Design differences between SQ and SPL woofers?

[TheUnderFighter 10+ year member]

Anyone care to take a bit to explain to me what differences there are between a daily woofer, and an SPL woofer? And what to look for in specs just to see it's a quality woofer? Things like coil type, length, width, spider type, cone material, xmax...... what these things mean, how I can translate them to useful information. What numbers are good for what application. If you want to link to an SQ woofer and an SPL woofer and point out the differences that'd be cool too.

Or direct me to a thread or page that explains this well.

Click to read more...

 

[whitedragon551 5,000+ posts]

Page Title

http://online.physics.uiuc.edu/courses/phys498pom/Student_Projects/Spring01/PPoongbunkor/Piya_Poongbunkor_TS.pdf

 

[SPLaudio 5,000+ posts]

spl woofers i build everything else is sq

 

[brodeisel 10+ year member]

Can i have it explained in english not in scientifc.

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

The biggest difference is stiff spiders to allow the driver to handle the power and maintain a certain mechanical compliance to allow the use of huge ports..

But really you want the same basis..

Linear stroke mechanically electrically and highest thermal cap..

Keep mass low and using the right amount of dampening for the app..

Though I'm thankful for t/s parameters But it's only part of the story..

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

It depends, SQ and SPL are more dependent on install. By that I mean SQ competitions have been won with 9500's and L7's.

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

Sq comps are based on flat FR and sound stage..

Its inefficient to have such a flat wide bandwidth and also hard to do, and you don't have to get it louder than 100db or so..

Where in spl is all about efficiency narrowest possible band with maximum efficiency and highest powerhandling..

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

But with the materials and motors we have today it's possible to get a flat wide bandwidth but there is a price..

It's called efficiency..

 

[FtheNutHuggers]

In SQ competition.....not "testing", you don't go for specifically flat, you go for natural. Hit a jazz club and listen to a few songs, paying close attention to the low stuff coming from the stand up bass and the kick drum. The feel of that drum.....its very hard to reproduce the dry airyness in an automobile without some panel or another adding its own harmonic and resonant distortion.....muddying it up let's say. You can get extension that may measure a flat response at any given mic position, but you can't mistake when it sounds just like the string being plucked or the feel of that specific bass drum as it was heard and felt in the studio or club you used as a reference. When you hear music being made, you can easily pick out when its not faithfully being reproduced or when other things are coloring the sound.

 

[FtheNutHuggers]

I can't really give any specific stats for you to look at to determine if the sub is good for SQ purposes. There are ratios and relationships between multiple parameters used in an equation to yield a "value". But how good those ratios are depends on each specific application in which the sub is proposed for use. You can have subs with relatively high Fs values belting out extremely low notes in some apps. The same goes for high BL product subsn there are applications where they can have wide bandwidths. There are apps when high mass is exactly what is needed to yield a specific bandwidth and texture withing a limited physical set of dimensions. Case in point: check out two totally different driver manufacturers. Fostex and Lowther. Their driver specs are worlds apart and they are both designed to yield like performance.....true sonic transparency. Fostex uses a low BL approach and Lowther the exact opposite. Without environment specific measurements and available dimensions for the proposed enclosure, none of the stats you are asking about will tell you a single thing about the driver's performance capability in that environment.

 

[The_Grimy_One 10+ year member]

It depends, SQ and SPL are more dependent on install. By that I mean SQ competitions have been won with 9500's and L7's.

Has an L7 really won an SQ competition? I can believe a 9500 but an L7? Lol.

 

[FtheNutHuggers]

An L7 more easily done than a 9500. Less acoustic manipulation is needed to correct the natural response of the L7.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Has an L7 really won an SQ competition? I can believe a 9500 but an L7? Lol.

At 126db, and in an install from a world class competitor, Id expect just about anything to sound good.

 

[n8skow 10+ year member]

Look into the KGC (Kicker Competition Group) of the early 2000's, Corel Himmel, Mark Eldridge, Markey Dietrich, and of course Gary Biggs - all multi-World Champions...

There's so much more to being an SQ champion than the equipment you use though...

As said before - comes down to the application.

Has an L7 really won an SQ competition? I can believe a 9500 but an L7? Lol.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

People have to remember SQ vehicles are not full RMS by any means. So if you want any sort of loudness, true SQ isn't to be had. Imo, neither are suited for daily. I'm young and restless, I don't want to listen at my music at 126 db's. I want 140's+. I don't think there is a system, in it's SQ setup, that is going to be that loud.