10's or 8's...worried about low end.

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

4 8w1v2's would have a linear displacement potential of 39.209 in^3 @ 400watts

2 10w1v2's would have a linear displacement potential of 40.1415 in^3

@ 300watts

Nice job finding an example that yielded less than a 3% difference in 'potential', and exhibits an atypical difference in Fs between sub sizes. Way to prove me wrong. lol

on woofersetc right now...
4 8w1v2's will cost you $400

2 10w1v2's will cost you $220

Nice job adding fluff to your post in an attempt to look righteous. Nobody here is debating price Sherlock. Not only that, but the same point (the array os smaller drivers is more expensive) has already been made previously, by myself. Oops?
A swing and a miss. Keep swinging slugger.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

yes but it translates into a figure that you can compare the low-end extension by
the fs changes in an enclosure but it will change proportionally... if 2 subs have different Fs's then it makes NO sence to say their responce curves will look the same...

If 2 subs have the same Fs, it still makes no sense to say that their response curves will look the same.

 

[almond 10+ year member]

yes but it translates into a figure that you can compare the low-end extension by
the fs changes in an enclosure but it will change proportionally... if 2 subs have different Fs's then it makes NO sence to say their responce curves will look the same...

along with nine other t/s params. f/s is thought to be constant. not a curve. or even the tip of the curve. it the subs free air resonance

 

[almond 10+ year member]

and as had been said far beyond in this thread you have already demonstrated enough that you have no clue as to what the hell you are talking about. even when seasoned audiophiles come one and tell you you are wrong on multiple occasion with multiple people you still argue that you are right.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

Nice job finding an example that yielded less than a 3% difference in 'potential', and exhibits an atypical difference in Fs between sub sizes. Way to prove me wrong. lol

dude i'm not trying to prove you wrong, i'm trying to help op make a good decision...

yes it has a 3% higher potential, but thats at a lower power and price... so how does it make sence to buy the 8's?

Nice job adding fluff to your post in an attempt to look righteous. Nobody here is debating price Sherlock. Not only that, but the same point (the array os smaller drivers is more expensive) has already been made previously, by myself. Oops?
A swing and a miss. Keep swinging slugger.

what are you talking about? look righteous? i simply stated the facts if he doesn't care about price, wants to be different, and wants to use a bigger amp, then he can go with the 8's if he wants to, all i did was give the facts

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

If 2 subs have the same Fs, it still makes no sense to say that their response curves will look the same.

exaclty!!! thats my point, he's acting like he can get 4 8's to sound just like a 15 just because of Sd

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

i'm trying to say that it depends on the sub... but it's usually STUPID to go with 4 8's over 2 10's sealed

Are you kidding me? This entire thing has been over me, and a few tohers, telling you that you cant make generalized statements about speakers based upon diameter. Now you want to say you are arguing that it depends on the sub. I guess you think that if some time in the middle of the arguement you jump ships, nobody will notice? I noticed. You fail.
Lastly, I do not believe Ive ever made the arguement that an array of 8's is superior to a single 10 (or fewer 10's). What I HAVE said is that an array of 8's is not intrinsically inferior to a single 10 (or fewer 10's). Your inability to grasp my point has lead us to this... a crossroads where your logic twists around so much it interesects with the logic of the people you are arguing with. Wait another page or two, your logic will twist back the other way and you'll be stating how instrinsically bad 8's are again.

lawl

 

[almond 10+ year member]

exaclty!!! thats my point, he's acting like he can get 4 8's to sound just like a 15 just because of Sd

and as had been said far beyond in this thread you have already demonstrated enough that you have no clue as to what the hell you are talking about. even when seasoned audiophiles come one and tell you you are wrong on multiple occasion with multiple people you still argue that you are right.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

along with nine other t/s params. f/s is thought to be constant. not a curve. or even the tip of the curve. it the subs free air resonance

you are still not getting it...

picture this... we compare 2

subs free-air...

the Fs is the value for their peak responce

Fs sub A > Fs sub B

now we put them in proportional encloures and the peak responce will probly change slightly, but proportionally... thus,

peak responce of sub A enclosed > peak responce of sub B enclosed

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

yes it has a 3% higher potential, but thats at a lower power and price... so how does it make sence to buy the 8's?

As Ive stated before, there are perfectly good reasons to go with 8's. Mounting constraints, either in depth of cone diameter. Or, in the case of some of the old SPL competitors using smaller drivers at the time, in an attempt to utilize as much space for radiating surface area as possible. Just to name two reasons. let me ask you this, by your reasoning, why does anyone ever run a pair of subs? Why would you run a pair of 10's? Clearly by your reasoning, bigger is always better, so a single 12 would be superior.
You are the guy with what, 5 subs, including four 10's.... and here you are arguing fewer larger subs are always better.

And again, I see you take in spelling information like you do car audio... its 'sense'. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

 

[almond 10+ year member]

you are still not getting it...
picture this... we compare 2

subs free-air...

the Fs is the value for their peak responce

Fs sub A > Fs sub B

now we put them in proportional encloures and the peak responce will probly change slightly, but proportionally... thus,

peak responce of sub A enclosed > peak responce of sub B enclosed

Fs = resonance frequency of the driver. In free-air, the driver's impedance will peak at this frequency.

http://www.diysubwoofers.org/definitions.htm

it is also the point where the sub will take the least amount of power to get to xmax in a free air state. the fs is a t/s param of the sub and constant. though you may be confused (hard headed and stubborn would be more like it) and be thinking of the "fs(subscript) box" which is something completely different.

and as had been said far beyond in this thread you have already demonstrated enough that you have no clue as to what the hell you are talking about. even when seasoned audiophiles come one and tell you you are wrong on multiple occasion with multiple people you still argue that you are right.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

Are you kidding me? This entire thing has been over me, and a few tohers, telling you that you cant make generalized statements about speakers based upon diameter. Now you want to say you are arguing that it depends on the sub. I guess you think that if some time in the middle of the arguement you jump ships, nobody will notice? I noticed. You fail.
Lastly, I do not believe Ive ever made the arguement that an array of 8's is superior to a single 10 (or fewer 10's). What I HAVE said is that an array of 8's is not intrinsically inferior to a single 10 (or fewer 10's). Your inability to grasp my point has lead us to this... a crossroads where your logic twists around so much it interesects with the logic of the people you are arguing with. Wait another page or two, your logic will twist back the other way and you'll be stating how instrinsically bad 8's are again.

lawl

wrong... your psycobable with the intent of once again making me look stupid is what fails... the first time you contradicted me i said that you misunderstood me...

so don't try to play dumb like you thought i was setting down a law of car audio... (that all 8"s are inferior to all 10's)

if you had been interested in helping op like i was you would've understood everything i said or at least questioned and i would explain...

but instead your aim seems to be to prove simple warranted generalizations wrong to make yourself look like a god of car audio...

my logic is twisted?...//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

i was taught to go by the rule, not the exceptions to the rule...

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

no the Fs is the peak of a curve, the curve of the subs frequency responce

wow, no... F/S is the resonance frequency of the sub in free air. Below this frequency the sub will lose effeciency. At F/S inductance is at it's highest and effeciency peaks.

Secondly, you've said it about 100x in this thread and your still wrong. Multiple subs are more effecient than 1 larger one, for a variety of reasons. Assume aa single sub off off Y watts hits Xdecibels. Then add another sub without adding power, you're output is now X+3 decibels. By adding a sub, you gained output without adding power, secondly, since each driver is seeing less power, you can actually gain more than 3 decibels, if the first sub was having power compression issues. More potential output with with the same power is more effecient.

Third a large speaker can play as high as a smaller one if they design it to, it's not a god given inherent part of the speaker. Inductance play a MUCH bigger role than cone area.

 

[almond 10+ year member]

wrong... your psycobable with the intent of once again making me look stupid is what fails... the first time you contradicted me i said that you misunderstood me...so don't try to play dumb like you thought i was setting down a law of car audio... (that all 8"s are inferior to all 10's)

if you had been interested in helping op like i was you would've understood everything i said or at least questioned and i would explain...

but instead your aim seems to be to prove simple warranted generalizations wrong to make yourself look like a god of car audio...

my logic is twisted?...//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

i was taught to go by the rule, not the exceptions to the rule...

and as had been said far beyond in this thread you have already demonstrated enough that you have no clue as to what the hell you are talking about. even when seasoned audiophiles come one and tell you you are wrong on multiple occasion with multiple people you still argue that you are right.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

As Ive stated before, there are perfectly good reasons to go with 8's. Mounting constraints, either in depth of cone diameter. Or, in the case of some of the old SPL competitors using smaller drivers at the time, in an attempt to utilize as much space for radiating surface area as possible. Just to name two reasons. let me ask you this, by your reasoning, why does anyone ever run a pair of subs? Why would you run a pair of 10's? Clearly by your reasoning, bigger is always better, so a single 12 would be superior.
You are the guy with what, 5 subs, including four 10's.... and here you are arguing fewer larger subs are always better.

And again, I see you take in spelling information like you do car audio... its 'sense'. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

dude i didn't say they are allways superior, you are putting words in my mouth or at least taking my words out of context...

my setup was about as efficient as a midget running track ...

in many subs the advantages of 2 10's outweigh the advantages of a single 12

again don't play stupid and act like i was laying down a law of car audio... you know very well i was making a generalization instead of giving advice based on exceptions as it seems you would have me do