# Opinions on Tang Band Shallow 12" sub?



## stryfe (Sep 28, 2009)

WQ-1814S

Parts Express Page
Parts-Express.com:Tang Band WQ-1814S 12" Subwoofer | Tang Band WQ-1814S 12" Woofer tb speakers sub driver neodymium line array home theater computer speaker car speaker in-wall subwoofer inwall sub shallow mount

Spec Sheet
http://www.parts-express.com/pdf/264-896s.pdf


----------



## NSTar (Feb 24, 2010)

looks like one of those mk III


----------



## AAAAAAA (Oct 5, 2007)

Looks neet, they also have a shallow 8, I am sure PE will get it soon to.


----------



## stryfe (Sep 28, 2009)

NSTar said:


> looks like one of those mk III


I was thinking the same...will need to compare the spec sheets side by side.


----------



## skydeaner (Mar 25, 2006)

wow, very expensive for what it is. Doesn't Pioneer have a shallow sub that performs very well? I think i remember a review that praised it. I don't have time to look around though, so i would check out the pioneer stuff.


----------



## stryfe (Sep 28, 2009)

skydeaner said:


> wow, very expensive for what it is. Doesn't Pioneer have a shallow sub that performs very well? I think i remember a review that praised it. I don't have time to look around though, so i would check out the pioneer stuff.




I have one of the Pioneer shallow subs, and yeah....I like it...but I'll always keep my eyes open and ear to the ground.


----------



## MrDave (May 19, 2008)

I can't imagine these really functioning as subs. The xmax is so limited. There are midbass drivers with as shallow a mounting depth and greater xmax.


----------



## blacklisthunter (Dec 3, 2008)

What about the new Dayton Shallow subs the NS series.

Parts-Express.comayton NS310-44 12" Neodymium Low-Profile DVC Subwoofer | Dayton Audio NS310-44 12" Neodymium Subwoofer Neo DVC Subwoofer dual voice coil low frequency sub lf in-wall inwall shallow bass home theater low profile NS Series

xmax is a little better.


I honestly don't mean to thread jack.. i just saw this new DA sub...


----------



## ellocojorge (Sep 30, 2009)

why not just go with the polk mm120dvc?


----------



## stryfe (Sep 28, 2009)

ellocojorge said:


> why not just go with the polk mm120dvc?


Almost 5 inch mounting depth.....would be tough to use in my vehicle.


----------



## stryfe (Sep 28, 2009)

blacklisthunter said:


> What about the new Dayton Shallow subs the NS series.
> 
> Parts-Express.comayton NS310-44 12" Neodymium Low-Profile DVC Subwoofer | Dayton Audio NS310-44 12" Neodymium Subwoofer Neo DVC Subwoofer dual voice coil low frequency sub lf in-wall inwall shallow bass home theater low profile NS Series
> 
> ...


No worries...glad you brought it up


----------



## Electrodynamic (Nov 27, 2007)

NSTar said:


> looks like one of those mk III


Are you saying that the TB shallow subwoofer looks like the BM mkIII? About the only thing they have in common is a flat diapragm. They are different mechanically and electrically (T/S's), and even have different baskets. They're both shallow though.  



stryfe said:


> I was thinking the same...will need to compare the spec sheets side by side.


The TB is shallower than the BM mkIII (2.8" compared to 3.4"), has a larger diameter voice coil (5" vs 2.5"), and has lower inductance. The BM mkIII has over triple the linear stroke (14mm compared to 4mm), higher power handling (450 vs 300), operates in the same size sealed enclosure, plays lower, and has a much lower Fs (16 Hz vs 35 Hz). I think the PE might be in stock though, where the BM mkIII's aren't.


----------



## stryfe (Sep 28, 2009)

Electrodynamic said:


> Are you saying that the TB shallow subwoofer looks like the BM mkIII? About the only thing they have in common is a flat diapragm. They are different mechanically and electrically (T/S's), and even have different baskets. They're both shallow though.
> 
> 
> 
> The TB is shallower than the BM mkIII (2.8" compared to 3.4"), has a larger diameter voice coil (5" vs 2.5"), and has lower inductance. The BM mkIII has over triple the linear stroke (14mm compared to 4mm), higher power handling (450 vs 300), operates in the same size sealed enclosure, plays lower, and has a much lower Fs (16 Hz vs 35 Hz). I think the PE might be in stock though, where the BM mkIII's aren't.


Well that just about sums it up! Thanks


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

What about Earthquake's SWS series? They were one of the first on the market.


----------



## NSTar (Feb 24, 2010)

Check out the polk mm series.


----------



## sleepingciv (Mar 2, 2010)

looks like they would play some rock n roll real good. i know my old ppi's i had look kinda like these, they did decent.


----------



## dantonel (Mar 30, 2010)

NSTar said:


> Check out the polk mm series.


Polk: 

# 12" subwoofer with dual 4-ohm voice coils
# polymer cone with butyl rubber surround
# carbon composite basket
# certified for marine use
# optional matching grille complements the basket design
# power range: 100-425 watts RMS (212 watts RMS per coil)
# peak power handling: 850 watts
# frequency response: 27-200 Hz
# sensitivity: 88 dB
# top-mount depth: 4-11/16"
# sealed box volume: 0.88 cubic fee


SI:

* 12" subwoofer
* 3.5" mounting depth <----------
* 10" diameter nomex spider
* 14mm of verified Xmax <-------------
* 2.5" diameter, dual 4ohm, voice coil
* 450 watts power handling <-----------
* Flat diaphragm
* Custom tooling of virtually every part
* 10 ring neo magnet cluster
* 0.5 ft^3 sealed enclosure requirement <---------




SI FTW (for the win)


----------

