# Which old school sub would you use?



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

So I have about 400 watts RMS, have about 1 cuft of space, and want to go old school on the sub. There are three subs that Ive always wanted, and they all happen to be on ebay. I might buy all 3, but wanted to see what you guys would sport.

for those who dont know what these subs look like,
PPI Pro:









Eclipse aluminum









Phoenix Gold xmax


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

Well what are they

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## smgreen20 (Oct 13, 2006)

The PPI sub you have pictured isn't the old school version, but there are some of the old school ones on eBay. Depends on what you want for bass. For shear boom, The XMAX. Overall performance I'd have to go with The Eclipse. A friend of mine had 2 of those and that was sweet.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

i am looking more for SQ, but my dynaudio sub is "pure" sq and its more of a large midbass, not a subwoofer. I want a subwoofer where I can get my tight drum hits, but also play the low bass notes needed in some of the music I listen to.

I have spent lots of time listening to the PPI pro as a friend of mine had one back in the day. I really liked how it sounded, but when his sub blew out fluid went everywhere as I believe it is oil cooled.

I havnt really heard the xmax for long time periods, just when I saw them in cars at audio competitions, but lots of people seem to swear by them. 

The Eclipse is a sub that I used to lust after. It has amazing excursion for its time, especially with its lower power rating than the crazy subs.

I am just looking for more opinions.


----------



## scoott (Feb 22, 2013)

I would go with a Boston Acoustics pro 12LF , or with a little more space, my favorite, JBL 1200 GTI.


----------



## smgreen20 (Oct 13, 2006)

I've only heard the PPI sub once and that was back in the mid 90's when they came out, I honestly don't remember much about their sound. They're not liquid cooled though. I'm a HUGE PG fan and was looking at that XMAX 12 myself, but out of those you listed, Eclipse.


----------



## edzyy (Aug 18, 2011)

Eclipse


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

I think I'll try to get the Xmax and the eclipse and try them both out.

If I don't get the Xmax then oh well but I have always wanted to hear one.

Btw I'm going to sell my dynaudio sub if any of you know anyone interested.


----------



## SaturnSL1 (Jun 27, 2011)

Personally I like the PPI Pros and the Eclipse. Never even heard of those PG subs although I'm sure they rock too


----------



## FartinInTheTub (May 25, 2010)

I LOVED the really old school mtx blue thunder subs... They were incredible.


----------



## Viggen (May 2, 2011)

I kicked myself for many many year when I went with a Boston 10.5 lf over the eclipse. Hates the sound of the Boston sub. 

I would do the eclipse however never owned any of them


----------



## JuiceMan88 (Jun 13, 2012)

Out of those choices I would go with the aluminum coned Eclipse. My other choices would be an Orion NT or an Audiomobile (circa 2002)


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

eclipse


----------



## jp88 (Jun 25, 2007)

Of these the one Id like to try would be the ppi
Im hoping to try out a soundstream exact 12 (orignal version) soon though


----------



## miniSQ (Aug 4, 2009)

i would go wit the eclipse too, but that picture is not of the old school versions.


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

I've owned 3 separate ppi pro 10's (real ones, not the ones pictured) ported / sealed - always satisfying. 

Boston 12.5lf (pair) didn't get down very deep, but were LOUD


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

I'd go with eclipse they sound good

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## MacLeod (Aug 16, 2009)

FartinInTheTub said:


> I LOVED the really old school mtx blue thunder subs... They were incredible.


This is EXACTLY what I thought of when I read the thread title. My first pair of subs were MTX Road Thunder 8's in 1989 so Ill always have a soft spot in my heart for old MTX subs.

Out of the choices you listed though, Eclipse most likely. I really like Eclipse gear from head units, amps and speakers. Just about everything they make that I ran into was very high quality.


----------



## SHAGGS (Apr 24, 2011)

Of the ones listed, I'd take the Eclipse. 
If I could choose any OS sub, I've always wanted to own a Stroker. Preferably a 15 or an 18. 
And I will, someday....Even if I never run it, I will, nay must, own one.


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

I always wanted an old school stroker too 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## sh.moto.2 (Jul 2, 2010)

the real old skool flat piston PPI (made by DD) Very good sound.... gets my vote


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

yea i know that the pictured PPI sub is not old school...Im getting an old school one (if thats what I get).


----------



## amalmer71 (Feb 29, 2012)

MacLeod said:


> This is EXACTLY what I thought of when I read the thread title. My first pair of subs were MTX Road Thunder 8's in 1989 so Ill always have a soft spot in my heart for old MTX subs.


Same here. I had a pair of 10" Blue Thunders in my '81 GMC Sierra Grande in the first custom box I made (sealed) and they were incredible subs. I had replaced a pair of MTX Terminators and the difference was 10 fold. The Blue Thunders were so much more accurate and the sensitivity was extremely high. Around 95 or 96 dB, IIRC.

They were ran with a Punch 100 DSM (which I still have), Denon CD player (don't remember the model) going through an Alpine 3331 EQ (which I still have) and an Alpine 3527 (which I still have) going to two Alpine 6.5" coaxials in the doors and Alpine 4"x10" coaxials I made custom panels for in the rear corners of the cab.

Ahhh, the good old days. 

-----------------

I'd choose the Eclipse.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

amalmer71 said:


> Same here. I had a pair of 10" Blue Thunders in my '81 GMC Sierra Grande in the first custom box I made (sealed) and they were incredible subs. I had replaced a pair of MTX Terminators and the difference was 10 fold. The Blue Thunders were so much more accurate and the sensitivity was extremely high. Around 95 or 96 dB, IIRC.
> 
> They were ran with a Punch 100 DSM (which I still have), Denon CD player (don't remember the model) going through an Alpine 3331 EQ (which I still have) and an Alpine 3527 (which I still have) going to two Alpine 6.5" coaxials in the doors and Alpine 4"x10" coaxials I made custom panels for in the rear corners of the cab.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the input. 

What I'm trying to avoid is liking a sub from its day (maybe it was your first so it has a special place in your heart) versus an old school sub that can keep up with today's subs and current technology.

The sub that will always have a special place in my heart is the Aura force. Wasn't a mainstream brand of sub but it had clean bass and was efficient on power. I just don't think I would feel the same about it today compared with modern subs.


----------



## eisnerracing (Sep 14, 2010)

scoott said:


> I would go with a Boston Acoustics pro 12LF .


Love the Boston 

Eclipse but got to ck model # to find the lower 
Power handling alum cone 

The Xmax is not a very long throw sub a lot like 
The Orion NT 

Maybe a mb quart pwe 12 (Rockford built)

Or even a Rockford Fosgate HE2 RFP3212


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

old school PPI PRO has ferrofluid

It's an underhung design, and one of the first examples to do so in a large sub factor, the front plate is very thick and makes the sub very heavy.

it is limited by a single slug magnet but the circumference of the magnet is closer to the pro subs, a strong motor.

the problem with it is the underhung design means the coil isn't tall and power handling can be an issue, hence ferrofluid.

also, linear excursion was limited by the motor design, and not near the throw of today's middle of the pack offerings.

The frame is very strong, high grade aluminum and better than almost every other sub I've handled, on par with the frame from a pro sub like the TAD 1601b.

The problem with the PPI is you are seduced by the sound of the motor at nearly "high" levels and when you want to go higher, it's not there, there's a definite point at which you figure out the sub's reaching it's limitations.

For the listener who doesn't measure their system by how much flex the sub can make in the roof, or how far you can hear it down the street, or also how well it communicates with whales, it's an excellent example of it's cast markings. State of the Art, for it's time.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

Sounds like its a good match for me. I remember when a friend had one and it started to leak. That was right after it came back from being services by ppi.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

vwdave said:


> The sub that will always have a special place in my heart is the Aura force. Wasn't a mainstream brand of sub but it had clean bass and was efficient on power. I just don't think I would feel the same about it today compared with modern subs.


I also love the Force subs. Don't rule them out - I still think their sound quality is great in comparison to modern day offerings... that is if you can find subs that aren't worn out with saggy suspensions. The RPM+ line of subs are just Force subs with new patina on them. They won't have mondo-excursion in small sealed boxes like a lot of modern subs will, but it will be hard to beat their accuracy when you give them enough airspace. 

They are also one of my favorite motors to build custom subs with. They have ultra-tight gaps (many benefits) and enough clearance to fit longer coils in if you need to. One of my favorite customs is an 8" built with a Force 12 motor.


----------



## Golden Ears (Jul 18, 2010)

I'm not sure if this helps, my girlfriend has three a/d/s reference standard – RS 10 subwoofers in her car with their 6 ohm dual voice coils wired in series/parallel for a 4ohm load.

There is a wonderful musicality to them- in part because the surround is thin enough for them to get some of the warmer timbres and subtle delineated bass overtones that seems to elude a great many subs. It's not just about magnet strength and stiffness of cone...---it's about the resonances in the voice coil, spider, basket and cone all being sorta spread out equally to not call attention to any one spot. There are a zillion subs that can hit harder, but when tuned right I really always enjoy these subs despite the high fs...which can be hard to work with. They work well with a fast 6.5 inch midbass driver.

I HAD TO HUNT FOR THEM FOR NEARLY A YEAR.

The frustrating thing about them is the dual 6 ohm voice coil which means you really need to be able to fit (3) of them... which means...MONO. And if you want *stereo* subs..you need to do 6....uh,..nearly impossible.

The other really musical sub were the older Entecs... but they were never made for the car.


----------



## eisnerracing (Sep 14, 2010)

A/d/s rs10 nearly impossible to find and when you 
Do people think its gold plated
And a dual 6 ohm voice coil wires in what ? 
Series / parrell with one woofer ??
Making it what ? 4 ohm - must be a magic trick 

Wires parrell dual 6 ohm vc is 3 ohms 

Rick Ryan swears by this sub 
I sold them back in the day very fluid and inviting bass


----------



## malcris (Feb 4, 2010)

I'll bump the a\d\s rs10's as well. The solution to the impedance problem is simple and there is a good reason why they did 6ohm coils. If you run the coils in parallel you get a final impedance of 3ohms which when you bridge 2 channels on a 4ohm amp it allows you to extract an extra bit of power without hurting the amp because I'm assuming you are crossing over from 100hz max down. Most amps will run 3 ohm bridged just fine provided you shorten the bandwidth. Also, if you've got a meter these run great off of a 4x100 amp in full stereo. For me, I've run 2 of these with each vc's in parallel and then each speaker in parallel to a jl 500/1 and found sonic bliss...Nothing else I've heard even comes close for sq. I mean who makes a 10" sub with a fs of 18.2hz anymore? They work perfect in .88 net or 1cu gross.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

eisnerracing said:


> A/d/s rs10 nearly impossible to find and when you
> Do people think its gold plated
> And a dual 6 ohm voice coil wires in what ?
> Series / parrell with one woofer ??
> ...


He was saying that he ran 3 of them so 4 ohms is possible. The w6v1 was a similar issue with its 6ohm coil.

Thanks for the heads up on the ads subs. I will try the subs that I have in my list and if none do it for me then I will investigate the ads subs.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

hurrication said:


> I also love the Force subs. Don't rule them out - I still think their sound quality is great in comparison to modern day offerings... that is if you can find subs that aren't worn out with saggy suspensions. The RPM+ line of subs are just Force subs with new patina on them. They won't have mondo-excursion in small sealed boxes like a lot of modern subs will, but it will be hard to beat their accuracy when you give them enough airspace.
> 
> They are also one of my favorite motors to build custom subs with. They have ultra-tight gaps (many benefits) and enough clearance to fit longer coils in if you need to. One of my favorite customs is an 8" built with a Force 12 motor.


I don't remember the motor structure of my force looking that beefy were there revisions o the sub? I could be wrong as its been over 10 years since I had it.


----------



## Golden Ears (Jul 18, 2010)

eisnerracing said:


> A/d/s rs10 nearly impossible to find and when you
> Do people think its gold plated
> And a dual 6 ohm voice coil wires in what ?
> Series / parrell with one woofer ??
> ...


Yes... people have this wild idea about insane value with these a/d/s/ RS-10 subs. 

Not sure why. 

I just haven't found many musical sounding subs, but I am not a sub afficiando...just a Home Audiophile looking for audiophile musicality and slam in a car. So dual 6 ohm voice coils need 3 subs with each voice coil wired in series (12 ohms per sub) and then when you wire them in parallel you get 4 ohms.

I think you can always get hard enough hitting bass if you just add more woofers and power. But if the musicality is not there to begin with, you can't do anything to make it suddenly appear with EQ in a sub or a bigger amp.

When SPL became "fashionable" in the 1990's the surrounds started getting thicker and wider (read harder to flex), the cones became stiffer (read higher breakup frequencies ..._audible_...), the spiders became stiffer and longer throw (read more ripples to create different flexing as the woofer extends- even though *MEASURED *distortion with pure sine waves is down,,,the ability to do complex bass passages becomes harder as each fold means more spider material = more moving mass), the magnets became bigger (generally good as long as the flux remains concentrated).

And when SPL came in...all of a sudden it was a lot easier to sell pure loudness to an untrained ear than explain delineated bass to a kid buying a woofer to play techno...who did not need bass delineation or fine wave reproduction for a computerized tones of Techno or Rap.

So yesterday I went to a fans stereo store (owner is a skateboard fan), and I heard the $185,000 Magico Q7 loudspeaker with 1000 watt Bryston mono Blocks, $10,000 Synergistics research speaker cable , and a $10-20K Stahl-Tek DAC (best DAC I ever heard) . Here is a shot of them in a different room.

Wizard High-End Audio Blog: Magico Q7 with FM Acoustics at TAA

Note the ultra stiff carbon fiber cone, and the beefy surround. Hallmarks of an expensive SPL type designed woofer. Note the boxes are very deep too- this is a long throw woofer, ...might have a deep magnet structure.

And the bass, while powerful, and sounding "large" and room filling, and "dug deep dynamically", (and mind you this is an extremely favorably reviewed speaker- some extremely respected reviewers have called it the best speaker *EVER*....) was not as delicate and nuanced and "clean bodied' as ...well...I think it should be at that price or even 1/20th of its price.

And next to that speaker...I saw yet another loudspeaker by a well respected manufacturer...with the dreaded thick surround _hard to flex_ ...and thought to myself..if this sounds really good the crossover designer must be a super genius...because a surround like that seems to go hand in hand with a "one note bass" sound.

So what is happening is ...speakers are becoming tailored to sell (on loudness and slam and low distortion at high volumes to deep pockets with less than sophisticated ears)...not necessarily tailored to be true to the source...or to be able to reproduce subtle nuances at lower volumes,....
.....

* or to try to make a recording sound like real life (For me this is the most practical approach).*

Why? Because *Since I do not have a live mic feed to Mick Jagger driving down the highway right next to my car * with MIC wire running into my car rolling down the highway I don't care if the speaker is absolutely true to the source (ie makes a Live microphone feed sent through a speaker sound like an unamplified voice)....I *ONLY* have a *RECORDING* as my source and *ultimately I want to make the RECORDING so it SOUNDS like LIVE*. (Ie..._not exactly true to the source (the recording)_....and yes.... all MIC feeds will add their own MIC colorations and so will the cables, the mixing boards, the plug ins, the artificial reverb...hell even running a harsh Digital feed through a reel to reel can help smooth harsh digital to help restore some life to it.

Robert Babicz about mastering audio on Vimeo

So... my .02 cents, that probably no one really cares about.... in my long winded tiresome posts.... is that... You want to make your "_dead _"recording sound *LIVE*, not a just like what came off the studio board live MIC feed (or your recordings will sound like...well..._*recordings*_....instead of _*LIVE*_ and to do that, *sometimes ZERO distortion just gets you the sound of a recording.* * I want it to sound LIVE. not like a well reproduced recording....so much of the high-end in home audio is chasing "faithfully reproducing the recording" ..which IMHO KILLS the rasion d'être of this entire hobby.


...faithfully reproducing the reproduction (played back recording)... WTF!

(IMHO The Ultimate "audio Xerox machine" would make a copy look identical to the ORIGINAL the copy was made from)





...and that my friends is a new and very treacherous AUDIOPHILE DEAD END..of which IMHO there are many in this insane hobby. 

So even though *the a/d/s/ RS-10 sub is not the most accurate*, and doesn't perhaps spec out the best. Given a feed from an adequate recording, and reasonably good amplifier it sounds closer to music to me than a lot of other lower distortion measuring subwoofers. _I AM NO EXPERT ON CAR SUBWOOFERS._ but compared to JL's and Velodynes, and some of the other usual suspects I have heard in very good installs...I personally like those old low tech a/d/s. They get me more into the music...without sounding ridiculously colored or unnatural.

I am sure someone can make MUCH better woofers easily than the a/d/s/ RS-10 if they would just try to stick to making recordings sound like live *unamplified music*...instead of just unnatural sounding low distortion slam that simply makes recordings sound like recordings.

The issue is when marketing and sales tells engineers to focus on the wrong thing. Since the 1990's I see this marketing and sales driven design focus kill end quality (look at Mercedes Benz cars designed after 1995 until say 2011) ... _*we got sold the "sizzle" without the "steak".*_

And many products became souless.

*(The Entec SW-1 subwoofer , which was servo controlled, had extremely low distortion-...in fact one of the lowest which would contradict what I just said - the exception that proves the rule- lol.. and sounded very very real and was my all time favorite...notably _ had a very pliable foam surround_ and I would never suggest a foam surround for the car environment with heat and sun and ozone.) And yes...I once considered how hard it would be to adapt these for the car.

Sorry about this soap box. Someone point me to a really musical subwoofer so someday I can edit or erase this.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

Golden ears: you have some good info, and alot of that I agree with, which is why I am looking at an old school sub. Most of whats out these days is SPL based, with the "cheaper" subwoofers taking below 1000 watts. I need a sub that will give me good output with 400 watts. I also dont want output as much as music.

So I have a question for those who support the Eclipse, they were made by TC sounds. There is a very similar looking subwoofer by TC sounds available at partsexpress.com, and its pretty inexpensive.

TC Sounds Epic 12" DVC Subwoofer 293-650

how is this sub? is it comparable to the Eclipse aluminum sub? I really would love that design but in a brand new speaker. The eclipse that I was look at on ebay has a damaged cone and surround. The price is also going up to a point where I dont want to pay for a damaged speaker if I can get a new one to not much more. I just noticed that int he specs it says that it has 6 mounting holes but the pic shows 8...so is the picture wrong or is it a typo to say it has 6 mounting holes?

A member on this site has an xmax that he is willing to let me try out and purchase if I like it. I think I will give it a try. If I like it, then I will buy it. If its not what I want, I might just take a leap of faith and buy this TC subwoofer.

I am also working with a seller of a PPI pro sub as well. I might just buy that one and hang onto it in case the others dont work out.

Cliffs Notes: I am working on an Xmax audition, PPI pro price to just buy, and looking at what seems to be a brand new version of the Eclipse sub if nothing else works out.


----------



## eisnerracing (Sep 14, 2010)

Golden Ears said:


> Yes... people have this wild idea about insane value with these a/d/s/ RS-10 subs.
> 
> Not sure why.
> 
> ...



Well put my almost same thoughts - and I do think the label
Audiofile or sq gets used more than it should I. Car audio
Home audiofile grade speakers cables start at $1000 not the mention 
Mono block tube amps , cables etc as well as a starting 
Pair of towers at $2000 ea 

I know people that say I have an audiofile grade car audio 
System and cost me $4000 I'm sure it sounds great 
But audiofile experts spend that on speaker wire or a set of 
Speaker isolation platforms for there $10k speakers 

I believe keep it as simple as you can with the highest quality
For best results - I collected many trophies with 
2 tweeters 2 6.5 mid range drivers and 2 tens 
Full fiber optic c-90 and a xdp4000 time correction is key in 
Automotive audio. 

Some of the beat sounding speakers are still to this day paper go figure .

Picking a subwoofer is very hard because of the acoustical variations of 
An automobiles interior . It a shot in the dark even with a perfectly designed 
Enclosure. Read the specs see what excites you for what 
You are looking for and you may have to play outside the manufaures 
Recommendations for the enclosure that works for your set up.

It all else fails remember Richard Clarke had a servo controlled 
Subwoofer enclosure that could change cubic feet as the music played to 
Reach maximum output and clarity .


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

I agree with everything you just said except its audioPHile. 

Yea I wouldn't go so far as to call my system an audiophile system as I have much that would need to improved upon, but it is a start to a decent SQ system. I like to K.I.S.S. with my system too... Front components, 1 amp, 1 sub.

I would use kimber kable too but I can't justify the difference in price with an increase in sq. I do have whopping $100 RCAs and most people will argue that those are a rip off.


----------



## jp88 (Jun 25, 2007)

eisnerracing said:


> Audiofile or sq gets used more than it should I. Car audio
> Home audiofile grade speakers cables start at $1000 not the mention
> Mono block tube amps , cables etc as well as a starting
> Pair of towers at $2000 ea
> ...


Im not sure why how much money someone spends had to be considered for their "audiophile credentials" 

ps In my opinion anyone that spent $10k on speaker wires has been conned by the audiofoolery experts


----------



## Golden Ears (Jul 18, 2010)

vwdave said:


> I agree with everything you just said except its audioPHile.
> 
> Yea I wouldn't go so far as to call my system an audiophile system as I have much that would need to improved upon, but it is a start to a decent SQ system. I like to K.I.S.S. with my system too... Front components, 1 amp, 1 sub.
> 
> I would use kimber kable too but I can't justify the difference in price with an increase in sq. I do have whopping $100 RCAs and most people will argue that those are a rip off.


Where are you in SoCal???.. I am in Newport Beach (CdM), just listened to Gary Summers MB last night. his 5.1 of Donald Fagen was a total solid.

I'm doing a DAC shootout today for myself and my GF. Chordette Qute vs Meridian Explorer vs Wadia 121.

I'm using the 12 gauge analysis plus and I really like it. I am using some SB flat Subs in my car, building some enclosures for them this week. I am hoping they have a chance at being musical.. but the Aluminum
cone is not looking so promising...

I got some "medical fake stitching skin" which I might try and dampen out some cone resonances with... if it is really bad. I'll attach it with some easy to remove rubber cement....it will likely end up lowering Fs.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

I used to live in irvine but now I live in calabasas.


----------



## Golden Ears (Jul 18, 2010)

jp88 said:


> Im not sure why how much money someone spends had to be considered for their "audiophile credentials"
> 
> ps In my opinion anyone that spent $10k on speaker wires has been conned by the audiofoolery experts



I wouldn't spend 10K on cable... it's just not anything you can really resell. Can you hear a difference... sadly yes... is it worth it..IMHO not for a car, besides where would you hide the cable boxes? I have had the MIT 120 pole HD speaker cable ($24,000) in my Home system- even on speakers that are less than the cost of the cable. (BTW the cable belongs to the owner of Chapman Loudspeakers), and you can easily hear the difference between that and say 60 Pole MIT Matrix HD ($6600). Is it worth the money just so violins sound better and xylophones, and a few odd effects like the walking chorus girls in Lou Reed's Take a walk on the wild side..to here them advancing a stride for every chorus on you???? I think I would spend my cash somewhere else.....but it sure is cool when you hear it.

The issue is.... you just can't get those subtle cool effects to happen CLEARLY with crap Rat Shack cable with most speakers... and with the very few speakers that you can...well they cost a bundle. You could spend endless amounts on speakers or amps..and still not hear that effect without good cable.. I hate that. I hate spending money on wire...and generally I don't. I use loaner cables from my boss...or I have some 20 year old MIT cables that I still reluctantly use.

I'd rather solder my amp speaker terminals to my loudpseaker terminals before I outlaid that kind of cash for cable...but...I'm not sure _eliminating the cable_ would get that sound either  ....I think there is some back EMF caused by the cone/voicecoil movement that interferes with the new signal and some speaker cables somehow help reduce this effect...

In term of cabling for making Subs sound better....I think it has some effects but our ear is much more sensitive to other frequencies... (like vocal range) ....but don't for a second think that having muddy bass doesn't screw up the rest of the chain... it does..because it is out of synch and the sum and difference frequencies just don't come together right to make correct overtones.

That's actually a pretty crappy explanation from someone (me) who repeatedly failed music class as a kid. Its more than just energy storage and dissipation...it's the amplifier draw modulating the power line (which is perhaps why some people like small amps and efficient speakers- less modulation) ..and so many annoying things....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgK87tmRVeY

This video is a very strong sedative.

But it might help explain why in low frequencies having a great sub helps all frequencies and why the quest of the OP to find a musical subwoofer is not unjustified at all.

I'm not saying all of what MIT says is the gospel. Some people hate Networked cables...and if you don't have enough poles they might seem ...for lack of better words...segmented... in that you hear the parts that are wrong between the poles. AND don't for a second think that a cable has this ideal flat range.. I'm pretty sure it would be somewhat choppy in there.

However..what it means for some DIYMA people.... if you take what they are trying to explain in the video and apply it.... is that perhaps you could use a really nice midrange cable for your midrange, a really nice bass cable for your sub, another that does well in punchy mid bass, and a cable that articulates well for your tweeter to make ...errr 3 poles of articulation ...for not too much money. Which causes less negative issues..cabling or EQ? It depends on how accurately you apply the technology with your ears and try to catch what you don't catch with your ears with measurements to identify other areas.


But who has the time???

It is likely that cables suffer from more than just atticulaltion issues (shielding- inductance, resistance..etc...) and each cable company probably attacks its own set of problems they identify as important. Whether of not those help you...or frankly make ZERO difference is a case by case basis. 

Typically the thing with the biggest magnitude problem is what should be addressed first..


WHAT TOTALLY SUCKS IN CAR AUDIO...is after you figure out those other things and get to wire... you would have to rewire your car. PITA.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

vwdave said:


> So I have a question for those who support the Eclipse, they were made by TC sounds. There is a very similar looking subwoofer by TC sounds available at partsexpress.com, and its pretty inexpensive.
> 
> TC Sounds Epic 12" DVC Subwoofer 293-650


It's hard to go wrong with an Epic. Those are based on the TC2+ motors, which is what was used in the Audiomobile EVO back in the day. The epic is a great sounding sub for the money. I don't recall ever seeing a bad review of one.


----------



## eisnerracing (Sep 14, 2010)

I do believe in high end speaker cable for cars after my experience with home 
Audio. 

In short twisted cable with layers of different layers of windings 
Treble is a high frequency and travels better on small core wire because it rides the 
Outside of the copper. Bass on the other hand rides the core and requires a larger gauge .
I also love braided speakers cable as it performs so great as well . 
I suggest anyone building an sq system to choose speaker cable as they would
Look at specs of an amp. 
Really good 14 or 12 gauge cable can be bought rather inexpensive by the 
roll. Also most think OFC is better than tinned copper cable not true 
OFC is great for home audio where it is 70 degrees no humidity or moisture.
Tinning cooper protects the OFC under the tin from oxidizing at the ends where it 
Has been cut or exposed. Tinned copper is better but hard to find good tinned 
High strand count raw wire . This is not the same as aluminum clad cheap wire.
I like monster xp-500 cable for the money -or any twisted multi strand cables 
i also use a home subwoofer RCA cable for my subwoofer amp as it is designed for sub level freq. not full range - carry some high end home audio knowledge to the car - why not !
Sounds great ! And I keep all the lengths to all speakers the same to match resistance .
If the wire to my front left mid to the amp is 16 feet then all the cable will be 16 feet


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

hurrication said:


> It's hard to go wrong with an Epic. Those are based on the TC2+ motors, which is what was used in the Audiomobile EVO back in the day. The epic is a great sounding sub for the money. I don't recall ever seeing a bad review of one.


So it does not have a lot in common with the eclipse sub? I never looked swriously at TC sound or audiomobile subs, even though I remember when audiomobile came out and I remember being intrigued.

It's good to know that those would be a good option.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

eisnerracing said:


> Treble is a high frequency and travels better on small core wire because it rides the
> Outside of the copper. Bass on the other hand rides the core and requires a larger gauge
> 
> ........
> ...


I really don't want to be the guy to bring up this debate again, but really?

Do you have any science behind this to prove it? I hate to say it - but this is about as snake oil as it gets. I don't have the link to it anymore, but somewhere out there is an ABA test that was done with lamp cord which people couldn't identify next to expensive speaker wire.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

vwdave said:


> So it does not have a lot in common with the eclipse sub? I never looked swriously at TC sound or audiomobile subs, even though I remember when audiomobile came out and I remember being intrigued.
> 
> It's good to know that those would be a good option.


IIRC, the old Eclipse 88 series subs used the TC9 motors which is a 3" coil. The TC2+ are 2" coil motors. There will be differences in power handling, but the Epic can still get down and boogie when needed and sound great doing it.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

hurrication said:


> I really don't want to be the guy to bring up this debate again, but really?
> 
> Do you have any science behind this to prove it? I hate to say it - but this is about as snake oil as it gets. I don't have the link to it anymore, but somewhere out there is an ABA test that was done with lamp cord which people couldn't identify next to expensive speaker wire.


It is scientifically proven that twisted wire (braided) does reduce the occurrence of some electromagnetic noise. The 90* angle will cause them to cancel each other out. I learned this in physics class, not related high end audio. His says nothing for the rest of the argument but as for all of that I say To Each Their Own. I will never be able to afford the crazy expensive wire so I don't care if its better or not.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

hurrication said:


> IIRC, the old Eclipse 88 series subs used the TC9 motors which is a 3" coil. The TC2+ are 2" coil motors. There will be differences in power handling, but the Epic can still get down and boogie when needed and sound great doing it.


So does TC sounds sell a sub with the 3" voice coil? I guess
I could just search myself.

I decided to pass up on the 88 series eclipse on eBay because it was approaching $100 and with damage to both the cone and surround it seemed to be stupid move with that epic priced not much higher and brand new.


----------



## eisnerracing (Sep 14, 2010)

hurrication said:


> I really don't want to be the guy to bring up this debate again, but really?
> 
> Do you have any science behind this to prove it? I hate to say it - but this is about as snake oil as it gets. I don't have the link to it anymore, but somewhere out there is an ABA test that was done with lamp cord which people couldn't identify next to expensive speaker wire.


They are tone deaf !! Really go to to home audio shop 
Have them place a high end cable say $200 a set on one speaker and lamp 
Cord on the other close ur eyes and have them
Balancelt to rt you will hear a differance if u are not tone 
Deaf as well
[/QUOTE] In short twisted cable with layers of different layers of windings 
Treble is a high frequency and travels better on small core wire because it rides the 
Outside of the copper. Bass on the other hand rides the core and requires a larger gauge .
I also love braided speakers cable as it performs so great as well . 
I suggest anyone building an sq system to choose speaker cable as they would
Look at specs of an amp.[/QUOTE]

might want to read a simple explaination that i already posted since the video from MIT you didnt watch


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

It's true that high frequencies are subject to the 'skin effect' but it is inconsequential at audio frequencies.


----------



## jp88 (Jun 25, 2007)

```
[QUOTE="alm001, post: 1923995, member: 34603"]It's true that high frequencies are subject to the 'skin effect' but it is inconsequential at audio frequencies.
```
[/QUOTE]

exactly.
unless of course you like listening to (and can hear) radio frequencies


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

eisnerracing said:


> They are tone deaf !! Really go to to home audio shop
> Have them place a high end cable say $200 a set on one speaker and lamp
> Cord on the other close ur eyes and have them
> Balancelt to rt you will hear a differance if u are not tone
> ...


What video?

The speaker wire theory has been debunked for a long time now, it's usually the audiophool crowd that still clings to it.

I can't find the lamp cord review I remember, but after a quick google I found some links to a blind test that results in no audible difference between Monster cable and coat hangers. :laugh:

Do Coat Hangers Sound As Good Monster Cables?


----------



## PPI_GUY (Dec 20, 2007)

I've used the OZ 250L 10" sub (Superman) and am currently using two IDQ 10D4 (version 1) and the OZ only barely has the nod on the ID's. Don't know if the IDQ's are quite "old school" yet but, they're getting close. Not sure when the first version was released. 
Those old OZ subs are truly remarkable.


----------



## todj (Dec 11, 2008)

TC Sells the LMS-R which utilizes the tc9 motor but the power handling exceeds your 400 rms limit. This sub also uses an LMS coil which makes distortion virtually inaudible (my opnion).


----------



## todj (Dec 11, 2008)

My vote for the sub you should run would be the Image Dynamics IDMAX. I wouldn't buy a new one though. V3 or lower. They get really loud on very little power. I am not aware of another sub that can get as loud as it with 200 rms. They sound great doing it also.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

thanks for the suggestions everyone.

todj: I really like the IDMAX but its too deep for my enclosure. I also never knew that it could run off so little power. I always thought I would need to use the IDQ, which I would have gone with if none of these panned out. I was also considering getting that TC sub with the 2" vc. I still could I guess, but right now im trying out the XMAX.


----------



## creakyjoints (Jul 1, 2013)

Much like religion. I believe. Therefore it's true. Some great markup for people selling this stuff. Most of these guys are as old or older than me. Meaning there hearing is garbage anyway!


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

creakyjoints said:


> Much like religion. I believe. Therefore it's true. Some great markup for people selling this stuff. Most of these guys are as old or older than me. Meaning there hearing is garbage anyway!


I dont get it. are you saying that car audio stuff is overpriced? that it doesnt really do anything? or am I completely missing the point of your post?

Car audio is nothing like religion, it doesnt take believing or faith, you just have to appreciate good sound. EDIT: I guess some people treat it like religion, they try to convert you to their beliefs, but thats just an ignorant way to view the world. ok now im completely off topic.


----------



## finbar (Feb 1, 2009)

> Which old school sub would you use?



DIYMA R12


----------



## creakyjoints (Jul 1, 2013)

Sorry. I was talking about these guys who spend thousands on wires and cables for home audio. They tend to be older guys who's hearing isnt that great anyway trying to justify a ridiculous expense. These guys who will spend a 100k on a home audio system. Pretty sure you could go to ALOT of musical performances around the world with that money. If they enjoy music so much go see some live and save your money for more important things.


----------



## SilkySlim (Oct 24, 2012)

Ok I love the IDMAX and it is very efficient. I also liked the eclipse subs when they were new. I just tried an OS sub that really really surprised me. It was the lanzar DC10 4ohm SVC in a 1.1 cuft. full 1lb. Of polyfil with about 400watts. It sounds great. It was a big surprise.


----------



## vwdave (Jun 12, 2013)

creakyjoints said:


> Sorry. I was talking about these guys who spend thousands on wires and cables for home audio. They tend to be older guys who's hearing isnt that great anyway trying to justify a ridiculous expense. These guys who will spend a 100k on a home audio system. Pretty sure you could go to ALOT of musical performances around the world with that money. If they enjoy music so much go see some live and save your money for more important things.


Ah gotcha. Yea there might be some truth to it, but you have a great point that most of them are guying this stuff to "keep up with the Jones" and really cant appreciate the difference. IMO the best test for how accurate a system is to have a true musician listen, and if they approve then its good. I dont meant a "rock star" but either a classical musician or some sort of a professional musician.



SilkySlim said:


> Ok I love the IDMAX and it is very efficient. And I do like it very much. I also liked the eclipse subs when they were new. I just tried an OS sub that really really surprised me. It was the lanzar DC10 4ohm SVC in a 1.1 cuft. full 1lb. with about 400watts. It sounds great. It was a surprise.


lanzar made some great stuff back in the day. So many good options here, ifthe XMAX doesnt work out I will have to try them out.


----------



## SilkySlim (Oct 24, 2012)

vwdave said:


> Ah gotcha. Yea there might be some truth to it, but you have a great point that most of them are guying this stuff to "keep up with the Jones" and really cant appreciate the difference. IMO the best test for how accurate a system is to have a true musician listen, and if they approve then its good. I dont meant a "rock star" but either a classical musician or some sort of a professional musician.
> 
> I have heard differences but just because it's different doesn't mean better. Nelson Pass has some good info tech papers on how different wires and can react weigh different amp designs. When I can link it on a computer I will. @passlabs.com
> 
> ...


I mentioned it because there are a few around right now.


----------

