Giving the RE XXX another Try *Pic*

[SicAudio 5,000+ posts]

This maybe the dumbest thing said on a forum //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

yup this is definatly the dumbest thing said on a forum lulz........

.

.

.

j/k i hate you too //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[James Bang 5,000+ posts]

What didn't like about the response?

 

[Toxic Tuan 10+ year member]

Hi James,

The transient response was slow. The moving mass was too high in my opinion. Also, the rubber tire surround didn't help either. On certain test songs, it would miss a couple of notes in a sealed box.

Have you tried one?

Tuan

 

[James Bang 5,000+ posts]

Never tried one of these. Never cared to. I sure wouldn't mind the older generations, though.

Is/was the sub fully broken-in? They might need to be paired with mean midbasses like the older models. IMO, shitty midbass = a shitty subbass.

 

[Toxic Tuan 10+ year member]

Never tried one of these. Never cared to. I sure wouldn't mind the older generations, though.
Is/was the sub fully broken-in? They might need to be paired with mean midbasses like the older models. IMO, shitty midbass = a shitty subbass.

Yeah,

The older XXX were much better than these IMO.

Tuan

 

[80INCHES 5,000+ posts]

I just pulled this dusty sub out of my storage. I remember not liking this sub too much. I didn't really like the response. But I'm going to give it a try again before I sell it. Might try a long coil also. Anybody have success with this sub?

imho its a piece of sh.it....moving mass waaaaaaaay to heavy and it doesnt get loud

Yeah,The older XXX were much better than these IMO.

u

Tuan

i sooooooooooooo agree with

80

 

[FurbiesAndBeans 10+ year member]

I heard these things like BIG boxes. like for example sealed for a 12 would be around 2-2.5 cu ft and ported would be like 4 cu ft...

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Yep, large sealed box, or dont bother.

 

[schackel 10+ year member]

i cant see the pictures is this a re xxx or the ss?

 

[xxxbasshead 10+ year member]

re xxx

 

[IMOVeCHICKENS! 10+ year member]

x2 on the huge sealed box ive heard thats what they perform best in i myself could never afford anything like this lol

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

The newer XXX is a very nice sub, just not a nice sub for what most people use subwoofers for on this forum. The high moving mass doesn't affect transient response, transient response is mostly dicatated by enclosure design and indutance. The sub is also very good a getting loud, if we are concerned with 15hz instead of 35 and take away the space constraints in most vehicles. It's a good HT sub for both movies and music, it just doesn't lend itself to a car audio install very well, especially not on a forum where "groundpounding" is the norm. In a car audio install I 'd use a big sealed box and then take away whatever low end you don't need via eq. They take alot of power and have alot of excursion capablity, you can contour the response almost anyway you want to, which is nice.

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

The newer XXX is a very nice sub, just not a nice sub for what most people use subwoofers for on this forum. The high moving mass doesn't affect transient response, transient response is mostly dicatated by enclosure design and indutance. The sub is also very good a getting loud, if we are concerned with 15hz instead of 35 and take away the space constraints in most vehicles. It's a good HT sub for both movies and music, it just doesn't lend itself to a car audio install very well, especially not on a forum where "groundpounding" is the norm. In a car audio install I 'd use a big sealed box and then take away whatever low end you don't need via eq. They take alot of power and have alot of excursion capablity, you can contour the response almost anyway you want to, which is nice.

that like saying a 2500 pound car and a 5kp car have the same characteristics.. lack of motor strength and mms go hand in hand with lowered efficiency and frequency response..

 

[Papermaker85 5,000+ posts]

frequency is directly related to acceleration.. speed of sound is linear its acceleration/volociety is relative to frequency.. motor strength(QE/bl/re) not only means lowered output but it also indicates usable bandwidth.. inertia, and mass does affect drivers..

if it didn't you could travel faster than light no matter you mass.. inductance affects woofer now in days because they run @ low loads which result in lower DF and increased emf..

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

frequency is directly related to acceleration.. speed of sound is linear its acceleration/volociety is relative to frequency.. motor strength(QE/bl/re) not only means lowered output but it also indicates usable bandwidth.. inertia, and mass does affect drivers..if it didn't you could travel faster than light no matter you mass.. inductance affects woofer now in days because they run @ low loads which result in lower DF and increased emf..

Glad you mentioned F=m*A, it's, good basic physics and dan uses it to prove you wrong. Look at dan wiggins article on debunking the BL/MMS, he wrote it YEARS ago. http://web.archive.org/web/20010810141852/lambdacoustics.com/library/whitepapers/bl_mms.htm

or

http://stereointegrity.com/docs/WooferSpeed.pdf

If by transient response we mean upper frequency extension then inductance is the key player, not BL/MSS. Effeciency does drop as a result of the higher MMS, but considering the actual design goals of the XXX as I outlined above, that's not a bad thing as the FS drops as well. You can use very large coils and get very high BL products as result. However, if the current stops at 75hz due to the high inductance, the woofer still won't be "fast" no matter how light the cone is. If there is less current, the actual formula for "force" BLi drops lower as well.