Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="zane" data-source="post: 15755" data-attributes="member: 540617">That is one thing that I noticed as well.&nbsp; &nbsp; I am curious as to why you attribute this to motor integrity as opposed to the cone design.&nbsp; &nbsp; I completely understand what you are saying, I would just like another take on this.&nbsp; &nbsp; It really seems to me that the roll off should not be occuring naturally as a design fault in a woofer designed primarily for SQ applications.&nbsp;&nbsp; Now, if what you are saying is that the motor assembly is too stiff to accurately reproduce the high frequency-thus resulting in a higher BL, Cms, and Rms measurement - that could very well be.I personally think that the overall problem lies within the massive surround; as it limits the speakers frequency response.&nbsp; &nbsp; My question now becomes, if this woofer is primarily designed for SQ Applications- why does it need this large surround?&nbsp;&nbsp; Granted, other manufacturers also utilize large surrounds- yet they do not do this at the expense of cone area.&nbsp;&nbsp; IMO- JL made a boo boo there.&nbsp;&nbsp; If they could offer the W7&#039;s with a cone the actual size of the speaker 10&quot;, 12&quot;, 15&quot;- respectively with a surround equally as wide as the current models- I believe that this would be a well needed improvement.&nbsp;&nbsp; The W7 has, however, been one of my more enjoyed listening experiences overall. - Still, even with thier quality of sound, I would not pay the prices they demand.&nbsp; The word inflation comes to mind on that matter....Overall, My Alchemy&#039;s have still left a better impression upon me than the W7&#039;s have.&nbsp;&nbsp; I can also say this about the Infinity Perfect and the Soundstream Exacts.Cant wait to see what next year will hold for JL though.....//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.giftake it easy,-zane</blockquote>

[QUOTE="zane, post: 15755, member: 540617"] That is one thing that I noticed as well. I am curious as to why you attribute this to motor integrity as opposed to the cone design. I completely understand what you are saying, I would just like another take on this. It really seems to me that the roll off should not be occuring naturally as a design fault in a woofer designed primarily for SQ applications. Now, if what you are saying is that the motor assembly is too stiff to accurately reproduce the high frequency-thus resulting in a higher BL, Cms, and Rms measurement - that could very well be. I personally think that the overall problem lies within the massive surround; as it limits the speakers frequency response. My question now becomes, if this woofer is primarily designed for SQ Applications- why does it need this large surround? Granted, other manufacturers also utilize large surrounds- yet they do not do this at the expense of cone area. IMO- JL made a boo boo there. If they could offer the W7's with a cone the actual size of the speaker 10", 12", 15"- respectively with a surround equally as wide as the current models- I believe that this would be a well needed improvement. The W7 has, however, been one of my more enjoyed listening experiences overall. - Still, even with thier quality of sound, I would not pay the prices they demand. The word inflation comes to mind on that matter.... Overall, My Alchemy's have still left a better impression upon me than the W7's have. I can also say this about the Infinity Perfect and the Soundstream Exacts. Cant wait to see what next year will hold for JL though.....[IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif[/IMG] take it easy, -zane [/QUOTE]

Verification