# IDQ 10v3 head to head with SA 10"



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

Here we have 2 10" subs that both occupy the mid-price/entry level SQ category. Image Dynamics has long established their dominance in this area, and the new v3 is a makeover on a traditional driver that has satisfied many people over the years. Sundown Audio on the other hand is a relative newcomer to the field, and it will be interesting to see how their driver performs in comparison.


















First up, the IDQ. Not only were there some serious cosmetic upgrades to this classic driver, but it appears the mounting depth has been increased by the use of a double stacked magnet motor. The same poly composite cone is used, but now we have easy to use push terminals, and an attractive rubber magnet boot. Newcomers will also be pleasantly surprised to see that this driver now uses ID's easily recognizable tall, thin rubber surround which maximizes cone area; a nice features imported from the Idmax. Another departure from traditional driver design is the lack of a pole vent, but rather venting under the cone and spider. It's often been said that a cooling system such as this, when done properly, has the potential to offer better cooling and minimized noise benefits over a traditional pole vent. Not to mention drivers without a pole vent don't require the typical 1" to 2" clearance behind the driver, saving space in any setup. The new IDQ also features what appears to be a plastic basket, rather than a stamped steel or cast frame. It certainly makes the driver much lighter and easier to handle, but whether or not it provides a stable enough platform for the sub at high excursions remains to be seen.


















Next up is the Sundown Audio 10". Noticeably smaller in depth, with a wider diameter single stack motor and more traditional, 4 spoke cast metal frame. Like the IDQ, this driver also uses a similar poly cone. That's about where the differences end, as this driver uses a small pole vent in the rear and no venting under the spider or the cone. You'll also see that the basket is painted a bright blue, with push terminals attached. What a funny coincidence, as the old IDQ v2's had blue painted baskets. It also uses a more classic foam surround, and unlike the IDQ v3 the tinsel leads are not sewn into the spider, making for a potential noise issue at high excursions as the cone slaps against the leads.

The first test I ran both drivers through was a distortion sweep. I selected a drive level where the Sundown sub just about hit 10% thd and rising, and adjusted the IDQ to the same output. The mic was placed close up to the sub in order to minimize room and baffle effects.

First the Sundown 10".











Very nice frequency response (in yellow) with no inductive hump between 50-100hz. This will make it easy to integrate the sub into any frontstage. Distortion rises slowly as you approach 20hz. Overall great results.

Next the IDQ 10".










Looks like about a 5db inductive hump at 60hz, indicative of a longer coil with many turns. Distortion is a bit higher than the Sundown sub, with a faster rising curve as you approach 20hz. Not really enough of a difference to be audible in a car.

Next I ran a 5 tone stimultaneous burst from 20-100hz with half octave steps. I chose a drive level where mechanical noise from the IDQ was easily audible, which is actually quite loud. It appears from the charts that both subs are fairly similar, with a slight edge to the Sundown sub. This would be consistent with the distortion plots above.

Sundown










IDQ










And lastly, I performed a free-air subjective listening test paying special attention to mechanical noise and distortion audibility. Regardless of the measurement results, I found that there was no easily discernable differences between either driver when listening for distortion. Both subs should perform admirably at levels appropriate for a typical SQ setup where overwhelming bass is not required, nor necessarily desired. The differences between box sizes and tuning and integration elements will of course come into play, but given my experience I believe both subs should sound rather similar once properly installed and tuned.

When it came to mechanical noise at high output, neither sub was truly offensive where the sound would be strongly audible outside of the box. In a trunk, the noise would definitely be completely inaudible. The IDQ clearly had a longer, more effortless peak to peak stroke, but suffered from the plastic frame noticeably flexing and a higher pitched plastic buzzing noise. The Sundown sub showed that it was reaching it's limits by emitting a strongly audible, low frequency flapping noise. Neither sub was as silent as the Adire Koda 10" I had tested awhile back, which was utterly silent up to it's final limits at which the spider would make small clicking noises, but neither was the sub as bad as the Ascendant Atlas 12" I had tested years ago which clanked hard. A light touch to the top plate of both drivers indicates that the IDQ runs a bit cooler after a 10 minute power test, but it's also possible that the coil 

So my final verdict is, toss a coin. Depending on your priorities (box size, tuning preferences, efficiency, cost) either sub would fit the bill of providing quality bass for a SQ setup at a modest price. The IDQ will give you a bit more output with less mechanical noise, but the Sundown has a smoother upper end response and a lower measured distortion.


----------



## azngotskills (Feb 24, 2006)

Thanks for taking the time to do the review....i really do miss reviews like this. Brings me back old school when i found the site LOL


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

thanks for the review, good to know they both perform well.


----------



## Rudeboy (Oct 16, 2005)

azngotskills said:


> Thanks for taking the time to do the review....i really do miss reviews like this. Brings me back old school when i found the site LOL


X2 - great stuff.


----------



## bjayjr5679 (Nov 8, 2007)

Did not know that the V.3 IDQ had a rubber basket? How bad is that? Does that effect reliability.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

bjayjr5679 said:


> Did not know that the V.3 IDQ had a rubber basket? How bad is that? Does that effect reliability.


Plastic not rubber. Plastic composite I imagine, not stereotype _"plastic"_. Plastic composites can be harder then steel.


----------



## dBassHz (Nov 2, 2005)

Thanks for the review... they are about the only things I read on this forum now.


----------



## bjayjr5679 (Nov 8, 2007)

Allright so help me out I am a noob about most of this what material is most desireable for a woofers basket? 



t3sn4f2 said:


> Plastic not rubber. Plastic composite I imagine, not stereotype _"plastic"_. Plastic composites can be harder then steel.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Nice review NP! Thanks for taking the time lately to do more and more of these. I always love to read through them and figure out if I'm going to spend more money or not. LOL! Keep up the good work.

Zach


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

bjayjr5679 said:


> Allright so help me out I am a noob about most of this what material is most desireable for a woofers basket?


Desireable? I don't know, but used most often in high end drivers? An aluminum alloy (anyone of the thousands available).


----------



## mojako (May 27, 2005)

nice review!!

how much is the Sundown 10"?


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

bjayjr5679 said:


> Allright so help me out I am a noob about most of this what material is most desireable for a woofers basket?


Kevlar coated silk , very light but yet very strong


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Cast frame FTW 

Of course this is only my preference, I like to push hard and long and nasty !


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Now , for the part you already know [ money talks ],Baby got back !!


----------



## atsaubrey (Jan 10, 2007)

There is talk that the Sundown used the same build house as the legendary SS10/SS12 "Velvet Hammer" from Soundstream, could this be the same driver only with a poly cone?


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

Somehow I missed this earlier, thanks for the results!


----------



## borgs (Mar 29, 2007)

Skaaning rocks!!
I'm bias


----------



## BEAVER (May 26, 2007)

I really like these head to heads. Too bad a guy couldn't make a living reviewing drivers, I'd like to see more of these...


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

BEAVER said:


> I really like these head to heads. Too bad a guy couldn't make a living reviewing drivers, I'd like to see more of these...


Indeed - its always a great resource to have these sort of comparisons available.


----------



## Horsemanwill (Jun 1, 2008)

actually the basket is a Composite basket a Fiberglass composite basket


----------



## mvw2 (Oct 2, 2005)

Npdang, have any additional subjective comments about sound characteristics like level of detail/clarity, thickness of note (light of heavy), muddiness, control, transparency, attack/decay, etc. Would you say they sound rather similar and to what other subs you've tested or different and in what ways?

I know this steps away from the raw data approach some, but I find it's helpful to offer some characteristic cues like if a sub is very smooth in presence and heavy in note or very light and crisp or if the sub is agressive and up front or smoother, subtle, and laid back. For example, an Alpine Type-R could never be described as crisp and highly detailed and the Dayton Reference could never be described as thick and heavy in note. I know everyones measuring stick is different, but there are still some gross truths. If differences or uniqueness is enough, it would be nice for you to share these behaviors.


----------



## isercastik (Jun 14, 2008)

SA looks EXACTLY like an older SS driver. (back when SS was SS not pyramid )


----------



## DAT (Oct 8, 2006)

I know this is old, but I have used both and I like the IDQ better, the SD is nice but too heavy for me ... you can bang the IDQ as well and use less power if needed...

But then again, I'm IDQ fan...


----------



## XllentAudio (Jun 29, 2009)

Definately a great review especially since I am in the market for these subs. You definately don't come by these to often.


----------



## akbarelamin (Jan 19, 2009)

Excellent review. Also MWV2, good questions.


----------



## AlexForbesR6 (Nov 22, 2009)

good review...so basically it comes down to personal preference


thats good to know


----------



## mSaLL150 (Aug 14, 2008)

npdang said:


> Neither sub was as silent as the Adire Koda 10" I had tested awhile back, which was utterly silent up to it's final limits at which the spider would make small clicking noises, but neither was the sub as bad as the Ascendant Atlas 12" I had tested years ago which clanked hard.


I know this is an old thread, but do you have any other comments/opinions or results on the Adire Koda subwoofer? I am currently using 2 of them and I am really enjoying them quite a bit.


----------

