent

ED's patent hasn't made it to Google patents yet, so you have to use the crappy US Patent Office viewer.

Compare the drawings. Notice that ED does not reference the JL patent as prior art. That is a crime. Ask yourself why ED never mentioned the patent when people started screaming about the similarities. Who knows what they were trying to pull. Piss and moan as they will, they were not the victims in this. They tried to get over on a company that had been helpful to them in the past and they got caught.


----------



## dBassHz (Nov 2, 2005)

JayBee said:


> I got mines for way cheaper than $295
> i'm not sure if that's chrome or polished stainless steel.


I hope you're bringing it to the H-Town meet.


----------



## JayBee (Oct 6, 2006)

if it's in my hands i certainly will.


----------



## hawkfan (May 1, 2006)

Boostedrex said:


> Out of the few of you that pre-ordered one of these subs, are any of you willing to send that sub to NPdang for testing? That would answer some questions right there.


Exactly. I want to see some actual measurements of this sub's performance. I want to see what this thing can really do. I truly believe that all of the patent/shady business practices stuff will take a backseat if this sub ends up being similar in performance to other high end offerings that cost at least $100 more. The W7 is obviously for real, so I would expect any driver modeled after it to be a quality driver, capable of both SQ and SPL.


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

I wouldn't say that the Av.2 was modelled after the W7...they are two very different drivers, most notably in the motor topology. The old basket was the only real similarity, although the Av.2 should be of the fairly linear long stroke variety.


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

With the LGSC design, I wonder what the efficiency numbers look like. It's not a big deal with todays massive and efficient amps but I am curious.


----------



## chadillac3 (Feb 3, 2006)

selftc said:


> i'm curious, how much money do you think eD would have been out if this truly went to court ? even if eD could prove it wasn't an infringement, would it have been worth it financially ?


And there you have the very convenient explanation eD presented to customers. The simple fact is I've never heard of JL randomly suing somebody, and it's not as if eD wasn't going to make the product due to a basket design. Especially with them trying to re-patent the idea kinda forces you down one obvious train of thought. I think in all reality it was worth it to eD either way; if they had gotten it through, then they have a product that would perform better, but if it didn't they could say, "this is the sub that scared JL."


----------



## Scott P (Sep 9, 2007)

I guess I'll reply since that is my ECA thread that keeps getting referenced.

Keep in mind that even when reading that thread there was alot of stuff that I, nor anyone else discussed there. I'm also not going to discuss anything new here. Just leave it at there was legitimate concern, but one that was defendable had it gone to court. The right thing (ethically speaking), at that time, was to just change the basket. 

The aesthitics of the basket were the only thing that was changed as of the last contact I had with ED. Essentially the changes were made to ensure that there were no glancing similarities to the w7 in any form or function. 

Quite frankly I think the whole thing has gotten out of hand, some of which was my doing albeit unintentionally. Basically JL felt concerned they were infringed upon, they flexed their muscle, ED conceded and changed the basket. None of this diminishes the fact that the AV.2 is still a tremendously capable sub. In all my years of working in car audio I have never heard a sub play as as well as the Av.2 I sh!t you not when I say I through almost 1000w of a 10hz -13db sine wave at it and it laughed at me. 

That said I have also canceled my preorder. The sub is to big for my tastes (weight and depth wise) and I am going IB for my next comp setup which the Av.2 just isn't built for.

as always I am willing to answer questions if anyone has any


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Punk0Rama said:


> I wouldn't say that the Av.2 was modelled after the W7...they are two very different drivers, most notably in the motor topology. The old basket was the only real similarity, although the Av.2 should be of the fairly linear long stroke variety.


That certainly seems to be the case. I definitely never meant to suggest otherwise. To me it is a bid deal that ED did what they did and did it the way they did it. I understand that seems trivial to many. 

The only explanation I can imagine is that ED's goal was to produce a sub that looked as much like the W7 as possible without stepping over the line legally. You can call it a tribute if you prefer, but to me, the patent and the public behavior afterward are consistent with previous behavior and completely unacceptable. 

Most people aren't going to care or even be aware of these behaviors when they are in the market for a sub. I've been studying them since they chose to attack me personally for daring to point out that the specs for eDead published on their Web site were overstated by 25%. The excuse is always the same - "we aren't dishonest, we're incompetent!" Neither possibility seems worth dealing with to me.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Scott P said:


> Just leave it at there was legitimate concern, but one that was defendable had it gone to court. The right thing (ethically speaking), at that time, was to just change the basket.
> ...
> 
> as always I am willing to answer questions if anyone has any


Can't just leave it at that. Please explain how it was both legally defensible to use the design (and more importantly to file the patent application in the first place) and at the same time the right thing ethically to change the basket? What am I missing that makes me think the only possible interpretation of your statement is that while it may not have been a crime to use the original basket or file the ED patent, it WAS unethical?


----------



## Scott P (Sep 9, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> Can't just leave it at that. Please explain how it was both legally defensible to use the design (and more importantly to file the patent application in the first place) and at the same time the right thing ethically to change the basket? What am I missing that makes me think the only possible interpretation of your statement is that while it may not have been a crime to use the original basket or file the ED patent, it WAS unethical?


what seems to be forgotten is that there has been three renditions of the the basket for this sub. The first is the basket on the LFR prototype. That is the one in the the pictures that have been referenced here that started the whole patent infringement concern. The second is the functional prototype that I and others here tested. That is the one the ED patent applied to. The third is the production basket that was made veiwable just afew days ago.

Again as I stated elsewhere, you have to pay strict attention to the timeline and the dates of certain information as well. Personally I think it's all a waste of time arguing over it anymore b/c as I have seen people are going to believe what they want to.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Scott P said:


> what seems to be forgotten is that there has been three renditions of the the basket for this sub. The first is the basket on the LFR prototype. That is the one in the the pictures that have been referenced here that started the whole patent infringement concern. The second is the functional prototype that I and others here tested. That is the one the ED patent applied to. The third is the production basket that was made veiwable just afew days ago.
> 
> Again as I stated elsewhere, you have to pay strict attention to the timeline and the dates of certain information as well. Personally I think it's all a waste of time arguing over it anymore b/c as I have seen people are going to believe what they want to.


Dismissing questions as the products of closed minds that will never acknowledge the truth isn't the same thing as answering them. As I was trying to point out in my previous post, dispensing self contradictory platitudes doesn't get us anywhere either. If there are facts to support your position, let's have at them.

I don't see any meaningful differences in the drawings submitted with each patent. Milne filed for his patent 3 years after JL's patent was granted without referring to it as prior art. That part of the time line doesn't support your position, even though I think I'm paying "strict" attention to the details. Instead of alluding to sequences of events you apparently think we aren't equipped to understand, how about laying them out and setting us straight. Feelings aren't relevant to this, I'd like to get to the truth.

Here's an easier to get to view of what the ED patent covers. Remember all that is being covered by the patent is the appearance of the basket. To be legitimate, ED's design needs to be substantially different than JL's. Can anyone really think this patent was filed without Mr. Milne thinking it looked mighty familiar?

This sort of thing happens all the time. Company A infringes Company B's patent because they aren't aware of the Company B's product or they want to see what they can get away with. I think it is less common for Company A to change their design and still insist they were in the right and the wronged party. It's not as if Company B doesn't incur significant risk defending its patent.


----------



## Scott P (Sep 9, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> I don't see any meaningful differences in the drawings submitted with each patent. Milne filed for his patent 3 years after JL's patent was granted without referring to it as prior art. That part of the time line doesn't support your position, even though I think I'm paying "strict" attention to the details. Instead of alluding to sequences of events you apparently think we aren't equipped to understand, how about laying them out and setting us straight. Feelings aren't relevant to this, I'd like to get to the truth.


You're proving my point to a T here. If you were paying attention and thoroughly reading through things you would have seen the JL's design patent was indeed a referenced patent.

I can even point it out for you if I must: eD's Patent

Look in References Cited section at patent document D484116



> Here's an easier to get to view of what the ED patent covers. Remember all that is being covered by the patent is the appearance of the basket. To be legitimate, ED's design needs to be substantially different than JL's. Can anyone really think this patent was filed without Mr. Milne thinking it looked mighty familiar?


I will be the first to admit that I haven't looked it up recently but in regards to design patents there only needs to be a 15% difference shown to be considered not infringing upon previously assigned patents. Having seen my prototype and a JL w7 side by side I can say with out a doubt there is atleast what i can construe to be a 15% if not more difference.


So like I said it is really a pointless argument since there are just too many preconcieved notions about ED (some of them meritted, some not). That is why I am trying to recuse myself from the debate and offering to answer questions purely on the performance of the speaker itself.



This sort of thing happens all the time. Company A infringes Company B's patent because they aren't aware of the Company B's product or they want to see what they can get away with. I think it is less common for Company A to change their design and still insist they were in the right and the wronged party. It's not as if Company B doesn't incur significant risk defending its patent.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Scott P said:


> I can even point it out for you if I must: eD's Patent
> 
> Look in References Cited section at patent document D484116


You are absolutely correct. I have no idea how I missed that. I did look. It must have been the date of the citation. In any case, I was clearly wrong to say that the citation wasn't there. The patent filing wasn't illegal because the relevant prior art was cited. Your point that a legally issued patent gave ED some chance to prevail is valid. The other posters who were repeating Milne's spin about JL being punitive and unfair were just wrong. I got carried away and conflated the too positions. Sorry about that.

I believe this means if ED's design matched their patent, JL would have to challenge the patent first and that WOULD be a pain in the ass for everybody. I still maintain that ED's filing, despite having a very thin chance of standing, was unethical. IMO, Milne's response to the incident was completely unethical, but I agree with you that debating the ethics of a documented serial liar is pointless. This has nothing to do with the idea that "preconceived notions" are without foundation or Milne's concept of "irrational haters", these preconceptions come from personal experience and a long written trail of outright lies.

As far as I'm concerned, the basket issue is closed. It will be up to JL to decide on further action on the patent which doesn't require the existence of a product. The idea presented here that JL considers ED a threat is obviously laughable on its face - not saying they shouldn't be concerned about small upstarts, just not ED. I'll continue to believe ED tried to pull a fast one and you and others may choose to believe certain technicalities absolve them of what I see as underhanded behavior. Now we will wait for the product to ship and be tested by objective outsiders (if there are any left).


----------



## Irons82 (May 12, 2006)

For those of you complaining about the pricing of the W7, keep in mind that it is the ONLY subwoofer on the market that cost more than $100 to manufacture. The 13Av.2 is... fugly to me, especially with the new basket.


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

Irons82 said:


> For those of you complaining about the pricing of the W7, keep in mind that it is the ONLY subwoofer on the market that cost more than $100 to manufacture. The 13Av.2 is... fugly to me, especially with the new basket.


Obviously you haven't seen the DD Z1 and it's giant neo magnet structure  I'm sure there are several other subs that cost over $100 to manufacture as well... most of them neo-based.


----------



## SQ_Bronco (Jul 31, 2005)

Irons82 said:


> keep in mind that it is the ONLY subwoofer on the market that cost more than $100 to manufacture.


I seriously doubt that... do you have any references for this bold statement?


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

If it is that ugly, may I reccomend a grill to cover the face and put the a$$ out of sight  

To me this is more about the sound, than the looks !


----------



## Irons82 (May 12, 2006)

SQ_Bronco said:


> I seriously doubt that... do you have any references for this bold statement?


The quote is a couple years old when the W7 first came out. It's probably outdated by now :blush: From a big head at Dynaudio. I'm not naming names.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Hic said:


> If it is that ugly, may I reccomend a grill to cover the face and put the a$$ out of sight
> 
> To me this is more about the sound, than the looks !


+1,000,000!!!! Who cares what the basket of a sub looks like when 98% of the time it will be hidden by the walls of an enclosure? That's like saying the engine in your Bugatti Veyron is ugly even though it will propel you to 218+mph! Does it matter what the motor looks like when you can't see it and it still clearly gets the job done? NO!

Scott, thanks for posting up your point of view. Is there supposed to be a difference in performance between the test model you have and a full out production model? If not then I know of at least 1 13Av.2 in SoCal that could be hand delivered to Mr. NPdang for testing.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

They can easily do what all companies do... send a cherry picked version out for testing while their production units have a wide performance variance.

I still haven't tested any ED drivers that performed comparable or better to any number of products at the same price point in terms of non-linear distortion and consistency.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

npdang said:


> I still haven't tested any ED drivers that performed comparable or better to any number of products at the same price point in terms of non-linear distortion and consistency.


Talk like that is going to get you labeled a member of the irrational hate parade. Not a terrible thing, turns out.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

Rudeboy said:


> Talk like that is going to get you labeled a member of the irrational hate parade. Not a terrible thing, turns out.


Well, granted I haven't tested that many ED drivers. Whatever they're doing, I give it up to them though. They've certainly done very well for themselves where many others have fallen by the side (including yours truly).


----------



## KAPendley (Nov 19, 2007)

I really shouldn't post here. I REALLY shouldn't. I am certainly biased when it comes to ED..................they do make a pill for it. I took my pill, and I am cured.

I have alot of experience with ED...........and I can honestly say that I nearly lost my store because of them. Anyone can be a Manufacturer of speakers and subs.................anyone with $$$ to buy into a Chinese company for outsourcing. 

If you are rocking ED in your stereo system..........then I am by no means trashing you. It probably is doing very well for you. But for the few customers that I sold it too, they have been nothing but disappointed. And not only in the equipment, but the service.

OK.............long story, bear with me. I bought into ED about this time last year actually. They were very pleasant over the phone, and the warranty seemed great. I sold some Kv series 10's in a box that I built based on ED specs, with a Massive 1000.1 amp ran at 1 ohm. (Massive is another story all together, but the amps do have nutz. lol) 2 weeks later, this very abusive customer blew them....no prob....fill out the ED RMA and sent them back for 25 dollars shipping. They call me when the subs come in, and tell me how "these subs have clearly been abused, it will cost the guy 250 plus shipping to get them repaired". OK, YOU call the customer and tell him that, because Im not. They do, and the customer said, NM, send them back to me. "OK sir, it will be $55. for shipping"

Why did it go up for shipping? Not only would he of had to pay MY cost for a "recone" but they decided to make money from shipping too?

Ok, I'll give them ONE more chance. Couldnt hurt...right?

Next customer..........2 Kv 10's, 1 ED NiN.1 (1200 [email protected]) and another box THEY recommened. The sub lasted 2 days. This is what it looked like.










NATURALLY they said is was CLEARLY abused. WRONG!!! It was CLEARLY OVERPOWERED!! But with everything set up with how THEY told me too, that was the result. The amp was fine, but the subs are overrated power wise. They do that too sell them. 

Anyway, my biggest qualm with them was when they told me that if I would learn to set up an amplifier, I wouldn't have that [email protected]#KIN WHAT!!??? I dont own a store or nothing.................WTH do I know right? NOTHING else I sell comes back, but I dont know how to set a gain? Like I said.......I took my pill, and believe it or not.......Im cured. I havent had a blown sub come back to my store since. LOL.

Rant over.


----------



## KAPendley (Nov 19, 2007)

BTW, from the last ED blog video that I have seen, Ben has a mohawk. Nuff said. Nothing says "I am a professional" than a freakin mohawk.


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

CCSS said:


> BTW, from the last ED blog video that I have seen, Ben has a mohawk. Nuff said. Nothing says "I am a professional" than a freakin mohawk.


I didn't realize they sold to dealers ? Is that a new thing ?


----------



## KAPendley (Nov 19, 2007)

Not anymore. They had started a dealer program right around that same time. But alot of us had problems that THEY wouldnt take care of. So they told us it would be a case by case deal. They booted me off their forum because of my "complaints" in front of other dealers. Did the same to some other dealers that I know. Too many questions, with no answers from them. What really got me was that after all the $$ money I spent, and LOST (I threw the rest of their blown subs away, didnt bother sending them back) they couldn't replace a couple of woofers? For first timers? The 5 yr warranty covers NOTHING. ALL manu's have a warranty clause in effect, but the difference between a GOOD manu, and a BS one, is they will replace the blown equipment as long as it was installed by an authorized dealer. 

By the way Jacob, got your flyer the other day. Equipment seems pretty nice bro, I just cant carry another line right now. Im cutting back on some lines now. About the only thing I carry (for the moment) is Arc, Eclipse, Clarion, Image Dynamics, Second Skin, Soundstream (which I may be dropping, not for faulty equipment though) and working on getting K40 direct. Its hard enough selling those lines to a community that believes Kicker and Kenwood is the BEST!


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

CCSS said:


> Not anymore. They had started a dealer program right around that same time. But alot of us had problems that THEY wouldnt take care of. So they told us it would be a case by case deal. They booted me off their forum because of my "complaints" in front of other dealers. Did the same to some other dealers that I know. Too many questions, with no answers from them. What really got me was that after all the $$ money I spent, and LOST (I threw the rest of their blown subs away, didnt bother sending them back) they couldn't replace a couple of woofers? For first timers? The 5 yr warranty covers NOTHING. ALL manu's have a warranty clause in effect, but the difference between a GOOD manu, and a BS one, is they will replace the blown equipment as long as it was installed by an authorized dealer.
> 
> By the way Jacob, got your flyer the other day. Equipment seems pretty nice bro, I just cant carry another line right now. Im cutting back on some lines now. About the only thing I carry (for the moment) is Arc, Eclipse, Clarion, Image Dynamics, Second Skin, Soundstream (which I may be dropping, not for faulty equipment though) and working on getting K40 direct. Its hard enough selling those lines to a community that believes Kicker and Kenwood is the BEST!


Indeed -- a warranty is only as good as the company behind it 

After I posted I realized that I had indeed sent you a flyer! I sent about 30 of them out last week... I don't send out a whole lot at a time, just a couple here and there. If you ever decide to carry the line just LMK!

How does Arc move for you in your area?


----------



## KAPendley (Nov 19, 2007)

Arc has actually done very well for me. Im working on a demo vehicle that will be all Arc. Foose sells itself, and once people hear them, they are sold. The amps are ROCK solid, never had the first issue with them. Had a sub or 2 blow, but really, I sold them to "bass heads" that only had the cash for entry level. Arc IMO is more of a SQ driver, until you step up too the Arc Series equipment. Arc helps me out alot, so I support them to the fullest.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

It is always the customer's fault if they don't understand the hardware. If I was a company selling a product and a sub like that was shipped in under warranty, I'd tell them to buy a new one.

I don't know about the shipping. Again, if I was a company, if under warranty, free, if blatant abuse, you pay shipping. I would either keep the paper weight or ship it back at their cost if they want the paper weight. I would not pay for stupidity. However, I would explicitly explain this to any distributor of my product stating that is at the distributor's digressions to send in hardware under warranty knowing full well that blatant misuse will incur charges. I doubt ED has such an understanding or discussed this with any distributor.

I really don't blame ED though. They are not there to pay for stupidity.

There are two different aspects to a woofer, excursion limitations and thermal limitations. Exceeding either can damage a woofer. Note a sub can be rated to any thermal capability it can handle, even if it's 1kw rms. This means NOTHING about excursion limits. When you stick it in a box of any size or configuration, it will be able to make use of only a certain amount of power at a certain frequency before reaching and exceeding xmax and further xmech. This should be _very_ well understood by the installer and customer. The sub should at the very least be modeled up to just estimate physical limits and point to usable power in a give box, any box influences on frequency response, and if any changes should be made to the box or amp configuration to compensate. A subsonic filter should be choosen to address any low frequency issues. I know most car audio shops do not do this, and it is unfortunate. You can spend 5 minutes tossing in specs, fiddling with box size, tune, and power levels and get a very good idea of what's appropriate and what power level can be used. Note this power level can be very different from "rated" rms. Rated rms is simply thermal. It has nothing to do with its physical limitations in a box. Some companies do take the effort to address this and actually rate rms lower or suggest overly small boxes to limit excursion to compensate.

Warranties never cover stupidity. I'm sorry that your customers are idiots who don't understand their hardware. That's unfortunate but unavoidable. However, both you and your customers should be aware of the capabilities and limitations of the hardware used, HUs, amps, speakers, subs. It's part of your job to know what you sell. Some companies overbuild hardware where you can happily beat the snot out of it and do no damage. Some companies don't. I would suggest sitting down with every customer and talking through the system and hardware used so they understand what they have, what they can do, and what they can't do. I know time is money, but it is nice to educate the customer as well, at least make an attempt if they themselves will not.

It's good that you're just tossing out the subs now. I can't see myself doing anything else when someone comes in with a junked sub. How can you expect a company to say "we'll take this obviously abused sub and here's a new one free for you."? How does that work?

The main problem with ED is that they are not a large company. They can not afford to pay for others. Big companies can afford to tailor more towards the customer and actually pay for some level of stupidity. It's a matter of good will, making both the distributor and customer happy. However, every time it happens, it's a hit on the business. If I was a business, I wouldn't like losing money like that. If it was a defect and the sub failed in some way that was a manufacturing error, fine. I pay for everything, new sub, all shipping, everything. If it was just stupidity on the customer's part, I pay nothing. It's not my problem. I know the process lacks heart, but business has no emotion. It's just numbers, cold, cruel, analytical. ED knows this. It's why they've survived as they have. They are really a company that shouldn't exist, but they do because Ben, despite being an ass in the good will sense, knows business and knows what he's doing. I've come to respect Ben very much as a business man cause he's actually pretty good at it. It doesn't make customers happy, but it keeps the business in existence. Which is more important?


Yeah, big rant, sorry. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Back to why I posted in the first place...lol

New e-mail today. 13Av.2 is shipping!!! Weeeeee. I won't be buying one, but I'm looking forward to those who are.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Looking good !

excerpt]

Dual FLEX Spider Design 5 years of suspension evolution has led us to this design. Dual 225MM FLEX spiders offer excellent linearity and compliance throughout excursion with integrated neck bridge design reducing rocking to a all time low necessary in a long excursion design. Dual FLEX design is capable of 120+MM of P2P movement. 

Leading 5 Year Warranty This product is covered by Elemental Designs industry leading 5 year warranty against manufacturing defects.

Free UPS Ground Shipping This item at regular pricing qualifies for free UPS Ground shipment anywhere in the US 48 States* Not applicable to locations outside US 48 States.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

You can put a price on your reputation though... at the end of the day you have to weigh what's more important.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

True, but at what cost? A company could make all their distributors and customers happy, go into bankruptcy and disappear. Who'd that help?

My gripe is that everyone wants a free lunch and complains when they don't get it. Even you npdang have put up with a lot that directly comes out of your own pocket. You do it because you're a good guy, but you don't do it to keep business running. Ben, despite everybody's hate towards him, runs his business well. He knows what he needs to do to survive. Unfortunately, that won't make a lot of friends.

CCSS, I'm not trying to be a dick to you. You have your own business to run as well as a reputation. However, the blame does fall on the customer, if he likes it or not. Warranty is to cover defects, not stupidity. Yes, costs come out of your pocket, but it's also your choice to pay out of your own pocket or force the customer to pay for his ignorance. That's part of your choice and your business. This is partially why I heavily think that both the installers and customers should be heavily educated on the hardware. The shop should know their hardware inside and out, and there should be some effort to teach the customer about their hardware. 

Knowledge keeps **** from happening. I've been running 300w rms to 25w rms tweeters for some years. You think I ever blew any? the answer's no Why not? 

I don't really expect shops to educate their customers, but it's a nice dream. If you knew the subs were over driven, it's pretty easy to pair them with a smaller amp or tell the customer to go easy on the sub in that high powered configuration and explain why. I would express the fact that if they did blow the sub, it would not be under warranty and they'd have to buy a new one. It's pretty easy to explicitly state to the customer that the warranty covers _only_ defects, not misuse. There are just steps that I see that should have been taken as part of the whole system build, install, and customer introduction to the hardware either during initial selection or final run through.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

I know exactly how you feel, trust me  I don't think taking one or the other extreme is the right path though. In my experience it's always been best to take care of the customer, and find another way to make up for it either by increasing prices or improving the "abuse" tolerance of your product, or finding a different market. They could have also just repaired the first broken driver on good faith, with some advice and a warning. Second time charge for it.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

mvw2 said:


> My gripe is that everyone wants a free lunch and complains when they don't get it.


Defining that free lunch depends on what is being promised. IMO, when it comes to ED, much of what you are calling wanting a "free lunch" is simply wanting what was promised. If one makes promises to get the business in the first place, expecting them to be fulfilled isn't unreasonable.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

Rudeboy said:


> Defining that free lunch depends on what is being promised. IMO, when it comes to ED, much of what you are calling wanting a "free lunch" is simply wanting what was promised. If one makes promises to get the business in the first place, expecting them to be fulfilled isn't unreasonable.


I agree. _If_ ED explicitly states a warranty method (hopefully in writing) that is more extensive than simple defect warranty, yes, I too would hold ED responsible on a higher level. However, that agreement (in writing) has to be there. Otherwise all warranties are simply against defect. I do agree there could be some "talk" going on promising things. However, talk is meaningless until it's down on paper.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

mvw2 said:


> However, talk is meaningless until it's down on paper.


It's not meaningless to the customer which is where ED's problem lies.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

That's the difference between business and people. One of them has no emotion, no heart.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

mvw2 said:


> That's the difference between business and people. One of them has no emotion, no heart.


Nothing you have said is wrong, but it leaves out the the kids conning kids aspect of their operation. Other than some strange patent filings, I don't believe anybody has even suggested that what they are doing is illegal. Caveat emptor absolutely applies. ED just works the befriending side of the equation much more than most. Their motto could be: "burning bridges one person at a time." Most of the vehement hatred you see on forums is an overwrought version of don't get sucked in to the cult. As long as you understand that you are not getting any special deals on what is actually low to maybe middle level gear, you will be fine if you choose to deal with them and they choose to deliver something that matches the specifications of what you ordered.

Your argument ignores the difference between abuse and a product failing because its advertised capabilities exceed its actual capabilities. If a sub is listed as handling 400 watts and is torn apart when you feed it 300 because it can only handle 200, that isn't user abuse. You really can't tell from a picture whether this is the case or not. Assuming one or the other possibility undermines your argument. IMO, quality control issues with eDead and the apparent switch and bait and switch being discussed in this thread leads me to always look at disputes with ED as them being guilty until proven innocent.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

If you put a sub in a small enough box you can increase the power and vice-versa, if you mount it infinite baffle.

clipping any speaker is easy to do if you are young enough


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

a$$hole said:


> clipping any speaker is easy to do if you are young enough


True that.


----------

