Stereo Integrity BM update

[negative3five 10+ year member]

Isn't the Sundown Z series almost the same as the old mag besides a 3rd mag? diff softparts but the motors very sim.

 

[jmanpc 5,000+ posts]

It seems to me like the BM has changed into a different animal from what you wanted it to be originally (From what I understood). The original BM was what the name implies- a Baby Mag. It was the entry-level sibling to the Mag- it offered great sound quality, but with a more petit structure and price tag.

Now, it seems, you've opted to keep it petit, but it is now looking like it will cost the same as a Mag? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

Honestly, it seems like it would have been a more prudent choice to keep it like it was in the hoss-picture era- a sub-$200 shallow driver that competed with the other shallow mounts. Now, even though its features exceed that of the big names, so does the price and in times like these, I'd see people opting for a less expensive alternative.

Now don't think I'm knocking you- I am excited to see a shallow mount with as good of performance as you claim it does. I'm glad you didn't stop short of perfection in order to have a driver you can truly be proud of. But business-wise, it doesn't seem to make much sense.

 

[bose301s 5,000+ posts]

It seems to me like the BM has changed into a different animal from what you wanted it to be originally (From what I understood). The original BM was what the name implies- a Baby Mag. It was the entry-level sibling to the Mag- it offered great sound quality, but with a more petit structure and price tag.
Now, it seems, you've opted to keep it petit, but it is now looking like it will cost the same as a Mag? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

Honestly, it seems like it would have been a more prudent choice to keep it like it was in the hoss-picture era- a sub-$200 shallow driver that competed with the other shallow mounts. Now, even though its features exceed that of the big names, so does the price and in times like these, I'd see people opting for a less expensive alternative.

Now don't think I'm knocking you- I am excited to see a shallow mount with as good of performance as you claim it does. I'm glad you didn't stop short of perfection in order to have a driver you can truly be proud of. But business-wise, it doesn't seem to make much sense.

I can't say much, but what I do know is that if it could have been kept how it was and achieve the goals that were set for it, that's how it would have stayed. However, that design was not able to reach the desired performance due to design limitations of conventional parts, and thus the basically complete redesign was necessary.

 

[negative3five 10+ year member]

He's supposed to post renderings of the new neo motor and I think klippel results im not sure tho...

 

[bose301s 5,000+ posts]

He's supposed to post renderings of the new neo motor and I think klippel results im not sure tho...

Yea, basically it was impossible to achieve the required BL with a standard ferrite motor so the neo motor was designed. Also, the new cone assembly is sweet. That was needed to allow the driver to be assembled as normal, which helps them while building it, also with the old Rohacell/nomex cone the former would rock on the poll causing rubbing at larger excursions, the new cone design completely solved that problem. This is going to be a cool little driver, I can't wait to see one.

 

[SQAddict 10+ year member]

Ive got to admit that I am anxiously awaiting the new BM. Traditional subs of every type and diameter saturate the market, and the technology (other than materials) has more or less plateaued. With the demand for shallow-mount subs growing, we have an opportunity to create the competition that will push these things to new levels. I am definitely no engineer, but I cant wait to see where the tech is in 5 years.

Any idea what the ETA is on a shipping product? As long as the price is right (I dont expect them to be "cheap" with all of the research and design going into them), I would love to snap one or two up.

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

It seems to me like the BM has changed into a different animal from what you wanted it to be originally (From what I understood). The original BM was what the name implies- a Baby Mag. It was the entry-level sibling to the Mag- it offered great sound quality, but with a more petit structure and price tag.
Now, it seems, you've opted to keep it petit, but it is now looking like it will cost the same as a Mag? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

Honestly, it seems like it would have been a more prudent choice to keep it like it was in the hoss-picture era- a sub-$200 shallow driver that competed with the other shallow mounts. Now, even though its features exceed that of the big names, so does the price and in times like these, I'd see people opting for a less expensive alternative.

Now don't think I'm knocking you- I am excited to see a shallow mount with as good of performance as you claim it does. I'm glad you didn't stop short of perfection in order to have a driver you can truly be proud of. But business-wise, it doesn't seem to make much sense.

Business-wise it makes sense to take the BM the direction I'm taking it. Shallow mount subs are becoming more and more popular every day. And when I go after an application/market I make the best driver I can possible make. Sure it's not the old BM's, but neither the Mag or the new BM are what the old Mag's and BM's were. Enclosure sizes have gotten smaller, the drivers have gotten more linear (BL linearity is GREATLY improved), sound quality has improved, the drivers are half the weight, etc. You just can't port them like you could the other drivers. But like I said in a previous post, the Mag v3 is coming back and it'll be less expensive than ever and have higher power handling capabilities also. Who knows what that company may come out with concerning a lower powered driver in the future. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

If you a cheap inexpensive shallow sub, simply grab a Pioneer or Kenwood. Expecting the best (literally) performance for 1/4 the cost of the current best performing shallow subwoofer is asking for a lot. I don't build "cheap" speakers. If that's what you want, there are plenty of drivers out there to fit the bill.

And now that the Mag v4 is what it is, the BM follows suit with the "Baby Mag" very well. It is a much smaller offering in every way. With ~500 watts in a tiny (0.5 ft^3 cubes) enclosure the BM will perform very similarly to the Mag v4 ... especially in LFE. Note that it is half the enclosure volume with even more low frequency extension than the Mag v4 offers in an enclosure that's double the size. Two BM v2's will have the ability to out-spl a single Mag v4 in the same sized overall enclosure (twin BM's will need 1.0 f^3 cubed and one Mag v4 will need 1.0 ft^3 sealed). Doubling the surface area while keeping the enclosure size the same has its advantages. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif But the main thing is mounting depth. Mounting depth is smaller than a credit card and overall depth isn't much more than that. You can shove the new BM into all kinds of places. Also weighing less than 12 lbs is pretty neat too.

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

Here are renderings of what the BM's motor is going to look like:

 

[bass_lover1 10+ year member]

Sexy. I take it the blue on the outer XBL^2 gap is some form of a shorting ring? Nice touch. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Too bad your drivers wouldn't work IB, well they would work but probably not well, or they'd be my next driver choice for sure.

 

[hornedfrog1985 5,000+ posts]

Does the BM smell like some other BMs?

 

[DBfan187 5,000+ posts]

I am sooooooooooo going shopping now woot!

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

Sexy. I take it the blue on the outer XBL^2 gap is some form of a shorting ring? Nice touch. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
Too bad your drivers wouldn't work IB, well they would work but probably not well, or they'd be my next driver choice for sure.

Yes, that is the shorting ring. It's blue on the one plane because that is the contrasting color to brass (you can see the brass color on the inside as it wraps around).

It'll work IB, but it won't handle much power IB...which is kind of the point of IB isn't it? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif Low power, lots of bass extension? This driver isn't suited for IB anyway because it will actually have too low of an F3 and F10 in a car which will muddy up the sound.

 

[ciaonzo 5,000+ posts]

Looks nice, I like what I'm seeing. Especially the low Fs.

Curious why you chose a progressive spider for a driver intended for sealed applications though. Does this have something to do with manipulating the compliance curve?

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

Looks nice, I like what I'm seeing. Especially the low Fs.
Curious why you chose a progressive spider for a driver intended for sealed applications though. Does this have something to do with manipulating the compliance curve?

The rolls change shape, but the compliance of the spider itself is not progressive. The end result is a compliance curve that isn't a curve at all, it's a straight line, which is perfect for a sealed only driver.

 

[FJF 10+ year member]

The rolls change shape, but the compliance of the spider itself is not progressive. The end result is a compliance curve that isn't a curve at all, it's a straight line, which is perfect for a sealed only driver.

What sensitivity spec are you projecting for this driver?