The Official Type R Thread

[Johnny Drama 5,000+ posts]

What do you think can handle the most power and sound the best in a sealed box between the 3? I am getting ancy to buy a sub and am sick of waiting for a deal on a Diamond TDX... let me know!!

Daily or for burps?

sx for power

R for mix of power and sound

se for sound

 

[Spkrman]

well, i agree somewhat..i did my testing in three different boxes(one sealed, two ported), two different tunings, three different power levels and two different vehicles. why? mostly because the re bandwagon was crying foul. in the end, as i've stated, the rl-p help it's own in output (but didn't win) and IMO was teh better sounding woofer hands down.
as to the bias, ur wrong. whether u want to admit it or not, u are indeed biased towards the type r, and in ur case, for good cause. ur an spl competitor and the type r has proven loudest for u. as to what u heard, jsut like in my h2h, we have to take it with a grain of salt because sq is subjective. i will say again, my rl-p has only come close to sounding the way u describe once...in 2.5ft^3 tuned to 28hz....in all other applications, it is one the lowest, crispest and cleanest sounding subs, with the ability to get loud, that i've heard. and whether or not u'll agree, 140+ is loud for daily.

I was as objective as possible in the SQ tests... Simply put, the RL-P didn't hit with as much accuracy as the type R (on the 45hz-50hz stuff) and not even close to the type S overall. It hits hte notes or it doesn't... thats all I was interested in. The woof didn't have the "big" presence that either of the others had, mostly because it wasn't loud.

Lets not forget only one coil on the R was connected... I'm sure that didn't help things, but it could have //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif.

Whether you like it or not, the test was very subjective... you said it yourself... in a similar box the RL-P sounded bad. So live with it, in this box it sounds bad. I'm not done yet, I'm going to test a smaller lower tuned box later today. I EXPECT more SQ out of the RL-P... but the SPL numbers so far are just depressing... I am maxing the woof out and it barely breaks a 40. To me, thats not acceptable and thats NOT a good daily driver. You should never have to max the woof to break a 40... the type R breaks a 40 without even much movement, let alone struggle.

Yet the Rl-P is still better? We'll see what happens later today.

4 ohms, orion 2500d..1200wrms at 14 volts(rated), give or take....and again, that's the most i'd ever recommend to put on the rl-p. we also know, wired to .5 nominal, it's going to see one ohm bursts and such....but even at 1.3, like u've already stated, ur at 1800....so, u've proven what's already known, the rl-p isn't a power monster. but to do what it is designed to do, it doesn't need 1800 or even 1200 wrms...and again, i'm not doubting the output numbers. i have no reason too. the rl-p is an sql woofer with a bias towards sq...teh type r's are an sql woofer with a bias towards output...like someone mentioned above, it's a street beater. it should get louder.

The RL-P was a power handling wuss, it didn't even come close. It handled as much as the alpine type S and wasn't nearly as loud doing it.

The RL-P DOES need this power to even to to a respectable volume level! Thats what the test has shown so far... it *doesn't* get *nearly* as loud as it should. While doing a 140 is was cryin... i'd say 137 is the level where it sounded pretty good, and thats just not loud enough.... not in an SPL box in a 2 door blazer.

my main issues are

1) u say no bias, when clearly there is. evryone with a hint of common sense and a knowledge of ur previous posts about the type r's can and will see that. i'm not saying that's a bad thing, but when it comes to sq, a bias will always affect what we want to hear.

when i did my tests, i had three sets of ears, mine, my wife's (who has zero audio knowledge) and a friend who was creaming his pants over the xxx. we all came to the same conclusions, except one. my wife said she couldn't tell and output difference, while ryan and i thought the xxx was indeed the louder sub.

in ur testing, we only get ur opinion and those of ur teammates, who all swear by the alpine. can u see the bias now?

SQ tests were objective, like it or not.

You said it yourself the RL-P didnt like the bigger box... so stand by what you say, dont make excuses for why it doesn't sound as good!

My test so far as agreed with you, yet you still call BS....

2) enclosure recommendation...it was suggested by ur compadre that mike suggested the 2.35 foot box with the 1700 (rated) wrms. i know mike, and he's conservative as hell. there isn't a chance he'd recommend that box for that power. that tuning, yes. he'd be more apt to suggest 1.5-1.75ft for that power.

I didn't suggest it, I'm the one performing the test.

Power doesnt matter to the SQ test, makes 0 difference. I didnt' just crank it and say ew... I played at various levels with lots of different material.

and that's it. those are my issues. we all know, well, most of us, that sq is subjective and relies heavily upon application,ie: box, vehicle and power. especially if it's clipped power or clean.

whether or not the type r proves out here (which, i don't see any other outcome) or the rl-p does, doesn't matter. as long as everyone knows, ur results, just like mine, aren't going to be the same results everybody gets.

I couldn't get the amp to the point of clipping with the RL-P... it cried before I could come close, so thats out the door.

If the R wins, it deserves to win. The test is flat out subjective.

Which btw... if you look at the results, the type S is the overall leader so far, didn't expect that did you?

of course, i wonder what the next flavor of the month is going to be?

To me, it will be whatever I test to be the best. Brand, rating... NOTHING matters to me except RESULTS!!!

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

What more do you want out of the test? Would you like me to test box after box after box until the RL-P sounds better? So far same size box, 2 different tunings. Not done yet...

You should atleast test a box that does the Rl-p justice //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif Given your supposed results of the listening test....I can tell you that there should be no one (including you and your "posse") who draws any conclusions about how the Rl-p stacks up to the Type-R (or any other sub) in SQ because the box was clearly inappropriate for the Rl-p if that is the type of sound it gave you.

Again...I don't know what you were listening to, but what you described is FAR from how a Rl-p should and can sound. This I can state with 100% confidence and certainty.

I do believe it will sound much better in my 2 cube 30hz box... it should at least, going from experience with woofs like this. But on that same note, the type R sounds alot better in the smaller lower tuned box, too.
You all believe the tests are biased towards the type R's... why?

Maybe because all you've done for the past 3 months is rave about how wonderful the Type-R is.

Possible reason?

You assume the R (and the S in this test) are in the BEST enclosures, while the former "bandwagon" woofer is in its worst. Maybe the type R is in its worst SQ box too?

I was never even bringing your listening tests of the Type R in question. What I was saying was that your analysis of the Rl-p's sound is clearly flawed by something. Box? Power? Setup? Couldn't tell you, I wasn't there. But what you listened to was not an Rl-p performing at it's maximum. Period.

As such, you can not draw any conclusions between it and any other sub on the market in terms of SQ as you tried to do already. Flawed test = flawed results = flawed conclusions.

Which makes statements such as this: "Not the worst, but far from woofers such as the alpine type X and JL w7." totally irrational and illogical.

That is all I was stating.

Take every test for whats its worth... but this is the only test that I have seen so far of the RL-P that didn't show any bias.

Kent's Rl-p vs. XXX comparo.

His wasn't any more biased than yours. So, depending on how you look at it....that's either a compliment or an insult to the test //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

I listened and told you what I heard, nothing more nothing less.

And what you heard as NOT and Rl-p performing optimally.

If you disagree with the way things were done, tell me now and I can correct any mistakes while I still have all the woofers.

If you are going to try to compare SQ, atleast test each sub in it's optimal sound quality enclosure.

But, don't get on here and say the test is worthless because it shows results you don't like...

I don't care about results as long as it's a fair fight.

If you want me to test 50 boxes in 50 cars, please close this thread now, thats out of the question.

Then just as long as everybody reading this understand that the results are anything but conclusive //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif (this goes for any vs. thread....not just this one)

And, following the recent bandwagon....I'd say 99% of readers don't comprehend that statement.

 

[SoundSplinter 10+ year member]

to me the rl-p is pretty smooth at low to mid volume. but once u start turnin it up it looses all it abilities.
[...]

but the box he had it in was about what was recommended for him 2 test it in from SS.

[...]

also if u play this sub for long periods of time and u smell coil, do not , i repeat, do not touch the cone. that thing will burn ya.

You likely will never hear me state that anybody's tests or opinions are worthless, as worth is determined differently by each and every person reading the words. Some may place much value upon them, others may place none - as with so many things in this world, a very subjective opinion it would be.

With that said, I would like to address the above comments. As to the RL-p being "smooth at low to mid volume ... but once u start turnin it up it looses all it abilities." Well that is no suprise to me, as I explicitly stated to this person before I shipped the woofer that their amp was too strong for this driver and their gain would need to be set conservatively. Obviously as you turn up the volume you will be feeding more power to the driver, and with the amount of power you had on tap it is a no brainer that the RL-p would struggle with it!

On to the second comment that has already been brought into question, about how "the box he had it in was about what was recommended for him 2 test it in from SS." This is entirely untrue. First off, I didn't give a specific recommendation as Mr. Potts never asked for one and always carried himself throughout our correspondance as someone with much experience and ability to adjust the box as necessary in order to determine the optimal performance of the driver. For example, in an email dated August 23rd, he told me: "Of course, the woofer will be tested in everything from the worst sounding fart box to the SQ box that I would build if a customer came to me with one of the woofers." Additionally, our website recommendations for the RL-p12 (as well as my own personal recommendations) do not advocate vented boxes larger than 2.0 cu ft net volume under any circumstances, with the general recommendation calling for a 1.5 - 2.0 cu ft net volume enclosure tuned between 28-34 Hz for in-car use (tuning dependent upon user preference).

.. and Finally, with respect to the last comment about the coil heating up and the cone getting hot - well sh¡eeeet this certainly ties into my first response regarding the power level. If you use more power than the given coil can withstand, obviously you will overload it. Keep in mind that every coil has a thermal time constant, and even at its RMS rating, exposure over a lengthy continuous stretch will bring all coils down in the long run. Our cone is aluminum for the expressed purpose of doubling as a giant heatsink where it connects directly to the voicecoil former. Thus, if you notice it getting far too hot to touch, you should realize that you are overpowering the driver. To exemplify that I did what I could to make Mr. Potts aware of this matter, consider the following response I wrote to him via email during our correspondance:

I should also note that I will be sending you a dual 4ohm driver, and that with your Orion 2500D, you will need to keep your gains set conservatively! 1700 watts @ 2ohms is too much power for the RL-p. Please keep in mind that this driver is designed for optimal use between 400-800 watts, and will reach full excursion with about 650 watts of power input. Anymore, while you may gain a fraction of dB or two, you're going to be adding a lot of stress to the driver that in my opinion, simply isn't worth it. I aim to provide subwoofers that sound phenomenal and have the potential to get louder than most ears will tolerate. I'm not into the whole SPL circuit, but can respect it, and in the interests of full disclosure I just want to make it clear that the RL-p is not designed to take the full force of the 2500D save for perhaps a very short burp or two (but I ask you to use conservative judgement when dealing with one of my babies ;-).

One last time, I want to reiterate that I never promote my products strictly for SPL purposes. My goal is not to make my customers deaf (though I assure you that the RL-p's can deliver your deaf wish if so inclined!), but to provide people with a reference quality speaker for home or car audio that doesn't come with the outrageous price tag or power requirements of other woofers designed for this class of application. In terms of build quality, minimal distortion, and overall sound reproduction - I stand by my drivers as among the best on the market for extremely accurate performance at a very reasonable price.

 

[mrray13 10+ year member]

I was as objective as possible in the SQ tests... Simply put, the RL-P didn't hit with as much accuracy as the type R (on the 45hz-50hz stuff) and not even close to the type S overall. It hits hte notes or it doesn't... thats all I was interested in. The woof didn't have the "big" presence that either of the others had, mostly because it wasn't loud.
Whether you like it or not, the test was very subjective... you said it yourself... in a similar box the RL-P sounded bad. So live with it, in this box it sounds bad.

i did agree, and i mentioned it. why are u getting defensive? int hat size box, the rl-p didn't sound good to me...i'm not backing down from that statement. i never have and i never will.

I'm not done yet, I'm going to test a smaller lower tuned box later today. I EXPECT more SQ out of the RL-P... but the SPL numbers so far are just depressing... I am maxing the woof out and it barely breaks a 40. To me, thats not acceptable and thats NOT a good daily driver. You should never have to max the woof to break a 40... the type R breaks a 40 without even much movement, let alone struggle.
Yet the Rl-P is still better? We'll see what happens later today.

i never said the rl-p was better. where did i say that? i said for what it's designed to do, it does a great job. u don't think a daily driver that has to be pressed to break a 140 isn't a good sub? kewl, that's ur opinion. i know others who think otherwise. and in other applications, it has broken 140 without the issues....

hell, maybe it's ur fabled tcab box it don't like? i dunno...i'm not there.

The RL-P was a power handling wuss, it didn't even come close. It handled as much as the alpine type S and wasn't nearly as loud doing it.
The RL-P DOES need this power to even to to a respectable volume level! Thats what the test has shown so far... it *doesn't* get *nearly* as loud as it should. While doing a 140 is was cryin... i'd say 137 is the level where it sounded pretty good, and thats just not loud enough.... not in an SPL box in a 2 door blazer.

again, in ur opinion. not everyone needs to break a 140 to be happy. u do. kewl. the rl-p isn't u r sub..so what? but it does indeed handle more then it's rated power, just not in that enclosure/ setup. just about everybody knew that already.

SQ tests were objective, like it or not.
You said it yourself the RL-P didnt like the bigger box... so stand by what you say, dont make excuses for why it doesn't sound as good!

My test so far as agreed with you, yet you still call BS....

again, where am i calling bs? by saying that the box isn't the right box? again, i'm agreeing with you, and i'm standing by my statement. i've never made a claim about anything else EXCEPT that i don't feel that that is the correct box, especially with that power. so just where in the falk am i calling u out on anything?? again, why so defensive?

wait, i do call bs on ur bias...my bad...

I didn't suggest it, I'm the one performing the test.
Power doesnt matter to the SQ test, makes 0 difference. I didnt' just crank it and say ew... I played at various levels with lots of different material.

I couldn't get the amp to the point of clipping with the RL-P... it cried before I could come close, so thats out the door.

If the R wins, it deserves to win. The test is flat out subjective.

Which btw... if you look at the results, the type S is the overall leader so far, didn't expect that did you?

To me, it will be whatever I test to be the best. Brand, rating... NOTHING matters to me except RESULTS!!!

again, adn we both agree, wrong box, too much power. maybe the amp wasn't clipping, i never said it did. i simply stated that we all sq is subjective and relies heavily upon box, vehicle and power. adn if that power is clean or not. i never said that in ur tests u were clipping the amp.

i don't get it. i've not been harsh, nor rude, yet u get all defensive. why? i've not bad mouthed ur testing, in fact i've stated how similiar yours is to mine. yet, you feel the need to get defensive. i've not disputed the spl numbers. i've only disputed two things and one of those we agree one.

1) wrong box....we both know that. i'm not backing down from that, go find my thread on the rl-p vs xxx...i said it way back then too....

2) power handling...box dependent. go to the same thread, u'll see i stated that teh rl-p didn't like anything over 1200 in a ported box. adn even then, i'd only recommend that to ppl whe knew what they were doing.

3) ur bias...and this we'll argue over till no end. just like james is biased towards kicker and dd, u are to alpine. sq, u **** right i'm biased towards SS..spl? nope, that's why there's a solo x in my truck. IMO, teh rl-p is one of the cleanest, crispest and low playing subs one the market. easily competes in sq with the likes of the xxx and magd2, both of which i've heard, one of which i've owned, both of which costs more. matter of fact, teh prototype mag 15 is sitting on my floor as we speak.

so why the hostility? "so stand by what you say, dont make excuses for why it doesn't sound as good!" and "Whether you like it or not, the test was very subjective... you said it yourself... in a similar box the RL-P sounded bad. So live with it, in this box it sounds bad. "...live with what??? i've agreed with you on that..wtf more do you want from me?? i'm not jumping on the type r or s bandwagon, if that's what u want. why? because of my experience with type r's. sure, they weren't the new ones, and maybe they've changed. but until i hear them for myself....nope, ain't going to happen.

hell, i'm not even saying the type r can't sound better then the rl-p. all i am saying is that in the right box, the rl-p is one of the best soundign woofers u can buy, especially for the money. oh yeah..i did say that the rl-p is an sql woofer with a bias towards sq and the type r is a sql woofer with a bias towards spl...which is why it should be louder. does that mean the r won't sound as good as the rl-p? nope, depends upon enclosure...adn in your opinion, the type r (or s) might always sound better..who knows?

but slow down and chill out. read the posts completely and don't make generalizations about everybodies posts. i'm not here to flame u in anyway.

and quit being defensive....

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/peace.gif.2db28b618ed8d1964ebbe2f5021d2c39.gif

 

[Spkrman]

I'll some it up so far in... not done yet //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

The RL-P will be given its fair shot @ performing to its max. The test probably won't be "finished" until monday.

Something we can all agree on, the RL-P sounds bad in this box. Its on par with previous tests, yet I'm still "biased"? hmm... That that for what its worth and move on. I'm not one to *only* test the box in the "rec'd" boxes, I'll test it in anything and everything , as stated in the email above to mike.

I look forward to hearing the RL-P in the 2 cube 28hz box, contrary to popular belief I *want* the woof to perform well. I didn't get into the test with the idea of screwing over SS and the RL-P, its just an objective comparison.

I have a 1 cube sealed box floating around somewhere... probably in my giant stack of test boxes. I also have a 1.5 ported (aerports, tuning = what I want) box floating around... it may get a shot if the 2 cube doesn't do the RL-P justice.

Before you write this test off as BS...

not done yet //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[ss3079 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[Raven 10+ year member]

When buying a sub:

1. If Sub X is made to be ported, and you will be running sealed, avoid sub X.

2. Even if Sub X can handle more power than Sub Y, you shouldn't give a *#^$ unless you have the power to blow both.

I'd say go with the SE, they like sealed boxes.

 

[dbhittin 5,000+ posts]

this is awsome....to much read though

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

I wondered what would happen when the new Type R boner ran into the Rl-p boner on the street corner.

And my main problem with all of these "Type-R" comparisons is that people read this one test, in one vehicle with limited number of box alignments (at best) and try to come to conclusive judgments such as "Oh...Type-R pwns them all!!" as evidenced in this thread alone.

Gee that sounds -exactly- like what I was saying in mrray's xxx vs rl-p thread. It got me accused of just riding the bandwagon blah blah blah. Remember? So, should we assume that of you now?

BTW, for whomever said 2.5cubes was suppose to be the XXX's optimum enclosure volume (as was used in mrray's test), I dont know where you got that info, but none of RE's XXX subs are recommended in a 2.5cuft box. *shrug*

Lastly, over the years, Ive seen so many forum boner subs/speakers come and go. If I were to believe all the hype, each new boner model is the last one, blows away what everyone previously thought was the best to the point of making the old boner sub obsolete, usually in terms of dirty, weak or just plain not loud. Its funny to see a new sub come out, touted as so super clean and loud (best of both worlds), its just an amazing new piece of technology. But, then a new sub comes out 6 months later that supposedly puts it to shame. Over and over this happens. If we were believe it all, we would have reached some musical nirvana in subwoofer technology a long time ago. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[Johnny Drama 5,000+ posts]

How about pics?

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

Gee that sounds -exactly- like what I was saying in mrray's xxx vs rl-p thread. It got me accused of just riding the bandwagon blah blah blah. Remember? So, should we assume that of you now?

No, what got you accused of being on the RE bandwagon was the "Oh give it another 1000w and the XXX will smoke the Rl-p. Give it more power and it'll sound 10x better than the Rl-p and get way louder" type of talk. And no one here is saying that the Rl-p should "own" the Type-R (as you tried doing in Kent's thread)...or that any sub should "own" the Type-R.

But, lets not revisit that, again //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

 

[mrray13 10+ year member]

I'll some it up so far in... not done yet //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
The RL-P will be given its fair shot @ performing to its max. The test probably won't be "finished" until monday.

Something we can all agree on, the RL-P sounds bad in this box. Its on par with previous tests, yet I'm still "biased"? hmm... That that for what its worth and move on. I'm not one to *only* test the box in the "rec'd" boxes, I'll test it in anything and everything , as stated in the email above to mike.

I look forward to hearing the RL-P in the 2 cube 28hz box, contrary to popular belief I *want* the woof to perform well. I didn't get into the test with the idea of screwing over SS and the RL-P, its just an objective comparison.

I have a 1 cube sealed box floating around somewhere... probably in my giant stack of test boxes. I also have a 1.5 ported (aerports, tuning = what I want) box floating around... it may get a shot if the 2 cube doesn't do the RL-P justice.

Before you write this test off as BS...

not done yet //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

well, at least u've calmed down...lol...

i've never written this off as bs...just ur bias.....adn like posted above, we'll argue that point till no end.

and i actually approve of ur test, jsut like mine....one box, two subs, one vehicle, same power. teh only thing changing is the subs....adn in this case the rl-p lost..so be it.

i look forward to arguing with you more as the other review notes are typed..//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

audioholic....i pulled the 2.5ft^3 tuned to 28hz straight off re's website.....click on the tech tab, then enclosure, then single, well that's tuned to 30.....also, i notice that they now have 2.1ft^3 at 28hz under the sq/sql enclosures for the xxx. i believe that used to say 2.5at 28.....but of course, i mighta transposed those numbers....

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/peace.gif.2db28b618ed8d1964ebbe2f5021d2c39.gif

 

[Pistonsfan70 10+ year member]

It looks like the SE cannot handle that much power though (I think it's like 500 rms) Can it handle alot more than advertised?

 

[Spkrman]

How about pics?

of the secret type R wang box that does a 147 with one coil hooked up?

maybe after finals //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif