# Myths or Reality....



## gallman (Oct 14, 2012)

Since I am pretty much a noob and have been doing a lot of research on here as well as other sites. I seem to come across anwers that seem to be conflicting to the same topic. Is the a definitve answer for any of these? And if some else has run across the same thing with other topics please feel free to add to the list.

Thanks to all ahead of time for your input.

1. Speakers have a break-in period.

2. Your amp should provide twice the power than your speaker are rated to handle in order to best drive the speakers (provide overhead and prevent amp clipping).

3. Your speakers should be rated to handle significantly more power than your amp can provide in order to ensure the speaker does not create distortion.

4. A round speaker will provide better quality of sound versus an oval speaker (eg. 6.5 vs. a 6x9).

5. As you pay a higher price for your component sets or separates the sound quality will be infinitely greater as will the construction of the speaker (eg. $1,000+ >$600 > $300).

6. ???


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

gallman said:


> Since I am pretty much a noob and have been doing a lot of research on here as well as other sites. I seem to come across anwers that seem to be conflicting to the same topic. Is the a definitve answer for any of these? And if some else has run across the same thing with other topics please feel free to add to the list.
> 
> Thanks to all ahead of time for your input.


You do realize the forum has a myth’s section, don’t you?



gallman said:


> 1. Speakers have a break-in period.


The jury is out on this one. While I have measured T/S Parameter differences between an out of the box subwoofer and that same subwoofer played in free air for 8 hours straight at a particular test tone, I can’t say that the T/S Parameters changed enough to provide an audible difference.


gallman said:


> 2. Your amp should provide twice the power than your speaker are rated to handle in order to best drive the speakers (provide overhead and prevent amp clipping).


Actually, if you want to prevent amplifier clipping, you’d need a minimum of 10x the RMS power! 

Also, what about your head unit clipping at the outputs? Or your external processor? Or the pre-amp section of your amplifier? You need to look at the point where you are trying to prevent clipping.

Now with that said, you can have all the power in the world, and you will still run into the negative aspects of power compression.


gallman said:


> 3. Your speakers should be rated to handle significantly more power than your amp can provide in order to ensure the speaker does not create distortion.


Sadly, a moving driver has an inherent amount of distortion. That’s just the way the ball bounces. I now laugh at how I used to get hung up on the distortion figures of amplifiers being 1%, .1%, .01%, .05%, and so on… Why? Because on average, most speakers reproduce music with double digit distortion figures due to their mechanical nature of reproducing sound. 5% to 10% is not uncommon in the automotive environment. Some people even have their subs producing 20% to 30% distortion.



gallman said:


> 4. A round speaker will provide better quality of sound versus an oval speaker (eg. 6.5 vs. a 6x9).


A properly designed speaker in the proper environment should sound relatively the same, regardless of its shape. The brand escapes me right now, but I know for certain there is at least one audiophile grade, home audio speaker set that uses oval woofers.



gallman said:


> 5. As you pay a higher price for your component sets or separates the sound quality will be infinitely greater as will the construction of the speaker (eg. $1,000+ >$600 > $300).


Once you get to a certain price point, you reach the law of diminishing returns. Basically, you can double the cost of a particular product, and may receive a marginal improvement in sound. I'm talking something low, like 5% better versus OMFG, am I ever blown away by the quality. Conversely, I’ve been known to spend double the money and end up less satisfied than I was before.

Usually the more expensive speakers are made out of exotic materials that will contain: Kevlar, carbon fiber, some weird treated paper, an exotic basket material, rare earth magnets, etc. 

With that written, you also have some grossly overpriced component sets out there that are marked at nearly $1,000 a set and contain less than $200 of raw components. 

Is your mind blown yet?

The audio plot thickens!


----------



## RNBRAD (Oct 30, 2012)

ChrisB said:


> Sadly, a moving driver has an inherent amount of distortion. That’s just the way the ball bounces. I now laugh at how I used to get hung up on the distortion figures of amplifiers being 1%, .1%, .01%, .05%, and so on… Why? Because on average, most speakers reproduce music with double digit distortion figures due to their mechanical nature of reproducing sound. 5% to 10% is not uncommon in the automotive environment. Some people even have their subs producing 20% to 30% distortion.


Ever thought about an amplifier distortion in relation to a speakers distortion, as in synergistic effects or an amplifiers distortion exacerbating a speakers distortion?


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

RNBRAD said:


> Ever thought about an amplifier distortion in relation to a speakers distortion, as in synergistic effects or an amplifiers distortion exacerbating a speakers distortion?


What about certain popular speakers that are purposely manufactured to reproduce that smooth, warm, rich, sound through even order harmonic distortion? They exist and they are popular.


----------



## gallman (Oct 14, 2012)

ChrisB said:


> You do realize the forum has a myth’s section, don’t you?


Found it right after I posted :surprised:. Anyhow this could be moved there and I wouldn't mind. I thought it would be nice to have all the major issues that a newbie runs into definitevly answered.

Like this one:

Oval speakers will typically distort at higher power faster than the equivilent round version? So if my objective is to get clear sound at say 115dbs in my car for the rock music I listen to, which speaker design do I go with? Factory has 6.5's in the doors but can fit a 6x9....oh what to do? That never ending question on the quest for the unattainable match of concert level volumes of rock music in my car with the clarity of jazz music.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

go for as much cone surface area as possible.


----------



## betterbelizeit (Oct 4, 2009)

1. Speakers have a break-in period. TRUE...Specifically Subs! 

2. Your amp should provide twice the power than your speaker are rated to handle in order to best drive the speakers (provide overhead and prevent amp clipping). FALSE ... Amp design takes presidence. Too many amp manufacturers exaggerate their specs. 

3. Your speakers should be rated to handle significantly more power than your amp can provide in order to ensure the speaker does not create distortion. FALSE/TRUE ... more of a crossover issue! Some speakers crave for more power than their stated max. Ex: I have 300 watts feeding my Rainbow Reference Mid-bass from my Audison Trenta. 

4. A round speaker will provide better quality of sound versus an oval speaker (eg. 6.5 vs. a 6x9). Don't know...I never tried a 6x9...but I remember my brothers car about 30 years had a 6x9.

5. As you pay a higher price for your component sets or separates the sound quality will be infinitely greater as will the construction of the speaker (eg. $1,000+ >$600 > $300). FALSE ... Marketing is a glorified lies.

6. ??? No idea!


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

gallman said:


> Found it right after I posted :surprised:. Anyhow this could be moved there and I wouldn't mind. I thought it would be nice to have all the major issues that a newbie runs into definitevly answered.
> 
> Like this one:
> 
> Oval speakers will typically distort at higher power faster than the equivilent round version? So if my objective is to get clear sound at say 115dbs in my car for the rock music I listen to, which speaker design do I go with? Factory has 6.5's in the doors but can fit a 6x9....oh what to do? That never ending question on the quest for the unattainable match of concert level volumes of rock music in my car with the clarity of jazz music.


If pristine sound is what you want in the vehicle, give up now while you have a chance. I spent the better part of two years trying to attain the best possible sound I could in the vehicle, only to realize that a properly set up home system will EASILY outperform the car system at the fraction of the cost.

Let me tell you what I discovered...

1. The speakers in the vehicle are not placed in equidistant positions from the listener. This is much easier to achieve in the home, and while time alignment will partially get you there in the car, that time alignment in and of itself causes other issues.

2. The environment is mobile and subject to a multitude of problems from that alone. How are you going to deal with the reflections from the glass and the hard surfaces? What about extraneous variables such as other vehicles, tire noise, road noise, rain, wind, etc.? All of that will impact your pristine sound no matter how much time, money, and effort you put into reducing the extraneous noise variables.

3. The power source is 12 volts DC and your amplifier power is limited to what your battery can store and what your alternator can supply. In other words, lots of luck maintaining 115 decibels average (which is pretty loud) off a single battery and a factory alternator.

The bottom line is that car audio is a compromise, and you have to decide what deficiencies you are willing to accept prior to delving into it. If you don't, you could end up spending lots of money and time swapping gear, only to find that it was all a waste to begin with.

My last warning to you is to beware of the power of marketing! You'd be amazed at what you will hear based on what you believe from a preconceived notion.


----------



## RNBRAD (Oct 30, 2012)

ChrisB said:


> What about certain popular speakers that are purposely manufactured to reproduce that smooth, warm, rich, sound through even order harmonic distortion? They exist and they are popular.


I think it's all in what we have become accustomed to whether it's more or less accurate reproduction. Kind of the reason Velodyne quit making their servo subs. Rep told me people didn't like them cause they were too accurate, didn't like the sound of an accurate sub as they were use to listening to distortion and became accustomed to it.. lol. So your statement makes perfect sense.


----------



## AudioHelper (Nov 21, 2012)

What happens to a speaker that "breaks" it in?


----------



## gallman (Oct 14, 2012)

ChrisB said:


> If pristine sound is what you want in the vehicle, give up now while you have a chance.... If you don't, you could end up spending lots of money and time swapping gear, only to find that it was all a waste to begin with.


Great advice as aside from becoming more knowledgable from this site I find I am wasting valuable time trying to attain the unattainable. SQ and Rock Music does not seem to go together. No one has the definitive answer but at least some definitive answers have been gathered in this post on a few issues I feel newbies like myself are encountering.

Thanks to all for the posts and anything else that you feel needs to be added.


----------



## gallman (Oct 14, 2012)

Oh and one more item to be dispelled or verified. A speaker with a high rms (ie 120 rms) will not sound good until you actually are playing music within the 120 rms range. In other words at low volumes it will not sound near as well as at higher volumes where you start to get into the RMS range of the speaker. Anyone?


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

x10000 on the amp distortion in relation to the speaker's distortion. You think you can hear a difference between 11 and 10.000000002%

Nah....


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Yeah...no, not true.



gallman said:


> Oh and one more item to be dispelled or verified. A speaker with a high rms (ie 120 rms) will not sound good until you actually are playing music within the 120 rms range. In other words at low volumes it will not sound near as well as at higher volumes where you start to get into the RMS range of the speaker. Anyone?


----------



## Salad Fingers (Jun 14, 2009)

gallman said:


> Great advice as aside from becoming more knowledgable from this site I find I am wasting valuable time trying to attain the unattainable. SQ and Rock Music does not seem to go together. No one has the definitive answer but at least some definitive answers have been gathered in this post on a few issues I feel newbies like myself are encountering.
> 
> Thanks to all for the posts and anything else that you feel needs to be added.


I think that if you can get away from this SQ obsession that people seem to have and concern yourself with what is fun to listen to with YOUR music, you'll be much happier. I don't care what Diana Krall sounds like on a system because I listen to Nile. I only care that Nile sounds the best it possibly can. Don't demo a system or judge your system with jazz if you don't listen to jazz. There's my advice.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

Salad Fingers said:


> I think that if you can get away from this SQ obsession that people seem to have and concern yourself with what is fun to listen to with YOUR music, you'll be much happier. I don't care what Diana Krall sounds like on a system because I listen to Nile. I only care that Nile sounds the best it possibly can. Don't demo a system or judge your system with jazz if you don't listen to jazz. There's my advice.


Argh, you are bringing back horrible memories of 2008 to 2009 when everyone was using Spanish Harlem by Rebecca Pidgeon as the demo song of choice. I remember one person telling me "there is this one note that most systems can't hit correctly!" My retort was something along the lines of who give a **** when you are doing the demo with a song I'll never listen to?:laugh:

Rebecca Pidgeon is cool and all, but let's see how the system handles the imaging of The Grudge by Tool instead. Why? Because I listen to Tool!


----------



## Salad Fingers (Jun 14, 2009)

ChrisB said:


> Argh, you are bringing back horrible memories of 2008 to 2009 when everyone was using Spanish Harlem by Rebecca Pidgeon as the demo song of choice. I remember one person telling me "there is this one note that most systems can't hit correctly!" My retort was something along the lines of who give a **** when you are doing the demo with a song I'll never listen to?:laugh:
> 
> Rebecca Pidgeon is cool and all, but let's see how the system handles the imaging of The Grudge by Tool instead. Why? Because I listen to Tool!


Exactly!!! If this doesn't kick ass, then I don't care...

Nile - Natural Liberation Of Fear Through The Ritual Deception Of Death - YouTube


----------



## thomasluke (Jun 10, 2011)

ChrisB said:


> Argh, you are bringing back horrible memories of 2008 to 2009 when everyone was using Spanish Harlem by Rebecca Pidgeon as the demo song of choice. I remember one person telling me "there is this one note that most systems can't hit correctly!" My retort was something along the lines of who give a **** when you are doing the demo with a song I'll never listen to?:laugh:
> 
> Rebecca Pidgeon is cool and all, but let's see how the system handles the imaging of The Grudge by Tool instead. Why? Because I listen to Tool!


This is something i just came to the realization of myself. I've been using all kind of **** to tune with and then tweak the entire time i was on my way to or from work.
Finally got smart last night and used some Eagle's live and Stained live.... Didn't touch a damn thing this morning.
Had a great ride to work this morning too.


----------



## gallman (Oct 14, 2012)

Salad Fingers said:


> Exactly!!! If this doesn't kick ass, then I don't care...
> 
> Nile - Natural Liberation Of Fear Through The Ritual Deception Of Death - YouTube


Wow, what kind of setup do you have in the car that is able to keep that sounding good at high ear deafening volume levels? Cuz I know you are not just driving around listening to it at normal conversation levels or less. I have to imagine the CD sounds so much better than the YouTube clip (musically speaking). But yeah, that and Tool, and stuff like Black Label Society is what I want to be rockin'. When I listen to music like this I like to "feel" the music on me (kind of like being at the show) and not just the drums either.


----------



## BadSS (Feb 2, 2008)

I can tell you,, not all speakers can accurately reproduce heavily saturated heavy rock / metal tracks at high volumes. I used to have the best series home speakers Infinity made and thought that the recording quality of most heavy metal tracks sucked. LOL,, it was the speakers. After buying a set of B&W 805s with dedicated subwoofers,,, I had a new found appreciation of the music. 

Then,,, I could barely listen to my car stereo with old school MB Quart speakers. I ended up having to bi-amp DIY Seas and Vifa drivers to get the sound close enough to the home system for me to listen to music in the car. Most branded car drivers,, at least those that I could afford,, don't come close. 

Bi-amping in the car makes a big difference also. Most crossovers for car applications are extremely basic and sometimes the crossover point used just doesn't work for a particular application. Going active allows the best crossover point between the tweeter and woofer for the application and allows perfect level matching between the woofer and tweeter. Plus, going active allows for time-alignment of the tweeter and woofer,, further closing the distance between the sound quality comparison between the car and a decent home stereo system.


----------



## gallman (Oct 14, 2012)

BadSS said:


> I can tell you,, not all speakers can accurately reproduce heavily saturated heavy rock / metal tracks at high volumes... I ended up having to bi-amp DIY Seas and Vifa drivers to get the sound close enough to the home system for me to listen to music in the car. Most branded car drivers,, at least those that I could afford,, don't come close.
> 
> Bi-amping in the car makes a big difference also. Most crossovers for car applications are extremely basic and sometimes the crossover point used just doesn't work for a particular application. Going active allows the best crossover point between the tweeter and woofer for the application and allows perfect level matching between the woofer and tweeter. Plus, going active allows for time-alignment of the tweeter and woofer,, further closing the distance between the sound quality comparison between the car and a decent home stereo system.


For a point of reference, what is your full setup, amp RMS wattage, HU, etc.? And how loud would you say you listen to the music?

Thanks.


----------



## SaturnSL1 (Jun 27, 2011)

ChrisB said:


> Argh, you are bringing back horrible memories of 2008 to 2009 when everyone was using Spanish Harlem by Rebecca Pidgeon as the demo song of choice. I remember one person telling me "there is this one note that most systems can't hit correctly!" My retort was something along the lines of who give a **** when you are doing the demo with a song I'll never listen to?:laugh:
> 
> Rebecca Pidgeon is cool and all, but let's see how the system handles the imaging of The Grudge by Tool instead. Why? Because I listen to Tool!


Tool sounds awesome in my car  ****, Tool sounds good on my 1965 Realistic home speakers lol

I don't want it, I just need it. To breathe, to feel, to know I'm alive.


----------



## SPLEclipse (Aug 17, 2012)

I didn't realize there were so many Tool fans on this site. I seem to be finding them everywhere. 

To get back to the whole "Speaker X needs 300 watts to really come alive" thing, there's probably two reasons for that:

1) The added harmonic distortion from overdriving the speaker makes it sound warmer. This happens a LOT.
2) A driver that will accept a lot of power will typically be less sensitive than one with a lower RMS rating. If you are using multiple drivers, the less sensitive one will stand out. Then you run into the problem of not having enough clean power to compensate for this, so you reach the conclusion that it's a terrible driver because you can't power it "correctly".


----------



## highly (Jan 30, 2007)

Let me just say that all of your intended goals for a system are attainable. To that I will add 'but not easily'. Your first car audio build will likely NOT get you to audio nirvana. Even with very well defined goals and an exceptional degree of luck on your side it is unlikely to happen. One thing to add to the list of considerations will definitely be how much disfigurement of the original vehicle will you tolerate to achieve the goal of exceptionally defined Tool at tactile volume levels. How much vehicular space, time, and money are you willing to dedicate to the long term goal of success? If you are looking to slap some speakers into the factory locations and expect that sort of result then you may be best served to save yourself the headache and abort now. 

Exceptional examples of cars that meet your criteria are the Team Zapco/ Elite cars. Steve Cook and Matt Roberts would be the masters of this type of build. 

Do speakers have a break-in period? Yes. Big, stiff suspensions loosen up with time. The bigger and stiffer the suspension, the more noticable the effect. The effects are generally minor.

Speakers require more power than they are rated for to be useful? No. However, if you are trying to achieve high output from insensitive drivers in small enclosures, high power is necessary. High sensitivity drivers in large enclosures get louder with less power. The current fad is generally towards the former, though many people seem to be leaning in the other direction when speed, impact, and high volumes are the goal. In either case, 'enough' power depends on the goal, the driver, and the installation. Insensitive drivers in small enclosures seem to become more lively when beat into submission with watts. 

High quality speakers can be effective in unconventional shapes? Yes. They CAN be. However that is not necessarily the norm. There are some good reasons to use a 6x9 or a 4x6 driver for certain things, but they are seldom selected for those properties (directional control prime amongst them). As such, you will probably find much more research and development time spent developing exceptional round frame speakers than oval frames. As a generalization that isn't always true. Just usually so.

Does spending more money get you more? Sometimes, yes. Often, no. There is more value in a proper installation than in the money you spend on the equipment assuming the equipment is of minimal acceptable quality. The installation can take the best sounding components and make them an utter failure or it can take modest components and make them exceptional performers. Learning how to properly install a given piece of equipment to leverage its best qualities and diminish its worst qualities is where the art and science of car audio meets. That's what this site - underneath (sometimes DEEP underneath) all the drama and crap - is all about.

-T


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

highly said:


> Do speakers have a break-in period? Yes. Big, stiff suspensions loosen up with time. The bigger and stiffer the suspension, the more noticable the effect. The effects are generally minor.


One pretty well-known tester has mentioned that although there seems to be some minor "loosening" of the suspension of a speaker, it usually occurs on the order of seconds, not days. He also noted that it returns back to "tight" before the next session.


----------



## highly (Jan 30, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> One pretty well-known tester has mentioned that although there seems to be some minor "loosening" of the suspension of a speaker, it usually occurs on the order of seconds, not days. He also noted that it returns back to "tight" before the next session.


Interesting. I can definitely say that the suspension on my Fi 18" _seems _to have loosened up a bit over time. It sounds very different in the car now than when it was first installed. I'm not saying that the 'well-known tester' was wrong; for all I know I just got used to it over the first 100 or so hours it was in the car. It certainly strikes me as being different now. 

There I go perpetuating myth in spite of myself...:laugh:


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

It will remain in the domain of myth until somebody posts the before and after T/S parameters. It's been posted before, but it's always shown that there is no break-in (or negligible break-in). Obviously, all that does is prove the null hypothesis. So it would be really neat if somebody could show data of something changing!


----------



## highly (Jan 30, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> It will remain in the domain of myth until somebody posts the before and after T/S parameters. It's been posted before, but it's always shown that there is no break-in (or negligible break-in). Obviously, all that does is prove the null hypothesis. So it would be really neat if somebody could show data of something changing!


Well, I did pull parameters before I dropped it in. I'll try to remember next time I pull it from The Hole.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

Haha thanks. It would be interesting to see if certain parameters changed over time, WHICH ONES? Then we can try to figure out why they changed.


----------



## highly (Jan 30, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> Haha thanks. It would be interesting to see if certain parameters changed over time, WHICH ONES? Then we can try to figure out why they changed.


I would expect the changes to be better resolved on a Klippel than by small signal analysis. Moving mass and electrical properties (Sd, Mms, Le Re, and Bl)are unlikely to change. Compliance may (Cms and Rms), but would not expect it to be resolved in small signal testing on a WT3. That's purely speculation, of course. I'll have to run it to see what's what.


----------



## MarkZ (Dec 5, 2005)

I'm actually not convinced that the changes AREN'T electrical. That's kinda why I want to see the results. It would be pretty interesting if "break-in" isn't what people think it is. I know that I've owned subs in the past that I've beat the piss out of, and I got the infamous "holy ****!" smell to come from them, and so I kinda wonder if that had any long-lasting results on their performance. Would that be considered "break-in"?


----------



## highly (Jan 30, 2007)

MarkZ said:


> I'm actually not convinced that the changes AREN'T electrical. That's kinda why I want to see the results. It would be pretty interesting if "break-in" isn't what people think it is. I know that I've owned subs in the past that I've beat the piss out of, and I got the infamous "holy ****!" smell to come from them, and so I kinda wonder if that had any long-lasting results on their performance. Would that be considered "break-in"?


Hmm. Maybe 'broken in' should be shortened to just 'broken' for that case?


----------



## Avaric3 (Dec 2, 2012)

Lol certainly doesnt sound good


----------



## User Name (Oct 9, 2012)

If you'd like some data rather than just opinions or person experiences,

Check out *this* link and
*this* one for interesting data on speaker burn in.


----------



## hankbot (Jan 6, 2013)

Fantastic reads. This is what I'm expecting to find when I pull my Anarchy's and re-measure them soon. I think setting up a break-in routine is in my future for drivers before box design begins. :thumbsup:



User Name said:


> If you'd like some data rather than just opinions or person experiences,
> 
> Check out *this* link and
> *this* one for interesting data on speaker burn in.


----------



## squeak9798 (Apr 20, 2005)

hankbot said:


> Fantastic reads. This is what I'm expecting to find when I pull my Anarchy's and re-measure them soon. I think setting up a break-in routine is in my future for drivers before box design begins. :thumbsup:


While I didn't go through every driver in the first article, if you actually plot the difference in response between the original T/S and the very last T/S measured in the 2nd article the difference in response is less than 1db. Which means the "test" proves exactly what we have been saying all along...driver break-in while measurable isn't _audible_.


----------



## hankbot (Jan 6, 2013)

While I agree 1db is hard to hear, how about being able to potentially lower your crossover almost 10hz thanks to the fs shift? As per the M-165X having almost a 9hz change. That could make a big difference in how a speaker crosses with your subs. I'm not saying it will always make world's of difference, but accounting for that big a shift in fs or qts seems like something worth accounting for as you approach that last little bit of SQ or SPL that one may be chasing. 

Given the tiny measurement variations between speakers that people argue about on here, how does it hurt to have more accurate data relating to the actual driver parameters for the majority of their life? 

Just sayin. 



squeak9798 said:


> While I didn't go through every driver in the first article, if you actually plot the difference in response between the original T/S and the very last T/S measured in the 2nd article the difference in response is less than 1db. Which means the "test" proves exactly what we have been saying all along...driver break-in while measurable isn't _audible_.


----------



## hankbot (Jan 6, 2013)

squeak9798 said:


> While I didn't go through every driver in the first article, if you actually plot the difference in response between the original T/S and the very last T/S measured in the 2nd article the difference in response is less than 1db. Which means the "test" proves exactly what we have been saying all along...driver break-in while measurable isn't _audible_.


Oh, and I pretty much have everything I need to put together a break-in rig. You are probably correct that it wouldn't be worth the investment for most people. It's just adding some wires and relays to my bench.


----------



## squeak9798 (Apr 20, 2005)

hankbot said:


> While I agree 1db is hard to hear, how about being able to potentially lower your crossover almost 10hz thanks to the fs shift? As per the M-165X having almost a 9hz change. That could make a big difference in how a speaker crosses with your subs. I'm not saying it will always make world's of difference, but accounting for that big a shift in fs or qts seems like something worth accounting for as you approach that last little bit of SQ or SPL that one may be chasing.
> 
> Given the tiny measurement variations between speakers that people argue about on here, how does it hurt to have more accurate data relating to the actual driver parameters for the majority of their life?
> 
> Just sayin.


That "big" Fs shift has absolutely nothing to do with your crossover point when the actual response curve along with every other aspect of performance is virtually unchanged. I think you are equating a much lower Fs with much better low frequency extension.....sorry, doesn't work that way when Q and all other associated parameters are changing proportionally. Excursion vs power, low frequency extension, F3, etc...everything performance related is for all intents and purposes identical. If you couldn't cross lower before, break-in isn't going to change any performance related aspect that will allow a 10hz lower crossover point. 

I'm not saying measuring TSP is a bad idea. Certainly manufacturer specifications could be drastically different than advertised, and that would be worthwhile information to have. However, thinking the driver behavior pre- and post-break in is going to be usefully different in any manor is simply incorrect.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

squeak9798 said:


> That "big" Fs shift has absolutely nothing to do with your crossover point when the actual response curve along with every other aspect of performance is virtually unchanged. I think you are equating a much lower Fs with much better low frequency extension.....sorry, doesn't work that way when Q and all other associated parameters are changing proportionally. Excursion vs power, low frequency extension, F3, etc...everything performance related is for all intents and purposes identical. If you couldn't cross lower before, break-in isn't going to change any performance related aspect that will allow a 10hz lower crossover point.
> 
> I'm not saying measuring TSP is a bad idea. Certainly manufacturer specifications could be drastically different than advertised, and that would be worthwhile information to have. However, thinking the driver behavior pre- and post-break in is going to be usefully different in any manor is simply incorrect.


Agreed 100% 

Kelvin


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

gallman said:


> 1. Speakers have a break-in period.


No measurable differences.



> 2. Your amp should provide twice the power than your speaker are rated to handle in order to best drive the speakers (provide overhead and prevent amp clipping).


Found this to be helpful !



> 3. Your speakers should be rated to handle significantly more power than your amp can provide in order to ensure the speaker does not create distortion.


HA HA, Bollocks !



> 4. A round speaker will provide better quality of sound versus an oval speaker (eg. 6.5 vs. a 6x9).


Not necessarily.



> 5. As you pay a higher price for your component sets or separates the sound quality will be infinitely greater as will the construction of the speaker (eg. $1,000+ >$600 > $300).
> 
> Think, paying for name. [ so, not in my experience ]
> 
> ...


----------



## hankbot (Jan 6, 2013)

Not arguing here, just trying to fully understand. Why exactly would the excursion per watt not change if compliance does? And would not a change in Fs mean there is a change in the impedance curve of the speaker, causing the area to the right of the peak impedance to be larger, thus more potential for current draw in the area between Fs and say 100Hz? 

I know we're not talking about earth shattering shifts in woofer performance, but it's still hard to wrap my head around the fact that this is not worth taking into consideration, especially if it's not hard for one to do.

I wish I had a quiet room with calibrated equipment , a klippel, or something equally ridiculous at home to test speakers. It'd be fun to really get my head wrapped around these numbers with real testing so that I could do some measuring and get data other than what I can get from my DATS and in car testing.

I look forward to understanding this better.



squeak9798 said:


> That "big" Fs shift has absolutely nothing to do with your crossover point when the actual response curve along with every other aspect of performance is virtually unchanged. I think you are equating a much lower Fs with much better low frequency extension.....sorry, doesn't work that way when Q and all other associated parameters are changing proportionally. Excursion vs power, low frequency extension, F3, etc...everything performance related is for all intents and purposes identical. If you couldn't cross lower before, break-in isn't going to change any performance related aspect that will allow a 10hz lower crossover point.
> 
> I'm not saying measuring TSP is a bad idea. Certainly manufacturer specifications could be drastically different than advertised, and that would be worthwhile information to have. However, thinking the driver behavior pre- and post-break in is going to be usefully different in any manor is simply incorrect.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

hankbot said:


> Not arguing here, just trying to fully understand. Why exactly would the excursion per watt not change if compliance does? And would not a change in Fs mean there is a change in the impedance curve of the speaker, causing the area to the right of the peak impedance to be larger, thus more potential for current draw in the area between Fs and say 100Hz?
> 
> I know we're not talking about earth shattering shifts in woofer performance, but it's still hard to wrap my head around the fact that this is not worth taking into consideration, especially if it's not hard for one to do.
> 
> ...


The enclosure has a much bigger impact in the system Q than a side to side parameter change from break-in 
Having an 8Hz to 9Hz change in driver parameters does not mean you'll be able to cross a driver lower by the same amount... 
Another thing to consider is the vehicle acoustic... You might have a really low FS driver for midbass (let's say 35Hz) but the way the acoustic can affect things, your F3 (-3dB point) is @ 80Hz, that means your Xover point shouldn't be much lower than that (80Hz) - you can of course cross lower but you'll need some form of phase matching and EQ to tune. 

Kelvin


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

The amount of speaker break-in is moot compared to the parameter shift come wintertime.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

There are measurable differences, observed T/S parameter changes beyond 100 hours. Measurements of my ScanSpeak 30W 12" sub below (fed pink noise to the driver without any filters, "moderate" excursion through the whole break-in period;

New;



~100 hours later (Fs drops, Vas increases, Qts drops);



The T/S continued to change until 80-90 hours until they stabilized. Noticed the same effect with my DLS Iridium 8i mids, they stabilized after ~40 hours break-in. Measurements were done in the same ambient temperature (room temperature).


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

hankbot said:


> And would not a change in Fs mean there is a change in the impedance curve of the speaker, causing the area to the right of the peak impedance to be larger, thus more potential for current draw in the area between Fs and say 100Hz?


A change in Fs will of course change the impedance response, if all other parameters remain the same the impedance peak would move left or right on the plot. How the impedance peak looks is not dependent on Fs itself but the Q of the driver. Q is measured at Fs.

What do you mean by "more potential for current draw" exactly?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Hanatsu said:


> There are measurable differences, observed T/S parameter changes beyond 100 hours. Measurements of my ScanSpeak 30W 12" sub below (fed pink noise to the driver without any filters, "moderate" excursion through the whole break-in period;
> 
> New;
> 
> ...


Now measure it fresh out of the freezer.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

Haha.. no impedance peak to measure then 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 3 via Tapatalk.


----------

