Closed Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 63

Reload Thread: 12" vs 15"

  1. #16
    ejschultz's Avatar
    ejschultz is offline CarAudio.com Veteran



    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Schererville, IN
    Posts
    2,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    57 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Quote Originally Posted by falcons03079313 View Post
    not always. thats my version of a fart cannon lol
    lol. Now I can hear the sound in my head, to the degree I believe you intended.



    94 Caprice Classic LS: DEH-P800PRS, TS-C720PRS, MRV-F545, MRD-M1005, 2 Fi X 12s in 2.5 net cubes sealed; 97 Grand Cherokee TSi: CDA-9855, TS-D1720C, MRV-F345, MRD-M605, SWX-1043D in .54 net cubes sealed




    Resident Jeep Expert, Mother Fucker




  2. #17
    Falcons's Avatar
    Falcons is offline that **** i dont like



    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Albion, New York, United States
    Posts
    5,224
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1375 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Quote Originally Posted by ejschultz View Post
    lol. Now I can hear the sound in my head, to the degree I believe you intended.
    yupp but aparently i fail at life sometimes lol



    Things to look forward to:
    (2) 10" or 12" imperium audio designs subs
    set of PHD MF 6.5" comps
    Completely seal off and deaden my doors
    aquire a 2k amp
    aquire a 2 channel amp for front stage

  3. #18
    Liquid Bass's Avatar
    Liquid Bass is offline Midwest Militia



    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    KC Missouri
    Posts
    3,000
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    This is actually a null argument....there are some factors that would support these theories



    system 1:
    Car:04 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited
    Sub: Tc Sounds 3000 quad 15
    Amp: Audio Pipe Ap1500.1
    Head unit: Eclipse AVN7000
    Big 3: 1/0
    System 2:
    Car: Gf's Pontiac G6 GT
    Sub: Orion HCCA 12.4
    Amp: Audio Pipe Ap3000d

  4. #19
    T3mpest's Avatar
    T3mpest is offline CarAudio.com Veteran



    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    3,012
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    351 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Quote Originally Posted by Liquid Bass View Post
    This is actually a null argument....there are some factors that would support these theories
    Such as? I'll refute any of it if you'll play devils advocate. I'd like to hear what you think would support a bigger driver being sloppier.



    Quote Originally Posted by sdmtnbiker420 View Post
    JL is for ballers. Theres a reason all the biggest rappers sing about JL, Zapco, Alpine..... and not Lightning audio or Pyle. It's all about the BALLER FACTOR.


  5. #20
    Chriszle's Avatar
    Chriszle is offline CarAudio.com Elite



    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    1,718
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    373 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Larger subwoofers have higher mms. Nuff said. However, enclosure design is the single largest factor that will determine how any sub performs.




  6. #21
    audioholic's Avatar
    audioholic is offline Moderator



    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Parts Unknown
    Posts
    23,586
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    320 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Quote Originally Posted by Chriszle View Post
    Larger subwoofers have higher mms. Nuff said. However, enclosure design is the single largest factor that will determine how any sub performs.
    Moving mass is what most common sense reliant people refer to when suggesting larger woofers are sloppier or slower. If we apply that same logic to something we tend to understand better, we can see how false that logic really is. For example, are heavier cars always slower than lighter cars? Why not? Because moving mass is not the sole determining factor in performance of a car. Its not the sole determining factor in a speaker's performance, frequency response, or its transient abilities either.

    Read up on Dan Wiggin's testing/write-up about modifying the moving mass of a speaker, and what affect it caused versus modifying speaker inductance. You'll be surprised.

    Larger speakers, generally speaking, actually have the potential to output LESS distortion than their smaller counterparts, given a specific output level. In other words, larger subs can get louder than smaller ones, so the larger one wont need to work as hard as the smaller one to achieve a certain output level. As excursion increases, BL drops and distortion goes up (less cone control). So if your goal is minimizing distortion, the less excursion required, the better. Hence, a larger diameter sub that doesn't have to excurt as far may very well be the better choice. Of course, many factors affects this, such as fs, freq of the material, listening levels, etc etc. Again, Im speaking in very general terms here.

    Its becoming popular to suggest SQ is 'all in the box', that is definitely not true. I like to look at it like this: the box has the potential to really screw up performance if its built wrong. If its built right, it simply allows the driver to perform as it should. Obviously a well designed/built box will perform better than a bad one, but dont take that logic so far as to decide the speaker plays very little role in final performance. Again generally speaking, the box tends to be a more dominant factor in frequency response, while the driver itself tends to be the more dominant factor in distortion audibility. There are exceptions of course, notably being the bandpass styles of enclosure, but my generalization holds true *usually*.



    No speaker, in the history of speakers, has ever been blown by too little power. Ever. I don't care what your friend told you, he's a dirty liar.


  7. #22
    ejschultz's Avatar
    ejschultz is offline CarAudio.com Veteran



    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Schererville, IN
    Posts
    2,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    57 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    I like the analogy using cars. That's definitely breaking it down nicely for everyone to understand why moving mass doesn't necessarily affect the "cleanliness" of a speaker.



    94 Caprice Classic LS: DEH-P800PRS, TS-C720PRS, MRV-F545, MRD-M1005, 2 Fi X 12s in 2.5 net cubes sealed; 97 Grand Cherokee TSi: CDA-9855, TS-D1720C, MRV-F345, MRD-M605, SWX-1043D in .54 net cubes sealed




    Resident Jeep Expert, Mother Fucker

  8. #23
    VWBobby's Avatar
    VWBobby is offline PG and SS nuthugger



    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Nibiru
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,326
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    148 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    If moving mass doesn't affect a speaker, how come no matter what level of brakes you put on a 4000lb car, its still going to take at least 130 feet to stop it from 60mph? Now, you are going to say "that's what stronger motor force is for". Stronger motor force can help control the speaker better, true, at the sacrifice of sound quality (distortion introduced).
    Sensitivity. Lets say you have a lightweight cone/suspension. The speaker should have a higher sensitivity. It will require a lighter motor to control this mass. The speaker should be able to reproduce more subtle tones, more accurately. For instance, high quality pro audio or home theater speakers will reproduce drum sounds, guitar or vocals with more accuracy than a typical car audio speaker.
    This is because the speakers are generally made from lighter materials, paper or wool cones, and generally have much lighter suspensions.
    This is where car audio speakers normally fail in SQ. Their mateirals and contruction generally lend themselves to be more sloppy, either not producing the sounds (at all), or not producing them accurately (distortion). At least that's my understanding.
    Feel free to discuss.




  9. #24
    kushy_dreams's Avatar
    kushy_dreams is offline The resident hippie



    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    twenty past four
    Posts
    4,091
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1499 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Quote Originally Posted by VWBobby View Post
    how come no matter what level of brakes you put on a 4000lb car, its still going to take at least 130 feet to stop it from 60mph?
    Bad analogy. If this was true then running ****** brakes from Pep Boys would yeild the same results as ceramic brakes on race cars, which is definitely not true.



    13 Dodge Dart Rallye 1.4T


    http://mobileaudioforum.com/forum/forum.php<

    BOYCOTT SKAR AUDIO! SHADY BUSINESS PRACTICES SHOULD NEVER BE ENCOURAGED!

  10. #25
    VWBobby's Avatar
    VWBobby is offline PG and SS nuthugger



    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Nibiru
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,326
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    148 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    No, its a great analogy. Newton's 2nd law: Force = Mass x Acceleration. The fastest braking cars are Formula 1 race cars and weigh 1,411 lb or more (minimum weight requirement). They can stop in approx 48 feet from 60mph. If the car was to weigh 4000lbs, the stopping distance would increase to around 130 feet..
    Point being, you cannot just overcome all weight limitations by using a stronger motor(brakes).




  11. #26
    IonRL205's Avatar
    IonRL205 is offline DJ h4z4rdes IonRL205 is a Supporting Member of the forum!



    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Abilene, Texas
    Posts
    2,449
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    946 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    You do know your brakes aren't the only thing that determines how fast you're gonna stop, your tires play a big role in it too.



    Headunit - Pioneer DEH-P8300UB
    Subs - None
    Sub Amp - 2x Crescendo 3kwp
    Front Stage - Polk Audio db651 Coaxial
    Front Amp - None

    Quote Originally Posted by zako View Post
    Most properly done 15 inch subwoofers are not suited for car audio use simply due to box size requirements.

  12. #27
    Chriszle's Avatar
    Chriszle is offline CarAudio.com Elite



    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    1,718
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    373 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Quote Originally Posted by audioholic View Post
    Moving mass is what most common sense reliant people refer to when suggesting larger woofers are sloppier or slower. If we apply that same logic to something we tend to understand better, we can see how false that logic really is. For example, are heavier cars always slower than lighter cars? Why not? Because moving mass is not the sole determining factor in performance of a car. Its not the sole determining factor in a speaker's performance, frequency response, or its transient abilities either.

    Read up on Dan Wiggin's testing/write-up about modifying the moving mass of a speaker, and what affect it caused versus modifying speaker inductance. You'll be surprised.

    Larger speakers, generally speaking, actually have the potential to output LESS distortion than their smaller counterparts, given a specific output level. In other words, larger subs can get louder than smaller ones, so the larger one wont need to work as hard as the smaller one to achieve a certain output level. As excursion increases, BL drops and distortion goes up (less cone control). So if your goal is minimizing distortion, the less excursion required, the better. Hence, a larger diameter sub that doesn't have to excurt as far may very well be the better choice. Of course, many factors affects this, such as fs, freq of the material, listening levels, etc etc. Again, Im speaking in very general terms here.

    Its becoming popular to suggest SQ is 'all in the box', that is definitely not true. I like to look at it like this: the box has the potential to really screw up performance if its built wrong. If its built right, it simply allows the driver to perform as it should. Obviously a well designed/built box will perform better than a bad one, but dont take that logic so far as to decide the speaker plays very little role in final performance. Again generally speaking, the box tends to be a more dominant factor in frequency response, while the driver itself tends to be the more dominant factor in distortion audibility. There are exceptions of course, notably being the bandpass styles of enclosure, but my generalization holds true *usually*.
    Not a fan of your car example. If two cars are exactly the same in every aspect, except that you add 500 lbs of weight to one car, it will be slower to accelerate and decelerate always. Maybe I should not have simplified it so much, as no one T/S parameter will give insight as to how a sub will perform .




  13. #28
    wickedwitt's Avatar
    wickedwitt is offline CarAudio.com Veteran



    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Abilene, TX
    Posts
    2,984
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    998 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Quote Originally Posted by Chriszle View Post
    I like the 18s cause they play the deep bass
    Put them in a ported box and you get continuous bass



    Stupid Loud.

  14. #29
    VWBobby's Avatar
    VWBobby is offline PG and SS nuthugger



    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Nibiru
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,326
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    148 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Especially if you have a big air hole.




  15. #30
    audioholic's Avatar
    audioholic is offline Moderator



    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Parts Unknown
    Posts
    23,586
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    320 Post(s)

    Re: 12" vs 15"

    Quote Originally Posted by VWBobby View Post
    If moving mass doesn't affect a speaker, how come no matter what level of brakes you put on a 4000lb car, its still going to take at least 130 feet to stop it from 60mph? Now, you are going to say "that's what stronger motor force is for". Stronger motor force can help control the speaker better, true, at the sacrifice of sound quality (distortion introduced).
    This is a point at which the car analogy breaks down. The stopping force of a car is determined by many factors that have no relation to a speaker. Tires used, road conditions, rotor diameter, the number of pistons per caliper, etc. Dont take the car analogy to the N'th degree.

    For example, the force/mechanism that propels the speaker cone into motion, is the same one used to stop it. Going back to cars, imagine their brakes being the engine, you simply reverse direction of the driveshaft and viola, you are stopping, and then moving the other direction. This is how a speaker starts and stops, using the same mechanism. Obviously, a car works much differently. This is why the analogy fails so rapidly if you try to apply it too closely to speaker physics.

    A stronger motor does not sacrifice SQ and introduce distortion. In fact, the stronger the motor, the more control over cone motion is has (starting AND stopping), so the less (BL) distortion it would produce.

    There are other factors that come into account besides simple motor force however. Most notably being the BL curve of the speaker. It could have a massively strong motor, but if BL drops off rapidly due to the design of the motor (narrow magnetic field, short coil, etc), then SQ will suffer. Conversely, a motor with less BL force, but a more consistent BL curve, could end up outputting less distortion then the motor with a higher BL spec, depending on excursion.

    Split gap, xbl^2, and the various methods JL uses on the W7, are known as BL optimized motor types. This means their design allows them to have a consistent motor force (BL) throughout its specified excursion limits (xmax). Why do companies go through the trouble of keeping their BL force consistent? Because BL distortion accounts for 70-80% of the audible distortion created by a speaker (not to be confused with signal distortion however). That is more evidence of the significant role motor force plays in cone control (and how little mms plays a role)

    Quote Originally Posted by VWBobby View Post
    Sensitivity. Lets say you have a lightweight cone/suspension. The speaker should have a higher sensitivity. It will require a lighter motor to control this mass. The speaker should be able to reproduce more subtle tones, more accurately. For instance, high quality pro audio or home theater speakers will reproduce drum sounds, guitar or vocals with more accuracy than a typical car audio speaker.
    This is because the speakers are generally made from lighter materials, paper or wool cones, and generally have much lighter suspensions.
    Less mass, or more motor force, both gets you to the same place... better cone control. But my point is, motor force plays a much larger role than mms.

    The home audio drivers you are talking about that use lighter materials etc (because they aren't in a harsh environment like a car) are midrange, tweets, and (most common) "fullrange" drivers. But again, my comments on mms relate to subwoofers only. The W7, with its 'heavy' car audio inspired cone and suspension, are being used quite successfully in a home audio environment. So have other car audio inspired subs, like the maelstrom, avalanche, etc. And guess what you usually see in a car audio sub converted over to a high-end home audio setup... BL optimization.

    Also worth noting, home audio speakers tend to have looser suspension, and higher sensitivity, because enclosure size is a smaller issue in home audio than car audio. Hoffman's Iron Law tells us: sensitivity, low frequency extension, small enclosure.... pick two. Since most subwoofer builders dont want to sacrifice LFE, sensitivity is generally the trade off between home and car audio. In car audio, we tend to use low efficiency subs, and pump mega watts through them, because we want to cram then into tiny boxes in our trunk.

    There is certainly something to be said for lower mms subs, the IDMax is a good example of a sub designed to (pretty much) minimize moving mass. It has a light cone, loose suspension, and its relatively efficient. There aspects of speaker performance we rarely discuss here, like timbre. This is where mms plays a larger role, the subjective end of SQ. But in terms of simple distortion output, no, mms plays a very small role, and BL plays a MUCH larger one.

    Hope that helps make more sense of the topic.



    No speaker, in the history of speakers, has ever been blown by too little power. Ever. I don't care what your friend told you, he's a dirty liar.


Closed Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
1e2 Forum