Poll: 10" or 12" woofer

[nan0bug]

Originally posted by: Rogodin2
"15" sub will not sound as clear at the 150-250hz range as an 8" sub."

With a frequency response of 150-250 your 8" woofer is NOT A SUB-it's a midbass.

A sub is designed for 80hz and lower.

I can't believe the drivel and lack of common sense and a consensus of terms-this forum never ceases to amaze me.

rogo

I never said to use the 8"s for 150-250hz. I was simply reiterating my point that smaller speakers work best for higher frequencies. An 8" speaker will reproduce sound in the 150-250hz range a lot better than a 15" would, right?

Unless I'm mistaken, I said that component speakers would round out that range the best, but we were talking about subwoofers, not components.

250hz is midbass range, but an 8" driver can do it and sound better than a 15" sub can, and it can still hit down into the 30hz range easily. Sure, it will sound sloppy, but not as sloppy as a 15" alone.

15s work best to hit as low as possible. 12"s and 10"s will work best to hit the whole bass range, although they won't hit as low as the 15s. 8"s are good for the upper range of the bass spectrum. 15"s and 8"s together, with proper crossovers, would sound better than a single 15" any day of the week.

Also, around 120-135hz is where subs will top out, although at that range component speakers will do better than any sub.

 

[Shockwave]

I just wanted to be a part of page 3.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: Viperoni

Originally posted by: Shockwave

Originally posted by: ShaneN

So far, the only person who actually is making any sense here is nourdmrolNMT1, keep up the informing of the uninformed ! If you don't want to listen to me or him, listen to Physics, it backs up everything he has said.

Thanks for backin me and Glen.

Me too

No love.

Then again, I didn't actually say anything useful.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: Shockwave
I just wanted to be a part of page 3.

Your page scheme is weak. I'm on the beginning of the second page.

:beer:

 

[Shockwave]

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: Shockwave
I just wanted to be a part of page 3.

Your page scheme is weak. I'm on the beginning of the second page.

:beer:

:beer:

Hey... :beer: + :beer: + :beer: + :beer: + :beer: =

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: nan0bug

Originally posted by: Rogodin2
"15" sub will not sound as clear at the 150-250hz range as an 8" sub."

With a frequency response of 150-250 your 8" woofer is NOT A SUB-it's a midbass.

A sub is designed for 80hz and lower.

I can't believe the drivel and lack of common sense and a consensus of terms-this forum never ceases to amaze me.

rogo

I never said to use the 8"s for 150-250hz. I was simply reiterating my point that smaller speakers work best for higher frequencies. An 8" speaker will reproduce sound in the 150-250hz range a lot better than a 15" would, right?

Unless I'm mistaken, I said that component speakers would round out that range the best, but we were talking about subwoofers, not components.

250hz is midbass range, but an 8" driver can do it and sound better than a 15" sub can, and it can still hit down into the 30hz range easily. Sure, it will sound sloppy, but not as sloppy as a 15" alone.

15s work best to hit as low as possible. 12"s and 10"s will work best to hit the whole bass range, although they won't hit as low as the 15s. 8"s are good for the upper range of the bass spectrum. 15"s and 8"s together, with proper crossovers, would sound better than a single 15" any day of the week.

Also, around 120-135hz is where subs will top out, although at that range component speakers will do better than any sub.

isnt that exactly why JL made a 13.5" sub????? (me gettin one!!)

however, yes, an 8 will play higher, but at that range, it is no longer in the sub frequencies, which, assuming, they named subwoofers correctly, is what they are used for.

MIKE

 

[glen]

Since the Subs are almost always in the back of the car, or the corner of the room in a home, you want the crossover to be - 80hz at the highest with a fairly steep slope, like 12db/octave or ideally 24db/octave.

Also, there is no need for 8's for mid bass.
In my home I am using six (3 per side) 12's for the frequencies between 80hz, and 2,800hz
picture

 

[Howard]

Some entertainment.

 

[RbSX]

It also depends on what type of car you have, a good 10 in a hatchback is all you need, but if you've got a sedan you'll want a good 12.

 

[Howard]

On a side note: Has anybody tried an IB setup for a subwoofer in their car, using the outside atmosphere as the other side?

 

[Rogodin2]

I'm going infinite baffel in my new HT room.

Here are a few pics of what I'm shooting for (using tumults insead of the tempests):

pic1

pic2

never said to use the 8"s for 150-250hz. I was simply reiterating my point that smaller speakers work best for higher frequencies. An 8" speaker will reproduce sound in the 150-250hz range a lot better than a 15" would, right?

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: Rogodin2
I'm going infinite baffel in my new HT room.

Here are a few pics of what I'm shooting for (using tumults insead of the tempests):

pic1

pic2

never said to use the 8"s for 150-250hz. I was simply reiterating my point that smaller speakers work best for higher frequencies. An 8" speaker will reproduce sound in the 150-250hz range a lot better than a 15" would, right?

Cool. I'd love to be able to play around with a few Tumults... Let us know how it goes.

BTW, it won't let me access the pics.

 

[Rogodin2]

I'm going infinite baffel in my new HT room.

Here are a few pics of what I'm shooting for (using tumults insead of the tempests):

never said to use the 8"s for 150-250hz. I was simply reiterating my point that smaller speakers work best for higher frequencies. An 8" speaker will reproduce sound in the 150-250hz range a lot better than a 15" would, right?

that's inane-if you know that a sub isn't built to work at frequencies above 80 hz why would you then try to compare a 8" driver (that doesn't move nearly as much air as bigger driver-most important of all is the amound of air the sub can move-a decent sub will move more air with a bigger cone and magnet-I can give you the schematics if you'd like) to a sub that can be tuned to a specific frequency.

If you do belive that a smaller sub is better than a larger one I can also give you the numbers for the wattage it would take to drive that sub to the same levels (these are objective and not subjective to the listener) as that of a larger sub (not just any sub though-these would be equavalent in design, just smaller cones).

IB is amazing and I'm going to do it.

If you need some fast empicial proof about driver size go into you major theatre and ask what size subs they use.

Bigger is better with subs-just like engines: "there is no replacement for displacement-bigger subs displace more air."

rogo pic1pic1pic01

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: Shockwave

Originally posted by: fyleow

Originally posted by: Shockwave

Originally posted by: 95SS

along with amps having "sound quality"

I wish some "audiophiles" would step up and takes RC's $10K test. Maybe that would shut them up!!

:evil:

Some have. All failed. The myth continues.....

Wow so there is no sound quality difference between amps? Good one.

You're going to start telling me there's no difference between 128kbps MP3 and CD audio too right?

Your an idiot too. An amp AMPLIFIES, hence its name. If it does something else, its not an AMPLIFIER is it. Again, until you do a little research, help yourself to a cup of STFU and let the big peoples talk eh?

OMG IDIOT. yes, it amplifies. duh. in the process it also distorts, introduces inaccuracies, imprints it's own frequency response characteristics, adds noise and interference, etc etc. there are HUGE difference in the sound quality and sonic signatures on different amps, both between tube and solid state, and within each of those types. if amps magically were perfect devices, they wouldn't be any different, but there's no such thing as a perfect amp. instruments amplifiers, for example, are the basis of a mutlti-million dollar industry devoted to the not-so-subtle differences between amps, where the changes that the power amp makes to the signal are considered a good thing. Line6's entire buisness is centered around attempting to digitally reproduce the sonic signatures of different power amps in one box. in fact, something as simple as changing the transformer in an amplifer can have a noticeable effect on the sound signature of an amp.

Shockwave, you're correct about bigger drivers being better than smaller ones, i'm with you on that. both physics and a listening test can prove it. but you obviously have no experience with amps or you never would have uttered such an astounding display of ignorance and misinformation. all it takes is 30 minutes with a variety of amps and some material you know well to hear the differences (and with proper speakers, the differences are huge, even for hi-fi equipment). and no, "In Da Club" probably isn't a good choice. if you don't believe me, cruise the garage sales and buy yourself a $5 old piece of crap receiver, like a technics or kenwood or something, and try it out with some killer speakers. you will be dismayed to hear how your beautiful speakers have been rendered all fuzzy, dynamically flat, and generally unpleasant by the cheap amp. it's not even a matter of power, even at low volumes the difference will be audiable.

and while i'm at it, D/A and A/D converters are NOT all created equal either. ask anyone in the recording industry. after all, by definition they are devices that deal with ANALOG signals as well as digital. for a D/A convertor, like you have in a CD player, what goes in is the same, obviously, but in the conversion mistakes are made (or in other words, a sonic signature is added), more so in the crappy ones. you don't hear this as obvious blips or bleeps, you hear it in the "air" of the sound, the realism of it. in the recording field, you can help alleviate these mistakes in crappy (by crappy i mean "only" costing $50 each for each mono D/A alone) by running them at 96kHz for tracking and then eventually mixing back down to 44.1 kHz. the results are better than if you have started at 44.1kHz to begin with, and the reason is because you made each of the converter's mistakes less signifigant (and therefore reduced the convertor's signature). pro studios have A/D's and D/A's that cost a minimum of $200 for each mono channel, and yes, they really do sound better.

 

[Shockwave]

Thomsbrain,
I mean it when i say I'm pretty much done with audio here. Your post just reaffirms this. There is an idiot here. But, it not be me. Theres no point in me doing your amp test, ITS BEEN DONE. And its been PROVEN amps sound the same. Now test equipment is a different story, but we can measure what we cannot hear. So yes, technically there is a difference. But sonically you cant hear it. I assure you. I ASSURE YOU. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. 100% accurate in my statement
YOU CANNOT HEAR A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MATCHED AMPS. Period. End of story. All that hype out there? Just hype my friend, just hype.

 

[thomsbrain]

shockwave, the "matched amps" thing is just my point. there's no such thing as matched amps, because there's no such thing as an amp that doesn't distort (whether clipping, EQ, dynamics, etc). just because a bunch of deaf car subwoofer freaks can't hear blatant high frequency distortion doesn't mean that those of us who value both our ears and what we put in them can't hear it "loud and clear." the "challenge" that someone mentioned earlier is ridiculous. comparing bottom-barrel consumer car sub amplifiers is like comparing dog crap to cat crap. yup, they both smell awful, and in a blind smell test i can't tell them apart. but compare cat crap to roses, and yes, i think i can tell the difference. although even then, if i've been smelling nothing but overwhelmingly strong dog crap for years, my nose's ability to distinguish those roses might be lessened to the point where i might miss them as well as the cat crap.

more proof that not all amps are equal: if all amps were equal, why do different types of power tubes sound different, even in the same amp? EL34's sound round and balanced, and distort early and smoothly. drop in 6L6's and you'll have clean accurate highs and deep, thumping lows. KT88's have massive low end and huge headroom. not only that, there are huge differences between the manufacturers of each of these tubes. some are darker than others, some have more headroom than others. and this is all for the exact same amp, biased to identical voltages. did you know that only minor design changes in the power amp of one of the earliest fender guitar amplifiers (think 40's and 50's guitar tone, Elvis, country, etc ) gave rise to the first marshalls (think clapton, hendrix, the who, etc)? big tone difference there, and even you will be able to hear it. for the difference between tubes in a given amp, listen to some guns and roses and then listen to the smashing pumpkins. same amp, different tubes.

of course this is all compounded by taste. some people LIKE certain types of distortion. that's why people like tube amps. it's cause they distort a little (and compress when driven hard), but that distortion is one that's pleasing to the ear. good solid state amps distort less, which means they are more accurate but often still less enjoyable to listen to. bad solid state amps distort in a way that is not pleasant to listen to.

 

[Shockwave]

Your right thom.

Although I will say this. Home hi-fi people dont really impress me for 2 reasons.
1) Their overly arrogant and stuck on themselves
2) Good sound in the home is EASY. GREAT sound in the home isnt hard. Try reproducing that in the car. You want a helluva challenge? Get great sound in your car. Home hi-fi'ers have it E-A-S-Y.

Thats why I dont give much weight to home hi-fi'ers. They have it easy and simple but are so stuck on themselves that they dont even realize how stupidly easy home hi-fi is. And you can qoute me on those accounts.