# Focal kx sub experience ? Anybody



## 58458 (Apr 30, 2012)

So I'm looking for people who have used any of the kx series subs. 
Mostly trying to get some feed back. Pros/cons likes and dislikes
So if you have used it let me know what u know!


----------



## Mitsu1grn (Sep 22, 2008)

Greetings!

What exactly would you like to know?

Nick Wingate
National Training Coordinator
Focal/Mosconi America


----------



## SentraStyleEMW (May 16, 2008)

I am currently running the 27KX in my car. I can honestly say it is the best sub I've used so far. I have it in around a 1ft^3 box getting about 400 watts RMS from an Alpine MRV-T757. Without a doubt the most accurate sub I've used. It is far from the loudest (but I wasn't really looking for loud when I bought it).


----------



## 58458 (Apr 30, 2012)

Well the reason I ask is because I have the choice of the kx and the morel ultimo, I just don't want everyone to chime in and start talking about the ultimo! I know what it does!
But when I search for info on the kx subs info seems to be pretty scarce


----------



## SentraStyleEMW (May 16, 2008)

You really can't go wrong with either sub. I have never personally heard the Morel, so I can't give you a comparison review.


----------



## acidbass303 (Dec 3, 2010)

Running 33kx, very very happy with it.....Extremely accurate and dynamic. For more output, ask Mr Nick Wingate for a ported enclosure design. Using the same design , plays flat, very low extension and great output.


----------



## Mitsu1grn (Sep 22, 2008)

Greetings!

As I have zero experience with the Morel driver I will not be making a comment on the pro's and con's on it. Having said that let me say this on the KX series of subs. Focal's philosophy has always been to build a "SUBWOOFER" not a bass driver. Big difference!!! Every KX series subwoofer is designed to be as accurate and linear as possible. They are not a "Club Sound" banger, but designed to reproduce as accurately as possible extreme low frequencies. 90% of my IASCA/USACi/MECA competitors use the KX series of sub's, ( 33KX is the most popular choice), and no one has any complaints on the performance of them. They are designed to play in a sealed enclosure, but some of them can be used in a ported enclosure. All of them are very efficient and don't need thousand's of watts to driver them, ( exception would be 46KX4 1000 watts nominal).

My suggestion would be to examine how much airspace you are going to allocate for the sub and look at the appropriate KX sub and see if it meets your needs. Seek out those folks who have one or better yet go to your nearest Focal dealer and see if someone there has installed one or has actually purchased one and listen. Its the best advice I can give you. Your ears are the best judge as to what works for you! 

Hope this helped!

Nick Wingate
National Training Coordinator
Focal/Mosconi America


----------



## 58458 (Apr 30, 2012)

Thanks guy all ready made my choice focal all the way!


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 4, 2013)

subbed for future research....


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

It's weird just going by the specs it doesn't seem like it would be THE greatest sub ever made especially considering the price.

Qts is .908, Fs of 48 hz, I think pretty much the only real use for it would be IB. And considering it's only got 9mm of Xmax you certainly would be limited in output especially since you have to run it sealed or possibly IB which necessitates needing more Xmax, and for such a low Xmax subwoofer it has 1.9 mH of inductance which is actually pretty high.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

Inductance by itself is meaningless, you need to compare it to the dc resistance. Re/Le ratio is a better indicator of a sub's inductance.


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

Well it's a 4.6 ohm DC resistance 1.9 mH inductance. That is kinda high and even more unusual is it's a 4 ohm rated subwoofer with 4.6 ohms DC resistance. So in reality it will never achieve a true 4 ohm impedance.

The specs I listed were just general reference. If you take a look at all the specs none of them really strike me as spectacular. Basically the Kx doesn't seem to bring anything new to the table other than the multistack magnet and outrageous pricing.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

A 1:1 Re/Le ratio is good, the ratio on that focal is actually very good. However, that measurement is inductance at rest. The Le curve throughout the whole excursion is where a woofer's inductance management shines. Two woofers can have the same Re/Le at rest but the one with a more linear Le curve will walk all over the one without.


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

But the problem is they don't publish the Le curve so how do you really know? Right now it's just assuming that the Focal is amazing based on an assumed Le curve but every other spec is average at best.

Personally if you asked me to choose between my JBL P1020D, 2 ohm subwoofer but .340 mH and damned if any golden ear can hear Le linearity especially on a woofer in a sealed box that doesn't have the kind of motor control comparable to other subs, ie lower Qts. With a Qts in the .908 range in a small sealed box you'd definitely get ringing as an SQ issue before you can hear Le linearity issues. Because one thing is certain, the lower your inductance is total, the much less likely any Le linearity issue is likely to even pop up.

So if you asked me to give up my P1020D for the Focal Kx just based on the specs alone I'd say no way. And now we're assuming that a single unpublished spec is better automatically makes this a superior woofer, sorry for me that just doesn't jive.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

KX line is a great subs, a bit too much money for what it is IMHO but if money is not an issue go for it.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

qwertydude said:


> Because one thing is certain, the lower your inductance is total, the much less likely any Le linearity issue is likely to even pop up.


Sorry, but that is just incorrect. Regardless of inductance at rest, any motor that does not employ any inductance management will have a similar le curve. There's just no way around it. A woofer motor itself is nothing more than an iron core inductor, so when the coil is on its inward stroke inductance will always rise without any shorting rings. Sure, that JBL's inductance at rest might be .34mh but it is likely over 2mh on its inward stroke. 

You're right, we don't know what the focal's inductance curve is like.. but with testimonials of being "the best sub I've ever heard", chances are the le and bl curves are not just a standard affair. 

Speaking of bl curves.. the loss of motor force as the coil moves from rest contributes to changes in qts throughout its stroke. A sub might have a very low q at rest but end up with a q of way over 1 at the limits of its stroke. All this does is induce distortion - known as "BL distortion". Both BL and Le distortion affect how the sub sounds, so it does not take a golden ear to hear the difference between a standard sub and a low distortion sub. Also, remember that some people prefer the sound of a low q low distortion sub and some prefer the sound of a high q low distortion sub, so it is very possible for a sub to have a high qts and still sound great (example - old school OZ high-q subs).


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

So even if my JBL had an inductance of 2 mH at maximum excursion you're still talking about an inductance Re ratio of 1 to 1. So it's still not high since you said yourself anything less than 1:1 and you're doing good. That's the point I'm trying to make. Let's compare it to THD because that's what all distortion boils down to once it comes out of the speaker. If we had a subwoofer that could create any sound wave with only .1% THD but at high power that rose to 5% THD, now lets we compare that to a subwoofer that always put out 5% THD. Do you call the second sub superior because it always puts out 5% crap vs one that puts out .1% crap and rises to 5% at max?

Basically this is the approach that JBL took when they made the WGTi was maximum Le reduction by making a single layer voice coil so any Le rise still keeps overall Le distortion low. And it's a similar approach to the original Power series. Ultra low Le to keep any Le distortion below levels where they'd be obvious in the sound.

SQ is about accurately reproducing the source. Whether one person or another likes it or not is irrelevant. That kind of reasoning certainly doesn't fly on this board when someone says the pinnacle of recording and reproduction technology is vinyl because of it's warm sound.

And the sound of a high Qts subwoofer in a small box simply will ring too much, there's no getting around that, to be considered as accurately reproducing the source, it's distortion and the Qts number alone should tell you it should not be put in a small sealed box. Now whether someone will say they like the timbre, playfulness, rambunctiousness, and organic warmth of that subwoofer in that enclosure is getting into hifi nonsense territory. Because that tends to be the type of descriptives I see with these ultra high dollar exotics vs actual useful descriptions backed up with verifiable specs to boot.

And as for other people's opinions of hearing the sub. More than likely what they've heard is an excellent install. I highly doubt anyone who's spending that much on a subwoofer is just gonna stick it into the trunk of their econobox and call it a day. They probably could have stuck in any woofer in that install, tell the listener it costs $1500 and they'd be "blown away" by the SQ.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

qwertydude said:


> So even if my JBL had an inductance of 2 mH at maximum excursion you're still talking about an inductance Re ratio of 1 to 1. So it's still not high since you said yourself anything less than 1:1 and you're doing good. That's the point I'm trying to make.


Changes in parameters throughout the woofer's stroke is what causes distortion. It doesn't matter if the inductance at rest is .000000000005mh - if it changes throughout its stroke, it will contribute to le distortion. 



> Let's compare it to THD because that's what all distortion boils down to once it comes out of the speaker. If we had a subwoofer that could create any sound wave with only .1% THD but at high power that rose to 5% THD, now lets we compare that to a subwoofer that always put out 5% THD. Do you call the second sub superior because it always puts out 5% crap vs one that puts out .1% crap and rises to 5% at max?


Actually, in my eyes.. yes I would consider the sub with 5% THD throughout its stroke superior to the one with 4.9% variance.



> SQ is about accurately reproducing the source.


Yes, this is why good le and bl curves are a good thing. A woofer with varying parameters is *not* reproducing the source with accuracy. 


> And the sound of a high Qts subwoofer in a small box simply will ring too much to be considered as accurately reproducing the source, it's distortion and the Qts number alone should tell you it should not be put in a small sealed box.


A woofer's Q is just a mathematical product of the sub's parameters that define how it will perform near its roll off. Like I said, some people prefer the response of a high q woofer and some prefer a low q woofer. A low distortion sub will still be accurate to the source, regardless of its q, so the preference is entirely up to the listener. Have you ever listened to a low distortion sub in a high qtc arrangement?


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

Take everything as a total. Don't just go into the variance of the spec.

The subwoofer with high distortion thoughout it's travel will output more distortion total and will sound worse.

Since it seems you can't imagine past what the numbers imply, how about this. A subwoofer starts out with 20% distortion but always maintains it. Vs one that starts out with .1% distortion and maxes out at 5%. Is the 20% distortion subwoofer still superior? Keep in mind when it comes to bass, you can't hear anything less than 10% distortion. That's a simple proven fact when people test for THD in subwoofer amplifiers claiming they can tell the difference between a class D amplifier and a class A/B subwoofer amplifier because of the increased THD of the class D. They can't get past the numbers pointing out the Class D with 1% has 25 times the distortion of the ultra high end A/B of .04% when in the end it doesn't matter since with bass anything under 10% is inaudible.

Because one thing I can guarantee you is that the Le linearity is contributing far less to the sonic accuracy of the subwoofer than the fact that people are putting this very high Qts subwoofer in the entirely wrong box. As in people claiming it'll sound good in a small sealed box and will even do ported well.

If it was any other speaker and it had a .908 Qts and someone told you it works well ported would you believe them?

It seems this subwoofer is a case simply of not enough info, not enough independent testing, and very few owners. And here you are defending it assuming it has to be good.
Every other time on this board a subwoofer comes up, the first thing we want is specs. And many of us would simply pass if the specs didn't pass muster. And if they tried to charge $1500 then we'd laugh.

But instead now we have a high dollar exotic and we're to simply take their word that it's the best. The numbers certainly don't stack up. But hey the numbers must be wrong this time right? Even though we rely on them almost every time to model a subwoofer and pass judgement on it but we're not allowed to on this one?

And a low distortion sub will only be accurate to the source if it's installed correctly. And with such low electrical damping of .97 any sort of suspension action, ie the spring back from a sealed box, working on the sub will cause excess overshoot (ringing) since the subwoofer can't damp the movement with it's motor.

And I have listened to low and high distortion subs in both high and low Qtc sealed box arrangements including IB. These include underhung subs which excel in Bl linearity and Le linearity because the entire coil is always inside the gap, Bl linearity in my opinion gives more accuracy than Le linearity which only tends to manifest itself with higher frequencies whereas Bl linearity is obvious because no matter the frequency motor strength is key to accurate sound reproduction. Le linearity on the other hand by the calculations alone would produce a negligible impedance rise at low frequencies. Which unsurprisingly is what subwoofers are used for.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

qwertydude said:


> Take everything as a total. Don't just go into the variance of the spec.


Parameter shift *is* the most important thing!

You can't just look at the qts at rest and form a complete judgement on the speaker. 



> It seems this subwoofer is a case simply of not enough info, not enough independent testing, and very few owners. And here you are defending it assuming it has to be good.


I've mostly been trying to explain to you how subwoofers work and why BL and Le curves matter? The two times I've mentioned anything about it were pointing out its Re/Le ratio and implying that it must have good BL/Le performance since people describe it as the best sub they've ever heard. I'm not the one coming in saying that the specs suck, everybody is using it wrong, and JBL is better.


> But instead now we have a high dollar exotic and we're to simply take their word that it's the best. The numbers certainly don't stack up. But hey the numbers must be wrong this time right? Even though we rely on them almost every time to model a subwoofer and pass judgement on it but we're not allowed to on this one?


Here's the thing - we don't have to take Focal's word on it because it's pretty clear that they have quite the reputation for making very fine products as evidenced by testimonials. Sure they're ridiculously expensive, but we aren't dealing with Critical Mass here. Even though numbers can paint a good picture, they don't paint the whole picture.

We can talk about theoretical subs all day long, but I'm going to give a real world example. I built a high Q 12" sub from a R12 motor a while back that ended up with a qts of .691. One would assume that it would only work IB or need a large enclosure so it won't ring, right? Because it still has a lot of motor force, it doesn't. In fact when modeled in the same enclosure size with the same power as an IDMAX 12, it has an almost identical frequency response from about 40hz down with more roll off above that. Qtc of the MAX is .762 and qtc of the R12 is .969. Going by your logic, this shouldn't work.. but it does. It exemplifies the fact that assuming all high Q speakers behave the same is incorrect.


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

I understand how you can compensate various parameters for another and end up with similar graphs. The IdMax is certainly not a complete simulation because it's missing the Le which is the one aspect you keep saying seems to affect subwoofers so greatly.

But if you trust the simulation enough to draw that kind of conclusion than by simulating the 13" Focal in a similar situation to say a JBL P1220D, I don't have that particular subwoofer but I do have the P1020D so this is a similar situation I'd face if I had to pick between them.










As you can see I don't care if the Focal can reproduce some frequencies very accurately. When put in a 1.25 foot sealed box it ends up with a 2.5 db peak above nominal, that's from the transfer magnitude tab though. That's a whole heck of a lot of ringing. I put the SPL tab to show that even with the aid of ringing and the nasty peak it would cause it's still only 1 db more efficient. Couple that with the properly size enclosure and it loses all efficiency advantage and still can't reproduce nearly the range of frequencies as the JBL.

The P1220D isn't nearly as peaky and has broad frequency response, plays lower and plays higher with out the big peak. At most in a 1.25 cubic foot box it's about 1db of ringing. So it's more ideally suited for small enclosures.

Most people the first thing you'd notice when listening to the subwoofer is if it's missing sub bass because if it's a subwoofer we expect SUBbass. And the Focal is a subwoofer. And it can't even make it up by claiming to reproduce a wide range of bass all that well.

So it might reproduce sound accurately if it has all the great technology but can we confirm it? No. All we have to go with are the published specs. And they don't look all that great. So even if it could reproduce sound to the highest fidelity, it would only do so within a narrow bandwidth. And certainly not under their recommended enclosure.

I'll admit the Focal Component speakers are great. But that doesn't necessarily mean everything else they make will be equally as stunning. We all should know not every company can make great everything. Some do subwoofers great, some do components and coaxials, some make great amps. It's extremely rare for a company to do all of them well.

In this case I think the Focal just isn't cutting it. If you ran a simulation like this and didn't know which was which 99% of the people would pick the JBL over the Focal simply because the Focal has too big a box requirement and a rather narrow bandwidth. To me that's a mediocre subwoofer even if it has low distortion features which are available in much more affordable subwoofers.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

Seriously.. we have two guys in the thread who own a kx sub and left comments on how great it sounds, but you (who haven't heard a Focal sub and won't acknowledge that bl and le curves amount to anything) don't like the specs and announce that it sucks and Focal doesn't know how to build subs?


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

hurrication said:


> Seriously.. we have two guys in the thread who own a kx sub and left comments on how great it sounds, but you (who haven't heard a Focal sub and won't acknowledge that bl and le curves amount to anything) don't like the specs and announce that it sucks and Focal doesn't know how to build subs?


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

It's because I have several JBL subs, they all model nicely and have excellent sound quality. But you have a subwoofer that doesn't model nicely but people swear sound great? To me that's very difficult to believe.

The other guy posted a custom built subwoofer that models nicely and no surprise sounds very good. But then wants to claim that even though it's not in the specs the Focal KX has technology that can somehow make this subwoofer perform better than it models?

It's just too much hifi nonsense bleed-over. $1500 can buy you a lot better performance than the KX can offer. And I didn't say Focal doesn't know how to build subs but I'm saying that it's very hard to believe that that particular subwoofer is worth spending $1500 on.

If you take a look at Focal's lower end subs. And those ARE ones I've heard. They have them on display collecting dust at a local audio shop. Never sold a single one. They're a joke in terms of performance. I'm talking the Focal P30. $300 and you get a stamped steel frame, 5.2mm of Xmax, and only 250 watts power handling. Heck the Rockford Fosgate Primes have better specs. But I'm guessing Focal put some of their special shorting rings and other stuff in even though if they did they didn't tell us and somehow it's also not affecting the efficiency of the sub like they usually do.

The Image Dynamics ID12 is far and away a better sub costs less and will outperform the Focal in every way. So does Focal not know how to build a subwoofer? Maybe not but they certainly aren't gonna win fans here by selling a low performing woofer for as much as they do.

For me it's far better to have a subwoofer outperform it's expectations and punch above it's weight. It's why I like the JBL's got mine for $150 and it's hard to argue against the Power Series as a known SQ sub. But for $1500 I'd at the least expect a subwoofer to model nicely.

But then again there's a sucker born every minute. And it's aweful hard to escape the Chivas Regal effect when you're pricing even a crappy subwoofer like the P30 for $300.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

qwertydude said:


> The other guy posted a custom built subwoofer that models nicely and no surprise sounds very good. But then wants to claim that even though it's not in the specs the Focal KX has technology that can somehow make this subwoofer perform better than it models?


I posted the sub to illustrate that judging a sub's performance based solely on its qts at rest (among other specs) is not always a perfect indicator of its performance. 

The JBL MS12 has a qts of .86 and 7mm xmax. According to you they must really suck? Not really according to this review!

Questioning things is good practice, but you have to keep an open mind. Have you ever thought that there just might be a lot more to designing and building low distortion subwoofers than just putting something together that spits out the same specs as everything else? That maybe they were designed and built by people who are way smarter than all of us?


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

Actually the MS12 has been discussed greatly on this forum. Even the engineer who worked on them posted on the thread. The MS is sort of a compromise because JBL thought people didn't want massive heavy motors in their subwoofers and they designed one that didn't have one, people wanted one that also played loud, and it'll do it. But having listened to one before. I'd rather take the big motored low Le older subs. They had better frequency response, better power handling, didn't bottom out, more box versatility and much greater output when run sealed.

It has a Qts of .86 and little Xmax. It also has very specific box requirements. And doesn't play nearly as flat or as accurately as their previous subs. It also breaks that Le rule. It has quite a high Le of 6.193 mH with a 3.7 ohm Re, terrible in my and your opinon. And doesn't have the midbass accuracy of it's predecessors. And just look at their own modeling the MS 12 has a ported box peak at 70 hz and a -3 db at 50 hz. My sealed box P1224 does better than that.

It is a well designed sub. It's designed now for the mass market that just wants to go boom. You don't hear too much about them on this site that cares more about SQ and having great low end extension. And the MS just simply doesn't.

So if you think I'm a JBL fanboy and they can do no wrong. Well there's a reason why I still run a 10 year old gen 1 Power Series subwoofer. And it's not for nostaligia.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

I'm seeing a pattern here. The guy writing the review seemed to love the sub's SQ. Doesn't echo what you are saying about it at all. 

Have you ever thought about trying out to be an IASCA judge? Nick Wingate could probably make a few calls and get you certif........ OH WAIT you think the subs that 90% of his team competitors use suck.. nevermind.


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

Funny because when I've attended some of the local compeitions here I see a good representation of subs for SQ use. The ones I usually see are IDMax, JL W7's, a fair share of WGti's, Some SSA's, and recently I've seen a couple FI's and thrown in there not sure of the models, and I've seen one Morel Ultimo, haven't seen Focal dominating the subwoofer stage sorry. Because for one thing LA is perhaps one of the biggest hubs when it comes to the car stereo scene. Texas, perhaps not so much. Apperently everything is bigger in Texas including the wallets for 90% of SQ competitors to be running those Focals. I will say Focal is very well represented for their components not generally their subs.

Maybe everyone else in Los Angeles is wrong. But I don't see and I doubt I ever will see 90% dominance in any car audio competition. Used to be back in the day you could well see a major dominance in brands like when Strokers came out probably half the cars in competitions used Strokers to post their numbers and it was damn likely they were powered by a US Amps surfboard. Still not 90% dominance but 50% or so is still crazy dominant. Those days are long gone everyone's upped their game and competitive equipment can actually be had for relatively little money especially compared to when entire magazine racks were dominated by car stereo equipment.

So based on my own experience I take that 90% dominance with a grain of salt.
Look on youtube for IASCA championship vehicles. You won't see 90% Focal domination. Actually I've been looking for IASCA SQ championship and the subwoofer stage is all over the place and I might hear a mention of the Focal sub but haven't seen one yet. But I will say the JL W7 and W6 is definitely very strongly represented when it comes to SQ subwoofers definitely more represented than Focal. Is it a bit of monkey see monkey do when it comes to people buying JL subs? A lot of people will say that, but then to turn it around, is it possible in that local area in Texas are people just going monkey see monkey do with 90% Focal subwoofer domination?

And they are nice subwoofers for sure Focal and JL. But still don't want to pay that much for a subwoofer even though it has very good SQ.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

Where are you coming up with the word "dominate"? Who said that? I think you're making things up and twisting words around and then using them to try and prove a point.

Have you ever been to a world finals event? Regardless of what things are like for the local scene, a finals event is a better gauge of what gear is winning.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

Oh, and nice move editing your post after I made mine to add an answer to a question I asked.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

Are ya just gonna keep editing that last post instead of making new ones?


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

I'd put it in the newer post but it simply easier to relate it to the previous one than quote the whole thing.

I may not have been to a world championship but it's kinda hard to imagine that all these other top level competitors don't know what they're doing especially since LA was THE originator for extreme auto sound and car culture in general.

It's kinda hard for me to keep up since I got out of actually competing and trying to look up SQ champions these days only tends to come up with champions from half a decade ago and very little info on their rigs.

Instead just like before it's clearly dominated by simple DB drags. Easy to look up their rigs, their numbers. SQ just always sits by the sidelines particularly because it's so subjective.

The one thing I do know SQ emphasis has recently been shifting toward sub bass. The IASCA tracks and judgments show it too. But for me SQ subwoofers have been and always will mean a subwoofer that can do it all sub bass, bass, midbass for me too. And unfortunately you can't beat physics and the simulations play that out. I've yet to see a subwoofer with high Le play as accurately as one with extremely low Le, regardless of whether there's a tiny bit more Le linearity in the one with higher Le. And yes that's including the subwoofer at rest and when it's playing at maximum levels. The low Le subwoofer will still sound clean at high levels and will obviously sound clean at higher frequencies long after the high Le sub has faded to inaudibleness.


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

And since you wanna be extra snarky. I'm not editting my last post now. I'll just keep adding new one liners like the reason I say you claim Focal dominates is because you're saying 90% of the competitors us that particular model subwoofer.



> 90% of my IASCA/USACi/MECA competitors use the KX series of sub's


So like I said, unless southern California is completely out of touch with car audio competition even though we practically invented it, and since we're not all on the Focal subwoofer bandwagon, we must be nuts right?

And since my own observations have been seeing sub bass getting more and more important over the years how can a Focal subwoofer that simply doesn't have the sub bass output win the subwoofer category?


----------



## The real Subzero (Apr 13, 2010)

I have a Focal 27KX and a pair of Focal 5WS. They sound every bit as good as the reputation says.


----------



## oilman (Feb 21, 2012)

The same KX33 has served me very well for the last two years and digs way low. Before i went with 9" MB it covered the higher end very well too. There were many different subs before it, but KX has been my favorite...and was before knew Nick.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

qwertydude said:


> I'll just keep adding new one liners like the reason I say you claim Focal dominates is because you're saying 90% of the competitors us that particular model subwoofer.


I never said focal dominates anything! You just came up with that on your own and built up an argument for it! The only thing that was ever mentioned about competing in this whole thread was when Nick Wingate mentioned that 90% of his competitors use kx subs. Are you saying that he is lying?


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

Either he is lying, exaggerating, or there is a very small very extremely loyal group of Focal subwoofer competitors somewhere in Texas.

But my recent experience going to shows and competitions in LA and Las Vegas I've seen almost every brand out there and even some really small time obscure brand subs out there in competition. But that particular subwoofer seems to be a lot harder to see in real life entered in actual in competitions. I'm sure there's more than a few who have the money to afford an install using one just like I know there's tons of 2x and 4x JLW7 installs that never compete.

But like I said that Focal sub is not at all common on the competition scene.


----------



## Mitsu1grn (Sep 22, 2008)

Greetings!

Just to set the record straight, we at Focal America have 15 members on our sound off team. Of the 15 members on our team 12 use Focal subs. They have the opportunity to use any sub that they choose to. We do not make anyone of them use a Focal sub. They choose to! 

Oilman is one of my competitors and has been using the 33KX for the past two seasons and is quite pleased with the performance. Just to be sure everyone understands, we at Focal America do not give anyone product. It is all purchased from a dealer that we use for our sound off team members. There is a reason they use them......they sound pretty damn good!

For the record, and just to make sure a few people understand why the subs are slightly more expensive than other SQ subs is this:

33 WX'S, 21 WX'S are utilizing the patented "W" sandwich cone. This is the stiffest, lightest cone used in speaker building today. Focal learned many years ago that the stiffer the cone is and the lighter the cone is the more uniform the wave formation shall be. Distortion is minimized and because of the weight being saved efficiency is raised. A 33WX takes about 4 hours to build and can only be built by hand. This ain't cheap. Also, these Subs utilize a ZAMAC frame. This is a composite metal frame that has three dissimilar materials brought together,( aluminum, magnesium, zinc). The engineers also learned that when you use dissimilar materials then a resonance frequency is less likely to occur. These materials are all dense and are non-magnetic as well. They are not one pensive to use. Last, but not least is the multi-magnet array. Focal learned that by utilizing this very unique way of arranging magnets that the magnetic force surrounding. The voice coil is roughly 40% stronger than a standard single ferrite magnet. Again, this ain't cheap to do. 

The KX subs are all built the same way except for the use of Kevlar cones. Yes, that is real, honest to god DuPont Kevlar. It is the second stiffest, lightest cones in use today only eclipsed by Focal's "W" cone. The same principles and build quality are applied to the KX subs as they are with the WX subs.

Also, just to educate a few people, every WX and KX sub goes through a process that is, from start to finish, 90% done by hand. That's right, built by hand by people who care about the MUSIC! Every sub,( and speaker by the way), are listened to before they leave the factory. If the tech does not like the way they sound, they are rejected. If they pass the listening test then each speaker must pass the next test. Frequency response and impedance response. These subs must pass these tests. If they don't meet standard they are rejected. 

It is a labor of love of music that drives Focal to build speakers to such a standard!!!

Last thing is this. When you build a subwoofer that is 50 times stronger than any other sub that has ever been built in the world and you build a home speaker around it and it becomes the reference standard for home audio 2 channel stereo reproduction,( Focal Grande Utopia Be EM $ 200,000.00 and we stay back ordered all the time), subwoofers and how they can reproduce MUSIC of extreme low frequency extension are something they kinda know how to do!

Nick Wingate
National Training Coordinate
Orca Design and MFG
Focal America


----------



## basher8621 (Feb 21, 2009)

To me the only con which is only a con to some is the price. It is a awesome sounding sub. I dont care what the specs say, specs wont tell you how it is going to sound. As far as output, i have heard it in sq tunes where subass is minimal but the sub is geared more to the sq side of the house but I would be willing to bet it has descent output. To say the sub isnt worth the price is stupid. Apparently people buy the sub or Orca wouldnt bring them in so to many who buy it, it is worth it...not often you see one for sale which tells me when people buy them they keep them.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 4, 2013)

Hmmmm..... All this reading on subwoofers is gonna make my brain explode lol! I'm now down to Morel Ultimo SC, Focal KX, or IDQ 12 V4. Of course the IDQ is the cheapest and is calling my name due to the price, BUT, if I do end up going for the gusto, its gonna come down to the Ultimo or the KX.


----------



## SouthSyde (Dec 25, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Hmmmm..... All this reading on subwoofers is gonna make my brain explode lol! I'm now down to Morel Ultimo SC, Focal KX, or IDQ 12 V4. Of course the IDQ is the cheapest and is calling my name due to the price, BUT, if I do end up going for the gusto, its gonna come down to the Ultimo or the KX.


Having use all the 3, I honestly feel the focal is much better than the other two. I had the morel right before the Focal too. The morel was very smooth and gets low, but it lacked the attack that the Focal sub had, and the Focal got even lower. You realllly feel the rumble of 12 15 hz. The morel requires a smaller box however, but if you got the space hands down the Focal wins. Two of my teammates run them and I personally love them. Thinking about getting it again for my car!  

So... Focal > Morel > IDQ

Hope that helps!


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

Wait your choices are the Morel, Focal and IDQ? Why not IDMax that's a little more fair comparison.


----------



## SoundJunkie (Dec 3, 2008)

I am another one of the Focal team members that use the 33KX subs. I have a pair of them in my SUV in 1.5 cu ft sealed enclosures...well damped and filled 75-80% with Black Hole Stuff so they "think" that they are in a larger enclosure.

I feed them 600 clean watts each and these things will plain get down! Fast and tight when they are supposed to be and fat and full when the material dictates it! Anybody who has heard a demo in my truck is always impressed by the sub bass. They are also quite transparent and blend perfectly with the front stage. 

And I have been running mine since before I was on Team Focal.... just for the record

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> Hmmmm..... All this reading on subwoofers is gonna make my brain explode lol! I'm now down to Morel Ultimo SC, Focal KX, or IDQ 12 V4. Of course the IDQ is the cheapest and is calling my name due to the price, BUT, if I do end up going for the gusto, its gonna come down to the Ultimo or the KX.


Nah, forget all of those and find yourself an old JBL power series. :laugh::laugh:


----------



## SouthSyde (Dec 25, 2006)

qwertydude said:


> Funny because when I've attended some of the local compeitions here I see a good representation of subs for SQ use. The ones I usually see are IDMax, JL W7's, a fair share of WGti's, Some SSA's, and recently I've seen a couple FI's and thrown in there not sure of the models, and I've seen one Morel Ultimo, haven't seen Focal dominating the subwoofer stage sorry. Because for one thing LA is perhaps one of the biggest hubs when it comes to the car stereo scene. Texas, perhaps not so much. Apperently everything is bigger in Texas including the wallets for 90% of SQ competitors to be running those Focals. I will say Focal is very well represented for their components not generally their subs.
> 
> Maybe everyone else in Los Angeles is wrong. But I don't see and I doubt I ever will see 90% dominance in any car audio competition. Used to be back in the day you could well see a major dominance in brands like when Strokers came out probably half the cars in competitions used Strokers to post their numbers and it was damn likely they were powered by a US Amps surfboard. Still not 90% dominance but 50% or so is still crazy dominant. Those days are long gone everyone's upped their game and competitive equipment can actually be had for relatively little money especially compared to when entire magazine racks were dominated by car stereo equipment.
> 
> ...



First of all, I think Texas has more of a SQ presence than California. Check out this event. Its the biggest event in recent years. Where in California have you seen such quality of cars and judges?

Team Audio Xperts | College Station-Texas 6.8.2013


Also, Nick never said, 90% domination, he said 90% of the team members of team Focal runs the Focal 33kx sub.. :surprised:


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

You're kidding me right? Those events look more like the weekly club meetings here. Looks more like the amateur class at the events I've been in.

A big event in California has literally hundreds of competitors with every class filled to capacity with competitors from amateur to the sponsored unlimited class, and very interesting exhibition class cars which are more like rolling music studios.

They have thousands of spectators. Fully sponsored rigs that probably cost more than most peoples houses. Not only do they sound fantastic they're also some of the most gorgeous customized cars to boot.

You're trying to compare Texas to the originators of car culture?


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

And no he didn't say 90% of Team Focal use Focal subs, that would be a no brainer. JL sponsored teams are never allowed to use non-JL subs.

I quoted him exactly



> 90% of my IASCA/USACi/MECA competitors use the KX series of sub's


----------



## Mitsu1grn (Sep 22, 2008)

Greetings again all!

Just to be clear so all understand, MY Team Members does not include every sound off competitors in the State of Texas. So, again, just to be clear, 12 of MY TEAM MEMBERS use Focal subs. 

Thank you!

Nick


----------



## optimaprime (Aug 16, 2007)

why does this always happen, he just wanted people to chime in on the subs he asked for. and for the record i have a jbl sub. just wanted to stay on the subject of the two subs he asked for.


----------



## SoundJunkie (Dec 3, 2008)

optimaprime said:


> why does this always happen, he just wanted people to chime in on the subs he asked for. and for the record i have a jbl sub. just wanted to stay on the subject of the two subs he asked for.


Because there will always be fan boys and haters! I gave my honest input based on actually owning and using one of the subs the op is interested in. 

Mods....time to clean the thread up a bit???

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## SouthSyde (Dec 25, 2006)

qwertydude said:


> You're kidding me right? Those events look more like the weekly club meetings here. Looks more like the amateur class at the events I've been in.
> 
> A big event in California has literally hundreds of competitors with every class filled to capacity with competitors from amateur to the sponsored unlimited class, and very interesting exhibition class cars which are more like rolling music studios.
> 
> ...


Hi friend, just out of curiosity, how old are you? You must be talking about the competition team in the 90's. Have you been to a sound off competition lately? Could you show me pictures or a link to an event that you speak of that has hundreds of sound off cars? Make me eat my words please.  I have heard from fellow competitors from California itself that the comps there are tiny nowadays.



qwertydude said:


> And no he didn't say 90% of Team Focal use Focal subs, that would be a no brainer. JL sponsored teams are never allowed to use non-JL subs.
> 
> I quoted him exactly


Yes thank you for reiterating and confirming what I had said. You quoted what Nick said, 

"90% of *my* IASCA/USACi/MECA competitors use the KX series of sub's"

Its in plain English. 

And on a side note, JL sponsers are NOT forced to use JL subs. I know of at least 3 competitiors on team JL that runs other subs, not JL.  I know there are more that runs other subs as well.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 4, 2013)

Mr Wingate or anyone else, could you please identify this Focal sub enclosure in this video?

focal K2 power - YouTube

Cliffnotes: Its the "quarter circle" looking enclosure with a clear plexiglass back with the focal logo on it (on the plexiglass).


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

I realize it's not the heydey like it used to be where a show was just car audio and nothing else. Shows tend to be all in one now but the sound off portions are still quite healthy and there's many cars that not only do the soundoffs but also the show car parts.

Events

But just take a simple look at the numbers. In the 2013 season there were 14 MECA shows in California, and only 4 in Texas. Go to the other competition sites and you'll see a similar trend. Then one by one go through the results and look at how many classes were filled. The only two states with regularly filled classes with more than one competitor are CA and Florida. One other interesting statistic is that with CA and Florida most of the winners are in state. Meaning the competition is still going strong internally. All the other states with just one or two shows in state a year tend to be dominated by the same people seemingly riding around state to state trying to gobble up trophies but rarely venture into the really tough competitions like in CA and Florida. There's no reason why you wouldn't want to enter in these states other than the competition might be a little tougher.


----------



## SQHemi (Jan 17, 2010)

qwertydude said:


> I realize it's not the heydey like it used to be where a show was just car audio and nothing else. Shows tend to be all in one now but the sound off portions are still quite healthy and there's many cars that not only do the soundoffs but also the show car parts.
> 
> Events
> 
> But just take a simple look at the numbers. In the 2013 season there were 14 MECA shows in California, and only 4 in Texas. Go to the other competition sites and you'll see a similar trend. Then one by one go through the results and look at how many classes were filled. The only two states with regularly filled classes with more than one competitor are CA and Florida. One other interesting statistic is that with CA and Florida most of the winners are in state. Meaning the competition is still going strong internally. All the other states with just one or two shows in state a year tend to be dominated by the same people seemingly riding around state to state trying to gobble up trophies but rarely venture into the really tough competitions like in CA and Florida. There's no reason why you wouldn't want to enter in these states other than the competition might be a little tougher.



WOAHHHHHHHH slow down querty, you've gotten quite out of hand. Whats with all the elitist BS being thrown around. NO CALI COMPETITOR in any format Iasca or MECA that I know of would agree with your statements here!!!!! 
First and foremost you're Meca information shows you're assuming they only do MECA and in reality they spread their competitions across Usaci and Iasca more so then Meca. And Meca has the only site where you can see the information you are referring. You have no clue how well they do in other formats. 
Secondly, they have great sounding cars and are tremendously passionate about SQ competitions and it shows immensely if you were to attend one of their events. Somehow you're correlation between their lack of MECA events and "rarely venture into the really tough competitions" implies a negative connotation that is just not true. They held the largest event of the year in terms of number of SQ competitors, why would they need to venture anywhere?

And in case you think I can't speak on the subject, I have been to every California MECA/Iasca event in 2010 thru 2013 AND I along with 2 others from Cali drove to Texas to the event this year that was linked. It was the largest event I have attended since I began competing and it had the stiffest competition as well. Texas and their surrounding states were represented extremely well at that event and results speak accordingly. 


To the OP. My apologies for side tracking your thread, I just couldn't allow myself and the other California Sq competitors to be bundled with this negative / elitist mentality. 

Also you're chosen options for subs are among the best available, your choice would seem more dependent on how it was to be used in your system.


----------



## The real Subzero (Apr 13, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> Mr Wingate or anyone else, could you please identify this Focal sub enclosure in this video?
> 
> focal K2 power - YouTube
> 
> Cliffnotes: Its the "quarter circle" looking enclosure with a clear plexiglass back with the focal logo on it (on the plexiglass).


Looks like a Focal 33KX.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 4, 2013)

The real Subzero said:


> Looks like a Focal 33KX.


Thanks, I wanted to know what enclosure it was though


----------



## The real Subzero (Apr 13, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> Thanks, I wanted to know what enclosure it was though


I looked online and found sub boxes with similar concepts, but that one have different markings. It is possible that a shop made that. It did look like a ported box with dampening inside. Likely it is recomemded specs.


----------



## Mitsu1grn (Sep 22, 2008)

Greetings!

The sub in question is probably a 33 KX. It could be a 40KX but the enclosure is a bit small for it. 

This appears to be a custom enclosure. We at Orca have not seen anything like that style of enclosure. Pretty cool how they did it though. 

Wish I could have been more help!

Nick


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 4, 2013)

Mitsu1grn said:


> Greetings!
> 
> The sub in question is probably a 33 KX. It could be a 40KX but the enclosure is a bit small for it.
> 
> ...


Oh okay, thanks anyway!


----------

