SoundSplinter RL-P 12 account (diary)

[Spkrman]

The Type X and RL-P both made their dB scores on the exact same track sample. They would be hitting it at extremely close frequencies.
For the sake of SQ evaluation, it proved to be terribly difficult to get a taste for their musicality when set as they would normally run, for sub-bass only.

I do appreciate the feedback and input! Thank you.

I don't understand the DB number test, did you play tones at all to find the peaks?

I don't see how testing how a sub sounds playing sub bass is difficult??? Why do you need to see if the woofer will play 100hz+ to know if it sounds good - it should absolutely never play that high in a properly setup SQ setup. As far as I read the review, the RL-P makes a good midbass driver but its weak on the low end? Perhaps you could explain your methods a bit more?

Btw, not gettin on ya because I need something to type about, just pointing a few things out //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

I don't understand the DB number test, did you play tones at all to find the peaks?
I don't see how testing how a sub sounds playing sub bass is difficult??? Why do you need to see if the woofer will play 100hz+ to know if it sounds good - it should absolutely never play that high in a properly setup SQ setup. As far as I read the review, the RL-P makes a good midbass driver but its weak on the low end? Perhaps you could explain your methods a bit more?

Btw, not gettin on ya because I need something to type about, just pointing a few things out //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Unfortunately, I don't have a Termlab, just a good ol' dbMeter.com meter to help with tuning. Please understand that these are, by no means, official numbers or tests. I did want to keep it as fair as possible, though, so with a generic track, I took a sample of a section that was spilling out good numbers, on a limited range of frequencies around 40-50 Hz, and hit both sets of subs with it. I'd think of it as a "how loud can my woofer get when I crank up the song I'm actually listening to" test. Not a burp at X frequency, by any means.

50 Hz and below, there certainly is a bit of room to listen to flavor and accuracy, but not a lot. Very rarely does music really dip that low, and I wanted to get an idea of how responsive the subwoofer would be if it were imposed with complexities that were more than just a tone. If it could perform well with that information, it should be able to perform quite well in the lower regions where it's best, too. I even turned off my most vocal midbass drivers to be sure what I was hearing was primarily the subwoofers. No, they don't need to be used as midbass to be good. Try hitting a midbass up for a full plate of 20 Hz at... hang on, lemme get a measurement...

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

...123.5 dB @ 20 Hz

 

[Spkrman]

Unfortunately, I don't have a Termlab, just a good ol' dbMeter.com meter to help with tuning. Please understand that these are, by no means, official numbers or tests. I did want to keep it as fair as possible, though, so with a generic track, I took a sample of a section that was spilling out good numbers, on a limited range of frequencies around 40-50 Hz, and hit both sets of subs with it. I'd think of it as a "how loud can my woofer get when I crank up the song I'm actually listening to" test. Not a burp at X frequency, by any means.
50 Hz and below, there certainly is a bit of room to listen to flavor and accuracy, but not a lot. Very rarely does music really dip that low, and I wanted to get an idea of how responsive the subwoofer would be if it were imposed with complexities that were more than just a tone. If it could perform well with that information, it should be able to perform quite well in the lower regions where it's best, too. I even turned off my most vocal midbass drivers to be sure what I was hearing was primarily the subwoofers. No, they don't need to be used as midbass to be good. Try hitting a midbass up for a full plate of 20 Hz at... hang on, lemme get a measurement...

Well you can't just pick a song and say one sub is louder than the other on this song... thats HARDLY a good indicator of each woofs actual capability.

Rarely does music dip below 50hz??? what are you listening to? If it has good midbass response it should have good low bass response... what sense does that make? Thats like saying my 5.25 has superb midrange, so it must have some kickass response at 30hz!

 

[sakufan 10+ year member]

hope it sounds as good as it looks!
be honest on the review, can't waiT!

BE HONEST FOOO!!!

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

BE HONEST FOOO!!!

Chill. Every detail I can verbalize is here. Doesn't get any more honest than that. If there are irregular methods to the standardized review process I'm sure Spkrman will be able to highlight those. I am not, nor claim to be a lab tester. Just wanted to get out some impressions from a normal user, with some detail.

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

Well you can't just pick a song and say one sub is louder than the other on this song... thats HARDLY a good indicator of each woofs actual capability.
Rarely does music dip below 50hz??? what are you listening to? If it has good midbass response it should have good low bass response... what sense does that make? Thats like saying my 5.25 has superb midrange, so it must have some kickass response at 30hz!

All I was saying there is that the sub-bass is extremely good (other than with an RTA, it's not very easy to outline), but I was having a hard time judging its ability to contour to particular sounds in the sub-bass region. It was easier for my ear to pick up those abilities at frequencies that generally provide more information.

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

I should also mention, for clarity, that I have not had much time to test these RL-P's, so I chose the track sample that performed the best for the Type X for an SPL measurement for its initial test result. The Type X's have had a significant number of different samples, sweeps, tracks, etc. and have not yet hit a higher number. I'm not saying they can't, but so far they haven't been higher in my particular application than the RL-P's test.

 

[sakufan 10+ year member]

Hahaha I was just f*ckin' witcha. It just looked like spkrman was gonna be on yer case from the start.

THat's a dam good review of yours, very in depth, perhaps more in depth than 90% of the reviews seen on this forum. I just find it hard to believe someone could still be criticising your review.

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

Hahaha I was just f*ckin' witcha. It just looked like spkrman was gonna be on yer case from the start.
THat's a dam good review of yours, very in depth, perhaps more in depth than 90% of the reviews seen on this forum. I just find it hard to believe someone could still be criticising your review.

Thanks man. I do appreciate the time you spent reading it, and your feedback, very much.

 

[Hundreth 10+ year member]

So do you like them more overall than the Type-Xs? What kind of box and power did you have your X's in compared to the RL-Ps?

BTW, nice review //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[alphakenny1 10+ year member]

**** i want one now //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/frown.gif.a3531fa0534503350665a1e957861287.gif.

nice review and enjoyed reading it.

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

So do you like them more overall than the Type-Xs? What kind of box and power did you have your X's in compared to the RL-Ps?
BTW, nice review //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Wow, tough question to answer. Up to now, the Type X's have been, hands-down, the over-all leader in anything I had previously experienced personally, with the possible exception to a pair of JL W7's (but, they weren't sealed and were peaking where I'd like sub-bass to be flatter, and weren't as musical as the Type X's).

I can't say one is really "better than the other" because they are distinctively different. The Type X have the "shake the hell out of your vehicle" factor. They also seem to be more at-home in the absolute lowest of audible frequencies. The Type X also have better sound quality than anything I've heard to date, other than the RL-P's. The RL-P's are more responsive and snappy. The RL-P's also seem to be able to hit higher SPL with average music, and almost half the power.

It's almost a case of having a set of both. One, for primarily uber-deep bass songs, and the other for good ol' punk rawk, classical, and everything in-between.

Now, keep in mind that someone can "shape" their response significantly through enclosure type and tuning and maybe a bit of EQ. I'm just talking about generic sealed enclosure performance in my vehicle.

The enclosure is the same for both pairs of woofers, and so is the amp, but the power is different. It is 1.35 cu. ft. per side, sealed, and dampened on the internal walls. Power to the Alpine Type X's was around 1000 RMS each, and the RL-P's are getting around 500-650 W RMS each, at max.

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

great review,

 

makes me even more happy that I have one also

 

[Savstyle 10+ year member]

that was a great review.do you plan on doing a review on the RLs?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/naughty.gif.94359f346c0f1259df8038d60b41863e.gif