What are the Shallow-mount disadvantages?

[jdes 10+ year member]

With everything being shallower, where would you put the suspension and motor to allow more excursion?

My understanding was that the motor(magnet) was built around the voicecoil and integrated into the suspension(sort of). That way it the would maintain close to standard xmax. Some shallow mount are only 2- 3 inches shallower so I maybe some do and other don't??

 

[BASS_WARRIOR 10+ year member]

Ive used the pioneer shallow mount subs, and I was very impressed with them. Hit good, sounded good, and were only seeing 300w each. I've never heard the kenwoods tho.

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

With typical motor topologies Xmax is going to be taken down compared to a deeper sub. Most shallow mount subs are in the 6-9mm range concerning Xmax. However, the thing to keep in mind is that their competition (normal, low-end subs that are shallow-ish) have about the same amount of linear travel. As far as the box requirements, that's all in the design. You can have two shallow subs and have one require 2 ft^3 and another require 0.5^3 and have the same low end extension (2 ft^3 is stretching it a bit, but I'm just giving you an example). Just because it's shallow doesn't always mean that it requires less space than a normal subwoofer.
Clearance-wise, there is plenty of clearance for most sub-500 watt and power applications. With a shallow cone, the proper suspension, and a shallow motor design, you can end up with plenty of travel for the intended application.

What you're not going to get is 4" of travel and 2000 watts of power handling out of a sub that's 3.5" deep. But what you can end up with is a very good performing subwoofer that is 3.5-4" deep off of 200-400 watts.

That's what I thought. After doing some research, it seems that shallow mounts have a long way to go. To me, there are too many subs that are only 2 inches longer that are much more capable, using that same amount of air space for a lot cheaper.

I guess I'm disappointed in shallow mounts period as it seems that the only thing you are absolutely getting is the small reduction in air space used by the sub thus you can use a box 10-15% smaller. Or for under the seat applications. Just makes my choice easier.

 

[blazeplacid 10+ year member]

most people that want that are looking for a little bass anyways

most bass heads want big 15"s with a huge box and big amp

almost everyone one i have heard talk about shallow subs wants a 8 or 10 in a really small box under the seat or hidden somewhere

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

Well the important thing to keep in mind is the reverse: some shallow subs can perform the same as thier counterparts that are 1-2" deeper. People seem to enjoy their Pioneer shallow subs, and for people who need shallow subs (under or behind-seat, false floor, or weight/space saving applicaitons) they work extremely well. You have to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges. Comparing a shallow sub to a normal/deep sub isn't really fair. That's like saying that your Ferrari can out-perform an Evo. Not so much the case when you're talking about a gravel/dirt rally.

And if your applicaiton can utilize a shallower sub that may also be lighter than a conventional sub and it offers similar performance, why get the deeper/heavier sub? Of course I'm generalizing - I know that a lot of shallow subwoofers don't offer "normal" or deep subwoofer performance. But if they did, why choose the deeper option?

But I see your point regarding what you're saying - if a shallow sub doen't offer similar/better performance, then why go that route when you can afford the extra depth?

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

almost everyone one i have heard talk about shallow subs wants a 8 or 10 in a really small box under the seat or hidden somewhere

Most shallow subs are 8's or 10's. Not too many options are out there for shallow 12's. If the depth issue is taken care of (if depth is the biggest concern), why go for less cone area if the option for more cone area is available?

 

[spudracer326 10+ year member]

just a note though the rf's sound better then the kenwoods in room the kenwoods sound much better in car...also a note the rf's need a breakin time(20 hours) as well the kenwoods are pretty much good to go...also the rf,, dust caps are very fragile....easly crackable...

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

most people that want that are looking for a little bass anyways
most bass heads want big 15"s with a huge box and big amp

almost everyone one i have heard talk about shallow subs wants a 8 or 10 in a really small box under the seat or hidden somewhere

Yeah, that's a good point. Under the seats it's a good idea but even in 8" or 10", it seems most entry level subs which are way cheaper will do.

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

Ive used the pioneer shallow mount subs, and I was very impressed with them. Hit good, sounded good, and were only seeing 300w each. I've never heard the kenwoods tho.

Yeah, though those aren't highly regarded, they probably do hit pretty hard, but probably not as hard as there entry level 8" or 10" and definitely not as hard as the Premier's which aren't very highly touted either all for more money.

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

Well the important thing to keep in mind is the reverse: some shallow subs can perform the same as thier counterparts that are 1-2" deeper. People seem to enjoy their Pioneer shallow subs, and for people who need shallow subs (under or behind-seat, false floor, or weight/space saving applicaitons) they work extremely well. You have to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges. Comparing a shallow sub to a normal/deep sub isn't really fair. That's like saying that your Ferrari can out-perform an Evo. Not so much the case when you're talking about a gravel/dirt rally.
And if your applicaiton can utilize a shallower sub that may also be lighter than a conventional sub and it offers similar performance, why get the deeper/heavier sub? Of course I'm generalizing - I know that a lot of shallow subwoofers don't offer "normal" or deep subwoofer performance. But if they did, why choose the deeper option?

But I see your point regarding what you're saying - if a shallow sub doen't offer similar/better performance, then why go that route when you can afford the extra depth?

I understand your point. I agree that it is not apples to apples. Here's what I mean:

Conventional Pioneer 10" Sub

Shallow-mount 10" Sub

​

* Dual 4 ohms voice coils*

Single 4 ohm voice coil

​

* Power Handling:

* Power Handling:

​

o Peak: 1000 watts

o 1000 watts Peak

​

o 350 watts RMS

o 250 watts RMS

​

* Double-Stack Magnet

* Single-stack

​

* Freq. Response: 18 Hz - 600 Hz

* Freq. Response: 20 - 1000 Hz

​

* Sensitivity: 87 dB

* Sensitivity: 87 dB

​

* Mounting-depth: 5-5/8"

* Mounting Depth: 3"

​

* Sealed 0.65 - 1.25 cu. ft.

* Sealed 0.35 - .70 cu. Ft.

​

* Shipped weight 14lbs.

* Shipped weight 15lbs.

​

$49.99

$99.99

​

 

[jdes 10+ year member]

So you get:

about an extra .05-.25cu/ft.

The loss of a voice coil

100 RMS less

Lose deep bass

Gain an extra 1lbs.

For double the money!!

​

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

So you get:
about an extra .05-.25cu/ft.

The loss of a voice coil

100 RMS less

Lose deep bass

Gain an extra 1lbs.

For double the money!!

​

Your comparing apples to oranges. I can find a deeper conventional sub in a heartbeat that is inferior to the shallow sub you listed - in weight, "frequency response", power handling, voice coil options (or lack therof), etc.

And about your comparison:

Loss of a voice coil means nothing. DVC adds wiring flexibility - it doesn't make the sub play lower or sound better.

Frequency response - you're going off the mfg's specified frequency range. Actual in-car response is another story. So you're basing your comparison off of a frequency range that the mfg lists, not what it will/might actually do, and your also using the bottom end as the comparison...which is 2 Hz difference. If you can hear that difference, good for you. I also doubt the 18Hz sub you listed will play 18Hz as loud as it will play 50 Hz in-car. On the flip side of the coin, I doubt the shallow sub will play 20 Hz at the same level as 50 Hz.

Weight-wise, the extra wood it takes to make the larger box just negated the 1 lb of "weight savings" that you listed.

The enclosure volumes on the two subs you listed ranges from 0.3 to 0.5 cubes benefit for the shallow driver...not 0.05 to 0.25.

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

So you get:
about an extra .05-.25cu/ft.

The loss of a voice coil

100 RMS less

Lose deep bass

Gain an extra 1lbs.

For double the money!!

​

Now let's say you can only easily mount in the car of a depth of 5inches and can only fit a .5 cube box... The shallow mount will fit easier, play lower and possibly louder.

 

[Electrodynamic 10+ year member]

Let's take a look at a few things:

Pioneer's shallow subwoofer specs out like this:

# 12" 4-ohm shallow subwoofer

# carbon and glass fiber reinforced IMPP cone with woven-fiber surround

# Air Suspension Control System eliminates traditional spider structure

# cast aluminum basket

# strontium magnet

# power range: 50-350 watts RMS (1400 watts peak power)

# frequency response: 18-1000 Hz

# sensitivity: 88 dB

# mounting depth: 3-5/16"

# sealed box volume: 0.50-1.00 cu. ft.

# $199 from an authorized dealer

And the Boston Acoustics G212 specs out like this:

# 12" 4-ohm subwoofer

# copolymer woofer cone with foam surround

# RadialVent cooling for increased power handling

# power range: 75-300 watts RMS

# frequency response: 20-350 Hz

# sensitivity: 89.6 dB

# mounting depth: 7-1/16"

# sealed box volume: 1.00 cu. ft.

# $199 from an authorized dealer

Now, I chose two VERY popular woofers that are the exact same price. In this scenario, the flat sub out-performs the deeper subwoofer in "frequency response" (I keep putting that in quotes because mfg's put frequency responses out there for gullible people who think it's good...just like peak power ratings on subs and amplifiers), destroys it in mounting depth, operates in a smaller enclosure (half the size of the deeper subwoofer), handles more power, and has more descriptives on the cone //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif.

In my previous post I was saying how I could see your initial thoughts / mindset on shallow-vs-deep subwoofers, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree now.

 

[Hintzyboy 5,000+ posts]

what stores did you visit in houston? ive heard the excelons were real nice, but i guess not as nice as the rf huh. memphis has a shallow one comin out too, but i havent heard one yet.

The m-class is pretty much a shallow-mount already. My old 12s were in a box that was 6" deep including MDF. I think the 12 is only like 5 or 5.5" deep