Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="zane" data-source="post: 16056" data-attributes="member: 540617">I see no possible way of &quot;getting&quot; arround the cone area......They have sacrficed it for the woofers surround.&nbsp;&nbsp; The Frame of the 12W7 itself is only 12.5&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp; Meaning .5&quot; for surround only.&nbsp;&nbsp; Realisticly, that is improbable with the 29.2mm of Xmax they claim.&nbsp; (on a personal note, I have not measured anywhere close to that Xmax in a real world install.&nbsp; My measurements one way were closer to 10mm) Now if the cone itself was actually 12&quot; then the cone area gains they brag about would hold true.This lack in cone area along with the general VC length and spacing is likely why many are noticing a lack in upper midbass response, and also why at lower frequencies the response seems mildly distorted.&nbsp;&nbsp; This could be due to the unusually high Fs of 27.23Hz.&nbsp; Even at 45Hz, some distortion is still audible at close listening distance.If this sub was all JL cracked it up to be, then I would easily say it is a &quot;perfect &quot; woofer, however, Infinity&#039;s Perfects do not illustrate many of the flaws found in the W7.&nbsp;&nbsp; They have thier areas of concern too, however, not near as present as those of the W7.Allthough, overall, I was pretty impressed with the W7, the Perfect would still be my first choice between the two based on the points discussed in this entire thread.Even output characteristics show the Infinity has the advantage..<a href="http://photos.msn.com/imageserver/image.aspx?Image=*EtEZjHm6cpqY2qTksA!TOpplpP5axN9vymT2wKpgkyrCYkIV!4bhAW0hngLLMRHsHX274!fj0a1gYWYQZp!paB06q0VxzC!Tq1DKxRQL3m7h2U*bVzQ*g5eHhcfUdnf" target="_blank">http://photos.msn.com/imageserver/image.aspx?Image=*EtEZjHm6cpqY2qTksA!TOpplpP5axN9vymT2wKpgkyrCYkIV!4bhAW0hngLLMRHsHX274!fj0a1gYWYQZp!paB06q0VxzC!Tq1DKxRQL3m7h2U*bVzQ*g5eHhcfUdnf</a>food for thought anyway,take it easy,-zane</blockquote>

[QUOTE="zane, post: 16056, member: 540617"] I see no possible way of "getting" arround the cone area...... They have sacrficed it for the woofers surround. The Frame of the 12W7 itself is only 12.5" Meaning .5" for surround only. Realisticly, that is improbable with the 29.2mm of Xmax they claim. (on a personal note, I have not measured anywhere close to that Xmax in a real world install. My measurements one way were closer to 10mm) Now if the cone itself was actually 12" then the cone area gains they brag about would hold true. This lack in cone area along with the general VC length and spacing is likely why many are noticing a lack in upper midbass response, and also why at lower frequencies the response seems mildly distorted. This could be due to the unusually high Fs of 27.23Hz. Even at 45Hz, some distortion is still audible at close listening distance. If this sub was all JL cracked it up to be, then I would easily say it is a "perfect " woofer, however, Infinity's Perfects do not illustrate many of the flaws found in the W7. They have thier areas of concern too, however, not near as present as those of the W7. Allthough, overall, I was pretty impressed with the W7, the Perfect would still be my first choice between the two based on the points discussed in this entire thread. Even output characteristics show the Infinity has the advantage.. [URL="http://photos.msn.com/imageserver/image.aspx?Image=*EtEZjHm6cpqY2qTksA!TOpplpP5axN9vymT2wKpgkyrCYkIV!4bhAW0hngLLMRHsHX274!fj0a1gYWYQZp!paB06q0VxzC!Tq1DKxRQL3m7h2U*bVzQ*g5eHhcfUdnf"]http://photos.msn.com/imageserver/image.aspx?Image=*EtEZjHm6cpqY2qTksA!TOpplpP5axN9vymT2wKpgkyrCYkIV!4bhAW0hngLLMRHsHX274!fj0a1gYWYQZp!paB06q0VxzC!Tq1DKxRQL3m7h2U*bVzQ*g5eHhcfUdnf[/URL] food for thought anyway, take it easy, -zane [/QUOTE]

Verification