# Why no Alpine Type R and Type S for "budget" builds?



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

I've talked to a couple people about these drivers, but thought I would open it up to discussion for the community in general. Keep in mind, I know virtually nothing about speaker design. 

Outside of some very positive feedback and praise of the current (SWR-8D_) and previous generation (SWR-8_3D) 8" model, the Alpine Type R woofers don't seem to get much attention from the DIYMA crowd, or SQ enthusiasts in general. The same holds true of the current Type S 15" model (SWS-15D_). I've seen some praise of the 15" Type S for SQ applications, but hardly a blip on the radar for the 10" and 12" offerings. Considering the street pricing on these, I'm a little surprised they don't get more attention.

Is this simply because the market is flooded with so many 10" and 12" options whereas choices for 8" and 15" drivers is more limited? 

Did Jim Walter find some special sauce for those two drivers that wasn't added to the more common sizes? 

Or is there some sort of SPL stigma attached to the Alpine drivers that prevents people from giving them a shot?

As a laymen, it would seem that Jim's focus in designing these drivers was to reduce distortion while increasing output at the cost of efficiency. I've come to that conclusion after reading some of his posts on the 8" R and 15" S listed above and looking at some of the information available on the drivers' designs. 

Some of the technologies/techniques shared by both lines are as follows...

High Amplitude Multi-Roll (HAMR) Surround
A combination of a traditional roll surround and an accordion surround to allow for higher Xmax/Xmech while keeping a smaller surround and increasing cone area.

Larger 65mm Voice Coils
Higher power handling and better thermal performance

Dual Flare Pole Vent
Reduces turbulence and air spring effect of air trapped behind the dust cap

Compound Radius Curve (CRC) Extended Pole Geometry
Provides for balanced flux saturation which leads to more symmetrical and flatter BL curves

Differences between the Type S and Type R include...

Segmented (R) vs Non-segmented magnet assembly (S)
(Segmented assembly is necessitated by frame/heat sink design of the R.)

Overhung (R) vs Underhung (S) Voice Coil Configuration

Shorting Sleeve (R) vs No Shorting Sleeve (S)

Cast Aluminum Frame/Heat Sink (R) vs Stamped Steel Frame (S)

The Type S 12...









The Type R 12...









Type R 12 Klippel (I doubt the Type S is nearly as flat)...


----------



## stills (Apr 13, 2008)

Alpines too run of the mill for many folks on here


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

Because they're mainstream. Many people here are more attracted to boutique/niche or high end products. The Alpine subs have been great for a few generations now. My only complaint about them is the suspension being a little stiffer than advertised, especially when the subs age. I pieced together some recone parts for the R 12's that use a much softer suspension which brings the qts down on them and cuts the leash on a great driver and turns it into an incredible driver. The R 12's that I've reconed this way have been some of my all time favorite subs.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

At this point it's practically the only driver line I use for subs. At the price point I can't think of anything that's competitive. Tymphany doesn't use shorting rings or underhung motors in their subs. Dayton does, but mostly in the neo models, and those are expensive.

My 'depth charge' sub with an Alpine Type S 10" went from my HT to my garage system.
My 'insubnia' sub with dual Alpine Type Rs is still in my HT.

I have a Type S 15" that I really want to use for *something* but I don't know what. I think that one is my fav, it's a ridiculous amount of displacement for around $120.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

I get the mainstream thing, and I am sure I am guilty of it myself. 

When looking at the "go to" DIY subs you're looking at the Dayton HO and HF from PE when compared to the Type R price point. They are shallower, which can be advantageous and are known to be low distortion. I don't think you would see nearly the same kind of output from them though. 

If you're shopping Madisound, I guess you could pick up an SB Acoustics or Scanspeak Passive Radiator for about the same price. 

I also understand that there is a natural tendency for the kind of people that would frequent DIYMA to gravitate to more boutique brands when there isn't a DIY solution to meet their needs. Chances are though, those boutique brands aren't going to offer anything that would appear to match the performance of the Alpines at a similar price point. 

Thanks for the feedback! Especially from PB since he has actually made use of some of these drivers.


----------



## Brian_smith06 (Jan 31, 2008)

I have the type s 10 in my install and enjoy it but it's hard to critique too much due to it being in a tiny sealed enclosure. It does its job but is a huge downgrade from my idmax


----------



## Timhof13 (Dec 24, 2013)

Brian_smith06 said:


> I have the type s 10 in my install and enjoy it but it's hard to critique too much due to it being in a tiny sealed enclosure. It does its job but is a huge downgrade from my idmax


How small?


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

rton20s said:


> When looking at the "go to" DIY subs you're looking at the Dayton HO and HF from PE when compared to the Type R price point. They are shallower, which can be advantageous and are known to be low distortion. I don't think you would see nearly the same kind of output from them though.


The Dayton HO 10 sounds better than the Type R 10 in a smallish sealed box but the Type R wins output and extension, no contest. If you need something to play low and loud in half a cubic foot, it's hard to imagine something much better. I could feel 7 Hz. Of 4 subs that I've run in that enclosure, it was the only one that didn't need a HPF/SSF of any kind. It probably sounds better in .8 - 1 cubic foot.

I think someone did some research at some point and determined that for pure displacement per dollar, nothing beat the Type S.


----------



## chithead (Mar 19, 2008)

I used the Type-R before, definitely one of my all time favorites. Tried both sealed and ported, both were excellent. Ported was in a CRX, and obviously for the output, but sealed enclosure in a wagon was very nice.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

strakele said:


> The Dayton HO 10 sounds better than the Type R 10 in a smallish sealed box but the Type R wins output and extension, no contest. If you need something to play low and loud in half a cubic foot, it's hard to imagine something much better. I could feel 7 Hz.  Of 4 subs that I've run in that enclosure, it was the only one that didn't need a HPF/SSF of any kind. It probably sounds better in .8 - 1 cubic foot.
> 
> I think someone did some research at some point and determined that for pure displacement per dollar, nothing beat the Type S.


Hey, I know that guy : Alpine Type S is your Value Leader. - diyAudio

It turned out that the stereo integrity drivers were a better deal, but the Type S is up there. Now that the SI HT driver is discontinued, I should crunch the numbers again.

Every once in a while I dream about quitting my job and doing prosound for a living, and if I did that I'd get one of those Harbor Freight trailers that you can build in your garage, and build a tapped horn the size of a Volkswagen loaded with ALpine Type S woofers, a lot of amps and a gas generator. Literally a party on wheels


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

strakele said:


> The Dayton HO 10 sounds better than the Type R 10 in a smallish sealed box but the Type R wins output and extension, no contest. If you need something to play low and loud in half a cubic foot, it's hard to imagine something much better. I could feel 7 Hz. Of 4 subs that I've run in that enclosure, it was the only one that didn't need a HPF/SSF of any kind. It probably sounds better in .8 - 1 cubic foot.
> 
> I think someone did some research at some point and determined that for pure displacement per dollar, nothing beat the Type S.


Was it the current generation Type R that you tried or one of the previous? And in what type of vehicle? I've heard the HO 10s and they do play very cleanly. What did you feel was lacking from the type R compared to the HO on the SQ side of things?



chithead said:


> I used the Type-R before, definitely one of my all time favorites. Tried both sealed and ported, both were excellent. Ported was in a CRX, and obviously for the output, but sealed enclosure in a wagon was very nice.


Nice to see people with actual experience commenting. For such mainstream offerings, the information available on them from SQ oriented users is pretty thin. 



Patrick Bateman said:


> Hey, I know that guy : Alpine Type S is your Value Leader. - diyAudio
> 
> It turned out that the stereo integrity drivers were a better deal, but the Type S is up there. Now that the SI HT driver is discontinued, I should crunch the numbers again.
> 
> Every once in a while I dream about quitting my job and doing prosound for a living, and if I did that I'd get one of those Harbor Freight trailers that you can build in your garage, and build a tapped horn the size of a Volkswagen loaded with ALpine Type S woofers, a lot of amps and a gas generator. Literally a party on wheels


I knew you and Brian Steele had done some of those comparisons in the past. Those SWS-15s do seem to get some decent attention as a value leader. 

I wonder if anyone is still on contact with Jim Walter. When he was active here on DIYMA he wasn't too shy about sharing information. I'd be curious to see his thoughts on the S and R 10s and 12s compared to the 8" R and 15" S. Some Klippel results for the Type S 10s or 12s would be cool as well.


----------



## Black Rain (Feb 27, 2011)

I personally love the Type Rs. I still have (3) SWR-1243D that was running before. They can produce an enormous amount of bass and they can handle a great deal of power. I used to feed them around 900wrms each when I had them in a 3.3ft3 sealed shared enclosure (no partitions). They used to really jump out and really never showed like they were struggling or overheating. 

Also, have (1) of the its predecessor SWR-1242. This one is also just as exceptional the 1243 model. My biggest thing with Alpine subs, is that they underrate their subs so low. I understand that its a marketing thing to ensure that most people out there will turn it up way past their breaking point, and this is designed to protect the sub.

Either way, I believe Alpine makes a great sub in the Type R, but most DIYers or SQ guys will shun them mainly because they are considered to be MAINSTREAM. But if you applied them just as you would any other sub, you'd see that they can probably out perform the better of them.


----------



## Mike Bober (Apr 11, 2013)

I currently have two 15" type R's in an IB set-up in my Camaro, but still need to get the system tuned come spring time when i get my car out of winter storage. I need to learn the REW software yet so im getting a bit antsy to get to work on it!


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

I'm a big fan of the 8" type R. I just never got around to ordering them for a build. I was going to try 6.5" subs under the seats first but that kind of went by the wayside too.


----------



## therapture (Jan 31, 2013)

The "mainstream" effect certainly comes into play because hey, if you don't have the latest "AbCdR botique" specialty drivers or spend 1000 bucks on some midranges, well then you just aren't serious about good sound...right?

There seems to be a great disparity between the true DIY'er that uses even cheap drivers sourced from places like PE or WoofersEtc, and the high end DIY guys that only use drivers that cost more than many of our entire systems.

I'll take a well setup and well tuned system using average parts, over the high end one that was installed poorly or didn't even seal and dampen the doors.
Back in the day a friend of mine used cheap Coustic amps, a couple Realistic subs, and some Pioneer run of the mill mids and tweets, and people loved the rig! He embarrassed many that spent 2x-3x as much.

If I ever changed my "cheap" Infinity sub out, it would probably be for the Alpine S or a Dayton model.


----------



## Brian_smith06 (Jan 31, 2008)

Timhof13 said:


> How small?


Right at half a cube


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

rton20s said:


> Was it the current generation Type R that you tried or one of the previous? And in what type of vehicle? I've heard the HO 10s and they do play very cleanly. What did you feel was lacking from the type R compared to the HO on the SQ side of things?


Current generation I believe, unless they made another new one in the past year. In the front passenger footwell of my Mitsubishi Lancer. I also used a pair of older generation Type R 10s in the trunk in my first install. I thought the HO was cleaner and more articulate. No contest in output. The sealed new generation Type R 10 in the footwell about matched a pair of HO 10s ported in the trunk.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

strakele said:


> Current generation I believe, unless they made another new one in the past year. In the front passenger footwell of my Mitsubishi Lancer. I also used a pair of older generation Type R 10s in the trunk in my first install. I thought the HO was cleaner and more articulate. No contest in output. The sealed new generation Type R 10 in the footwell about matched a pair of HO 10s ported in the trunk.


From what I can tell, the previous generation is very similar to the current generation (e.g. SWR-1223D vs SWR-12D2). Specs are pretty close, but in this specific case the new model has slightly lower Fs, Le, Qms, Qes, Qts and cone area, but slightly higher Vas and power handling. So even if it wasn't the newest that you tried, I would guess that it would be very similar to what is currently available. 

I wonder how much of the differences between the HO and the Type R in the footwell would be audible in a like for like typical trunk install.


----------



## Alrojoca (Oct 5, 2012)

Good for Alpine to offer good value and get respect from important and very qualified people from DIYMA.


----------



## asianinvasion21 (Sep 24, 2012)

Had my type r's for probably 5 years now and they are still running strong. I've ran them sealed, ported and IB. I think if more people tried these subs IB they would consider them more on the SQ side. These subs were not natural sounding to me at all when in a box imo.


----------



## Silvercoat (Dec 5, 2013)

Having worked retail for 8 years and also being a user and current displeased user of Alpine I can answer the crap out of this thread.

---Type R---
When I first got into the biz at Best Buy, Alpine was the nicest thing we carried in the store. I agree with this in the face that their speakers/headunits/subs/amps were the nicest. I had the 2 model year previous 10" Type R. This sub was a beast and sounded amazing. I beat the crap out of it for 2-3 years and then sold it. It is still kicking today and sounds great. I did not go with the Type S at the time (which was 350W RMS) because the MRP-M500 and AlpineR were a better combo for a bit more money.

The next Type R went up to 600W and was supposed to be a better sub. The sub looked much more plain and to me did not have any justification for the increase in rating. The sub sounded a bit worse and at the time Alpine's budget amp was 500W RMW so it did not make much sense.

After this when Alpine went to the current 1000W RMS version, the sub did not appear to get much better. I put in a few with an Alpine 1000W RMS amp and to be honest, they were no where near as loud and sounded just a good as the previous ones. 

So for the Type R subs, they have gotten more power hungry but have not become better or louder subs I feel.

--Type S---
It was pretty obvious that Alpine followed the upgrade Model X > move old tech down approach here. When I first came onto these they were like Older Type R's. When they Type R got upgraded, the old Type-S became the Type-E. The older Type S I think was a good sub to fill in with the MRPM500 as it was a midgrade, 300W S4Ohm sub. It worked great in ported or even better in sealed boxes. When it got upgraded to a 500W model, it got a little better and took over for the Type R a bit as midgrade or upgrade. The current one is still a decent sub and has many of the tech from the Old Type R. the basket and internals are not a nice as the type R, but it is a solid sub all around. The only we have with the current one is it will burn up up sometimes in ported boxes on 500W. I think the current Type S may be slightly overrated or susceptible to distortion in build quality. It is a good sub by any means but there are a lot of close contenders in this segment that require less power and have better capability to get "louder" for the money. This sub tried to be a Type-R but isnt quite there in that spot. I think the power rating needs to be adjusted otherwise still a good sub.


---Typer R 8's---
These subs use the older Type R builds usually amodel year behind if you look at them. The 8 in the prefab box is a monster and has a lot of good reviews. The sub by itself is great but suffers a bit on the sensitivity side ofr an 8. Very good subs that not many people take advantage of probably due to the fact that if they need a 8" they probably have depth requirements or they want something like a JLW7-8.

I dont think it is an SPL issue. I think its segment choice/power/design.

I dont think the current ones justifies the price point for mainly the "Alpine" premium. I think Alpine is facing this on their head units and speakers at the moment.

If Alpine is a premium brand, then they need to have the latest and greatest or have just that much better quality over everyone else. I think Alpine has lost a lot of its edge at this point. Same could be said for brands like Rockford Fosgate.

For example, look at Rockford Fosgate as a BRAND and how good their website,community,display,product choice and development is.

Yet think about how many people especially in concerns with SQ would choose a ~$800 set of Focal/Hertz speakers over a $800 set of Rockford T3's. Both probably sound pretty darn good.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

You post seems a bit of a "shotgun" approach. Peppering bits and pieces of information, but not really enough there (at least for me) to track well. 

Model numbers would certainly help. Or even visual cues from models you described. Each update of the R & S subwoofers have some sort of aesthetic change so that they can be pretty easily identified. 

I definitely appreciate the response though and your contribution to the thread. I think some of the issues you've mentioned have been addressed by Jim Walter at some point. Either through posts here, or in one of the videos that you can find on youtube where he talks about Alpine subwoofer design.


----------



## Silvercoat (Dec 5, 2013)

rton20s said:


> You post seems a bit of a "shotgun" approach. Peppering bits and pieces of information, but not really enough there (at least for me) to track well.
> 
> Model numbers would certainly help. Or even visual cues from models you described. Each update of the R & S subwoofers have some sort of aesthetic change so that they can be pretty easily identified.
> 
> I definitely appreciate the response though and your contribution to the thread. I think some of the issues you've mentioned have been addressed by Jim Walter at some point. Either through posts here, or in one of the videos that you can find on youtube where he talks about Alpine subwoofer design.



I will see what I can track down to clarify.
--- Type R ---
SWR-1042D - Loved this sub, this was the "500 Watt" one I owned 1st. The 12" version was great as well. So the "42" series

SWR-1243D - I did not see much improvement in this sub, but I think the price changed slightly and I did not see any improvement in performance. 

SWR-12d4 - Newqest 1,000W version, I put in a few but did not see the benefit of such a high power range. The older subs also felt a little better in the build quality.

SWR8 with the con similar to the 1042D - Love this sub as well, it was a monset for its size.

Maybe it had something to do with going from pole vented to another design?

--- Type S ---
SWS-1242D - I heard of few of these and saw a few that lasted a long time. Seemed to be a great sub. Never sold one personally

SWS-1243D - These we had some issues with. The tinsel leads were week on some of them and the build quality seemed to go down.

SWS-12D4 - A great sub. We seemed to have some distort in ported boxes but when the power was underrated for the sub it seemed to solve that issue. 

Looking at the leads, basket, segmented surround, it was cool to see how the tech would move down the models.

Hope this helps. I could say volumes about their speakers and headunits as well. Amps have been solid though. My 1st gen PDX's have worked great.


----------



## Alrojoca (Oct 5, 2012)

I guess my question to silvercoat would be

What other sub brands has he used?


If I drive 4 diferent scion car models, I will find some flaws in all them but the choice is limited to scion, I would need to drive Hondas, and toyotas and maybe Acuras and Lexus, then I might find out than my scion FRS might give me a better value than the sport Lexus or Acura costing 2 or 3 times as much


----------



## Sine Swept (Sep 3, 2010)

I agree with them maybe not being natural sounding. I will say that they are quite articulate. Sealed or ported on 500RMS I have not seen anyone disappointed. I am thinking about people that had this as a first setup and a first taste at their own in car bass.

I have 2 1243's in the wife's car paired with an Alpine monoblock and it does sound quite pleasing. It was mentioned to me once from someone that my JBL Power series 12s seemed to have more output than the Type R's that were available at that time. This was not verified by a meter. The R's seem to articulate more, with a sound of their own.


----------



## etroze (Dec 24, 2013)

I actually had the Type S when they came out (ones that spiders let go on all the time) I liked them a lot, they were very clean sounding and had a ton of punch when you wanted them to and I believe they were sealed in about a cube each. At the time though all I knew is I wanted bass so I couldn't really make an accurate review. Plus I owned these when I was 17 lol.


----------



## Silvercoat (Dec 5, 2013)

Alrojoca said:


> I guess my question to silvercoat would be
> 
> What other sub brands has he used?
> 
> ...


Glad to answer.

Before I had the Alpines, I had some JBL's which I loved. They were cheapo entry level lines about 15 years ago. They were good because they were cheap and had high sensitivity which made them "load" to me.

Working retail around these items allowed me to see how some products evolved and who was better this year over the next. I needed this because I needed to make quick suggestions to customers.

I have also owned some Kicker S entry levels, Comp R mid grade and I currently have a Solo Classic 12" which I love. This was their "small box" sub and it certainly deliveries tight punchy bass. I replaced my ported Type R with this sub. I lost a bit of overall volume but the sub is a bit more accurate. I have also had a few mid grade Rockford subs, Some Kenwood stuff, and a few other things one can easily find on the market. Whenever I pick a sub I always buy for a purpose and take a subjective approach when it comes to comparing subs.


----------



## nstaln (Feb 11, 2009)

I'm giving some serious thought to a pair of SWR-8d's in individual .2cube sealed enclosures, each one glassed in under each front seat...fed 250rms each and crossed at [email protected]@24db for dedicated midbass duty.


----------



## Silvercoat (Dec 5, 2013)

nstaln said:


> I'm giving some serious thought to a pair of SWR-8d's in individual .2cube sealed enclosures, each one glassed in under each front seat...fed 250rms each and crossed at [email protected]@24db for dedicated midbass duty.



I have grappled with "small sub as midbass" game as well. Most folks I have seen suggested you loose out due to either space/spl/upper end of midbass.

These subs are great for needing sub in very small area, there are usually better options for "needing more midbass"


----------



## nstaln (Feb 11, 2009)

Silvercoat said:


> I have grappled with "small sub as midbass" game as well. Most folks I have seen suggested you loose out due to either space/spl/upper end of midbass.
> 
> These subs are great for needing sub in very small area, there are usually better options for "needing more midbass"


I've read a few threads that say this driver is quite good for mid-bass...when properly driven.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

I like the R but not the S, but I mean if your budget is in that range you're probably making compromises that matter elsewhere. But the R needs some space to be happy, I've learned. I REALLY like the shallow R, it isn't cheap but wow it solves some problems with its shape, and it really gets down. 

But Sundown SD-2 and now SD-3's, sometimes as SA-12 seem to be better still, and about the same price approximately. Another unsung hero is the Infinity line.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

For reference, a Type R 12 can currently be purchased for under $150 without any special discount. Quite a bit less if you're diligent in hunting down coupon codes, etc. The Type S 12 is just shy of $100. Even on a budget, bumping up to the Type R is almost a no brainer.

To the point of the subs getting higher power ratings, as I understand it, this was done purposefully. SPL guys throw a ton of power at their subwoofers anyway, so Alpine wanted to make the drivers more robust. Making the drivers more bulletproof led to lower sensitivity. So, from one generation to the next you would actually see LESS output for the same amount of power. 

Why do this? Because as Jim Walter, he designer himself said, "power is cheap!" Finding an amp that will drive a current generation Type R with enough clean power is peanuts these days.


----------



## Lanson (Jan 9, 2007)

I'd agree, the R is the deal.

If you give them good space, I think they rock out pretty well.



rton20s said:


> For reference, a Type R 12 can currently be purchased for under $150 without any special discount. Quite a bit less if you're diligent in hunting down coupon codes, etc. The Type S 12 is just shy of $100. Even on a budget, bumping up to the Type R is almost a no brainer.
> 
> To the point of the subs getting higher power ratings, as I understand it, this was done purposefully. SPL guys throw a ton of power at their subwoofers anyway, so Alpine wanted to make the drivers more robust. Making the drivers more bulletproof led to lower sensitivity. So, from one generation to the next you would actually see LESS output for the same amount of power.
> 
> Why do this? Because as Jim Walter, he designer himself said, "power is cheap!" Finding an amp that will drive a current generation Type R with enough clean power is peanuts these days.


----------



## ninetysix (Dec 6, 2009)

I'm a big fan of both the S And the R. They are readily available in Australia and priced pretty good IMO.

My car has two SWR-843Ds initially in about 0.2ft³ later expanded to 0.3ft3 sealed on the floor in front of the seats. For a while they were performing sub duty, crossed around 80hz to a set of Boston spz60. They needed a tiny boost to play low, but for the price they really rocked. 450w a side from a pair of soundstream Picasso nano monoblocs, certainly a "budget" setup there.

But 8s could only play so low, so a SWR-12D4 went in the trunk in just under a foot sealed (marine ply, lots of bracing and stuffed with poly. Sealed it up against the ski pass thru with a fairly well sealed trunk and man it plays low, strong below 20hz but only the mic can hear it. My car is a small sedan so that's all the sub I need. Sub crossed 70hz LR 24 to the 8s and about 200hz to the Bostons.

Recently just threw two SWS-12D4s in about 2ft³ shared in a down firing box in the Mrs 05 legacy wagon fed 1200w @ 1ohm from a nakamichi mono bloc and it plays low and loud, and blends very well with the mains, very musical so far. Winisd suggested they would be quite peaky around 90hz but that didn't eventuate in reality. Very minor EQ work required to get it flat up to about 100hz, tho I've only just started tuning and haven't settled on a crossover point.

I got the two S12s for only a little more than the single R12 (everything costs a lot more here and the pricing doesnt make a lot of sense). would have liked to run a SWS15 but the box would have been too long with the box down firing. Thought about a single 12R ported or even a pair sealed, but they would have needed more power to be happy, and in both cars sealed has worked a lot better than the ported 12s they both had for a while. YMMV

Looks pretty ghetto but it fits like a glove, came in pretty cheap and exceeded my expectations by a fair margin, as did the 12R+8Rs in my car.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

I am running a 10" type r, but my build is far from "budget"


----------



## Bminus (Sep 24, 2014)

My first subs I ever had where 2 of the older typer R 10s in a down fire under seat truck box in my 07 GMC Sierra. I had them in about .9ft^3 per chamber and ran them off of an MRX M110. 
I LOVED those subs. They had great low end extension and were MUCH cleaner than any other of my friends subs (Kicker, RF, etc etcc).


----------



## Chris12 (Sep 20, 2018)

Has anyone compared the Alpine type R sub, specifically the R12" to the Audiofrog GB12 and/or the Illusion Audio C12 XL?


----------



## Ge0 (Jul 23, 2007)

Chris12 said:


> Has anyone compared the Alpine type R sub, specifically the R12" to the Audiofrog GB12 and/or the Illusion Audio C12 XL?


Does it make sense to compare a $250 sub to $600 and/or $1000 models? Hmm... Over the last 4 to 5 years since this thread dies someone may have done it. I recently turned into a Sundown audio fan boy because I love my little SD4. Is Sundown a company you have considered?

Ge0


----------



## Chris12 (Sep 20, 2018)

Ge0 said:


> Does it make sense to compare a $250 sub to $600 and/or $1000 models?


Sure it does, why not?

As far as what I’m looking for:
I’d like to try out two 12” Subs in a sealed enclosure. I have a sedan, so ideally I’d like to stay under 3 cuft, but I probably have a little wiggle room.

I have a JL Audio HD1200/1 to power them, so around 600 wrms each.

If money weren’t a factor, I’d buy two Illusion Audio Carbon 12xl’s - but at $800 each I’m exploring other options. If I went with the c12xl’s I’d probably increase the power to them, possibly with a second hd1200/1.

I’m considering the Alpine Type R’s because they are readily available used in my area and seem to model very well.

Instead of asking for a comparison (between the type R and the c12xl/ gb12) maybe I should’ve asked what I’d be giving up by going with the alpine subs. Would it be a night/ day thing or more of a nuance thing?


----------



## Golden Ear (Oct 14, 2012)

There is a night and day difference between the C12XL and Alpine Type R. Don’t get me wrong, I like both subs. I’m running a Type R 12 in my Tahoe right now and I’ve ran the 8” version in my Ranger and both are good, capable subs. But, the C12XL is incredible. One of the best subs I’ve ever heard (along with its cousin the Raven 12XL). Personally, I’d spend the extra coin to get the illusion or Raven and get another hd1200 to power each sub, but if budget is the main concern then a pair of Alpines will suffice. IMHO 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chris12 (Sep 20, 2018)

Golden Ear said:


> There is a night and day difference between the C12XL and Alpine Type R. Don’t get me wrong, I like both subs. I’m running a Type R 12 in my Tahoe right now and I’ve ran the 8” version in my Ranger and both are good, capable subs. But, the C12XL is incredible. One of the best subs I’ve ever heard (along with its cousin the Raven 12XL). Personally, I’d spend the extra coin to get the illusion or Raven and get another hd1200 to power each sub, but if budget is the main concern then a pair of Alpines will suffice. IMHO
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks for your reply - it’s exactly the type of feedback I was looking for. I am really just looking to buy once, so I’ll keep the illusion Audio subs at the top of my list.


----------



## therapture (Jan 31, 2013)

If a given sub is powered by xxx watts, and another sub is powered by xxx watts, but both are moving through the same excursion levels and not being over driven, and given that both subs are of decent quality and tuned properly with a dsp, there should be almost no variation.

That's the point of DIY and using raw drivers.

Look guys, speaker tech isn't black magic and voodoo, it's technical and scientific. A transducer from XYZ does the same thing one from ABC does.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

therapture said:


> If a given sub is powered by xxx watts, and another sub is powered by xxx watts, but both are moving through the same excursion levels and not being over driven, and given that both subs are of decent quality and tuned properly with a dsp, there should be almost no variation.
> 
> That's the point of DIY and using raw drivers.
> 
> Look guys, speaker tech isn't black magic and voodoo, it's technical and scientific. A transducer from XYZ does the same thing one from ABC does.


You're right in that it isn't black magic and voodoo, but your simplified description isn't really how it works. Sure it would be nice if two speakers of a given size moving the same amount sounded the same, but it just isn't the case. Especially not when you start asking them to play louder and/or lower. Sure differences at subwoofer frequencies can be harder to hear, but it doesn't mean they aren't there or that you _can't_ hear them. Efficiency, motor design, suspension design, etc, etc, etc, all contribute to a driver's performance.

Objective testing, like what Erin is doing again with the Klippel bears this out. Sure, when you apply 1 watt to a speaker and it is hardly moving, efficiency variation between two drivers will likely be the only noticeable difference within an acceptable pass band. But as you apply more power the differences become more pronounced and more noticeable. Deviations from the incoming signal (distortion) get exponentially worse as we ask the cone to move more and more from the rest position. This is audible even when you're driving a speaker within industry accepted limits of linearity. (And we have also seen that most exceed industry standards much earlier than published specs claim.) These distortion profiles, usually called timbre, are what give varying speakers their own "sound signature."

And I will repeat, Yes, you can definitely hear this in subwoofers. Certain installs might help mask the differences between subs, but the difference between a good subwoofer (Alpine Type R) and a REALLY good low distortion subwoofer (Illusion C12XL) is definitely audible. Even with all of the DSP tuning you could ever wish to apply.


----------



## preston (Dec 10, 2007)

Those are good points rton20s. Although I admit when I am listening to one of my subs isolated but with the xover at 100 or below, its hard to imagine noticing much SQ difference between them. But then, I only listen at moderate levels. I have an Alpine Type R 15" in a box in my truck, and an AE IB-15 in my car IB. The IB sub definitely digs lower as the Alpine starts rolling off earlier, but as far as SQ man I would be hard pressedto say one sounded better than the other. And both will make my lips vibrate when playing an appropriate source material.


----------



## JCsAudio (Jun 16, 2014)

I’ve run multiple lesser subwoofers back to back in the same vehicle compared to the best one I have with two shorting rings and a good low distortion motor design. From the best to the worst there is a big difference.


----------

