I want a "Wowing" 18

[cotjones 10+ year member]

I just lost my entire reply, and Im not about to re-type it for some waste of skin like yourself Cot. Believe what you want. Tell us your system wasn't built for SQ, and then also argue we cant prove it had lousy SQ. Keep telling us how it must have sounded great cuz your non-highschool aged highschool friends all thought so, but when a group of more knowledgeable enthusiasts explains otherwise you claim that is the ignorant group. Keep telling us how you are only here to learn, yet every thread you participate in is filled with your nonsense theories and arguments on why you are right.
And when you are done with all that, you kid genius you, look up speaker coupling. Mr Multi-sized subs sound awesome. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif If I cant educate you, maybe you can educate yourself. I cant wait till a week from now when you claim you are the local expert on speaker coupling. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

And the more you squirm and say you didn't lie about the chip, the worse it makes you look. Again, anyone who would believe they really have a 111hp or 145hp chip in their gasser truck just doesn't know a fucking thing about the topic, and should keep their ignorant mouth shut. But not you. So you either lied, or spoke on something you know NOTHING about. But you would never do such a thing, would you!?!

Now you are just completely ignoring my posts, I SAID 50 TIMES i Spoke of something i knew nothing about! i said that the second after the initial post!!!

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Now you are just completely ignoring my posts, I SAID 50 TIMES i Spoke of something i knew nothing about! i said that the second after the initial post!!!

Well, if you are now agree'ing with me that you are a know it all that needs to learn to read more and type less, then I think we finally agree. Lets see if you take that advice.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

I just lost my entire reply, and Im not about to re-type it for some waste of skin like yourself Cot. Believe what you want. Tell us your system wasn't built for SQ, and then also argue we cant prove it had lousy SQ. Keep telling us how it must have sounded great cuz your non-highschool aged highschool friends all thought so, but when a group of more knowledgeable enthusiasts explains otherwise you claim that is the ignorant group. Keep telling us how you are only here to learn, yet every thread you participate in is filled with your nonsense theories and arguments on why you are right.
And when you are done with all that, you kid genius you, look up speaker coupling. Mr Multi-sized subs sound awesome. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif If I cant educate you, maybe you can educate yourself. I cant wait till a week from now when you claim you are the local expert on speaker coupling. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

And the more you squirm and say you didn't lie about the chip, the worse it makes you look. Again, anyone who would believe they really have a 111hp or 145hp chip in their gasser truck just doesn't know a fucking thing about the topic, and should keep their ignorant mouth shut. But not you. So you either lied, or spoke on something you know NOTHING about. But you would never do such a thing, would you!?!

And i'm not an expert on speaker coupling but from what I do understand it has absolutely nothing to do with this... it applies more to higher frequency speakers like tweeters and mid-range. Not sure though, Or is this just another brain surgery question?

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Do some self research for a change.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

Well, if you are now agree'ing with me that you are a know it all that needs to learn to read more and type less, then I think we finally agree. Lets see if you take that advice.

about the chip, I tried to say that from the BEGINNING i never attempted to be a know-it-all, I SAID i didn't know, Type less? i tried, but then that was just "avoiding" the subject... one sentence under a picture and the forum was firmly latched on me. I Admitted i didn't know anything about it hundreds of times but once again no one would listen to that, they just kept telling me to prove shit... I think you might FINALLY be catching on.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

Do some self research for a change.

I'll get back to you on that

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

In looking up the term, coupling is not correct. My bad.

I have explained why multiple sized subs are bad to you before Cot. You pretend as if I have not. Different subs, models and even diff sizes, have their own frequency response. If each speaker playing the same freq band is not playing an identical frequency response, identical amplitude and displays the same impedance characteristics... they will not reinforce each other in a linear fashion. When building a SQ oriented system, predictable frequency response is a must. Dialing in a single speaker type/sized system can be complex enough, let alone if you have two different subs that display different characteristics.

You have claimed over the years that the 13.5 was in a different chamber than the 10's, for performance/SQ reasons. I ask you, how can you be sure it displayed the same impedance rise as the the four 10's thus giving similar output and freq response characteristics AT ALL SOUND LEVELS? You cant. This is only one example of why running multiple sized subs can cause unnecessary problems, when there is no 'problem' that needed this 'solution' in the first place.

So now that I have explained my stance to you, again. How about you explain why running multiple sized subs is necessary. Oh that's right, you already did...

... and yes i found that the only way i could get full rich sound at ALL bass frequencies was by mixing sizes of subs...

And you wonder why nobody wants your advice? This is why. Even when you admit you are wrong, you demand proof in triplicate, and still try to argue you might not really sorta actually be wrong at all.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

In looking up the term, coupling is not correct. My bad.

Thats what i thought, but no worries.

I have explained why multiple sized subs are bad to you before Cot. You pretend as if I have not. Different subs, models and even diff sizes, have their own frequency response. If each speaker playing the same freq band is not playing an identical frequency response, identical amplitude and displays the same impedance characteristics... they will not reinforce each other in a linear fashion. When building a SQ oriented system, predictable frequency response is a must. Dialing in a single speaker type/sized system can be complex enough, let alone if you have two different subs that display different characteristics.
You have claimed over the years that the 13.5 was in a different chamber than the 10's, for performance/SQ reasons. I ask you, how can you be sure it displayed the same impedance rise as the the four 10's thus giving similar output and freq response characteristics AT ALL SOUND LEVELS? You cant. This is only one example of why running multiple sized subs can cause unnecessary problems, when there is no 'problem' that needed this 'solution' in the first place.

So now that I have explained my stance to you, again. How about you explain why running multiple sized subs is necessary. Oh that's right, you already did...

And you wonder why nobody wants your advice? This is why. Even when you admit you are wrong, you demand proof in triplicate, and still try to argue you might not really sorta actually be wrong at all.

Ok this is more like it, keep your responses logical like this...

Now my answer... Yes I agree If your goal is SQ than you are right Different size drivers won't re-enforce each other in a perfectly linearly fashion. However the difference won't be for example...

a db 3 boost at 50 hz

a 10db boost at 51

and a 6db at 52...

The subs are too similar to exhibit that erratic of a response...

like i said, if you were talking about 2 completely different subs it would be a little different.

That said yes, to the meter, the response was probably peaky.

but not audibly, unless you can hear a 1db difference, Cause I sure can't.

especially at the Volume level that my particular system performed... (pretty freakin loud)

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Thats what i thought, but no worries.


Ok this is more like it, keep your responses logical like this...

Now my answer... Yes I agree If your goal is SQ than you are right Different size drivers won't re-enforce each other in a perfectly linearly fashion. However the difference won't be for example... a db boost at 50 hz a 10db boost at 51 and a 6db at 52... The subs are too similar to exhibit that erratic of a response... like i said if you were talking about 2 completely different subs it would be a little different.

That said yes, to the meter the response was probably peaky, but not audibly, unless you can hear a 1db difference, Cause I sure can't. especially at the Volume level that my particular system performed...

If what you suggested were true, we could run virtually any two subs together with no loss if performance. However, we cant. What you are failing to factor in is impedance rise characteristics. Two different subs, with two different sets of t/s parameters, two different enclosures altering impedance rise etc. Impedance rise changes alone can contribute to alot more than 1 db changes in output.
And finally, you smell. I can probably google an equation that proves it too.

(That last part is just so you know I still dont take you very seriously. Maybe some day, but not yet.)

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

... and yes i found that the only way i could get full rich sound at ALL bass frequencies was by mixing sizes of subs...

honestly I have no fvcking idea why I said that, that was thoroughly retarded. I think I was using the terms "full and rich" to describe louder. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif I admit that was a retarded post

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

If what you suggested were true, we could run virtually any two subs together with no loss if performance. However, we cant. What you are failing to factor in is impedance rise characteristics. Two different subs, with two different sets of t/s parameters, two different enclosures altering impedance rise etc. Impedance rise changes alone can contribute to alot more than 1 db changes in output.
And finally, you smell. I can probably google an equation that proves it too.

(That last part is just so you know I still dont take you very seriously. Maybe some day, but not yet.)

10W6v2-D4

Free Air Resonance (Fs): 28.5 Hz

Electrical “Q” (Qes): 0.497

Mechanical “Q” (Qms): 8.458

Total Speaker “Q” (Qts): 0.469

13W6v2-D4

Free Air Resonance (Fs): 24.3 Hz

Electrical “Q” (Qes): 0.464

Mechanical “Q” (Qms): 6.700

Total Speaker “Q” (Qts): 0.434

The resonance of the subs are close enough that putting the 13 in too little airspace made even the effects of impedance rise comparable.

If it were between the 10 w6 and this it would be a different story:

18" RE XXX

Electrical Q Value -Qes: 0.68

Mechanical Q Value -Qms: 2.82

Total Speaker Q Value -Qts: 0.55

Free Air Resonance -Fs: 15.60 Hz

Equivalent Compliance -Vas: 482.0 liters

One-Way, Linear Excursion -Xmax: 54 mm

Efficiency -SPL 1W/1m: 86.20 dB SPL

Effective Piston Area -Sd: 1210 cm^2

DC Resistance -Re: 4.2 ohm

Nominal Impedance -Znom: Dual 2 ohm

Thermal Power Handling -Pe: 2000 W

Force Factor -Bl: 18.16

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

I seem to be able to find ALOT of multi-sub setups on RF's website, lol I wonder if that is because they sell it at best buy?

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

10W6v2-D4 Free Air Resonance (Fs): 28.5 Hz

Electrical “Q” (Qes): 0.497

Mechanical “Q” (Qms): 8.458

Total Speaker “Q” (Qts): 0.469

13W6v2-D4

Free Air Resonance (Fs): 24.3 Hz

Electrical “Q” (Qes): 0.464

Mechanical “Q” (Qms): 6.700

Total Speaker “Q” (Qts): 0.434

The resonance of the subs are close enough that putting the 13 in too little airspace made even the effects of impedance rise comparable.

If it were between the 10 w6 and this it would be a different story:

18" RE XXX

Electrical Q Value -Qes: 0.68

Mechanical Q Value -Qms: 2.82

Total Speaker Q Value -Qts: 0.55

Free Air Resonance -Fs: 15.60 Hz

Equivalent Compliance -Vas: 482.0 liters

One-Way, Linear Excursion -Xmax: 54 mm

Efficiency -SPL 1W/1m: 86.20 dB SPL

Effective Piston Area -Sd: 1210 cm^2

DC Resistance -Re: 4.2 ohm

Nominal Impedance -Znom: Dual 2 ohm

Thermal Power Handling -Pe: 2000 W

Force Factor -Bl: 18.16

Impedance rise is box dependant. You are only comparing driver specs. The specs between your 10's and 13 could have been WAY off at, say, 3/4 excursion, in the two separate boxes you had them placed in. For example.
And again, I wouldn't even attempt such a system without an overly complex xover network to separate the frequencies. Which adds noise and phasing issues of its own. And then Id want to tune it with an RTA present. And even then it would have so much capability of sounding bad, yet no foreseeable reason to sound better than a simple single sub type system, that even attempting it in any serious regard is preposterous. Seriously Cot, you aren't the first one to try it. And you aren't the first one to think they even pulled it off successfully. But you are just about the only one Ive ever met that claims to have matured beyond such a noobish attempt, while still maintaining that they pulled it off successfully.

You aren't even the first one in this argument to have tried it. Yes, one of my first systems consisted of multiple sizes/types of subs. Guess what? All my friends thought it was the best system they ever heard too. but Ive learned that even with my uncanny teen-age education of the basics back then, and the blessings of my peers, that in all likelihood my system sounded like crap just like virtually ever attempt everyone else has tried. That is why no serious competitor in the SQ realm has ever successfully done it. And why none bother trying these days.

 

[2throwed 10+ year member]

the op wants a sub that wont sound like poo, and the title says wowing 18, not a sub to complete an award winning sq set up. so cotjones, why did you start posting in this thread again?

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

Impedance rise is box dependant. You are only comparing driver specs. The specs between your 10's and 13 could have been WAY off at, say, 3/4 excursion, in the two separate boxes you had them placed in. For example.
And again, I wouldn't even attempt such a system without an overly complex xover network to separate the frequencies. Which adds noise and phasing issues of its own. And then Id want to tune it with an RTA present. And even then it would have so much capability of sounding bad, yet no foreseeable reason to sound better than a simple single sub type system, that even attempting it in any serious regard is preposterous. Seriously Cot, you aren't the first one to try it. And you aren't the first one to think they even pulled it off successfully. But you are just about the only one Ive ever met that claims to have matured beyond such a noobish attempt, while still maintaining that they pulled it off successfully.

You aren't even the first one in this argument to have tried it. Yes, one of my first systems consisted of multiple sizes/types of subs. Guess what? All my friends thought it was the best system they ever heard too. but Ive learned that even with my uncanny teen-age education of the basics back then, and the blessings of my peers, that in all likelihood my system sounded like crap just like virtually ever attempt everyone else has tried. That is why no serious competitor in the SQ realm has ever successfully done it. And why none bother trying these days.

Look, I'm not suggesting it was an ideal setup in any way... Think of it like this, It might not have been the best, or worth the risk and complexity, but There are many Same sub setups that I would not have traded it for.

4 12"L7's can kiss my ***

Anything RF can kiss my ***

Kenwoods woulda sounded worse REGARDLESS of the install

Even a set of 2 12" Type-X's on a k a piece didn't have as flat of a response as mine did (comments of the owner)

A lot of this is very install Dependant.

Its fair to say that my system was overly complicated, Not optimal, wouldn't have been worth the retail price and too risky because of how many variables were involved.

It is not, however, fair to say it sounded like shit or wasn't loud. It did sound good, relatively.