Shallow Mount Sub's

[bose301s 5,000+ posts]

It seems the BM has been in development stages for sometme. The website and forum seem dead.

I can't release any details but I will say it is for sure coming.

 

[Trancer 10+ year member]

Hey, sorry to bring up an old thread, but since I am building a system for my friends '07 regular cab Silverado, I very well might have to utilize a shallow mounted subwoofer. Im sure you might have already read a thread about me asking for advice on another thread I started, but I found this in google and would really like to get this stereo install right. I only have one shot.

When I started looking into these, I was a bit skeptical, and well.. I still am. I know they are more geared towards SQ that SPL. But can these kind of subs get loud and impress a college kid on a budget? Will be going in a sealed box with .7 cu ft of airspace. 10": 5.5" mounting depth and for a 12": 4.75" mounting depth.

So has anything changed since this thread was started a year ago? When will the Stereo Integrity BM kIII come out? Was there a previous version like a SI BM or SI BM kII that I missed? How do I get a pair of these? From what I have read, these SI BM's seem to be a myth and all hype, but no one has any to give a review on, promote, or sell so they just seem like a ghost to me. Their website isnt very informational either. I guess its the curious part in me that draws me to them so much and the fact that people say that the SI BM's are suppose to be the "2004 Caraudio.com Type R Boner" except this time, I have yet to hear anyone actually owning one, any availability, etc... just.. "I hear they are suppose to be bad a-ss!" I dont get how they are suppose to be so great when it hasnt even been released yet and I cant find anything on it. Maybe someone could help me out. Id really like to get my hands on a pair.

I was also referred to the MB Quart 304's. Anyone have any input on these?

Anyone have any input now that a year has passed since this was created. Maybe the threadstarter went ahead and bought a pair of shallow subs and can give me some feedback? I myself might have to start looking into a shallow mounted subwoofer since I am looking to trade my truck in (See Signature) for a 2011 Sierra Crew Cab 4WD Hybrid. Its the exact same truck I have now, but instead of having the high performance Z60 suspension package, my new truck will be a 4wd with the offroad Z-71 suspension package. The Two-Mode Hybrids get a combined 20/20 city/highway as a 4wd. Last and first 2WD truck I will ever buy. I miss my Z-71

The problem with the Hybrid Sierra and Silverado's is th at the batteries are under the rear back seats of the crew cab. It takes up the entire section under the seats and thats where I have my subwoofer box, obviously. So I would have to a bit creative. I dont know what to do. Maybe Ill keep my subwoofer box I have now (See Signature) and relocate the batteries to the bed of the truck and seal them up, or go a bit ratical on a brand new $50k truck and do a blow through. If I get the balls to do a blowthrough on a brand new $50k truck, I would have sooo much fun with that. I think Id go with 4 RE XXX's in a big ported box tuned to 30 hrz. But thats a whole nother day.

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

So has anything changed since this thread was started a year ago? When will the Stereo Integrity BM kIII come out? Was there a previous version like a SI BM or SI BM kII that I missed? How do I get a pair of these? From what I have read, these SI BM's seem to be a myth and all hype, but no one has any to give a review on, promote, or sell so they just seem like a ghost to me. Their website isnt very informational either. I guess its the curious part in me that draws me to them so much and the fact that people say that the SI BM's are suppose to be the "2004 Caraudio.com Type R Boner" except this time, I have yet to hear anyone actually owning one, any availability, etc... just.. "I hear they are suppose to be bad a-ss!" I dont get how they are suppose to be so great when it hasnt even been released yet and I cant find anything on it. Maybe someone could help me out. Id really like to get my hands on a pair.

Fiction can be fun but I find the reference section much more enlightening. There is no "myth and all hype."

Our BM mkIII subwoofer has been out since January of last year (2010). The first production run was entirely sold out before they were ready to be shipped. Ordering for the second run had to be stopped early due to the possibility of selling out again before they were ready. Once pre-orders were shipped out this last time it took us 9 days to sell out of the remaining ~ 90 drivers. If you want to see how well they are doing look at some of the MECA results or simply poke around a little bit. Zach Lefler uses a pair of BM mkIII's and he took the MECA SQL Modified state title in California, Ryan Slade in Georgia did very well in MECA with a pair of BM mkIII's, and Scott Buwalda's Canadian distributor uses two BM mkIII subwoofers in his Hybrid Audio demo vehicle. A lot of people have them and love them. I get emails all the time about the performance of the drivers and how my customers love them, but a lot of them don't post up on the forums. Some of the more vocal customers are usually on DIYMA (diymobileaudio.com).

A few minutes poking around on DIYMA provided these reviews in the Member Product Reivews section:

SI BM MKIII 12" Review - DIYMA.com

Another Stereo Integrity BM12 mkIII review - DIYMA.com

Stereo Integrity BM mkIII Subwoofer - DIYMA.com

I also don't see how our web site "isn't very informational either." We have over 3 pages dedicated to the design, application, ordering (when available), and FAQ on nothing but the BM mkIII. Main BM mkIII page, Technical page, FAQ page, Review page, and our Order page. How much more information do you want? If there's anything about the use, design, and target application that you've missed while reading through the plethora of information we have hosted on our site about the BM mkIII you can simply send me an email (nick@stereointegrity.com) or visit our forum, which is linked at the top of all of our web pages, where you can see in-depth discussions and updates about the BM mkIII's.

 

[sundownz Pro Seller]

I even did some SPL testing :

OT: SI BM MKIII SPL Fun ! =) - Car Audio Classifieds

 

[Trancer 10+ year member]

Fiction can be fun but I find the reference section much more enlightening. There is no "myth and all hype."
Our BM mkIII subwoofer has been out since January of last year (2010). The first production run was entirely sold out before they were ready to be shipped. Ordering for the second run had to be stopped early due to the possibility of selling out again before they were ready. Once pre-orders were shipped out this last time it took us 9 days to sell out of the remaining ~ 90 drivers. If you want to see how well they are doing look at some of the MECA results or simply poke around a little bit. Zach Lefler uses a pair of BM mkIII's and he took the MECA SQL Modified state title in California, Ryan Slade in Georgia did very well in MECA with a pair of BM mkIII's, and Scott Buwalda's Canadian distributor uses two BM mkIII subwoofers in his Hybrid Audio demo vehicle. A lot of people have them and love them. I get emails all the time about the performance of the drivers and how my customers love them, but a lot of them don't post up on the forums. Some of the more vocal customers are usually on DIYMA (diymobileaudio.com).

A few minutes poking around on DIYMA provided these reviews in the Member Product Reivews section:

SI BM MKIII 12" Review - DIYMA.com

Another Stereo Integrity BM12 mkIII review - DIYMA.com

Stereo Integrity BM mkIII Subwoofer - DIYMA.com

I also don't see how our web site "isn't very informational either." We have over 3 pages dedicated to the design, application, ordering (when available), and FAQ on nothing but the BM mkIII. Main BM mkIII page, Technical page, FAQ page, Review page, and our Order page. How much more information do you want? If there's anything about the use, design, and target application that you've missed while reading through the plethora of information we have hosted on our site about the BM mkIII you can simply send me an email (nick@stereointegrity.com) or visit our forum, which is linked at the top of all of our web pages, where you can see in-depth discussions and updates about the BM mkIII's.

Thanks for the reply. I appreciate the response. When I said its not very informational, I meant as in when they would be available, where to purchase them, price etc... Not numbers wise. There is plenty of info on the actual subwoofer itself. Sorry I wasnt clear on that. I wasnt knocking the product by any means, its just that I keep getting referred to these subs or I read that these are recommended, yet its frustrating when I cant get my hands on a pair. And although I want to get my hands on a pair, Its really not going to work well for my friends' install and if I decide to go with a pair for my new truck, because of the VC configuration. Since each sub is a 4ohm DVC sub, my final load would be either 1 ohm or 4 ohms. I dont like to run amps at 1 ohm, even if they are 1 ohm stable. Call me weird, but hey, thats how I have never had an amplifier burn out on me except recently, a 18 year old Clarion 4 channel amp made in 1993. And if I am trying to achieve 450 watts rms per sub, Ill need to find an amp that does 900 watts at 4 ohms. Thats going to be a pretty pricey amplifier, one that my friend won't be able to afford and honestly, I don't want to change up my Phoenix Gold Tantrum 1200.1 or run it at 1 ohm. So Im hoping a 2 Ohm DVC configuration is going to be available.

If the box I am using has .7 cu ft per chamber and the sub takes up .05, that leaves me with .65 cu ft of airspace. Should I leave this alone? Add a piece of wood in each chamber to reduce the volume of the box to get closer to the recommended .5 cu ft of airspace or would it matter being .15 cu ft of airspace over the recommended amount? Assuming I can get my hands on a pair quickly. Im currently building the system for his truck now and assuming I can find an amp that will do around 900-1000 watts at 4 ohms for under $200.

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

Thanks for the reply. I appreciate the response. When I said its not very informational, I meant as in when they would be available, where to purchase them, price etc... Not numbers wise. There is plenty of info on the actual subwoofer itself. Sorry I wasnt clear on that. I wasnt knocking the product by any means, its just that I keep getting referred to these subs or I read that these are recommended, yet its frustrating when I cant get my hands on a pair. And although I want to get my hands on a pair, Its really not going to work well for my friends' install and if I decide to go with a pair for my new truck, because of the VC configuration. Since each sub is a 4ohm DVC sub, my final load would be either 1 ohm or 4 ohms. I dont like to run amps at 1 ohm, even if they are 1 ohm stable. Call me weird, but hey, thats how I have never had an amplifier burn out on me except recently, a 18 year old Clarion 4 channel amp made in 1993. And if I am trying to achieve 450 watts rms per sub, Ill need to find an amp that does 900 watts at 4 ohms. Thats going to be a pretty pricey amplifier, one that my friend won't be able to afford and honestly, I don't want to change up my Phoenix Gold Tantrum 1200.1 or run it at 1 ohm. So Im hoping a 2 Ohm DVC configuration is going to be available.
If the box I am using has .7 cu ft per chamber and the sub takes up .05, that leaves me with .65 cu ft of airspace. Should I leave this alone? Add a piece of wood in each chamber to reduce the volume of the box to get closer to the recommended .5 cu ft of airspace or would it matter being .15 cu ft of airspace over the recommended amount? Assuming I can get my hands on a pair quickly. Im currently building the system for his truck now and assuming I can find an amp that will do around 900-1000 watts at 4 ohms for under $200.

The ETA is answered in our forum and also over on DIYMA. We are a direct company so you purchase them directly through us on our Order page when available. The power handling / requirements and enclosure volume questions are both answered in detail in our FAQ page.

 

[Cruzer 10+ year member]

that sub the best shallow imo, the xbl2 is top 3 best sq motor designs. however, doesnt it cost like $250 per sub? thats a bit much imo, but it is the best shallow imo

 

[sundownz Pro Seller]

250 a bit much ??

XBL, shorting ring, Neo motor, custom tooled spider, carrier, diaphragm, etc, etc.

IMO it's a bargain.

 

[Cruzer 10+ year member]

i doubt it sounds better than say the shiva with the same motor, or mach 5 subs with the same motor. no they arent shallow, but they dont cost that much. even the shiva that costs almost that much will take twice the power, get louder, sound just as good

maybe i should say for $250 its a bit much for me. i would love to have two of these in my truck, but i dont wanna spend $500 for just subs when my amp didnt even cost half that

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

i doubt it sounds better than say the shiva with the same motor, or mach 5 subs with the same motor. no they arent shallow, but they dont cost that much. even the shiva that costs almost that much will take twice the power, get louder, sound just as good
maybe i should say for $250 its a bit much for me. i would love to have two of these in my truck, but i dont wanna spend $500 for just subs when my amp didnt even cost half that

Comparing apples to oranges now aren't we? Taking mounting depth and enclosure requirements (ie, the point of a shallow subwoofer) out of the picture and comparing price to sound quality? *read - sound quality, not output!* Even then the Shiva did not use XBL^2 and neither does any Mach 5 product. The only "Shiva" to use XBL^2 is the Exodus Shiva-X and it has a 7" mounting depth! The suspension on our BM mkIII is also considerably more linear than the Shiva or any Mach 5 within their limits. With a 10" linear nomex spider the Cms/Kms curve is completely flat showing no suspension induced distortion into the output of the driver. Couple that to the ruler flat BL curve and low Le with the short coil and shorting ring directly in the gap and you have a great recipe for great sound. Also the original Shiva had 15mm of Xmax and was ~5.5" deep. Our BM mkIII has over 14mm of Xmax and is only 3.2" deep. Sure the Shiva and other drivers have more peak excursion, but you're forgetting about the tiny mounting depth that the BM mkIII possesses.

If you want to compare similar products instead of ignoring mounting depth and enclosure requirements you can look at the 13" JL TW5 and the 12" Alpine Type R shallow. Un-authorized price on the JL is right at $359, and the Type R is $299 - both make the 12" BM mkIII more affordable and a better bargain.

 

[RAM_Designs 5,000+ posts]

Comparing apples to oranges now aren't we? Taking mounting depth and enclosure requirements (ie, the point of a shallow subwoofer) out of the picture and comparing price to sound quality? *read - sound quality, not output!* Even then the Shiva did not use XBL^2 and neither does any Mach 5 product. The only "Shiva" to use XBL^2 is the Exodus Shiva-X and it has a 7" mounting depth! The suspension on our BM mkIII is also considerably more linear than the Shiva or any Mach 5 within their limits. With a 10" linear nomex spider the Cms/Kms curve is completely flat showing no suspension induced distortion into the output of the driver. Couple that to the ruler flat BL curve and low Le with the short coil and shorting ring directly in the gap and you have a great recipe for great sound. Also the original Shiva had 15mm of Xmax and was ~5.5" deep. Our BM mkIII has over 14mm of Xmax and is only 3.2" deep. Sure the Shiva and other drivers have more peak excursion, but you're forgetting about the tiny mounting depth that the BM mkIII possesses.
If you want to compare similar products instead of ignoring mounting depth and enclosure requirements you can look at the 13" JL TW5 and the 12" Alpine Type R shallow. Un-authorized price on the JL is right at $359, and the Type R is $299 - both make the 12" BM mkIII more affordable and a better bargain.

Exactly what I wanted to say, glad you saved me the time. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[Cruzer 10+ year member]

no one is doubting the design or the beauty of the sub. and im referring to the shiva-x, why ur comparing a new sub to an old no longer produced sub that didnt use the xbl2 motor when i clearly said it has the same motor which clearly shows im referring to the new shiva.

i didnt say its not a fair price amongst other shallow subs.

i simply said for me, at $250 each, its a lot. only way i would buy it is if that was the last resort. i had only 4 inches of mounting depth.

i would rather give up a seat and have the sub i want thats cheaper, has the xbl2 motor or better(AE lambada motor).

if i pay $250 for a sub, or setup, its going to be either 2 subs, or a very nice single sub. dont see 1 of the bm mk having the output i want for $250. sq yes, easily.

i would easily have the bm over all other shallow subs.

 

[Trancer 10+ year member]

The ETA is answered in our forum and also over on DIYMA. We are a direct company so you purchase them directly through us on our Order page when available. The power handling / requirements and enclosure volume questions are both answered in detail in our FAQ page.

Yes, I saw that and read that before I posted it. I understand that a larger box than .5 cu ft will lessen the power handling and a smaller box will yield less output. So yes. I understand it, but still does not answer my question. Which would be better? Which would perform better? You are simply just deflecting my answer to the FAQ, yet it doesn't answer my question of "will I benefit with my box having .65 cu ft over a .5 cu ft box after .05 cu ft speaker displacement.

 

[Trancer 10+ year member]

Wow. Finally. Someone answered one of my questions. How much does this sub cost? $250? Wow. Definitely not budget friendly. $250 for both subs is something in my friends budget. I myself am not disputing the oh so mighty XBL^2 motor and the sound quality, but for $500 for two subs, is out of my friends price range and honestly, probably even out of MY price range, for a Shallow Mount sub. Looks like the MB Quart 304's it is, unless I can somehow find a set of used BM MKIII's, which doesnt sound possible. Since they seem to be a limited production subwoofer, therefor making them very sought after, someone would probably pay near MSRP for a used BM MKIII sub, so I dont see that happening. Hopefully the MB Quart 304's will have more output than the MKIII. Or I may just build a custom ported box for my friends regular cab truck and put in 2 SA8's.

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

Wow. Finally. Someone answered one of my questions. How much does this sub cost? $250?

While you've asked a couple questions such as "So has anything changed since this thread was started a year ago? When will the Stereo Integrity BM kIII come out? Was there a previous version like a SI BM or SI BM kII that I missed? How do I get a pair of these", I didn't see you ask how much they were. If I missed it, I would like to see where you asked about the price. Can you show me where you asked about the price and not only about availability?

As to "deflecting" your question, your question about which would be better can only be answered by you because to use the target 0.5 ft^3 recommended volume or a larger 0.65 ft^3 hinges on the system goals, output desired, LFE desired, etc, of the user. When we state the following in our FAQ:

Yes you can. However, power handling and/or low frequency extension will be affected. The BM mkIII has been engineered to provide optimum performance in 0.5 ft^3 sealed. Making the enclosure volume significantly smaller than recommended will cause a reduction in low frequency extension. On the other side, making the enclosure volume larger will significantly reduce the power handling of the driver. If you make the enclosure smaller than recommended (0.5 ft^3 sealed), we suggest using an aperiodic membrane such as a ScanSpeak Variovent. Making the enclosure larger will diminish power handling as follows: In 0.75 ft^3 power handling is reduced to 375 watts. In 1 ft^3 the power handling is reduced to 300 watts.

...it means that making the enclosure volume significantly smaller than recommended will cause a reduction in LFE. On the other side, making it larger will reduce the power handling of the driver. If you must send 450 to 500 watts RMS to the driver for extended periods of time because SPL is what you, or the customer, are after then we suggest looking for a different subwoofer. And if the price was out of the budget, questions about the subwoofer should have stopped right there because it is simply out of the budget. Or instead you can poke fun at the most linear (flattest BL, flattest Cms curve, flattest Le, etc) shallow mount subwoofer and sound quality in today's market and sound quality ("the oh so mighty XBL^2 motor and the sound quality").