# New SI BM information



## Electrodynamic

Here is an excerpt from the newsletter I sent out recently:



> In this newsletter I will outline what is happening to the BM series subwoofers. First and foremost almost everything is changing except the size of the voice coil and the shape of the basket. Other than that, everything is being improved.
> 
> The cone/diaphragm has been changed to a two-piece patent-pending design that is more rigid than anything else on the market while maintaining an ultra-shallow profile. The surround has been changed to a normal roll surround. The basket will be painted Lexus metallic white with all of connectors/fasteners being black chrome. The spider is an improved, but still massive, 10" nomex weave. And last but not least the motor is being changed to a 10 disk neo ring that not only improves BL but also makes the unit ~5 lbs lighter. And of course the shorting ring is still being implemented to lower and maintain inductance over stroke which will provide un-paralleled transient response in shallow subwoofers.
> 
> All of these changes are only going to push the start of production back another 30 days. The changes are worth their weight in gold, as the new BM's will now be the highest linear stroke, best performing, best sounding, best looking drivers in the shallow subwoofer arena.


Here are a few pics of the mkII (not the final version):

Here you go:


































And here are renderings of what the BM's motor is going to look like:


----------



## [email protected]

so 30 days and they are shipping?


----------



## AndyInOC

THAT is a very impressive shallow mount


----------



## Inferno333

Me likey!


----------



## Electrodynamic

BeatsDownLow said:


> so 30 days and they are shipping?


No, it's just pushing production back another 30 days.  I'll let you guys know the process though. 

However, signing up for our newsletter is the quickest way to get the most up to date information.


----------



## thehatedguy

That's a good looking shallow woofer.

Having just got a Black Onyx IS300, BO would be a sexier color than WDP.


----------



## Boostedrex

Looking forward to seeing/hearing that sub in 2 days from now Nick. Looking nice though.


----------



## mSaLL150

Put me down for 2 of them!

Is the new motor going to change the depth at all, or are we still looking at ~3.5" mounting depth? Will the changes affect the original .5cu ft airspace recommendation?


----------



## Electrodynamic

The motor changes won't affect the depth at all. Overall mounting depth is still going to be 3.5" but when mounted on a piece of wood that is 3/4" thick it only needs 2.75" of internal depth. The depth won't change at all because the motor is inside the basket even though the motor is a mm or two thinner. And yes, the enclosure size is still going to be 0.5 ft^3 sealed.


----------



## dawgdan

any rough ETA for this? I saw the pushing production back another 30 days comment.


----------



## Boostedrex

Electrodynamic said:


> The motor changes won't affect the depth at all. Overall mounting depth is still going to be 3.5" but when mounted on a piece of wood that is 3/4" thick it only needs 2.75" of internal depth. The depth won't change at all because the motor is inside the basket even though the motor is a mm or two thinner. And yes, the enclosure size is still going to be 0.5 ft^3 sealed.


And I don't know if it has been asked or not Nick, but how much room do you need to leave between the back of the sub and the rear wall of the box? Any pole venting space needed?


----------



## Electrodynamic

Boostedrex said:


> And I don't know if it has been asked or not Nick, but how much room do you need to leave between the back of the sub and the rear wall of the box? Any pole venting space needed?


The new motor parts are being sourced and tooled, so we don't have an ETA for them yet. When we do, it will be released in one of our newsletters.

Technically you don't have to leave space behind the pole because the pole sits about 2mm in from the very back of the driver. However, for optimum performance, I would leave 1/4" behind the driver, which would make the internal box height an even 3".


----------



## Riveted1

I've been waiting for these things to come out since you first announced them. Man it's been a long wait! But I'm glad you're taking the time to make sure it is right. I'm just not so sure about that white color.... :blush:


----------



## Electrodynamic

Riveted1 said:


> I've been waiting for these things to come out since you first announced them. Man it's been a long wait! But I'm glad you're taking the time to make sure it is right. I'm just not so sure about that white color.... :blush:


No one's sure about any color.  No matter what color I say the basket is going to be painted, people always want something different. If it's black or grey, it's too normal. But if it's another color, it's not the right color. I want white, so that's what you're getting.


----------



## Boostedrex

Electrodynamic said:


> Technically you don't have to leave space behind the pole because the pole sits about 2mm in from the very back of the driver. However, for optimum performance, I would leave 1/4" behind the driver, which would make the internal box height an even 3".


Now that's what I'm talking about! Nice!!


----------



## Electrodynamic

You guys will get to play around with the mkII (the one pictured) at the meet.   I'm building a box for it tonight so we can shove it in anyone's vehicle who wants to hear it.


----------



## mSaLL150

Boostedrex said:


> Now that's what I'm talking about! Nice!!


x2! Awesome space requirements. These things really will disappear in my truck (no pun intended ).



Electrodynamic said:


> You guys will get to play around with the mkII (the one pictured) at the meet.   I'm building a box for it tonight so we can shove it in anyone's vehicle who wants to hear it.


If you guys get a chance, toss it under the backseat of ARCuhTEK's F150 and see how it sounds placed there. I have the same exact vehicle.


----------



## Riveted1

Electrodynamic said:


> No one's sure about any color.  No matter what color I say the basket is going to be painted, people always want something different. If it's black or grey, it's too normal. But if it's another color, it's not the right color. I want white, so that's what you're getting.


Ya I understand. Opinions are like assholes. It just seems like black or grey is more universal. Mine will be hidden anyway, so I guess it won't really matter :laugh:


----------



## Electrodynamic

I just listened to the little sucker in 0.5 ft^3 for an hour. The result was really good - it sounds exactly like I anticipated it to sound. I'll post more on how it sounds later on because I'm super tired right now.


----------



## [email protected]

do you have a price point for these?


----------



## Electrodynamic

Not yet.


----------



## el_chupo_

Nick, any T/S specs we can ogle over?


----------



## Electrodynamic

Nope. Sorry guys. 

This isn't the final version, so the T/S's will be significantly different on this unit than the final driver. You guys won't like that it doesn't reach a .707 in the recommended box anyway (even though Qtc means d*ck in a car as long as it's below a 2.0 (2.0 is where you start hearing differences) - the only thing you should be concerned about is the F3 in the target enclosure). As long as the F3 is ~ 50'ish Hz, you're golden due to the 12 dB / octave gain you get in a car compared to the 12 dB / octave loss you have with a sealed box. The end result is a flat response down to 20 Hz.  But anyway, this version is substantially different than what the final version is going to be. We're literally re-tooling the entire motor including the switch to neo over ferrite, which will shift the parameters quite a bit.


----------



## VP Electricity

You look at Joseph's/Earthquakes' patent on "flat" woofers? Any design-arounds?


----------



## DS-21

Interesting. 12 only or any plans on doing a 10 as well?


----------



## Electrodynamic

We're not encroaching on anyone else's patent. The carrier we have is completely proprietary. The motor is also completely custom. And we tooled up our own 10" spider too, so that's custom as well. The BM v2 is a no-holds barred approach to extreme performance out of a shallow package. 

Right now it is only going to be a 12" unit. We're not saying that we're not thinking about doing a 10" later, but at least for the first year the BM v2 will only be a 12" unit.


----------



## ItalynStylion

What's the back of the motor look like? What kind of venting is there underneath the spider?


----------



## Electrodynamic

ItalynStylion said:


> What's the back of the motor look like? What kind of venting is there underneath the spider?


Directly behind the motor looks like a solid backplate with a pole vent. There are 12 ~18mm rectangular holes for venting.


----------



## VP Electricity

Electrodynamic said:


> We're not encroaching on anyone else's patent.


Never said you were, dude. Asked if there were design arounds. Figured you might actually address his claims and explain how your design is different. Given your response, I think I'll repeat myself. If you have looked at his patent, I would think you could speak to his claims and to how you do things differently. If you haven't looked at it, you wouldn't know if you were infringing. 



Electrodynamic said:


> The carrier we have is completely proprietary.


Beside the point. 



Electrodynamic said:


> The motor is also completely custom.


X2.



Electrodynamic said:


> And we tooled up our own 10" spider too, so that's custom as well.


X3. 



Electrodynamic said:


> The BM v2 is a no-holds barred approach to extreme performance out of a shallow package.


Is that the tag line from the box? As a product manager, whenever I see the phrase "no-holds-barred", I giggle. 

To repeat, I am not accusing you of anything - I'm just asking for someone who is making a flat woofer to explain how their design avoids some existing IP, that's all.


----------



## Electrodynamic

VP Electricity said:


> Never said you were, dude. Asked if there were design arounds. Figured you might actually address his claims and explain how your design is different. Given your response, I think I'll repeat myself. If you have looked at his patent, I would think you could speak to his claims and to how you do things differently. If you haven't looked at it, you wouldn't know if you were infringing.


And I think I'll repeat myself as well. Given your questioning even after looking at the pictures I've supplied it should be obvious as to how we are not infringing on his patent. 




> Beside the point.


Actually it is part of the point. Our carrier, coil, diaphragm, and suspension is not field-replaceable and does not extend to the bottom of the basket as stated in patent 6861352. The carrier also de-couples the voice coil former from being directly attached to the diaphragm/cone, which is another part of his patent. His patent is very specific to a certain kind of shallow loudspeaker, including, but not limited to, the suspension and the motor, all of which ours is not. 



> Is that the tag line from the box? As a product manager, whenever I see the phrase "no-holds-barred", I giggle.
> 
> To repeat, I am not accusing you of anything - I'm just asking for someone who is making a flat woofer to explain how their design avoids some existing IP, that's all.


As per the latter, it doesn't really matter what I type because it might be a marketing phrase, right? Maybe I should say something else when I'm referring to our driver that has the highest Xmax to overall height ratio on the market. If you have any idea's I'm all ears. We haven't even begun working on the box yet.


----------



## bose301s

To VP Electricity

I would have to assume that someone in the business of making a shallow mount sub would look at the patents out there and do their best to avoid infringing on them, no one wants an IP lawsuit on their hands, especially a small company like SI that can't fight it like a JL or other big companies could.

Also, why are only on SI's case? There are multitudes of shallow drivers out there from JL, MTX, Kicker, Pioneer, Kenwood, Memphis, RE and many more yet you don't seem to be questioning them. I think you are succumbing to the fact that you can question the designer/owner of SI and get under his skin. I know I have done that before with other owners on the internet, it just made me come off as a dickhead as this is making you come off as one. If you really want to know be nice, it worked much better for me when I was, or take it to PMs, I am sure Nick would be happy to talk to you.


----------



## Boostedrex

I hate that I wasn't able to stick around long enough to hear the BM last Friday. I can tell you guys that it's a really nice looking driver in person. And the fact that you can get it in such a shallow box is GREAT!

Nick, you mentioned something in an earlier post that caught my eye. Shooting for a target F3 of 50Hz and letting cabin gain step in the level the response down to 20Hz is exactly why I love my current subs. It seems that the BM is going to resemble that sub a lot in response. Am I right in assuming that? I can't wait to get a pair of these from you, put a move on it man!! 

Zach


----------



## Electrodynamic

That is correct - in a car it'll be flat to 20 Hz without a problem.


----------



## ItalynStylion

Electrodynamic said:


> That is correct - in a car it'll be flat to 20 Hz without a problem.


Graphically flat or perceptually flat?


----------



## DanWiggins

VP Electricity said:


> Never said you were, dude. Asked if there were design arounds. Figured you might actually address his claims and explain how your design is different. Given your response, I think I'll repeat myself. If you have looked at his patent, I would think you could speak to his claims and to how you do things differently. If you haven't looked at it, you wouldn't know if you were infringing.


Hi VP,

Anyone who has read the Earthquake patent would see it is trivial to design around; there is one independent claim and several dependents, meaning if you can get around the independent (claim 1) you have gotten around all claims.

And the easiest way to do that is to get around the very first line in that claim: a removable/replaceable cone and voice coil.

Note that, if you could replace the cone, voice coil AND suspension (surround and damper) as a single unit, you would also get around the Earthquake patent; Mr. Sahyoun is very specific about cone and voice coil only being replaceable, so any design that also had a replaceable cone, voice coil, surround and spider would be an improvement on his design, and not violate the patent.


----------



## Electrodynamic

ItalynStylion said:


> Graphically flat or perceptually flat?


It depends on your ears.


----------



## ItalynStylion

Electrodynamic said:


> It depends on your ears.


Tee hee


----------



## snaimpally

DanWiggins said:


> Hi VP,
> 
> Anyone who has read the Earthquake patent would see it is trivial to design around; there is one independent claim and several dependents, meaning if you can get around the independent (claim 1) you have gotten around all claims.
> 
> And the easiest way to do that is to get around the very first line in that claim: a removable/replaceable cone and voice coil.
> 
> Note that, if you could replace the cone, voice coil AND suspension (surround and damper) as a single unit, you would also get around the Earthquake patent; Mr. Sahyoun is very specific about cone and voice coil only being replaceable, so any design that also had a replaceable cone, voice coil, surround and spider would be an improvement on his design, and not violate the patent.


Wow! What a ridiculous limitation to put in an indep. claim. I doubt that a removeable/replaceable cone and voice coil is novel so why even bother putting it in an indep. claim? This limitation properly belongs in a dep. claim. I wonder if it was drafted like that originally or whether the limitation was added during prosecution to get around the cited art.

The BM is based on a design licensed from Dan Wiggins. The patent pending design Nick refers to is Dan's design. Very cool that he is a member of the forum.


----------



## VP Electricity

DanWiggins said:


> Hi VP,
> 
> Anyone who has read the Earthquake patent would see it is trivial to design around;


Anyone smart enough to read a patent knows not to assume what another's design around would be. I just asked what it was. I got tap-dancing. No reason to try to impugn *me* just because _your_ guy couldn't answer the question and had to go ask for help from a grownup. Obviously HE hadn't read it... 

Other than that, clear answer, thanks for specifically responding to the question.


----------



## ItalynStylion

VP Electricity said:


> Anyone smart enough to read a patent knows not to assume what another's design around would be. I just asked what it was. I got tap-dancing. *No reason to try to impugn me just because your guy couldn't answer the question and had to go ask for help from a grownup.* Obviously HE hadn't read it...
> 
> Other than that, clear answer, thanks for specifically responding to the question.


Hey...cut that **** out and play nice.

Get your facts straight. Nick didn't even contact Dan. I talked to Dan about this thread and asked that he comment and clear up any shenanigans going on in here. Nick is an honest and hard working guy, lay off him.

Geez...I ****ing hate drama


----------



## VP Electricity

Oh, go breathe into a paper bag. 

I have never said anything bad about either of these people or their woofers, or their niceness or lack thereof, or their work habits. I am certain they work hard and are kindhearted. 
I just asked a question, got tap-dancing, asked it again, and YOU (sorry for getting my "facts" wrong  went and got a grownup, who made a crack about how dumb I must be for not knowing the answer before I asked the question. 

I have never made any critical comments about this product or personal comments about those selling it... And all I get is smart as comments. Fine, go right ahead. 

Guess I won't bring up the JL patent as a topic... 

Seriously, how are we supposed to know the answers to these kind of questions? Hope you read our minds? 



ItalynStylion said:


> Hey...cut that **** out and play nice.
> 
> Get your facts straight. Nick didn't even contact Dan. I talked to Dan about this thread and asked that he comment and clear up any shenanigans going on in here. Nick is an honest and hard working guy, lay off him.
> 
> Geez...I ****ing hate drama


----------



## Electrodynamic

snaimpally said:


> The BM is based on a design licensed from Dan Wiggins. The patent pending design Nick refers to is Dan's design. Very cool that he is a member of the forum.


The motor technology, XBL^2, is Dan's for sure.


----------



## DanWiggins

VP Electricity said:


> Anyone smart enough to read a patent knows not to assume what another's design around would be. I just asked what it was. I got tap-dancing. No reason to try to impugn *me* just because _your_ guy couldn't answer the question and had to go ask for help from a grownup. Obviously HE hadn't read it...
> 
> Other than that, clear answer, thanks for specifically responding to the question.


Nick is "not my guy", he's a client. You brought up the red herring of the patent, and you got upset that no one really paid attention to you. If you can't understand patents then I'd suggest taking a bit more humble tone. As an old professor of mine used to say "I can fix ignorance; attitude, not so much".


----------



## DanWiggins

ItalynStylion said:


> Geez...I ****ing hate drama


And people wonder why I got worn out from the car audio group... Perhaps I should just go back to the bench and factories, and leave the consumer crap alone...


----------



## James Bang

perhaps.


----------



## monkeybutt

James Bang said:


> perhaps.


Alright, here we go...this is gonna be good?:worried:


----------



## koneco

Looking gooooooooooood.


----------



## rrNewbie

Oh guys seems a good design.
I can't wait a review!


----------



## Electrodynamic

I would send out the current version for demo use, but it would be kind of fruitless because the new neo version is going to perform better. The current proto is just sitting in my living room though. Hrmm.....


----------



## Boostedrex

Hmmmm indeed sir. LOL!


----------



## Electrodynamic

'you want it to play around with? I asked Jason, but he hasn't responded yet.


----------



## Boostedrex

Send it on out. I'll put it through it's paces out here. I'd also like to see just how easy I could get it under the front seat of the xB. Is the neo version going to have the same mounting depth and airspace requirements?


----------



## Electrodynamic

Yep, the neo will have the same air space requirements and it will be the same depth as well. The biggest difference will be the weight of the mkIII compared to the mkII that you'll receive (about 8 lbs less weight for the newer version).


----------



## Electrodynamic

...and to think that I _almost_ threw away the packing box that the BM came in yesterday but I thought "you know what, I may send this puppy off to someone."


----------



## Boostedrex

Good thinking meng.  Just let me know the details via PM and we'll go from there. I can't wait. Especially since I didn't get to hear it at the meet.


----------



## subwoofery

Electrodynamic said:


> Yep, the neo will have the same air space requirements and it will be the same depth as well. The biggest difference will be the weight of the mkIII compared to the mkII that you'll receive (about 8 lbs less weight for the newer version).


When I hear all the new goodies that have been included into the BM alone, I feel that the price will be "Mag's price" around $250.00 *BUT* even though the Mag is your Top of the range, the BM will still use its purpose... 

Kelvin 

PS: Want to try and squeeze 3 x BMs where others can't


----------



## mSaLL150

If I lifted my rear seat 2" I could fit a box with 2.1 cubes = 4 BMs 

Crap I need more powa


----------



## Boostedrex

Hmmm, 4 BM's huh? Sounds like I need to hook you up with a new mono block Marc.  Start saving up meng!

Also, I'll be getting a hold of you once the BM gets here and I get the box put together for it. I figure that you'll be pretty interested in getting to hear it in your truck.


----------



## Electrodynamic

Low and behold, Jason finally responded.  Zach, I'm going to ship it to him first. It should only take 1 day to get to him once I ship it since he's in NC just like us. Then after he's done with it I'll help him out with the shipping out to you.


----------



## koneco

Let me know when these things ship, will ya? Hopefully I'll have a raise by then and can have some fun with 'em. I'm more interested in the BM as a home theater sub than a car sub. My ported POS is waaaaaay too large for just a ten.

Anybody familiar with turning car subs into home theater subs?


----------



## [email protected]

koneco said:


> Let me know when these things ship, will ya? Hopefully I'll have a raise by then and can have some fun with 'em. I'm more interested in the BM as a home theater sub than a car sub. My ported POS is waaaaaay too large for just a ten.
> 
> *Anybody familiar with turning car subs into home theater subs*?


A sub is a sub, might have a different load on the amp, but besides that it is a sub


----------



## mSaLL150

Boostedrex said:


> Hmmm, 4 BM's huh? Sounds like I need to hook you up with a new mono block Marc.  Start saving up meng!
> 
> Also, I'll be getting a hold of you once the BM gets here and I get the box put together for it. I figure that you'll be pretty interested in getting to hear it in your truck.


Im kidding, 2 BMs is much more practical. Can't wait to hear it!


----------



## koneco

BeatsDownLow said:


> A sub is a sub, might have a different load on the amp, but besides that it is a sub


I suppose you're right, but a car amp ain't gonna work on AC power, right?


----------



## Boostedrex

Electrodynamic said:


> Low and behold, Jason finally responded.  Zach, I'm going to ship it to him first. It should only take 1 day to get to him once I ship it since he's in NC just like us. Then after he's done with it I'll help him out with the shipping out to you.


Sounds good meng. I'll give Jason a call and talk to him about it.


----------



## Electrodynamic

I'll keep you updated as long as you sign up for our newsletter.  That is the fastest way to keep up to date on the BM's progress. I always email our reps first and then a newsletter goes out and lastly the forum is updated. 

mSaLL, you can do 2, but I'm going to do 4!! I can fit 4 of them under the factory carpet in the spare tire area. 'Gotta love that 0.5 ft^3 requirement and shallow depth!


----------



## danssoslow

koneco said:


> I suppose you're right, but a car amp ain't gonna work on AC power, right?


It doesn't have to be powered by a car amp. There are many AC amps that will power a BM or any other sub. Check Parts Express, and be mindful of the impedance when looking for an amp.


----------



## mSaLL150

Electrodynamic said:


> mSaLL, you can do 2, but I'm going to do 4!! I can fit 4 of them under the factory carpet in the spare tire area. 'Gotta love that 0.5 ft^3 requirement and shallow depth!


heh if I had an unlimited budget I could probably do 20 something BMs in the bed of my truck.  4 will be sweet though. 

I'll see what I can do as far as airspace under my rear seats. I have a feeling these things are gonna be huge for the pickup truck market. Right now the only shallow mount 12s out there that are anything worth looking into are the Exiles. I'd imagine that the BM should be in a league of its own when considering the depth, airspace, and most importantly the performance.


----------



## cjlawrnc24

i am learning so much


----------



## Boostedrex

Nick, I talked to Jason and we'll work out the shipping to me once he's done with the MKII proto.

I already have 4-5 guys here who want to check it out and throw it in their car. I'm going to put it in a .5ft^3 net sealed box as per your recommendations. I'm curious to hear people's thoughts on it. I'm more curious to see just how easily I can get one of these things under the front seat of my xB.


----------



## slade1274

Zach, Nick,
Put me on the distro list as well, I'm sure there are some folks near ATL that would like to hear it. Don't know how big Erin's GTG is going to be on the 25th, but that should be some good PR as well.



subwoofery said:


> ......
> 
> PS: Want to try and squeeze 3 x BMs where others can't


Oh, and this almost deserves a quote in someone's signature:laugh:


----------



## Electrodynamic

PM Jason on here and ask him about shipping it to you before Zach gets it. It should only take 1-2 days to get there, and you're right, it'll be neat for people to hear it even though it's not going to perform as well as the mkIII. It's decently close enough though.


----------



## Boostedrex

Sounds like a good idea to me as well. It wouldn't make sense for J to ship it to me only for me to turn around and ship it back to GA.


----------



## Electrodynamic

cjlawrnc24 said:


> i am learning so much


First post FTW!!!!


----------



## slade1274

Electrodynamic said:


> PM Jason on here and ask him about shipping it to you before Zach gets it. It should only take 1-2 days to get there, and you're right, it'll be neat for people to hear it even though it's not going to perform as well as the mkIII. It's decently close enough though.


Consider it done- I'll probably talk to him sometime this week anyway.



Electrodynamic said:


> First post FTW!!!!


First post with comment that they're learning FTW. Better than the redundant first post of "Best XXXXXX"


----------



## audiofanatic01

I just keep waiting week after week for some new BM info.  But I no the day will come and velvet ropes will part and champagne will fall from the heavens.


----------



## Boostedrex

audiofanatic01 said:


> I just keep waiting week after week for some new BM info.  But I no the day will come and velvet ropes will part and champagne will fall from the heavens.


Calm down Mr. Cage. LOL!


----------



## 1sashenka

I vote to have a pre-sale on these puppies, so that some of us can get straight to the triple or quad set-ups 

If I go with the quad set-up, I will most likely have them all layed out in the trunk facing up. However, over the years I have grown to love my subs facing the rear, and adjusted my T.A. accordingly. I wonder if having four subs in the trunk facing up would force me to change settings. I sure hope not, as my settings are right on the nose these days. Kinda weary about having subs facing up, but I could make a nice enclosure and make a beauty of a trunk.

Also, I suppose BM's will come in dual 4 ohm configs, so that four of them will show 2 ohms final mode, or 1/2 ohm for those Sundowners.


----------



## Electrodynamic

The reason they're being made in dual 4 Ohm is the anticipation that most people will be using them in pairs off of a 1000 watt amplifier and they can have a 1 Ohm load. And there are plenty of amps that will deliver 500 watts into a 2 Ohm load as well (even most 1000 watt @ 1 Ohm amps do roughly 500 watts @ 2 Ohm).


----------



## MXracer115

These subs are only gonna handle 250 watts rms?


----------



## Electrodynamic

500 watts RMS in their recommended enclosure (0.5 ft^3). Who said 250 watts? *edit* I see where you may have gotten that from my post above. Since these are dual 4 Ohm subwoofers you can run a pair of them off of an amplifier that produces 1000 watts at 1 Ohm or you can run a single driver off of an amplifier that produces 500 watts at 2 Ohm.


----------



## MXracer115

I see. How do you think these will sound in a .6-.7 ft enclosure


----------



## Electrodynamic

They'll perform great in slightly larger enclosures, but power handling will go down. In 0.6 to 0.7 you're looking at ~400 to 450 watts of power handling, which is no big deal because it's only a couple tenths of a decibel quieter than 500 watts.


----------



## MXracer115

If I have a jl 1000/1 could I still use that? Or do you think it'll be too much?


----------



## Electrodynamic

For a single BM, a 1000/1 is way overkill. Your 1000/1 is better suited towards a Mag and not a BM. But for two or three BM's, the 1000/1 will be just fine.


----------



## MXracer115

Itll be powering two subs. I have a box for two 12s, with about .65-.7 ft per driver


----------



## Boostedrex

Something else that I think people are starting to lose track of already is just because a sub can handle 500 watts RMS doesn't mean that it needs it. If the new BM's are anything like the Mag, they will only need 200-300 watts to be amazing! Just speaking IME with the Mag here. I'll attest to the power needs of the BM after I get it here.


----------



## Electrodynamic

^ Exactly. The Mag's don't need anywhere near 1000 watts to perform well, and the BM's will be the same way; they don't need 500 watts to perform well. Anything from 200 to 400 watts is wherethe BM's will be happiest. If you have an amp that is at the limit of the BM's, be sure to keep the gain turned down and to not over drive them. They are very similar to the Mag's in the aspect of not distorting at all until they bottom out. You won't hear the driver stressing before it bottoms out, it'll just bottom out without a warning. That's the only drawback to a linear motor.


----------



## mSaLL150

Electrodynamic said:


> They are very similar to the Mag's in the aspect of not distorting at all until they bottom out. You won't hear the driver stressing before it bottoms out, it'll just bottom out without a warning. That's the only drawback to a linear motor.


I am noticing that with these Adire Kodas too. They are super efficient as well, they get going off very little power.


----------



## F1Audio

I hope these come out real soon. I am planning my amp purchase around them. I want just one. The amp I am looking at is a 4 ch. that will do 400x2 @ 4 ohms bridged. Should work nicely, yes? I might have to go ahead with the Mag if the BM is a bit late.


----------



## Electrodynamic

F1Audio said:


> I hope these come out real soon. I am planning my amp purchase around them. I want just one. The amp I am looking at is a 4 ch. that will do 400x2 @ 4 ohms bridged. Should work nicely, yes? I might have to go ahead with the Mag if the BM is a bit late.


The BM's are going to be dual 4 Ohm, so with a single driver you'll have a 2 Ohm load or an 8 Ohm load.


----------



## F1Audio

Not if I run them in stereo....400x2 in stereo....800 total for the sub.


----------



## subwoofery

F1Audio said:


> Not if I run them in stereo....400x2 in stereo....800 total for the sub.


Still going to be 200rms per sub... unless I'm missing something 

Kelvin


----------



## F1Audio

You missed where I said I am only going to be running a single sub.


----------



## Electrodynamic

You'll be almost doubling the power that a BM can handle. It's rated at 500 watts RMS maximum in 0.5 ft^3. It won't handle 800 watts at all. If you open your amp on a single BM you're going to have a heavy expensive pancake paper weight in no time.


----------



## F1Audio

Thanks Nick. That is what I was trying to get at. If it will not handle it, I will look at a different amp. Or I will find out how that particular amp will handle an 8 ohm load bridged.


----------



## bsvrs

Can we PLEASE get some listening impressions? I'm about to die waiting on this thing.


----------



## Electrodynamic

bertholomy has the mkII right now. He, slade, and a few others got to listen to it at the DIYMA meet in NC a few months ago. But he's got the mkII version now and should post up something soon. Speaking of which, I'll shoot him a PM and ask him how the listening is going.


----------



## ealvar

Electrodynamic said:


> bertholomy has the mkII right now. He, slade, and a few others got to listen to it at the DIYMA meet in NC a few months ago. But he's got the mkII version now and should post up something soon. Speaking of which, I'll shoot him a PM and ask him how the listening is going.


Now that you have a few prototypes floating around is there new info on pricing?

Curious to see where these fall in comparision to other slim subs like the eD, Tang Band, Memphis, JL, RE SL, etc.

I currently have an eD SQ10 getting pushed by about 240w and I like it, but it just doesn't dig deep enough and would like more output.


----------



## Electrodynamic

It's only one prototype that is being sent out right now. And the only reason it's being sent out is for a few people to play around with it. It's the mkII version, so it's not the final neo version which is going to perform better. Once we get data on the mkIII version we may release projected pricing but the actual pricing on the drivers won't be released until production starts. Right now it's looking to be a tad bit more expensive than we initially planned for 2 years ago. But that's what happens when you end up tooling almost every single piece. Don't worry though, we may throw a special or two to help with pricing. 

When the mkIII prototype gets here, that little sucker is going out to a few select people to review in anticipation for the production run showing up. That is, of course, after we put it through its paces! 

...I'm going to send bertholomy another PM.


----------



## invinsible

So when can we expect it to release? How would dual SI BM setup sound against single Si MAG v4 ?


----------



## Electrodynamic

We will provide a release date through our newsletter followed by our forum when a date is finalized. 

Twin BM's will probably be louder than a single Mag due to surface area alone. They'll sound different because they're a different driver all together, but they'll still sound good.


----------



## ealvar

Electrodynamic said:


> It's only one prototype that is being sent out right now. And the only reason it's being sent out is for a few people to play around with it. It's the mkII version, so it's not the final neo version which is going to perform better. Once we get data on the mkIII version we may release projected pricing but the actual pricing on the drivers won't be released until production starts. Right now it's looking to be a tad bit more expensive than we initially planned for 2 years ago. But that's what happens when you end up tooling almost every single piece. Don't worry though, we may throw a special or two to help with pricing.
> 
> When the mkIII prototype gets here, that little sucker is going out to a few select people to review in anticipation for the production run showing up. That is, of course, after we put it through its paces!
> 
> ...I'm going to send bertholomy another PM.


Thanks for the additional info. Keep us posted!

There certainly is a lot of excitement surrounding the release of the BM drivers. Congrats on keeping us on our toes 

E


----------



## bsvrs

So when you say a tad more expensive.. Are we still talking under 200 a piece or is it up around the Mag price now?


----------



## Electrodynamic

It's projecting to be up around/above the price of a Mag now. But like I mentioned, we'll do anything we can to keep it below the cost of a Mag with group buys, maybe a 30-day special, etc. 

PS: I don't think we ever said sub-$200 either. Maybe we did, but that was years ago. The target was always to keep it around the $200 mark, but the driver has evolved into something much more complex than we initially thought it was going to be.


----------



## Boostedrex

Even at a Mag's price point it's not like that would be offensive. Look at the price tag of a JL TW5 woofer.  Just keep your focus on making a quality sub Nick and I have no doubt that it will sell itself.

Zach


----------



## ItalynStylion

Nick, if you can bring the sub in under $300 it would still be a bargain IMO, hell, even $350. I get questions all the time about subwoofer and audio suggestions and I think about half of those questions I answer with, "The SI BM would be your perfect solution without a doubt....but I don't know when it's coming out."

I've had to turn away so much business for you man it breaks my heart. Get this thing done so I can send you some customers!!!!


----------



## Electrodynamic

ItalynStylion said:


> Nick, if you can bring the sub in under $300 it would still be a bargain IMO, hell, even $350. I get questions all the time about subwoofer and audio suggestions and I think about half of those questions I answer with, "The SI BM would be your perfect solution without a doubt....but I don't know when it's coming out."
> 
> I've had to turn away so much business for you man it breaks my heart. Get this thing done so I can send you some customers!!!!


Yeah, no joke! You guys have no idea how many emails I've gotten about the BM's. It makes me sick to have to keep telling everyone that there is no ETA or pricing yet. 

However, it *will* be under $290 shipped for sure. To be honest, I want to keep it at/below the cost of the current Mag. I'll let all of you know about results/pricing/ETA's as soon as possible.


----------



## slade1274

ItalynStylion said:


> Nick, if you can bring the sub in under $300 it would still be a bargain IMO, hell, even $350.....


LIES LIES LIES!!!!

Keep your target where it is!


----------



## Problemhouston

Electrodynamic said:


> They'll perform great in slightly larger enclosures, but power handling will go down. In 0.6 to 0.7 you're looking at ~400 to 450 watts of power handling, which is no big deal because it's only a couple tenths of a decibel quieter than 500 watts.


So what's to gain by putting them in a larger than .5 enclosure? low end extension?


----------



## snaimpally

VP Electricity said:


> Anyone smart enough to read a patent knows not to assume what another's design around would be. I just asked what it was.


For anyone smart enough to read a patent, the design around the Earthquake patent is _trivial_. If the patent being designed around recites a limitation of two specific field replaceable parts, you can either have more or fewer, or different field replaceable parts and then you don't infringe. Had I written it, I might have written one independent claim with a limitation of "_at least two field_ replaceable parts" to cover someone designing around by having more than two, with dependent claims covering the various parts.


----------



## snaimpally

On a non-patent related note, I'm still looking forward to checking these puppies out. Its been a long wait. I was beginning to think they were vaporware.


----------

