$150 to spend

[Cruzer 10+ year member]

the peerless xxls 10 can be used in .6 and 1 cubic foot just fine.

might not be as loud as say the dcon 10 in the same size box off the 250 watts, but it will be a lot better sounding imo

@audioholic, dont u have to increase power to the 8" sub generally to get it to use the extra stroke, xmax, to reach the same spl level as a larger sub? box size only does so much. for example modeling sa-8 and sa-10 sealed. the sa-10 in .55 off 400 watts is louder than the sa-8 untill u use 1500 watts. box size doesnt really play much a factor, sealed anyways. .55 to 1 cube it barely changes.

as for ported, sa 10 1.25@32hz 400 watts, the sa8 needs to be in the same size box, same power, just to reach its same output at the peak of 32hz, but the rest of the spectrum is way behind

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

What I said makes perfect sense. It is more efficient to achieve output via cone area than it is to achieve it via stroke. That is a fact.
The technologies that enable a longer stroke tend to decrease sensitivity. On the other hand, you automatically gain 3dB of output by doubling your cone area while keeping the same overall power.

Again, another fact is the larger cone area's "price paid" is a larger enclosure. To use your logic in the vacuum you are presenting it to us in here, we should all be driving using 32" subwoofers.

 

[OmegaBunny 10+ year member]

What not go with one or two SA-8 sealed in .6^3 each?

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

@audioholic, dont u have to increase power to the 8" sub generally to get it to use the extra stroke, xmax, to reach the same spl level as a larger sub?

When wanting to keep the same alignment, yes you basically need more power. But in the context of 'which is a more efficient way of getting more air displacement, cone area or excursion', box alignment (freq response) plays no role. This is a purely theoretical argument. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif

In theory, if an 8" sub had infinite cone excursion potential, with a constant input power you could increase box size until excursion is high enough that the 8 would out displace the 15 in its given enclosure size, both with the same input power. Just like, in theory, we can say that increasing cone size is 'free displacement' while ignoring that larger cones require stiffer suspension, just like longer excursion does. Moving mass = weight * speed. Larger cone = more weight, more excursion = higher speed. Both increase moving mass. And higher moving mass means stiffer suspension, which means lowering efficiency.

 

[dragonrage 10+ year member]

I never suggested a 32" subwoofer. That was just an exaggerated way of saying my point. You really ought to look into this some more, because seriously, bigger cones are more efficient at transferring sound.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

I never suggested a 32" subwoofer. That was just an exaggerated way of saying my point. You really ought to look into this some more, because seriously, bigger cones are more efficient at transferring sound.

I didnt say you suggested a 32" sub.

Ive looked into it plenty. No offense, but its you that needs to do some more homework on the subject. Ive explained why your theory is incorrect, but you simply reply with 'no, Im right'. Feel free to counter any info Ive posted in this thread on the subject. But if you are going to continue to just claim you are right with no evidence to support yourself, I dont see much point in placing a lot of faith in your opinion here.

 

[dragonrage 10+ year member]

My point is only demonstrated with nearly every line of subwoofers in existence, but believe what you will. You have provided no evidence, either, when mine is, like I said, demonstrated practically everywhere.

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

Regardless of what anyone tells you, SSA does not make any SQ subs. Reason being they all use conventional motors that do not have any technology to linearize the BL curve. This may sound like mumbo jumbo to you but feel free to research into it if you like. The short of it is that they will increase their distortion quickly as you turn up the volume because the amount of force exhibited on the voice coil by the motor (magnet assembly) is varying wildly with excursion. That said, for a conventional motor, they are definitely not the worst sounding. They are NOT one-note boomers. They will sound okay at best.
For your situation, I recommend the Dayton Reference series. It is a bit better than the IDQ in SQ for less money. It has almost the same output capability as the IDQ, which is pretty good but not amazing.

Parts-Express.com sells Speakers, Replacement Speakers, Speaker Building Parts plus HDMI Cables, Home Audio and Video, Pro Audio and Commercial Sound. We offer services for Speaker Reconing, Speaker Refoaming, Speaker Repair. Great selection of Elect

For a 12", you want the RSS315HO-44 and it is DVC 4 ohms. For a 10", it's RSS265HO-4, but unfortunately is only SVC 4 ohms. It will work on 125 watts but the 12" on 250 watts would be a fair amount better.

Can you clarify that a tiny bit? Are you saying that because we use standard over hung coil designs, our drivers don't have the ability to sound great because they don't have a perfectly flat BL response? Not trying to be combative, but I feel it is a little too broad of a statement, and SQ is very subjective and the mass majority of the market don't prefer ruler flat BL drivers. Many people have stated that they feel those types of drivers are too flat is too lifeless or dry of a sound for their listening preferences. Maybe it is just me, but I am beyond tired of the mantra that: "if it ain't got XBL2 it ain't SQ". I have not had any negative feedback in terms of the sound quality of our drivers in proper installs, and that is quite a large sample set. We do address inductance in the Xcon design, we have had numerous very positive reviews on our products (including Kippel response etc.) . Not trying to prove my products to you, just trying to get a better understanding as to what you are getting at.

 

Edit, I do agree the Dayton is also a very nice choice, and keep in mind much of the above is based on our customers and years of forum traffic.

 

[bumpin buick 5,000+ posts]

What I said makes perfect sense. It is more efficient to achieve output via cone area than it is to achieve it via stroke. That is a fact.
The technologies that enable a longer stroke tend to decrease sensitivity. On the other hand, you automatically gain 3dB of output by doubling your cone area while keeping the same overall power.

This gain of 3db first off is a guideline, and you have that guideline incorrect. Scientifically with a double in cone and power a 3db gain can be expected.

B(in voltage terms) = 20log(V1/V2)

dB(in power terms) = 10log(P1/P2)

Combined dB = 10log([10^(dB1/10)]+ [10^(dB2/10)] + [10^(dB3/10)] etc, etc)

So adding two identical SPL sources gains you 3dB

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

My point is only demonstrated with nearly every line of subwoofers in existence, but believe what you will. You have provided no evidence, either, when mine is, like I said, demonstrated practically everywhere.

If evidence of your theory is so readily apparent, you'd think you'd find it easier to name one single piece of evidence that reinforces it than it would be to sidestep the fact that you have not.

I enter every discussion here with an open mind. So if you can refute a single thing Ive said in this thread, please do so.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Can you clarify that a tiny bit? Are you saying that because we use standard over hung coil designs, our drivers don't have the ability to sound great because they don't have a perfectly flat BL response? Not trying to be combative, but I feel it is a little too broad of a statement, and SQ is very subjective and the mass majority of the market don't prefer ruler flat BL drivers. Many people have stated that they feel those types of drivers are too flat is too lifeless or dry of a sound for their listening preferences. Maybe it is just me, but I am beyond tired of the mantra that: "if it ain't got XBL2 it ain't SQ". I have not had any negative feedback in terms of the sound quality of our drivers in proper installs, and that is quite a large sample set. We do address inductance in the Xcon design, we have had numerous very positive reviews on our products (including Kippel response etc.) . Not trying to prove my products to you, just trying to get a better understanding as to what you are getting at. 

Edit, I do agree the Dayton is also a very nice choice, and keep in mind much of the above is based on our customers and years of forum traffic.

He's an "on paper" sort of guy. Truth be told, I agree that flat BL's mean less distortion. Obviously. I own multiple xbl^2 drivers. But Im open minded enough to realize sound preference is subjective, not objective. Dragon is unwilling, or unable, to respect the distinction between SQ and personal preference. To him, if its not BL optimized, you best not call it a good sounding speaker.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion...

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

He's an "on paper" sort of guy. Truth be told, I agree that flat BL's mean less distortion. Obviously. I own multiple xbl^2 drivers. But Im open minded enough to realize sound preference is subjective, not objective. Dragon is unwilling, or unable, to respect the distinction between SQ and personal preference. To him, if its not BL optimized, you best not call it a good sounding speaker.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion...

On paper is a good way to describe it. When people ask, I sometimes say: "Are you listening to it or is your RTA in charge?" //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[Bumpin' Goalie 10+ year member]

I'd prefer to enjoy my music as much as possible, even if I sacrifice perfect marks on paper. Luckily, my preference and paperwork overlap often. I by no means dispute the science of this hobby, and I use it as an ever-important tool to further my projects for myself and others.

It's great to know how to work both by ear and using physics/math.

A person just needs to know what they like, and then how to achieve it in the most proper way. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[Cruzer 10+ year member]

He's an "on paper" sort of guy. Truth be told, I agree that flat BL's mean less distortion. Obviously. I own multiple xbl^2 drivers. But Im open minded enough to realize sound preference is subjective, not objective. Dragon is unwilling, or unable, to respect the distinction between SQ and personal preference. To him, if its not BL optimized, you best not call it a good sounding speaker.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion...

depends on what your definition of sound quality is. to me sound quality is the best quality sound to accurately reproduce the sound of the music.

in that situation, a lower distortion driver is by definition a SQ driver, and by definition has better SQ over a higher distortion driver.

I respect denim, and heck ill even say im jealous. wish i did something i loved, had my own company, made tons of money, etc. etc. but he simply does not understand the above statement.

the dcon, icon, and xcon, have pretty good sound quality. they will produce music pretty accurately, and will satisfy 90% of the world in terms of sound quality. Just because its proven that a driver can more accurately produce music, is no reason to be hurt, or feel the need to defend your product, or even get involved in the conversation.

i participate over on DIYMA and have talked to lots of people who are all about SQ, yet they will tell u they run something like the icon, or fi q. why? i thought they were about SQ? because they like the sound of that little bit of distortion, so its not lifeless, sterile, etc. etc.

im a noob, dont get me wrong, i know very little. i plan to try one of these low distortion subs, and i might end up just like 90% of people in the world. having no audible distortion might take the life out of the sound, and i might be disappointed. i can tell u one thing. if i am, im going to be picking up something along the lines of an icon, fi q, etc. and im not just saying that... just like most say, SQ is subjective, its all opinion. i want to enjoy my music. if low distortion ruins that for me, ill be grabbing the next best thing, something that still sound great, and has lower distortion than a lot, but can bring the life back into the sound, so i enjoy it, so im happy.

i feel like the whole SQ group gets bashed almost. just because u dont like low distortion drivers, doesnt mean others dont. just because they are more true to the music, is no reason to be offended. Just because 2-3 people on a forum of a million tell others the facts that X sub is more true to the music than Y sub, is no reason to be offended.

/rant

"Sound quality can be defined as the degree of accuracy with which a device records or emits the original sound waves."

"In a playback setting, sound quality is characterized by the same traits as in a live setting but is also affected by the recording techniques and equipment used, from the microphones at the session, through the pressing at the record or compact disc factory, to the quality of electronics and speakers used to recreate the sound in a listener's home."

 

[Cruzer 10+ year member]

real question is, why go with an icon when u can go with a fi q, its cheaper except the 15", get to choose dusctap color to match box, interior, dash lights, amp, favorite color, car color and has options/add ons if need be or want to

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif