Older XXX or MX?

[1ndatrunk 10+ year member]

Loud just for the sake of being loud is getting a bit old, so my next setup will be SQL, with a little more SQ than L. I was debating between either the older model XXX or the MX, both in 15s. I have more than enough power on tap for either (2500+), so thats not an issue. I've read some great reviews on both, but have heard niether in person. My goal is low, clean bass with the ability to get decently loud.

I've heard that the MX has a motor noise issue, but I'm hoping that since it'll be in a trunk, that it won't be a problem. Both are in the same price range, so it all comes down to which will perform better.

Click to read more...

 

[Zeuslicious 5,000+ posts]

XXX Hands down....

 

[1ndatrunk 10+ year member]

XXX Hands down....

You would say that, it was yours I was looking at. You go as far to say hands down? Will the MX not even come close or beat it in any category?

 

[BassAddictJ 5,000+ posts]

xxx all day man. i miss my old 15's //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[FurbiesAndBeans 10+ year member]

Isn't the XXX like the ultimate low end monster by having huge xmas?

 

[Zeuslicious 5,000+ posts]

You would say that, it was yours I was looking at. You go as far to say hands down? Will the MX not even come close or beat it in any category?

Ask Beerdrnkr, He played with my old 15" avalanche 1 week and then he did a direct swap to a 15" MX... Avalanche was cleaner, deeper and lower than the MX... MX was a lil bit louder at high fz but only like 1db... NOW I've played myself with Avas and XXX. Plus I know the soft parts on both of them...

Still 2k+ is kinda high for both drivers imo //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[1ndatrunk 10+ year member]

Ask Beerdrnkr, He played with my old 15" avalanche 1 week and then he did a direct swap to a 15" MX... Avalanche was cleaner, deeper and lower than the MX... MX was a lil bit louder at high fz but only like 1db... NOW I've played myself with Avas and XXX. Plus I know the soft parts on both of them...Still 2k+ is kinda high for both drivers imo //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

If I was to do a D2 sub my amp would only be doing a little under 2k, so that should be good if I go easy on the gains. The XXX is almost the same as a RE HC isn't it? I've heard one of those and liked it alot.

 

[80INCHES 5,000+ posts]

oLD XXX BY FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR

80

 

[1ndatrunk 10+ year member]

Seems like the XXX is the winner. How does it compare as far as loudness to an RE HC? As stated, I have heard one of the HC 15s in a 28hz tuned box, and it sounded **** good. Would the XXX be a bit louder, but still retain the same sq and low bass extention?

 

[msand951 10+ year member]

Good thread, im in the same situation. I have an 05 XXX 15 d2. And power isnt an isuue. but what size box would you guys recommend and ported? ill be putting it in the back seat of my truck so space isnt an issue. Im waiting on my amp so i havent heard or tried this sub which is why i havent sold it. im debating whether i should sell it and get another sub since im going to have around 3k rms to mess with. I was thinking of a 18 btl, nightshade, alpha v3, aq, Im planning on maybe pushing one of them at around 2k so i will set the gain down sum. And i figure i can get 1 of those subs in the 300$ range. which is what im going to sell my sub for if i decide on doing it.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

I own old XXX's, and Id still consider the MX. It's 4" coil would be better for handling 2500 watts than would the XXX's 3" coil, if power handling and not turning your gain artificially low is a big consideration to you. 2500 watts is about the most Id ever consider powering one of my XXX's with, and even then Id dial the gains down, meaning it would never see a true 2500. But with that said, Ive never heard an MX, and actual wattage used is pretty irrelevant to final performance levels.

Old XXX is BL optimized, I dont think the MX is, but I might be wrong about the MX.

 

[1ndatrunk 10+ year member]

I own old XXX's, and Id still consider the MX. It's 4" coil would be better for handling 2500 watts than would the XXX's 3" coil, if power handling and not turning your gain artificially low is a big consideration to you. 2500 watts is about the most Id ever consider powering one of my XXX's with, and even then Id dial the gains down, meaning it would never see a true 2500. But with that said, Ive never heard an MX, and actual wattage used is pretty irrelevant to final performance levels.
Old XXX is BL optimized, I dont think the MX is, but I might be wrong about the MX.

I'm slow and also new to some terminology. Whats BL optimized mean? Also, is artificially turning my gains down potentially damaging to my subs?

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

I'm slow and also new to some terminology. Whats BL optimized mean? Also, is artificially turning my gains down potentially damaging to my subs?

BL is, to speak generally, motor force of the speaker. BL distortion accounts for the vast majority of the distortion caused by a speaker directly (not to be confused with signal distortion, such as clipping an amp or pre-amp). BL optimization means the BL (motor force) of a speaker remains constant no matter at what point the speaker is in in relation to excursion. let me back up and state that a non BL optimized speaker means as the cone moves further from its resting point, motor force, and thus cone control, decreases. BL optimized speakers mean that motor force is (basically) the same no matter if the cone is moving 1mm or 30mm. As motor force drops, and thus cone control drops, distortion occurs. The further a non BL optimized speaker's cone moves, the less control the motor has over it. BL optimized speakers will relate the same force on cone cone control no matter how far the cone excurts (not a real word but I dont care).

The reason I mentioned it not as an end-all positive for the XXX is, some people actually prefer the BL distortion of speakers, as they are use to hearing it all their lives (BL optimization is a new technology). Many times when someone hears a BL optimized speaker, technically they are hearing LESS distortion, but when you've never heard a speaker that does not exhibit this distortion, its often is described as the sound is 'lacking' something they think should be there. Long story short, some people prefer hearing BL distortion, because they think it sounds 'right', when reality is its not true to the original source material. It would be like someone who has only heard tube amplifiers all their life, and when they hear a solid state system that lacks the 'warmth' (even-order harmonic distortion), they think it sounds 'wrong', when we all know these days that tubes add an artificial warmth to the sound that was not meant to be there in order to remain true to the original sound.

I hope that makes sense, Ive been drinking tonight. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Oh, and to answer your other question, no, turning your gains down will only serve to limit amplifier output. If you have an amp that outputs 100 watts (for example), turning the gains down will limit its output to something less. Many times this is done when you have an amp that is capable of over driving the speakers. So in effect, it has the opposite affect of damaging speakers, it will limit output (watts) to the speaker and hinder the amp's ability to damage the speaker.

Your questions were a bit noobish, but that's totally okay. That's what this forum is all about, learning about the hobby we all participate in here. Do not be afraid to ask a question if you dont know. If someone harasses you for asking, they are being the jackass, not you. Hope I helped.

 

[Varinabassing 10+ year member]

i just learned something thanks