# ED 12av2



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

An interesting driver. First thing that struck me was the unusually large top plate. Looks like an underhung motor or some variation of one. A nice touch was the gap venting holes. A feature I haven't seen since the days of Lambda Acoustics. Also notice the spacer ring is huge. One thing I didn't like about the spider were the rolls are very tall, and sit somewhat close together. Moving the cone up and down you can see the rolls crumple and pop as you reach higher excursions. Given the resin treatment of the cloth, it might cause excessive wear over time. The surround is quite large, and combined with the huge spider give this driver a tremendous amount of mechanical throw, although you will see the surround crumple the further you move inward. Inductance is quite high for a short coil design, but probably a compromise with powerhandling. I like the cone, very stiff and durable although Imho unattractive. During test, the driver was reasonably quiet, better than say an Idmax v2, but not dead silent like a w7. Not that you would hear it in a box, but it's a sign of good mechanical clearances and design. The frame is quite sturdy, and the motor is beautifully finished and impeccably glued together. On to the test results.


















































This driver is clearly motor limited, which is a good thing for durability but perhaps a small compromise in terms of distortion performance. Fairly good BL curve, but nothing you wouldn't see in a decent overhung design. Small forward offset, I'd put xmax at about 25mm rearward and close to 29mm forward. As you can see, the suspension isn't even close to being stressed and has plenty more room to go. Le curve shows the use of Faraday rings in the motor. A nice touch, and markedly better performance than your typical curve. The motor also does quite well thermally. Hardly warm to the touch, and no signs of any problems. I also ran a quick distortion sweep to get a feel for problem areas. This driver seems to be remarkably clean in the lowest octaves, but distortion rises noticeably above 50 to 80hz. Notice the dropping response at 40-50hz as you move up in frequency. T/S parameters are spot on. Kudos to ED.

My quick impression, this is a low frequency monster capable of enormous output and good performance down low. It also looks designed to take abuse. However, given the distortion plot, low efficiency, and high inductance, this is a driver that you probably want to keep crossed over fairly low with lots of power on tap.


----------



## tcguy85 (Oct 29, 2007)

cool! and there ya have it!


----------



## azngotskills (Feb 24, 2006)

glad to see measurements and reviews back again from you


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

nice review and thanks....


----------



## newtitan (Mar 7, 2005)

ahhhhh the goood old days have returned AWESOME 


thanks for all those that chipped in to ship and purchase that monster


thanks for the review and supplied data also


----------



## rimshot (May 17, 2005)

Ok im going to be the pessimist here no ed hate intended.

So, basically inductance is so high that it needs to be crossed low, the cone area has been jeopardized to support that outrageous surround, there may be issues down the road with the spider bending in ways it shouldn't and the thing weighs 60 pounds. 
From your data and my own interpretation, it appears something as standard as a Fi Q12 could match this drivers output in a sealed enclosure and possible play higher cleanly while doing it. Would I be right in this assumption? Also I have noticed companies (alot of whom use XBL technology) Have been rating XmaX @ 70%BL now I see the graph but maybe I am not reading it right, could someone tell me the xmax of this driver at 70% bl? Thanks.
I was interested in one a few months (or was it years?) back but the delays took their toll. Also, it appears the motor was designed in such a way that it gives priority to sheer output rather than linear output at high levels like a CSS SDX15 for example. 
I appreciate the test as always npdang and really miss these test/reviews. CHEERS

<edit> I just read the graph and now see that at 70%bl it has 27-28mm one way throw which is pretty impressive. I wish this driver wasn't so heavy. Wonder what the sd is.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Thank You Bryan [ for 13av.2 ], Thank You Don [ for getting it to test site in one piece ], Thank You Jeff for allowing all of them to do this test!


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Nguyen, Thank You for running the test on this beast !


----------



## unpredictableacts (Aug 16, 2006)

So this is not a W7 killer, but where does this woofer rank amoung all of the ig woofers out....W7,IDmax,Flatline,OZ ME......I know there are others.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

I've missed this kind of talk


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

I guess my interpretation of the Klippel data is a bit different.

Yes, this is an underhung driver...the top plate is a sure giveaway. However, I don't think the BL plot is as linear as several other underhung drivers I've seen measured. That type of BL linearity is easily realized in many overhung drivers. Now, that wouldn't be such a big deal, but the inductance is higher than I had anticipated and very non-linear. This is manageable with the right low-pass filter, but still...not quite what I hoped. A bigger problem: coil offset is 5-6mm in the coil out direction; that isn't horrible, but it isn't particularly good either, especially when that's ~20% of Xmag.

Suspension linearity is impressive and very well done on their part. It might be better if there was less compliance (more stiffness) at the outer edges of the stroke, but this driver doesn't really have the motor to use it anyways.

I agree that it comes reasonably close to spec in all respects and is, indeed, a subwoofer designed for low frequency output.

In terms of sheer linearity, it does not approach the W7. But it is still a pretty decent subwoofer and even better if the coil offset was smaller (which could be a problem with this one particular driver, or a consistency problem across all of their drivers).


----------



## bryanwescoe (Nov 2, 2007)

Thanks npdang for putting it through its paces. Looks like it fared incredibly well for the Preorder price of $285 (shipped, I now know shipping is like $70 lol). So is it pretty safe to say its hard to beat in the price to performance ration? I mean the IDmaxx and W7 are both significantly more expensive.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

Yeah, it certainly does seem to do its intended job well. The price is ok. The box sizing is decent enough both sealed and ported. Sensitivity is a bit on the low side, but many folks don't seem to mind running big amps. I think ED went the smart route to make this sub motor limited. It'll certainly help any potential mishaps from folks beating the snot out of them. The spider thing may be curious though. Maybe Ben will see this and opt for a slight revision in the future. Then again, car audio in general is not a tremendously long term thing. Maybe longevity isn't a big concern when talking about the average number of years of use.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

bryanwescoe said:


> Thanks npdang for putting it through its paces. Looks like it fared incredibly well for the Preorder price of $285 (shipped, I now know shipping is like $70 lol). So is it pretty safe to say its hard to beat in the price to performance ration? I mean the IDmaxx and W7 are both significantly more expensive.


You're a stand up guy for sending your woofer cross-country.

Kudos to you and Cheapboy.

The old days are back.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Thanks to Nguyen for testing this beast and thanks to everyone else that helped in getting that beast out to L.A. for the test. I'm glad to see that this is indeed a good sub. I had recommended it to one of my friends when it was first announced. She got in on the first 25 sold and got hers for like $250 shipped or so. She hasn't installed it yet, but I'll be looking forward to hearing it once it's in.

And like several others, I'm really pumped to see more testing going on here again. I'd love to have my TC OEM 10 tested, but I think I'm about the only person that's concerned with it since you can't buy them anymore and there weren't that many of them to begin with. 

Zach


----------



## simplicityinsound (Feb 2, 2007)

good to hear, i am not speaker expert so most of hte date and review means very little to me, are you going to do a listening test? i am more or less intrested in how it sounds.

based on your initial impression, i do think that for the price, its an excellent choice for those who are looking for those kinds of speicific subwoofers. now if we can confirm it with a listening test, and in time, see about its long run reliablity, i mya consder trying it more...though with the kinds of installs i like to do, its very seldom that i get such a chance hehe

b


----------



## circa40 (Jan 20, 2008)

Thanks for the review.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

simplicityinsound said:


> good to hear, i am not speaker expert so most of hte date and review means very little to me, are you going to do a listening test? i am more or less intrested in how it sounds.
> 
> based on your initial impression, i do think that for the price, its an excellent choice for those who are looking for those kinds of speicific subwoofers. now if we can confirm it with a listening test, and in time, see about its long run reliablity, i mya consder trying it more...though with the kinds of installs i like to do, its very seldom that i get such a chance hehe
> 
> b


Bing, 

You'll get to do a listening test soon enough. The friend of mine who bought a 13Av.2 is planning on brining the car to you for an install.  It's a 2002 BMW 3 series coupe. So you'll get your wish for a listening test.

Zach


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

I'm no speaker expert either, trust me. But it doesn't really take one to interpret the results of these tests. They are about as simple as reading a dyno, but it can sometimes be very difficult to trace back what the problem is (that's what you pay Klippel for).

You've got about a 7db rise from 150hz down to 40hz. Mvw2 has the results of the PRS 12", and you can see what a marked difference a sub with .5mh inductance has vs. this one. I think ED did a great job with this sub, especially given their target market.

I did listen to the sub for a bit, but couldn't really tell you anything about how it sounds. Too many other things going on room/baffle/enclosure etc.


----------



## BLD 25 (Apr 13, 2007)

npdang said:


> I'm no speaker expert either, trust me.


if you are not an expert, who is?


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

Nice read, really happy to see more driver test data. Thanks for the effort N!


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

npdang said:


> An interesting driver. First thing that struck me was the unusually large top plate. Looks like an underhung motor or some variation of one. A nice touch was the gap venting holes. A feature I haven't seen since the days of Lambda Acoustics. Also notice the spacer ring is huge. One thing I didn't like about the spider were the rolls are very tall, and sit somewhat close together. Moving the cone up and down you can see the rolls crumple and pop as you reach higher excursions. Given the resin treatment of the cloth, it might cause excessive wear over time. The surround is quite large, and combined with the huge spider give this driver a tremendous amount of mechanical throw, although you will see the surround crumple the further you move inward. Inductance is quite high for a short coil design, but probably a compromise with powerhandling. I like the cone, very stiff and durable although Imho unattractive. During test, the driver was reasonably quiet, better than say an Idmax v2, but not dead silent like a w7. Not that you would hear it in a box, but it's a sign of good mechanical clearances and design. The frame is quite sturdy, and the motor is beautifully finished and impeccably glued together. On to the test results.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Faraday rings, underhung design [large top plate ] 5 year warranty...

What's not to love  

If used to produce subbass [it is a perfect fit]this will make you go Hmmm


----------



## Daishi (Apr 18, 2006)

Thanks for the review npdang and everyone that was involved in getting it to him. I hope we can get more of these reviews going on a regular basis.


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

mmmm good ol days.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

Would anyone like to comment on why ED's specs and what I see here seem quite different and how that might or might not make any difference?


----------



## Electrodynamic (Nov 27, 2007)

Other than missing Xmax by 6mm (25mm outward and 20mm inward is ~22mm each way if the coil would have been aligned properly) the T/S specs look about as close as you could ask for. ...unless I totally missed something.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

electrodynamic said:


> Other than missing Xmax by 6mm (25mm outward and 20mm inward is ~22mm each way if the coil would have been aligned properly) the T/S specs look about as close as you could ask for. ...unless I totally missed something.


I don't think you missed anything


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

electrodynamic said:


> Other than missing Xmax by 6mm (25mm outward and 20mm inward is ~22mm each way if the coil would have been aligned properly) the T/S specs look about as close as you could ask for. ...unless I totally missed something.


That's what I was asking, having very little experience with these things, I was asking about the significance of differences like these:

Qts: .4862/.45
Qes: .5336/.48	
Qms: 5.4721/7.48
Fs: 22.0762/23.29
Vas: 64.1447/55.79
Bl: 19.3977/14.81


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

http://www.electronixwarehouse.com/education/speakers/theil-small.htm
quoted from above link ^^^^^
(NOTE: For terms you do not understand,
please refer to our Glossary)

This mathematical description of loudspeaker behavior applies to any sound transducer, but finds it's most common application with enclosure design for woofers/subwoofers.

For most audiophiles, a standard enclosure that meets the VAS requirement for the their driver will usually perform quite adequately. See bold section below.

The three Theile/Small parameters that primarily determine the frequency response of a loudspeaker are:

Compliance or Vas

Free-air resonance or Fs

Response time or Qts

Compliance or Vas is a measure of the overall stiffness, or resistance to motion of the cone, the surround, and the spider. It is specified in term of the volume of air having the same compliance as the driver. A small number corresponds to a small volume of air, which is stiffer than a larger volume of air. Thus, compliance and stiffness are inversely proportional.


----------



## KAPendley (Nov 19, 2007)

5 Yr warranty? lol....


Ok............Im shutting up now.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

a$$hole said:


> http://www.electronixwarehouse.com/education/speakers/theil-small.htm
> quoted from above link ^^^^^
> (NOTE: For terms you do not understand,
> please refer to our Glossary)
> ...


I get the definitions, I'm asking if the differences, especially Vas and Bl are significant in any way. The numbers aren't even close. Doesn't that matter?


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

There will be some variation. It is common to see some numbers vary by 30%. In that sense, the numbers are close enough.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Rudeboy said:


> That's what I was asking, having very little experience with these things, I was asking about the significance of differences like these:
> 
> Qts: .4862/.45 = lower numer [ I like ]
> Qes: .5336/.48 = lower number [ I like ]
> ...


I added on the quoted text, my feelings about this


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

mvw2 said:


> There will be some variation. It is common to see some numbers vary by 30%. In that sense, the numbers are close enough.


Thanks. Exactly what I was asking. So after all of the sturm und drang, this should be a reasonable value for people who want to throw a good bit of power at it and another way to compensate for what people seem to be describing as a lower than usual x-over point? Be interesting to see how people configure systems around it.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

a$$hole said:


> I added on the quoted text, my feelings about this


Ah, that's very helpful. Thank you.


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

Well the response is plenty usable out to several hundred Hz. It's not that you have to cross low. You just need to do a little EQing work, that's all. This is something you would need to do anyways in a car install, so it's not a big thing. If you don't have a lot of EQing ability to invest enough for just fine tuning the bottom end, then you may want to limit the crossover point to a range that maintains a relatively flat output sensitivity.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

mvw2 said:


> Well the response is plenty usable out to several hundred Hz. It's not that you have to cross low. You just need to do a little EQing work, that's all. This is something you would need to do anyways in a car install, so it's not a big thing. If you don't have a lot of EQing ability to invest enough for just fine tuning the bottom end, then you may want to limit the crossover point to a range that maintains a relatively flat output sensitivity.


Would you say it brings anything remarkable to the market, or would you say something more like" x% of a W7's performance at x% of its price, or something similar relative to a different sub? I'm not assuming anything negative, the consensus seems to be reasonable price to performance. I'm just trying to get some impressions of where it will fit in the market. For those for whom this would be a good choice, what might be some other products to consider and why would this product stand out?


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

I feel this will be a nice compliment to a system that alredy can reproduce 50Hz - whatever makes you happy at the top end of the frequency spectrum.

You will have a sound and a visceral impact [ to die for ] , if you can accommodate this beast of a driver.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

a$$hole said:


> I feel this will be a nice compliment to a system that alredy can reproduce 50Hz - whatever makes you happy at the top end of the frequency spectrum.
> 
> You will have a sound and a visceral impact [ to die for ] , if you can accommodate this beast of a driver.


That's a fairly specific slice of the market, no? mvw2 seems to be suggesting it is more general purpose than that. What would be your dream implementation for this (specific driver combinations) ?


----------



## JayBee (Oct 6, 2006)

While i still the size is the biggest hinderence in using this driver, it seems to me that it would make a killer sub to mate with a nice 3-way active front that is utilizing larger midbass drivers (7"-8").

The goal of this driver was never to be a W7 killer, but instead to create a sub with a super strong lowend. From all accounts it's not the loudest sub around, but its low end extension is just absolutely sick. That is really why i picked one up in the first pre-order. It was only $250 shipped and i wanted something that could get gut wrenchingly deep. I really liked my old 12A and they were trying to make something similar, that wouldn't destroy itself when it reached xmax. From the time i entered the pre-order, i was able to get all of the things together that i needed to put together a fairly nice system to compliment it.


----------



## innsanes (Feb 8, 2007)

Boostedrex said:


> Thanks to Nguyen for testing this beast and thanks to everyone else that helped in getting that beast out to L.A. for the test. I'm glad to see that this is indeed a good sub. I had recommended it to one of my friends when it was first announced. She got in on the first 25 sold and got hers for like $250 shipped or so. She hasn't installed it yet, but I'll be looking forward to hearing it once it's in.
> 
> And like several others, I'm really pumped to see more testing going on here again. I'd love to have my TC OEM 10 tested, but I think I'm about the only person that's concerned with it since you can't buy them anymore and there weren't that many of them to begin with.
> 
> Zach


I actually own a tc-10 oem myself, havent even hooked it up yet, been so busy. Right now im really loving the ARc Flatline.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

innsanes said:


> I actually own a tc-10 oem myself, havent even hooked it up yet, been so busy. Right now im really loving the ARc Flatline.


I know what you mean. My OEM 10 was supposed to go into my Scion, but I won a DIYMA R12 during last year's Marv BBQ raffles. Once the DIYMA went in the Scion for "testing" I forgot all about the TC.


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

Missed this review. Great to see a new driver review, damn I miss these.

Thanks, npdang for doing one last one.

Boostedrex, I also have a BNIB TC OEM 10 laying around. It is still there due to the DIYMA and the IDQ. Someday I will actually find a use for it.LOL


----------



## 04silverz (May 28, 2008)

good review
yet antoher sub im interested in, yet wont get bc of the steep dropoff above 50 hz. i hate how i love big woofers yet listen to purely heavy metal


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

04silverz said:


> good review
> yet antoher sub im interested in, yet wont get bc of the steep dropoff above 50 hz. i hate how i love big woofers yet listen to purely heavy metal


That's a tuning/equipment issue.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

npdang said:


> An interesting driver. First thing that struck me was the unusually large top plate. Looks like an underhung motor or some variation of one. A nice touch was the gap venting holes. A feature I haven't seen since the days of Lambda Acoustics. Also notice the spacer ring is huge. One thing I didn't like about the spider were the rolls are very tall, and sit somewhat close together. Moving the cone up and down you can see the rolls crumple and pop as you reach higher excursions. Given the resin treatment of the cloth, it might cause excessive wear over time. The surround is quite large, and combined with the huge spider give this driver a tremendous amount of mechanical throw, although you will see the surround crumple the further you move inward. Inductance is quite high for a short coil design, but probably a compromise with powerhandling. I like the cone, very stiff and durable although Imho unattractive. During test, the driver was reasonably quiet, better than say an Idmax v2, but not dead silent like a w7. Not that you would hear it in a box, but it's a sign of good mechanical clearances and design. The frame is quite sturdy, and the motor is beautifully finished and impeccably glued together. On to the test results.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nice


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Can one of the mods change the title ?

13av2 , instead of 12av.2

Thanx !!


----------



## norcalsfinest (Aug 30, 2008)

Owning one of these beasts, lets see if I can clear up some of the questions raised...

1. Linearity: This driver is extremely linear down low, and it does get sickeningly low. 

2. FR: The sub was intended to deliver a powerful low end, and is more geared toward an install with a strong front stage. It does well up to about 63Hz, but you definitely need at least a 3rd Order LP. I run a 4th order LP @ 63Hz.

3. Sound: Everyone wants to compare it to a W7, and IMO that is a fair comparison, as long as you are talking about the 12W7. In my experience, tonality is a draw between the two. Above about 50-55Hz (as npdangs results show) the W7 has a slight advantage (emphasis on slight), but below that the 13Av.2 has the edge. When it comes to the low end of the spectrum, the 13Av.2 is the clear winner. It just goes lower, louder, cleaner, and more effortlessly. The 12W7 rolls off around 18-20Hz, while the 13Av.2 plays right down to 10Hz strong. It's quite amazing to watch, actually.

4. XMax: If I have one comment, it is that the Xmax is very accurate. the spec of 28.75mm one way has been reached, if not exceeded, without bottoming the sub out. But, anything past that and things get very un-linear very quickly

Overall, I'd say the drivers are close, and that it really depends on the system and the goals of the system. If you don't have the midbass to compliment the 13Av.2, I'd definitely buy a W7. But, I'd prefer to use the 13Av.2 in an SQ oriented setup based on the Frequency response. MOST SQ cars are going to run a crossover that suits the 13Av.2 anyways, and the benefit of more linear extension on the bottom is something that I personally prefer.

I've done builds with W7's, in a variety of setups, and have worked for JL dealers.

Either way, you can't go wrong. But for the price and performance of the Av.2, for me it was a no brainer.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Can this sub be used in IB?


----------



## norcalsfinest (Aug 30, 2008)

eD says no, but I believe somewhere I read that someone is doing an IB build with one. I don't see why you couldn't. Possibly due to the relatively weak motor of the underhung design?


----------



## Ricci (Sep 30, 2008)

Interesting test. I don't think it did too bad considering what it costs. I also like the fact that it is a motor limited design.Hopefully ED does a future version with better inductance control and gets some of the cone area back with a different surround (high roll?).


----------



## norcalsfinest (Aug 30, 2008)

Ricci said:


> Interesting test. I don't think it did too bad considering what it costs. I also like the fact that it is a motor limited design.Hopefully ED does a future version with better inductance control and gets some of the cone area back with a different surround (high roll?).


556cm2 Sd and ~29mm xmax, more than a Huge majority of 12" woofers out there. How much cone do you need?


----------



## czechm8 (Oct 15, 2008)

Frequent viewer...........first time poster!

I'm running a sealed 13av.2 on a TRU Hammer and I've been pretty impressed with this driver so far. I picked up two of them on the pre-order and one of the signed first 25. I too have an old 12a and an 8ax so I am familiar with the lineage.
Norcal is right, this thing absolutely kills on the low end and is way more than my ears like with the Hammer doing rated power!
My front is a set of Nobeliums crossed @ 63 Hz/ 6db slope and the 13av.2 really shines crossed that low.

If you really want a treat, run this thing in a ported box! I built a 2.3 cf box tuned to 28 Hz and I just can't get used to that much output in my full sized SUV! I much prefer the sealed setup.

Great review and board! Hope to share more in the future.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 12, 2008)

nice to have ya here czechm8


----------



## czechm8 (Oct 15, 2008)

Ya, I see a lot of familiar names over here!


----------



## norcalsfinest (Aug 30, 2008)

I really stress the strong front stage aspect when using this woofer. I'm sure someone will try to cross it over at 80Hz with weak midbass and complain it blends terribly, but it really is geared more toward a typical SQ cross over point of around 50-60Hz, and in my preference a 3rd or 4th order slope. Unless you have some very very strong 6.5's or a nice set of 8's up front, this probably isn't the right woofer for your needs.


----------

