most over-rated sub?

[Towncar 10+ year member]

^^ Its hopeless

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

^^ Its hopeless

Yeah I know, just having some fun I guess. lol

Thanks for the head's up though towncar.

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif :hilariou: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif :hilariou: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif :hilariou: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif

 

[cotsretribution]

seems to me that you got your panties in a bunch over generalizations that i did not make so i'll walk ya through them one by one

Okay, you misunderstood my point. Let me re-ezplain it. When I said in an 'ideal world' I was referring to a world where we had the technology to build a speaker that could play flat, and with authority at audible listening levels, from 20hz to 20khz. We do not, so we split up the freqs. But, if we did have that technology, 1 speaker per side would be ideal (one sound point source, less anomolies in the signal from filters, etc etc). The more speakers you add, the more problems you also add. Therefore, the fewer used to acomplish the same goal, the better off you are. Period.

A SPEAKER DOES NOT EXIST THAT CAN REPRODUCE THE ENTIRE SPECTRUM OF SOUND AT THE SAME VOLUME RELEVANT TO INPUT>>> however close they might come they never succeed in perfections... the idea is as you put is fantacy... the best we CAN do it develope better and more efficient ways to split the frequencies up, whether they are split twice or 50 times, my point for this part is that you cannot avoid splitting the frequencies

Uhm, no. First of all a 'sub' is only defined as a 'sub' based upon the frequency range it is playing. There are plenty of 'subs' that can also work effectively as a midbass driver, extending above your arbitrary 200hz region you pulled from the air. Granted, most true dedicated subwoofer wont play above 200hz effectively (or even to it), but this shows you are basing specifics theories on generalities.

you used my generalization here to throw out the whole idea instead of understanding the implied fact in the generalization.... granted yes there are some subs that will extend above 200hz even so they have limits and do not go extensivly beyond that region try limiting your definiton of a sub to a 10 inch sub in this circumstance... yes it CAN hit mid-bass but not nearly as efficientty as an 8 or a 6.5... so in other word try to understand my point before throwing the entire statement out because of a small acceptable generalization...

Secondly, a sub does not require a highpass filter to play the subbass region 'flat'. I really have no idea where you got that, but Id love to see you prove it via testing.

i was thinking equalizer not HP filter but that was my mistake

A speaker's resonant frequency is not its sweet spot that it plays best, that is a function of the subwoofer in combination with the enclosure size/type/design. The Fs of the speaker affects the design of the enclosure, but ultimately you can tailor the system tuning via enclosure perameters. Yet another generalization.The word is concept. And what I stated isn't merely a personal theory, its a basic acoustical fact. Most in-depth books, like speaker design cookbook, say the exact same thing.

not a generalization... yes resonance depends on enclousure and such, even so same subs in the same setup (enclosure,type,design) have the same resonance.. resulting in a peak responce

It can what? Perform better? Lets put it this way, if you cannot build a single-sized sub system to play 'flat' from, say 30hz to 100hz, well that's your problem, not a design flaw in today's speakers, systems or designer's heads. Again, this is an age-old arguement, you aren't the first relative noob (no offense) to think of it, argue its possible blah blah blah, but in the end, never proves it. Go ahead, go build some insane multiple sized sub system to play your 2 or 3 octaves, all blended perfectly, all level matched perfectly, and performing in ANY noticeably better wy than a well built single sub system. Go ahead and try. Then, when you are done, do it for the same money as that single sub system, or hell, even close to the same money, then come back here and tell us we are all wrong. If you do, I'll be the first one to congratulate you. But until then, you are simply a pipe dreamer with an attitude.

i don't know how many times i've said this and dread how many more i'll have to say it... "I KNOW IT IS PERFECTLY POSSIBLE AND EASIER TO DO IT WITH SAME SIZE SUB OR SINGLE SUB SETUPS" i simply do not want to... if i want to do it the hard way and spend more money let me... you can't agrue thats its possible to get at least comparable results with a mutli sub setup... maby impractical, but still possible

So, its your opinion its easy to build a tweeter that'll play 4khz to 20khz flat? Do yours? I bet you'd be surprised.
There are plenty of single sized sub systems out there that play flat as a ruler from 20hz up well into their midbass range, and do it at volume levels you would find painful, so why your big need to break through some technological ceiling that does not even exist?

You do realize these companies you cite as making the perfect mids and tweeters, also make subwoofers right? Any theory as to why they make such near perfect mids and tweets, and yet their subs cannot play 20hz to 100hz flat? Subs are just that much more tricky to design? lol You are seriously talking way over your head dude, give it up.

never said they didn't make sub that play flat but if you will honestly tell me that it is easyier to tune highs than it is to tune subs, i'll withdraw that comment

My favorite part was when you said nobody has created such a perfect sub yet, but when they do they are too expensive and often installed wrong. Which is it, they do not exist yet, or they are over priced and installed wrong? lmao Can't have it both ways. Care to pull any more facts from your posterior to back up your claims?

again word-picking instead of paying attention to the point... so i'll reword it for you... "there is no such thing as the perfect sub... those that even come close are too expensive and/or very install dependant (easy to screw up)

Maybe for you. Care to explain exactly why you think its such a difficult task for everyone else?
See, this is the attitude Im talking about. Clearly I was talking over your head, but instead of simply asking me to elaborate, you jump to a conclusion, assume you are right, and talk trash as if you know what the hell you are talking about. You don't.

you say i have an attitude? the only attitude i have is being sceptical that anyone knows EVERTHING...

There wont be any 'missing frequency' if done correctly. Aprently you think a crossover is a brickwall, its not. Ever wonder why there are different slopes in xovers? Gee, maybe its to play with overlap/underlap...? Ever consider that your environemnt may be giving you an artificial boost at a freq very near your xover point, and how to fix such a problem? Hmm, maybe if I 'underlap' that freq so both the mid and tweet are trailing off at that freq, coupled with the artificial boost equals *gasp* a flat frequency response. Chew on that situation a little bit before you contemplate coming back with yet another smart-ass comment that shows you dont even fully grasp the topic, mmmkay? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif

again i made no generalization, you litterally said "a slight hole in the crossovers" that implies that the slopes fall off at underlappig frequecies... had you said "a dip, or a slump in the frequency responce you would have been correct but you specifically said "a hole" how was that supposed to be taken any other way?

Ever wonder why there are different slopes in xovers? Gee, maybe its to play with overlap/underlap...?

if i'm not mistaken it's impossible to cut off a frequency responce but yes you are correct that different applications would call for different slopes to be ideal

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

I'm closing this idiocy.

I think the Einstein quote in my sig pretty much sums it up.

 

[ngsm13 5,000+ posts]

Indeed.

nG