# Designed to the Max 8 inch XBL WOOFER GROUPBUY



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Hello gents.

My name is Mark Kravchenko. I work as a loudspeaker and loudspeaker driver designer. I've been in and around this business for over 25 years. And I have learned a few things over that length of time.

I work for some OEM's that require exceedingly high driver quality. The kind that you pay serious coin for.

We are talking SEAS and Scanspeak type quality.

I'm the chief cook and bottle washer. There is no marketing department. I'm presenting driver design in ways few people have ever seen. The quality is world class. And these drivers will be available very soon. A limited number of them will be available for testing by a few qualified people. 

I have been working away on some projects that are well documented as premium builds. I work with a build house that understands quality. It is run by and owned by an American. We speak the same language. Loudspeaker. And we are equally zealots in terms of keeping the quality high and extremely consistent. Drivers of this caliber are rarely if ever offered to the DIY market. Grab them while you can.

This thread will showcase a no holds barred 8 inch Neo Dual gap motor.

It is Dual voice Coil. So there are quite a few ways to wire it up. I'll post the series and the parallel specs below.

Yes it is designed under license as an XBL motor.

Very long throw and extremely high build quality.

Some pics are below.





T yoke



Basic pieces.




Bumped Back plate



Custom machined cast aluminum frame.




Dual gap pole piece.



Side profile.




Motor assembly.



Surround profile view.

I am getting questions on power handling.

A coil this size with the glues I have specified can handle a clean 150 watts. Continuous. 

However the driver will not. It will play loud and proud. And it will do so for a very long time as long as you do not cook it or rip it apart with to high a power input.

This is a performance driver. And you have to treat it as such. I have custom coil and custom spider designs in this to allow such a large coil and high excursion levels. But as with any mechanical system there are limits as to what it is capable of. 

So if you launch it across your car you are on your own.

If you let out the smoke you are on your own.

This is a driver for people that know what they are doing. It is capable of very high performance levels. And that means that it is engineered to the hairy edge of it's design constraints. I am making full use of the available excursion in this size of basket. It is possible to smoke or launch any driver you may choose to use in your car or your home if you miss apply power or mount it in an incorrect enclosure.

What I can guarantee is that my product will meet specifications because each and every one of them is tested before it leaves the factory. This is why I work with this company. They are that good at what they do.

All components are tested in every conceivable form. From mass of the moving parts to sizes of the steel and magnet all the physical components are verified against a reference sample set. During the build process they run through three fail safe electrical tests. Every motor is verified for field strength at four points on the clock. Every unit is rub and buzzed tested. And every unit must pass a frequency response test that is plus 1.5db minus 1.5 db from a golden standard approved by me. The frequency response testing and other methods are documented in my tweeter group buy.


If you want a pair in the GroupBuy here is how it happens:

PM me and I will send you a Paypal Invoice.

The cost of these is $260 per driver shipped to North America. For the rest of the world that I can mail to the shipped price is $300.


I will invoice at full price. You make payment you are in.

Be sure that your address in Paypal is current. I will be maintaining a group buy list on this thread. Make sure you are on the list.

I will keep this group buy open from September 21st until October 31. 

A full Production run takes 45 days from the point I book a driver production run. 

After the group buy these drivers will be $310 shipped in North America and $350 shipped to most everywhere else.


----------



## REGULARCAB (Sep 26, 2013)

OH SNAP!!!!!!


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Yep she's alive!

Here are the Thiele Small Specs:


----------



## casey (Dec 4, 2006)

whats the OD of the basket?

xmax?

looks nice so far


----------



## miniSQ (Aug 4, 2009)

Is this designed to be a woofer or a subwoofer?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

so in for this.. but i would like to know a few things before i do jump on board. depth? xmax? outer diameter? impedance? (i know you said DVC but what impedence).. usable frequency response?


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

casey said:


> whats the OD of the basket?
> 
> xmax?
> 
> looks nice so far



X-max is 14.2mm one way.

I'm retooling the surround because it can barely do 14mm one way right now.

It would be nice to be able to push a little further.

The specs will stay the same.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

miniSQ said:


> Is this designed to be a woofer or a subwoofer?


This can be used for lower midrange. But not really recommended much above 800 hertz as it starts to beam because of piston size right around 800 hertz.

I'll post frequency response charts soon enough. Waiting for a dust cap.

Yes it makes a difference!


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> so in for this.. but i would like to know a few things before i do jump on board. depth? xmax? outer diameter? impedance? (i know you said DVC but what impedence).. usable frequency response?



Posted specs are coils in series.

So they are 2.3 ohm coils.

If you want to fool around with possible specs do some math.

I'll post parallel 2.3 ohm DCR Thiele Small parameters today.

Size I will post when I measure them up today.

Usable frequency response is from around 25 hertz to 800 hertz. The inductance is not to high so you are limited to piston size and where it starts to beam.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

As for the frequency response this will be close. It's the same cone and surround.

I'm changing out the surround because it does not meet my excursion specs.

So the top end will change a little bit.

So some explanation of the curve. It is raw data. No smoothing whatsoever.
As in 1/48 octave. Every ripple and bump of the actual frequency response at one meter is shown in all it's ugliness. So with any marketing smoothing it looks a heck of a lot flatter. For real world frequency response curve this is awesome for an 8.









Red line is the last generation. Black line was the old TRIO8. Better is the way to go.

Always.

Hence redesign on the motor!


----------



## Ultimateherts (Nov 13, 2006)

So are these like the tweeters where OEM will get most of them?

Great work though, really awesome stuff you are going!


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Ultimateherts said:


> So are these like the tweeters where OEM will get most of them?
> 
> Great work though, really awesome stuff you are going!


That will be true unless this groupbuy cracks 250 pieces. Then the run will be dedicated to the groupbuy.

There are minimums sir.

Right now I have set aside 100 pieces.

The OEM's get something a little different.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Dimensions for KAXBL8

OD	224mm

ID	190mm Mounting hole

Mounting depth 112mm

Motor OD	94mm

Motor Height	50mm

Basket Height	62mm


----------



## mykel (Dec 28, 2013)

What enclosure type and size are you recommending?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

4.5 inches deep..... :O


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

mykel said:


> What enclosure type and size are you recommending?


I'll make up a series of videos that show different enclosure simulations.

Give me some time. very busy here at the factory at the moment. AMT's are finally falling into place.

New design, new teething pains.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> 4.5 inches deep..... :O


Yep.

That's what you get for having long excursion and decent efficiency.

And your math is pretty good.

Funny how there are only a couple of countries left on earth that do not use metric.

It is actually much easier to use once you get your head around it.


----------



## miniSQ (Aug 4, 2009)

mwmkravchenko said:


> Yep.
> 
> That's what you get for having long excursion and decent efficiency.
> 
> ...



TGFG
112 mm is how many inches - Evi


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

miniSQ said:


> TGFG
> 112 mm is how many inches - Evi


112 / 25.4 = 4.409 inches.

.409 x 16 = 7/16" actually a 32nd shy of 7/16"

So 4 7/16"

Remember I am still a practicing cabinet maker. And we still use inches in cabinet making in Canada. Carpentry to. We are a slow bunch to change.

But we buy our gas in liters, temperature is in Celsius, Weights are in pounds or kilos.

Go figure. It all changed in Canada in 1979. Learned English units in school up to then and then metric from there on.

At least Metric makes some sense.

Try to figure out the volume of a quart or a pint easily.

A liter is easy. A ten centimeter cube, or 100mm cube.

Oh well. What ever works.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

gregerst22 said:


> just google 112mm to inches.. or type in whatever conversion you want. 100 dollars to pesos.. etc.
> 
> 4.409" is pushing it for me. I'm gonna have to remeasure.


Thanks.

I can't remember how many times I have written that backwards.

24.5-25.4

It's fixed!


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

The beginning of the motor assembly.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Just a little bit later :surprised:


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

so anyone here actually think this can fit in their car?


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Next stage.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> so anyone here actually think this can fit in their car?


I tried to do my homework for this driver.

It is less deep than quite a few drivers in it's excursion category.

And I'm giving the actual excursion capabilities, not something made up for marketing purposes.

The other serious plus is the level of efficiency that I have been shooting for.

Most of the 8 inch subs I have been studying are 6 to 8 db less efficient. That is a serious amount.

I use a coil size that most companies are specing in at 500 watts. I have never believed that a 2 inch coil can do that. I come from a pro audio and high end design background. So I spec 250 watts.

I do have a much more shallow version of this in the works. It's just going to be much more expensive to produce.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

i just cant see this fitting in more than 99% of vehicles without major mods


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> i just cant see this fitting in more than 99% of vehicles without major mods



Since you are in the mood for advice...

You have a loudspeaker designer listening.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Moar low! Lol. But how much will this shallow one you speak of cost? Differences? Depth?


----------



## iroller (Dec 11, 2010)

sub'd


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> Moar low! Lol. But how much will this shallow one you speak of cost? Differences? Depth?


Moar low?

Please enlighten me.

Cost will be $350 to $380 as long as it is in small batch mode.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

mwmkravchenko said:


> Moar low?
> 
> Please enlighten me.
> 
> Cost will be $350 to $380 as long as it is in small batch mode.


Moar low as in less depth


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

gregerst22 said:


> Is it possible to make something along the lines of a Morel SW9 or Dyn MW182 with similar 3" depth and SQ oriented but with more throw? I would say 3.5" max depth.


You realize that the driver in this thread has an X-max of almost 15mm. That is measured one way. And a mechanical of 21mm one way.

The drivers you are referencing are not even in the same state, never mind ball park!


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

gregerst22 said:


> Is it possible to make something along the lines of a Morel SW9 or Dyn MW182 with similar 3" depth and SQ oriented but with more throw? I would say 3.5" max depth.


The dyn is less than 3 inches deep from what I remember


----------



## jriggs (Jun 14, 2011)

mwmkravchenko said:


> Since you are in the mood for advice...
> 
> You have a loudspeaker designer listening.


I don't know man, I run the scan Illuminator 18wu in the doors of a Chevy Tahoe (big deep doors). They are 3.8" deep and I had to use a 1" spacer/baffle and do major trim work on the door card to make them fit with out cutting metal. 4.5" would never work with out major mods.


----------



## JoshHefnerX (Jun 13, 2008)

I just built some sealed door pods for my doors because there just isn't a lot of depth behind the inner skin before it hits the glass. and had a real tough time getting my 3.5-3.75in depth in there before I can't open the glove box. With this depth they'd definitely have to be in the kicks.

They do have some massive movement though. Always a fan of xbl motors. Have 3 'old skool' brahmas in the house here.

Question on that excursion vid, there's some noise sounded like mechanical. Is that the mic, or was there some tinsel slap? 

Josh


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

JoshHefnerX said:


> I just built some sealed door pods for my doors because there just isn't a lot of depth behind the inner skin before it hits the glass. and had a real tough time getting my 3.5-3.75in depth in there before I can't open the glove box. With this depth they'd definitely have to be in the kicks.
> 
> They do have some massive movement though. Always a fan of xbl motors. Have 3 'old skool' brahmas in the house here.
> 
> ...


Answer to tinsel slap.

That is the backplate hitting the granite counter top. Not tinsel slap.


So dream depth for you guys is 3 inches or 75mm.

Do I understand this correctly?


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

gregerst22 said:


> MOAR means "More"
> internet slang


I'm old. But not that old!

And even old farts can use a thing called google.

Just trying to understand the statement.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

mwmkravchenko said:


> Answer to tinsel slap.
> 
> That is the backplate hitting the granite counter top. Not tinsel slap.
> 
> ...


obviously the lower the better but i just cant see anyone fitting 4.5 inch deep 8 inch mids in the front of their car.


----------



## 1fishman (Dec 22, 2012)

3.5" is workable IMO. 

On the subject of depth can i ask what difference does a shallow/flatter cone have, vs a deeper/steeper cone?


----------



## JoshHefnerX (Jun 13, 2008)

Realistically 3.5 is at the point where it starts to get tough. I think most cars can accommodate that in the doors w/o too much work. 3.75+ You have to start getting creative. Think about where the door glass is in relation to the seat and glovebox. Most people could probably get that 4+ done in the kick area, custom fiberglass, but not the door.

But I will say that kind of xmax in an 8 is awesome. 

Josh


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

1fishman said:


> 3.5" is workable IMO.
> 
> On the subject of depth can i ask what difference does a shallow/flatter cone have, vs a deeper/steeper cone?


It effects the upper range of the drivers output. A flatter cone will lower the top end roll off. Specifically you will get much less top end. THis 8 is decently good as a two way driver. But with the larger surround I'm working to it will get a bit ragged above 800 hertz.


----------



## jriggs (Jun 14, 2011)

mwmkravchenko said:


> It effects the upper range of the drivers output. A flatter cone will lower the top end roll off. Specifically you will get much less top end. THis 8 is decently good as a two way driver. But with the larger surround I'm working to it will get a bit ragged above 800 hertz.


Well few if any will be looking at an 8" driver with this much throw for a two way. So upper range extension is not very important in a driver like this.


----------



## LumbermanSVO (Nov 11, 2009)

This looks like it might be a good match for my full-size ES horns, I just wish I wasn't going into the slow season at work.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

jriggs said:


> Well few if any will be looking at an 8" driver with this much throw for a two way. So upper range extension is not very important in a driver like this.


It's an interesting idea but it doesn't really match up with the music we listen to.

The greatest demands on speakers for any type of music is in the bass region. The real money shots are around 60 to 120 hertz. This covers the thump in the chest region and what almost everyone considers pounding bass.

That true for music from dub step to pipe organ.

So this driver has a few things going for it that few other do. It is low inductance. So it has a wide bandwidth capability. It can play quite high up without rolling off the top end due to having a higher inductance. This 8 also is quite efficient compared to many other car audio 8 inch drivers.

Efficiency is an important factor when you take a few points into consideration.

You can tell me you have a kilowatt or two on tap if you want. Power in mobile audio is no longer much of a problem. So the argument goes that efficiency is not really that important.

That is until you listen to an efficient system. There is a marked difference in the sound quality. Why?

Power compression. Voice coils and electric stove elements have something in common. They both heat up when you apply power.

When a voice coil heats up it increases the DCr or the basic resistance of the coil. The higher the DCr the less power you can deliver. The more power your amp delivers the higher the DCr. It becomes a circle that can push up the actual resistance of your driver to three to four times it's nominal value.

That cuts your power down considerably. And also your potential for a loud sound.

The next thing to consider is baseline efficiency. The 8 I am offering is almost 89db/watt. If you compare that to many high excursion woofers out there the normal range is 82 to 84 watts.

Every three db means you need twice the power in to get the same loudness out. That is not factoring power compression at all. So if you take the low end of 82 compared to my driver there is a 4.5 to one difference in power in versus SPL out.

So back to the power compression idea. The low efficiency competitor will be much hotter than my driver at the same SPL output. So why do higher efficiency drivers have a cleaner sound? They are less stressed from the get go.

Now to sharpen the pencil a bit more. You are not going to use this kind of excursion on an 8, while at the same time crossing over to a tweeter in a two way.

The excursion question is simple when you consider that the driver will only be really be pushing it's travel points on peak demands. Not continuously.
And that when the music is that loud there is quite a masking effect generated in that we don't perceive the distorted output in the same way. It will sound more bassy.

So working as a two way system possibility depends on one thing really.
It depends on what you are using for a tweeter. I designed these a few years back:

Funk Audio Speaker - 8.2P - Funk Audio

Two 8's in an MTM. It's all in the choice of driver that you hand over the top end to. If your higher frequency driver can handle it you can use an 8 to make a two way if your eight is designed for it.

Couple the KAXBL8NEO with this:

Bohlender Graebener Neo8 Planar Transducer

And you are golden.

This 8 is designed for it.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Next stage in the production of the KAXBL8NEO

Bonding the magnet to the T yoke.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Next up!

Starting to look like a woofer! Sometimes I call this the wrong driver. The two part adhesive is some strong smelling stuff believe me.


----------



## 1fishman (Dec 22, 2012)

jriggs said:


> Well few if any will be looking at an 8" driver with this much throw for a two way. So upper range extension is not very important in a driver like this.


I agree. I think most car audio guys are interested in 8" or larger drivers are going to use them for midbass only. 

I want a 8" to perform in the 60hz(or lower) to 400hz area. It's nice that it can go higher, but not really needed for 3 way. 
Even if i could get a 8" that does well up to 2500hz im not going to ditch my 3" midrange drivers. In my case my mid bass fires into my leg, so i like the my midrange coming from another location un-obscured, like from my pillars. 

So whatever can help keep the 8"speaker in the 3"-3.5" depth range with it's great efficiency, and awesome Xmax would be great. (flatter cone or...)


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

I didn't think about putting a midrange in the pillars that large.

That could definitely work.

So largest problem with this woofer is the depth.

A serious question is now pretty simple. Are you guys prepared to pay for a shallow one?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

yeah i just want to hear what your method would be to make a similar driver with similar specs, but be about 3 inches or so deep


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> yeah i just want to hear what your method would be to make a similar driver with similar specs, but be about 3 inches or so deep


So would many other designers.

Lets just say that similar performance in a much more shallow woofer is possible. It is just expensive because all of the metal has to be custom.

When you can use an already made basket it really makes the cost simpler.

There is a way that I can make a cup motor, and mount it in such a way that only about a half inch will protrude beyond the back of the basket in this configuration.

That will sacrifice 3mm of X-max. So it will give about 11mm.

The cone would be very different. Pretty much a satellite dish. But it is possible.

I'm simply not so sure about putting a boat load of design and R&D into something that will never fly because it is close to $400 a pop.


----------



## jriggs (Jun 14, 2011)

mwmkravchenko said:


> It's an interesting idea but it doesn't really match up with the music we listen to.
> 
> The greatest demands on speakers for any type of music is in the bass region. The real money shots are around 60 to 120 hertz. This covers the thump in the chest region and what almost everyone considers pounding bass.
> 
> ...


That's awesome AND you completely missed my point. This is mobile audio. 4.5" is to deep for this driver and in this application everyone using this type of driver (large midbass) will also be using a small, 2-5" midrange driver in A-pillars or kick panels or dash or high on the door cards. Looks like you are finally getting the point though based on the last few responses to this thread. A shallower 8" midbass with similar throw would I be very desirable.


----------



## jriggs (Jun 14, 2011)

mwmkravchenko said:


> So would many other designers.
> 
> Lets just say that similar performance in a much more shallow woofer is possible. It is just expensive because all of the metal has to be custom.
> 
> ...


Well look at the other similar options available right now from Morel, Dynaudio and Illusion - $600-900 a pair. So...


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

jriggs said:


> We'll look at the other similar options available right now from Morel, Dynaudio and Illusion - $600-900 a pair. So...


Hard to argue when you are right.


----------



## jriggs (Jun 14, 2011)

The JL Audio ZR800 is also something to look at as an alternative to the pricier 8-9" mid bass driver. They can be found for $140-230/ driver. Several of the major sq competitors on this site use this for a mid bass. Pretty much **** above 500 hertz, but cross it below and you have an amazing driver for its intense purpose. 

-87 db @ 1 watt
- 3 3/8" depth
-8.6 mm of Xmax
- high qts


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

jriggs said:


> The JL Audio ZR800 is also something to look at as an alternative to the pricier 8-9" mid bass driver. They can be found for $140-230/ driver. Several of the major sq competitors on this site use this for a mid bass. Pretty much **** above 500 hertz, but cross it below and you have an amazing driver for its intense purpose.
> 
> -87 db @ 1 watt
> - 3 3/8" depth
> ...


 So most uses for a driver like this are in doors, no rear enclosures?

So you are wanting something with a high Qts so it basically behaves like it's in the free air?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

mwmkravchenko said:


> So most uses for a driver like this are in doors, no rear enclosures?
> 
> So you are wanting something with a high Qts so it basically behaves like it's in the free air?


99% of people mount midbass's in the doors free air or in the kick panels infinite baffle vented into the frame


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

So then high Qts Shallow she be.

The great thing about this groupbuy, for me is that sell or not in this configuration there are other markets for this driver.

But you guys are giving me very useful information.

If you or anyone else has some ideas as to what you want to see in an over the top design please speak up.

It's about a three month design cycle from concept to prototype.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

have you ever designed speakers for car audio use before?


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

> have you ever designed speakers for car audio use before?


And by this question you are suggesting what? 

The answer is not so simple.

Straight up, purpose designed car drivers:

No.

But It does not take a genius to understand some fundamentals.

Installation sizes are something that I really have little experience in.

The fundamentals of a loudspeaker motor are the same no matter what usage. Proper plating from my vendor is a given. And for car use a waterproof cone is a no brainer.

What I have done is looked at many different types of car audio drivers.

And had many discussions with a vendor that builds many car audio drivers.

So coupled with what I know, what I have learned, and what you guys are tossing in is starting to sound like a good set of design parameters.

But as this is a groupbuy thread for a different driver. You may want to contact me by P.M. If you want to discuss this further.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

I was just curious. Didn't want to sound like a dick.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> I was just curious. Didn't want to sound like a dick.



You didn't.

Just that sometimes people can get pissed off fast. It was the end of a long day for me. Of working with many piss ants that need to understand the simple fundamentals of loudspeaker design. I understand the design end of this business. And I work with an outstanding build house that fills in where I lack in knowledge. Little special tweeks and such in the production side. 

You just got in the line of fire.

Sorry.


----------



## GLN305 (Nov 2, 2007)

Glad to see this driver moving forward. I can accommodate the depth in my doors, so time to do some number crunching and make sure the money is there. Thanks for offering this to us!


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

GLN305 said:


> Glad to see this driver moving forward. I can accommodate the depth in my doors, so time to do some number crunching and make sure the money is there. Thanks for offering this to us!


It's been an adventure for me to. 

You guys are giving me very useful feedback.


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

Very interested in this design, as well as the "shallow mount" version. I'm in agreement that for car audio use, the shallow-mount version maximum depth should not exceed 3.5", with a target of 3" preferable. In addition, ANYTHING that can be done to reduce the overall diameter/mounting diameter, without reducing Sd or xmax/xmech, would be a HUGE plus.

Happy R&D!


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

If we're going into the custom tooled frame territory, what are the chances of making an 8" driver that's actually 8 inches at the flange instead of 8.7-8.9" like most?

It kills me that almost all 6.5" drivers are right at 6.5in / 165mm at the flange, but when you step up to 8" drivers, they're almost all 8.85in / 225mm at the flange. That extra really makes a difference when trying to fit in a car door.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

> f we're going into the custom tooled frame territory, what are the chances of making an 8" driver that's actually 8 inches at the flange instead of 8.7-8.9" like most?
> 
> It kills me that almost all 6.5" drivers are right at 6.5in / 165mm at the flange, but when you step up to 8" drivers, they're almost all 8.85in / 225mm at the flange. That extra really makes a difference when trying to fit in a car door.





> Very interested in this design, as well as the "shallow mount" version. I'm in agreement that for car audio use, the shallow-mount version maximum depth should not exceed 3.5", with a target of 3" preferable. In addition, ANYTHING that can be done to reduce the overall diameter/mounting diameter, without reducing Sd or xmax/xmech, would be a HUGE plus.


I will look into available baskets. Might end up being a little cheaper.

If I have to pay for a old it will get really expensive fast. Also changing baskets to non standard sizes means that I have to also pay for cone and surround dies and molds. This becomes just a little bit on the expensive side. I have done this already for some drivers. 4 to 6 thousand dollars disappears very quickly.

But never say never!


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

The very inexpensive Silver Flute W20RC38 uses a true 8" frame. If you could use something like that and make the whole thing around 3" deep with good xmax, you'd have a winner.


----------



## Ultimateherts (Nov 13, 2006)

Not to be a jerk, but Meniscus Audio now carries the BG Radia 8" which is said to perform very similar to the CSS TRIO 8!

BG, BGW8F-4   Trio 8


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

That looks like a nice woofer! But it's 15mm too wide and 15mm too deep


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

strakele said:


> That looks like a nice woofer! But it's 15mm too wide and 15mm too deep


or you're just driving the wrong car!


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

cajunner said:


> or you're just driving the wrong car!


this. whats an 8 inch woofer if the cone is only 7 inches? might as well get a beefy 6.5


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Ultimateherts said:


> Not to be a jerk, but Meniscus Audio now carries the BG Radia 8" which is said to perform very similar to the CSS TRIO 8!
> 
> BG, BGW8F-4** Trio 8


That was the source of the original TRIO8.

And no you are not being a jerk. If you guys want the current offering it is available. It is not optimized for automotive use. It is optimized for performance. A car model might be coming depending on who I can get interested. I'm not so rich that I can can fork out 10 to 12 grand on a hunch that something will sell.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

> Description
> BG Radia (Bohlender Grabener) 8" Woofer
> 
> Have you missed the Trio 8? Look no further as we now stock this premium woofer from BG. It is used in their top of the line in wall and free standing systems.
> ...


Ah yes. It warms my evil little heart. Take a look at the Xmax. Only 9mm less than my 8 inch driver.

:surprised:


----------



## Ultimateherts (Nov 13, 2006)

mwmkravchenko said:


> Ah yes. It warms my evil little heart. Take a look at the Xmax. Only 9mm less than my 8 inch driver.
> 
> :surprised:


However, it plays up past 600 or so which makes it ideal for even 2way with a wideband driver!


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Ultimateherts said:


> However, it plays up past 600 or so which makes it ideal for even 2way with a wideband driver!




Mine is in Red.

Trio 8 is in Black.

The BG has the same cone and surround profile. They are the factors that make the most difference after the inductance of the voice coil. Higher inductance means less high frequencies.


----------



## Ultimateherts (Nov 13, 2006)

mwmkravchenko said:


> Mine is in Red.
> 
> Trio 8 is in Black.
> 
> The BG has the same cone and surround profile. They are the factors that make the most difference after the inductance of the voice coil. Higher inductance means less high frequencies.


I understand that, but even if it only goes up to 500 there are plenty of widebanders that could used from there on up.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

gregerst22 said:


> Not too many cars have room for a 4.4" deep woofer. Heck most people have trouble fitting anything more than 3". I've got about 3.75" max depth and just swapped out my ZR800's for some anarchy's. Honestly the ZR800's have a **** ton of bass but not that clean in the upper mid bass frequencies. The Anarchy's have lot bass for a 6.5" and they play higher and cleaner but are horribly inefficient. I've got 300w on each and I couldn't imagine using them with anything less. I like them but I'm still looking for the perfect mid bass something that has a lot of clean throw and can easily extend to 500Hz. Above all it must fit.


this is my perspective, if you have ZR800's and they can't quite get down to the subs, then there's something wrong with your car.

if you actually need the throw of the anarchy to address some null that develops right in the big dump kick drum response, then it's probably an issue that won't resolve unless you can overwhelm the dropout on either side to mask the hole.

that's why I say it's the car.

or someone just likes it really, really loud.


----------



## DonH (Jun 25, 2009)

I can appreciate Kravchenko sp? actually asking his target market for input on the product. Could mounting depth be a problem? yes. This market has been pummeled with the WANT for a slim driver. Most consumers want slim as possible without a loss in sens. and xmax limitations. Designers hit the books. what most of the market sees is, in my opinion, rushed inefficient ****ty designs. With that said, I do believe this driver is beautiful. simple in the way it looks, yet very finely designed. justified through the pricing. 

My question to the OP, did you do any sort of market research or sampling before starting the project? or is this just a gut feeling project?


----------



## Ultimateherts (Nov 13, 2006)

gregerst22 said:


> but they aren't as clean sounding as I'd like in the upper mid bass range. Now maybe that's my inability to tune it correctly.


Sounds like they need an actual enclosure. I have not used the ZR800, but JL's website does list enclosure sizes for them. You might gain cleaner upper mdibass/midrange by doing this, but you will lose low end a bit. If you run a subwoofer then you should not be worried.

ZR800-CW - Car Audio - Evolution® - ZR - Mid-Bass Driver - JL Audio


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

DonH said:


> I can appreciate Kravchenko sp? actually asking his target market for input on the product. Could mounting depth be a problem? yes. This market has been pummeled with the WANT for a slim driver. Most consumers want slim as possible without a loss in sens. and xmax limitations. Designers hit the books. what most of the market sees is, in my opinion, rushed inefficient ****ty designs. With that said, I do believe this driver is beautiful. simple in the way it looks, yet very finely designed. justified through the pricing.
> 
> My question to the OP, did you do any sort of market research or sampling before starting the project? or is this just a gut feeling project?


This is a product that has been designed for Home audio OEM's. It is a very high quality design. 

It can work in limited applications in vehicles.

Yes I know you guys want a shallow driver. And yes I agree that there are a boat load of poorly designed drivers shoved onto the car market.

Seriously, I am weighing the probability of doing a very shallow design. It will cost me a fortune to develop.

The people that end up using this current offering will be able to tell you what they think about the design quality and the SQ. 

If they say good things there is a greater possibility that I will be able to do a car audio only driver run.


----------



## DonH (Jun 25, 2009)

mwmkravchenko said:


> This is a product that has been designed for Home audio OEM's. It is a very high quality design.
> 
> It can work in limited applications in vehicles.
> 
> ...


Trust me, i know tooling costs... But this answers my question. This is a home audio driver that some folks may be able to use in the car environment


----------



## miniSQ (Aug 4, 2009)

DonH said:


> Trust me, i know tooling costs... But this answers my question. This is a home audio driver that some folks may be able to use in the car environment


some of the best drivers i have ever used in my car have come from the home market.

dynaudio 17w75 and D28II comes to mind as well as the NHT1259. I just happened to have run those 3 drivers in my car in the very early 90's

Anyone remember richard clarks grand national? Or Earl Zausmers BMW? Or anything the guys from speakerworks did in the early 90's?


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)




----------



## Infinity (Jun 28, 2005)

Simple, elegant, and not a bunch of money tossed into chrome and ********. I can't wait to hear these!


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Infinity said:


> Simple, elegant, and not a bunch of money tossed into chrome and ********. I can't wait to hear these!


Thanks. I like simple and well thought out. There are so many car products that are all bling and not much substance. There are also seriously good car products. I'm trying to strike a balance.

Now if I can only shorten them enough so everyone will be happy!

Short story is if I sell about 20 of them in their current configuration I can start on development for the shorties.

Means I won't make a penny, but roll it all back into R&D.

Just have to find me an OEM that wants a car woofer designed to the max....


----------



## Infinity (Jun 28, 2005)

Unfortunately, car audio has gone to cheap junk, or MASSIVELY expensive. There seems to be a hard time finding the in-between balance. Good luck. I like what you're doing


----------



## ThreeMan (May 11, 2009)

Subbed. 

Specs look nice and I can easily fit them, so I am not swayed by the size.

When is the decision being made on production? Is it contingent on the amount of buyers?


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

ThreeMan said:


> Subbed.
> 
> Specs look nice and I can easily fit them, so I am not swayed by the size.
> 
> When is the decision being made on production? Is it contingent on the amount of buyers?


Thanks for the kind words.

There are 12 that are almost ready right now. So far orders are staying small enough that I can cover them as soon as I get delivery of the drivers.

Seems like everyone is lusting after a more shallow version.

As for larger production it will depend on the next OEM contract I have to fill, or if there is enough call for the drivers through the group buy.

No smoke or mirrors.

If I have more ordered in the group buy than 6 pair currently in production I can and will fulfill the orders. With a little request I can do a mini run if required.

It's good to be associated as a consultant with a quality production company.
They need me, I need them.


----------



## NealfromNZ (Sep 3, 2013)

mwmkravchenko said:


> This is a product that has been designed for Home audio OEM's. It is a very high quality design.
> 
> It can work in limited applications in vehicles.
> 
> ...


A shallow driver could also be a good sell to the oem in wall speakers for home / home ht use. Not many quality 8 inch designs out there that will fit within a 4 inch or 100mm wall depth.

Could be a case of the driver serving two markets.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

I love these. If I was in the position to pick these up for a home build, I wouldn't hesitate. I'll have to just keep watching for now.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Honestly I might be down for the original size if I can find a way to modify my door cards without being to ugly


----------



## mmiller (Mar 7, 2008)

Sub'do.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

You guys don't have to twist my arm on the shallow mount version.

I get it loud and clear.

It's a simple matter of coin to get it done.

And getting enough product out in the real world so that people can trust that the product is good.


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> this. whats an 8 inch woofer if the cone is only 7 inches? might as well get a beefy 6.5


The cone on a beefy 6.5 is under 5 inches.. 

A 6.5 has about 125 cm2 of cone area.
An 8 with a true 8" frame would have 215 cm2 of cone area. That's 72% more. Coupled with twice the xmax equals just under 3.5 times the swept volume. That's a HUGE difference.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

I think an 8 should have an 8 inch diameter from the outside of the surround.


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

Most other speaker sizes are measured at the edge of the frame. Why should it be different for 8's?

Most 3.5" mids are 3.5" (89mm) at the flange
Most 6.5" mids are 6.5" (165mm) at the flange

Sorry for the derail


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

No real derailing here. Some opinions and thinking out loud.

I can say any of it has been detrimental.

You guys have user based ideas.

And I read them all.

Here is a view from the manufacturing side.

There are only so many sizes of baskets available. To tool up one is $7000 U.S. even in China. So As of now that is very out of the picture.

I understand the gripes about not having a standard car dimension. It is not as simple as you would like it to be.

Or myself for that matter.

To get a given X-max there has to be enough room for the mechanical travel. Baskets that have the X-max I am designing for all have a set pattern. They are larger than normal car driver openings. The family of baskets I chose has been great to work with. They are truly well made and very strong. They also have enough meat on them that I can make modifications to allow greater X-max and still have enough mechanical strength.

So we are stuck with them.

I am pushing through the 6.5, the 8 the 5.35, and the 15 over then next month or so. So I am very busy.

The tweeters are done but again I am carefully prodding the mount vendor to get his act in shape.

Come the new year I will take all your recommendations and try to create a cost effective shallow mount version of a few drivers.

If this current offering is interesting to you. But them. It will push development on the others.


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

Bump for updates.


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

They are ready for production.

What I am waiting for is a redo on the 6.5. When it is ready then I will ship them. It ever so slightly expensive to ship drivers from China.

The last 24pc shipment I did for a client cost me as much in driver cost as it did in shipping. So an aggregated shipment is the most economical way to get them over here.


----------



## GLN305 (Nov 2, 2007)

Now I gotta decide, do I buy this woofer or wait for the shallower unit to be engineered and built. It sure is nice having these kinda problems LOL


----------



## lv_v (Aug 24, 2005)

Any update?


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

I'm waiting to buddy.

As soon as I have something I will put it up.


----------



## phrozen_lad (Jun 21, 2015)

Is this still available?
p.s i dont mind if its shallow or not


----------



## mwmkravchenko (Oct 6, 2009)

Shortly. I am concentrating on landing the tweeter groupbuy at the moment. They should be ready by the 25th of June.

How many are you looking for?

End of August beginning of September delivery time.


----------



## reath1 (Apr 15, 2014)

Sub'd


----------

