Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RobGMN" data-source="post: 8896127" data-attributes="member: 683408">I remember when they came out with those low Vas subs, there was something else sacrificed, but no clue what it was. Maybe just power?But the other benefit of the iso design was the natural reduction in distortion. I guess if you can produce a driver that uses 1/2 the volume of a &quot;normal&quot; driver, and also has lower distortion, then iso goes out the window.Would be interesting to see distortion specs of the old school drivers versus new school, just to see how much things have changed.And just to clarify, the dual-opposed looks like this [ATTACH=full]64507[/ATTACH], whereas the standard box would look like this [ATTACH=full]64508[/ATTACH].&nbsp;Neither is ported, the drivers are the same, they both share the full internal volume of the box, they are both wired in-phase relative. The only difference is baffle position.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RobGMN, post: 8896127, member: 683408"] I remember when they came out with those low Vas subs, there was something else sacrificed, but no clue what it was. Maybe just power? But the other benefit of the iso design was the natural reduction in distortion. I guess if you can produce a driver that uses 1/2 the volume of a "normal" driver, and also has lower distortion, then iso goes out the window. Would be interesting to see distortion specs of the old school drivers versus new school, just to see how much things have changed. And just to clarify, the dual-opposed looks like this [ATTACH type="full" width="170px"]64507[/ATTACH], whereas the standard box would look like this [ATTACH type="full" width="243px"]64508[/ATTACH]. Neither is ported, the drivers are the same, they both share the full internal volume of the box, they are both wired in-phase relative. The only difference is baffle position. [/QUOTE]

Verification