# JL 10W7 or JBL W10GTi MkII



## Torquem (Jun 27, 2009)

I was hoping that some of you guys had some experience with these speakers. I want to run one of these subs in a sealed enclosure with about 600 RMS on it. What differences would I see between these two given that both are installed in their optimal sealed enclosures and that they are both seeing 600 rms? I admittedly don't know how to use each subs parameters to identify strengths and weaknesses. If it matters it will be in the hatch of my 2002 Acura RSX. I do listen to a lot of music that gets pretty low. I figured that the 10w7 would probably hit lower, but that's just a guess. Thanks for any info and opinions!


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

go with the Jbl, if you had more power id say w7.

the sound will be equal, but the jbl will get louder on 600 watts.


----------



## Torquem (Jun 27, 2009)

Do you think it will go just as low as the w7?


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

Torquem said:


> Do you think it will go just as low as the w7?


yes.

also, even with more power, many people will prefer the jbl over the w7.

jbl is a GREAT sub.


----------



## Torquem (Jun 27, 2009)

Thanks for the input. I might just pull the trigger on it and see how i like it.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

Torquem said:


> Thanks for the input. I might just pull the trigger on it and see how i like it.


Why not keep the 12w7? I've never heard the Gti, but I can't imagine it having any advantage over either w7.


----------



## Torquem (Jun 27, 2009)

I'm going with a smaller sealed enclosure.


----------



## sn95chico (May 10, 2010)

I Sold my 2 12w3v2 in the H.o box for a 1 10w7 in a H.O box 

I love it 

Its the tightest sounding sub i have ever owned 

its has perfect sq and has very low lowes


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

bassfromspace said:


> I've never heard the Gti, but I can't imagine it having any advantage over either w7.


jbl is 5db more efficient, with 600 watts it will get louder and be better controlled/more dynamic, 

and its less then half the price of a w7.


----------



## Torquem (Jun 27, 2009)

It looks like I could get away with a small sealed enclosure on the W12GTI as well. 

What I am looking for is a sub that will dip down to 30 hz with authority and play up to 80 relatively smoothly. I listen to quite a bit of music with low bass, but want to avoid the size box that porting would require.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Torquem said:


> It looks like I could get away with a small sealed enclosure


If the box is small, the low end seems to be diminished, somewhat.


----------



## Torquem (Jun 27, 2009)

Well let me simplify this some.

I want to be able to play relatively low with authority (say 30 hz) with a relatively flat response up to 80hz. I'd like to keep the box under 1.25 cuft gross if possible. Sealed. My amp makes a solid 625 rms @ 4ohm and 12 volts. 

Are my goals unreasonable? Or would one of these (or other subs for that matter) fit the bill?


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

id build a sealed box that is (15%) bigger then recommended (as discussed recently here on this site manufacturers *ballpark* enclosure sizes for many reasons) , a bigger *then recc* sealed box will allow the sub to play the lows louder.

in your tiny car any of these options is going to be very loud and get very low

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ven-cabin-gain-reality-do-we-need-low-fs.html


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

60ndown said:


> jbl is 5db more efficient, with 600 watts it will get louder and be better controlled/more dynamic,
> 
> and its less then half the price of a w7.


5 db efficient at what frequency? If it's efficient, it lacks low end. Hoffman's Iron Law.

Better controlled/more dynamic is audio gibberish.


----------



## basshead (Sep 12, 2008)

i've a friend that have a w10gti and his sealed box too small (.65), so everything under 35 is gone.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

bassfromspace said:


> If it's efficient, it lacks low end. Hoffman's Iron Law.
> 
> Better controlled/more dynamic is audio gibberish.


more power and box design can make a subwoofer play low, and you wont find anyone that says jbl subs cant get low 


underpowered cars perform the same as underpowered subwoofers.

no fun at all, they drag and are slow to respond to adjustments in input.(not dynamic)

giving a subwoofer/car adequate power makes it perform ideally (dynamic/responsive).

not gibberish,

physics


----------



## pjhabit (Aug 12, 2008)

What physics makes a woofer perform "slow" at lower volume?


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

pjhabit said:


> What physics makes a woofer perform "slow" at lower volume?


600 watts.

whos talkin bout low volumes?


----------



## pjhabit (Aug 12, 2008)

When you turn the volume down you ask for less power from your amp.
Using your "physics" would mean a slower woofer at lower volumes/faster at higher volumes.


----------



## yermolovd (Oct 10, 2005)

I had a 10w7 on 600w PG Xenon amp in 1.25cu ft enclosure. 600w is quite enough.
In the smaller box it will take more, but I found the box size and the power to be a great combo as far as loudness/frequency response.
I haven't heard a 10 jbl, I heard 15, so not a fair comparison. I'd say you have to make a decision on the biggest box you can (say maybe 1cu max) and decide which sub is going to fit you better. With that power, I'd personally opt for a bit larger enclosure (no tiny .5 cube ****) which can fit in the car properly (mind the jbls mounting depth, its like 10"?).
I encourage to at least try winisd to graph both subs to have at least the idea in regards to excursion (never late to learn). If you don't feel like doing that, then you can only rely on the "experts" and people's brand loyalty, preferences.


----------



## mathematics (May 11, 2009)

i'd take the JBL over the JL also


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

pjhabit said:


> When you turn the volume down you ask for less power from your amp.
> Using your "physics" would mean a slower woofer at lower volumes/faster at higher volumes.


is a 300 horse power car only 120 horse power when its parked?


----------



## Redcloud (Feb 5, 2009)

Torquem said:


> I was hoping that some of you guys had some experience with these speakers. I want to run one of these subs in a sealed enclosure with about 600 RMS on it. What differences would I see between these two given that both are installed in their optimal sealed enclosures and that they are both seeing 600 rms? I admittedly don't know how to use each subs parameters to identify strengths and weaknesses. If it matters it will be in the hatch of my 2002 Acura RSX. I do listen to a lot of music that gets pretty low. I figured that the 10w7 would probably hit lower, but that's just a guess. Thanks for any info and opinions!


I am running my 10w7 in a custom built to spec ported enclosure powered by a RF T1000 and it does not disappoint (I estimate 600-700 RMS at 3 ohms). I think the JBL will offer a better value if purchasing new but if you pick one up second hand I would go for the w7.

It unlike anything I have ever heard from a single 10. It sounds really good and gets super low and loud. Only other 10 that I have personally heard that can hang is the TDX woofer from Diamond Audio. I might put the JBL in my wife's car and do a side by side.


----------



## Torquem (Jun 27, 2009)

Thanks for the input guys.

I will say that loudness is not the goal. I would rather it be able to play deep than loud. Im looking for whatever sub will go the deepest in a sealed box off of 600 RMS. It will be in a hatchback, so loudness will not be a problem.


----------



## pjhabit (Aug 12, 2008)

60ndown said:


> is a 300 horse power car only 120 horse power when its parked?


Huh?  

Does a 300hp car use 300hp to go to the grocery store?


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

60ndown said:


> more power and box design can make a subwoofer play low, and you wont find anyone that says jbl subs cant get low
> 
> 
> underpowered cars perform the same as underpowered subwoofers.
> ...


How exactly do you determine whether or not a sub is being 
underpowered?


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

bassfromspace said:


> How exactly do you determine whether or not a sub is being
> underpowered?


ive used many systems in the last 20 years where my preferred listening volume on those songs i just had to wang (loud) was at the end of the amplifiers ability, and upgraded to a much larger amp leaving the same sub in place, with the bigger amp, i could get louder AND the sub went from sounding edgy/harsh/offensive and distorted to clean/dynamic/controlled and buttery smooth, the only difference being moar power available to it/them.


any amp driven into the last 20% of its ability is a mistake ime.

todays *typical* strong 12 inch subs (83db efficient + or - a few), wangin some well recorded bass @ freeway speeds, trying to overcome road noise (70db from 20-500hz) with quality bass/sub bass material, requires at least 1000 watts to remain inside the amps first 80% and remain 100% clean in its signal imo/e,

parked is a different story, 200 watts sounds great.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

60ndown said:


> ive used many systems in the last 20 years where my preferred listening volume on those songs i just had to wang (loud) was at the end of the amplifiers ability, and upgraded to a much larger amp leaving the same sub in place, with the bigger amp, i could get louder AND the sub went from sounding edgy/harsh/offensive and distorted to clean/dynamic/controlled and buttery smooth, the only difference being moar power available to it/them.
> 
> 
> any amp driven into the last 20% of its ability is a mistake ime.
> ...


You said earlier that box design is key to performance as well. You may have been able to achieve the results you desired with a larger sealed or ported enclosure, or bandpass, or horn enclosure. 

The inablility to achieve a certain volume doesn't mean your sub is underpowered, it just means your system as it stood at that time did not fit within your system goals and parameters.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

bassfromspace said:


> You said earlier that box design is key to performance as well. You may have been able to achieve the results you desired with a larger sealed or ported enclosure, or bandpass, or horn enclosure.
> 
> The inablility to achieve a certain volume doesn't mean your sub is underpowered, it just means your system as it stood at that time did not fit within your system goals and parameters.


much of that is true, i still believe tho, 

if a subwoofer can handle 500 watts, it needs 500 clean watts to perform optimally.

if its designed to handle 1000 watts you will need an amp that can provide 1000 clean watts, which is probably going to be an advertised '1400' watt amplifier (most amps start to clip towards 100% output)

we can use ported, bandpass and horn enclosures, but we will never realize the full potential of a system until the driver has reached its absolute x-max and the signal is clean.

or course its easy to kill a driver at that point if yer not careful :


given a choice between, 

1. a 500 watt sub with a 750 watt amp

2. a 1000 watt sub with a 400 watt amp



ill use option 1 every time.


----------



## DaylenIsOnFire (Dec 31, 2009)

60ndown said:


> is a 300 horse power car only 120 horse power when its parked?


haaha i would be a smartass and post a dynosheet but its all good i get the point your making... an amp has the potential to make the power at anytime like a car has potential to make the power when its needed just by command...


----------



## danno14 (Sep 1, 2009)

"Does a 300hp car use 300hp to go to the grocery store?"

mine does..... 90 at a time


----------



## Iron Maiden (Jul 13, 2008)

60ndown said:


> much of that is true, i still believe tho,
> 
> if a subwoofer can handle 500 watts, it needs 500 clean watts to perform optimally.
> 
> ...




I will use 1 evertime as well. Both are very good subs. I prefer the JL subs, cant say antything at all bad about JBL and both have great customer service. I know Manville answers emails and is a cut above when it comes to being attentive to your questions and needs. I say JL.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

60ndown said:


> much of that is true, i still believe tho,
> 
> if a subwoofer can handle 500 watts, it needs 500 clean watts to perform optimally.
> 
> ...


1. Powerhandling is an arbitrary # which is more reflective of the enclosure it was tested in than the actual capabilities of the driver.

2. The difference in the amount of power that we're talking about are miniscule in comparison to the way we detect loudness. A bump of 250 or even 500 watts doesn't directly translate into a comparable gain in volume.


----------



## mathematics (May 11, 2009)

you don't really understand what you are writing about. a speaker that can handle 500W RMS does not NEED to be matched with an amp that equals that power to perform optimally. Optimal performance is about the enclosure design. You will get more output from a ported design at a given wattage than that same wattage in a sealed enclosure. I don't know about you, but I do not want my system performing optimally when my drivers are at max excursion.



60ndown said:


> much of that is true, i still believe tho,
> 
> if a subwoofer can handle 500 watts, it needs 500 clean watts to perform optimally.
> 
> ...


----------



## Heath (May 3, 2009)

I would go with the W7. Care audio mag recently did a sub woofer shoot out and I believe the W7 was at the top. I have not heard a W7 but have a pair of the sister W6 and these are a great sounding sub. They probably don't hit as hard but the sounds quality is there for sure.


----------



## Hondakilla98 (Apr 2, 2010)

I personally would go with a Fi Q with High Qts. $234+shipping. And you can get the dust cap in a variety of colors to match your car.


----------

