Ascendant Audio Arsenal

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

i dont think that is always true. i always thought the same thing as well. but when i started looking into getting an ED 15Ae which has about 29mm Xmax i thought man this thing should slam with that much Xmax. Then i was directed to this thread
http://www.icixsound.com/vb/showthread.php?t=12483&highlight=Ae

where Ben Milne did a comparison with the Ae vs. the Ov2. The Ov2 has 19 mm Xmax ( a whole 10mm less) i know there isnt a huge difference in the results numbers wise, but to think that the Ov could keep up with and actually outproduce the Ae with that big of a difference in xmax was pretty interesting.

What squeak said. Linear displacement times cone area directly determines output capability in sealed systems. No tests on ICIX prove otherwise, no matter what eD wants you to believe.

 

[Slammed 5,000+ posts]

$160 for the 12"

mmmmm.....

 

[mega1268 10+ year member]

ive spoke with chad a bunch in the past few days and he said the Arsenals 5 dbs louder then the ava and much flatter response. it seems liek tehy used a very long voice coil and i know the cone is bigger and uses kinda liek what the Idmax uses surround to get more cone area. but i dunno how that little bit of cone can make up 5 dbs. but he promises me its better and for 160 dollers........... can u complain. even if its just as good or close to as good as teh ava.... 160 dollers... u can get 2 of them for under the price of a new XXX

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

ive spoke with chad a bunch in the past few days and he said the Arsenals 5 dbs louder then the ava and much flatter response.

I highly doubt he would make such a statement...lest someone gets on a TL as soon as they receive theirs and proves otherwise for all the forums to see //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[adio 5,000+ posts]

Judging by the specs, Id rather own Avalanches. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

exactly what i was thinking

 

[Nova_ 10+ year member]

The Arsenal 12 works great as a drop-in for the Avalanche 12. With nearly identical thermal power handling, it works well with similar amplifier power. However, it will play louder with less power in the same boxes. It also features a much flatter frequency response thanks to its aluminum shorting ring.

I'm guessing it's more of a DD than the Avalanche? lol.

 

[adio 5,000+ posts]

i wish i could buy a ava18

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

ive spoke with chad a bunch in the past few days and he said the Arsenals 5 dbs louder then the ava and much flatter response.

Ported? Sealed? Linearly? Peak, reaching near Xmech?

I find that statement rather hard to believe, personally.

 

[blackgeltabs 5,000+ posts]

ive spoke with chad a bunch in the past few days and he said the Arsenals 5 dbs louder then the ava and much flatter response. it seems liek tehy used a very long voice coil and i know the cone is bigger and uses kinda liek what the Idmax uses surround to get more cone area. but i dunno how that little bit of cone can make up 5 dbs. but he promises me its better and for 160 dollers........... can u complain. even if its just as good or close to as good as teh ava.... 160 dollers... u can get 2 of them for under the price of a new XXX

Welcome to talking to a salesman. He led you, you believed, he did his job.

I think his new drivers wont be anything compared to his old. I just looked through his website and I still dont like how he words anything... It seems like he try's as hard as he can to make these compare to the old one, like he knows they probably won't.

 

[mustatang 10+ year member]

it's a fact of physics that the sub that can move the most air will have more output (all things equal).

And all things are never equal. That's catch to that entire way of thinking. You're dealing with two different subwoofers. They don't start equal. In the case of the Avalanche and Arsenal, one starts WAY louder than the other.

AKA, one is helluva lot more efficient than the other. Neither subwoofer will handle infinite amounts of power. As a matter of fact they have almost the same power handling capabilities. So the Avalanche never has the ability to make up the efficiency gap. Eventhough, theoretically it 'could'.

I agree, sure it 'could' be louder, but you'd have to kill the driver in the process. That's the problem with many of the high Xmax/low efficiency drivers. The Ae is that way.

The power it takes to get the higher Xmax driver to full Xmax and become louder inside a theoretical bubble can't happen when the driver is put to the test. There's not enough power handling capability for it to reach its theoretical potential.

The graph that Chad posted is level matched. It's showing the upper end frequency response difference. A different box isn't going to fix or suddenly even out the nearly 7 dB difference that exists at 70 Hz, but if any one thinks it will more power to you.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

And all things are never equal. That's catch to that entire way of thinking. You're dealing with two different subwoofers. They don't start equal. In the case of the Avalanche and Arsenal, one starts WAY louder than the other.

That's fine and dandy that one starts out louder at 1w/1m. But once that lower excursion sub exceeds 20.5mm, it will begin behaving in a nonlinear fashion whereas the Avalanche will have another 7mm of linear travel within it's helm. Might it take more power to reach that extra 7mm of linear travel? Maybe. But that's not what we were concerned with here. We were comparing overall displacement potential, not efficiency, which the Avalanche *should* have more of (I don't recall the Ava's Sd off hand). Which gives it a potential linear output advantage over the Arsenal, plain and simple.

As a matter of fact they have almost the same power handling capabilities. So the Avalanche never has the ability to make up the efficiency gap. Eventhough, theoretically it 'could'.

It may never make up for the efficiency gap (if one exists, never compared them personally) on a watt/output basis. But the Arsenal can never make up it's linear displacement disadvantage from a peak linear output standpoint.

I agree, sure it 'could' be louder, but you'd have to kill the driver in the process. That's the problem with many of the high Xmax/low efficiency drivers. The Ae is that way.

I would hardly consider the Arsenal to be an efficiency king at 85db/w/m

The power it takes to get the higher Xmax driver to full Xmax and become louder inside a theoretical bubble can't happen when the driver is put to the test. There's not enough power handling capability for it to reach its theoretical potential.

Enclosure dependent //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

The graph that Chad posted is level matched. It's showing the upper end frequency response difference. A different box isn't going to fix or suddenly even out the nearly 7 dB difference that exists at 70 Hz, but if any one thinks it will more power to you.

I prefer to have my subwoofer crossed well below 70hz. I don't really want 70hz to be very audible from my subwoofer. So I would hardly consider that an appealing trait. There is a 10db difference at 100hz....lets gloat that as an output advantage aswell....... //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif

 

[mega1268 10+ year member]

Don,

You raise a very good question. Yes, the Arsenal has 20.5 mm of xmax. This

will take some getting used to, but the Arsenal is louder than the Avalanche

with less power in the same car audio boxes. Period.

There is going to be a large section on our website with actual measurement

graphs and real data showing the reality of xmax and comparisons in output. The

few who have had the chance to hear the two drivers side by side thus far have

all agreed with me. It only takes about 5 seconds to hear the difference. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

The Arsenal is also much flatter than the Avalanche in frequency response,

or most any driver that I have ever measured. At 80 Hz is is around 5 dB louder

than the Avalanche. This difference is very audible and it makes the Arsenal

sound like a jackhammer. Most big subwoofers roll off up high, but the Arsenal

does not. It has the low end of the big subwoofers combined with the high end

of SQ subwoofers. It is in a league of its own.

We just wanted a driver that outperformed the Avalanche and cost less too.

That is what the Arsenal does, plain and simple. Keep your eyes peeled on the

website for more info and feel free to ask me more questions if you have them.

Thanks again for your email,

Dale Kuypers

Ascendant Audio

just for the people who said he would never say something like that....... yea im lying to you. cause i have good reasons..........

 

[mega1268 10+ year member]

and people saying its nowhere as good as the avalanche. Then what other sub would u recommend for SQL purposes for less then 160 dollers.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

At 80 Hz is is around 5 dB louderthan the Avalanche.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif 80hz? If it was a 5db difference at 30hz I'd be impressed.....but at 80hz? I want 80hz to be played mainly by my mids, not my sub.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

and people saying its nowhere as good as the avalanche. Then what other sub would u recommend for SQL purposes for less then 160 dollers.

Image Dynamics IDv3 is $159 authorized, and only has ~3mm less excursion and has very good SQ.

Dayton Titanic is $159.99, offers 18.7mm Xmax and good sound quality.

Acoustic Elegance AV12 is around $150, has great SQ and around 23mm Xmax.

HSU Research AW1203 is $139, has 18mm Xmax and good sound quality.

Should I continue?

And keep in mind that according to the webiste, that $160 price is a sales price...which won't last forever. Regular price, according to the site, is $220 for the 12".