What makes Kicker so bad?

[ChevyRidinLow]

Speaking of pioneer... these are also a one-of-a-kind design
6 1/2" sub like no other

This is a servo motor sub, 26 inch cone.

i heard these ****** lol. ever see the mythbusters episode where they put like a 60 inch cone on a piston connected to the driveshaft of a car? i think it did like 161.3 at 16hz lol. they had no clue what they were doing though.

 

[R34P3R 10+ year member]

i heard these ****** lol. ever see the mythbusters episode where they put like a 60 inch cone on a piston connected to the driveshaft of a car? i think it did like 161.3 at 16hz lol. they had no clue what they were doing though.

Name of said episode? I did just watch one recently where they tried to set off firearms with bass but failed, ultimately smoking an MTX showcar. Good times.

EDIT:Nvm. Episode 58-Shattering Subwoofer

The Episode I was talking about was 121-Thermite Vs. Ice

Google FTW

Oh and Kicker FTW. I beat the HELL out of my 12" L7's for 2 years and then ended up reselling them on Craigslist for more than I paid. That's one hell of a deal if you ask me.

 

[ChevyRidinLow]

Name of said episode? I did just watch one recently where they tried to set off firearms with bass but failed, ultimately smoking an MTX showcar. Good times.


Oh and Kicker FTW. I beat the HELL out of my 12" L7's for 2 years and then ended up reselling them on Craigslist for more than I paid. That's one hell of a deal if you ask me.

not sure the name just google mythbusters subwoofer you'll find it.

 

[Popwarhomie 5,000+ posts]

Kicker isnt that bad.. Its just there is much better out there. I went from a CVR 12" to a 12" L7 to 2 AQ HDC3s to 2 sundown SAs. Ive also had DS components and have KS components that im looking at replacing right now. For first setups kicker is fine but again there is much better out there. I like their amps though. When I sold my AQ3500D I put my little kicker 400.1 in for my temp setup and that little thing still impressed me.

 

[the727kid 10+ year member]

Love my Kicker IX Amps.

 

[RAM_Designs 5,000+ posts]

I love the older amps since you can grab them for pretty good prices, and I really like the SoloX's as well.

 

[wickedwitt 10+ year member]

Memphis developed the LVS in the late 90's... the dual stacked basket is still used today.Cerwin Vega revolutionized the SPL subwoofer with the Stroker... completely new designe and original tooling.

Pheonix Gold built the Cyclone... a subwoofer without the limitations of a voice coil.

Rockford Fogate DVC revolotionized the way we wire subwoofers today.

Aura built a 21" subwoofer without the added weight of a giant magnet by using a small neodium magnet instead.

These are just a few companies that pioneered a completely new design, or improved upon current designs already used.

I wasn't clear, but I kind of meant in the last 10 years, when there hasn't been any money in doing anything new. Companies did all kinds of stuff all the way up to the late 90's, because there was a huge market of people spending 5-10k on a system. I bet there's a 98% decrease in the amount of people who lay that kind of money into their stuff vs. people who do 'bass specials'.

 

[wickedwitt 10+ year member]

You are an idiot //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

Please stop posting.

Takes one to know one...

No one is putting a gun to your head to read my posts. Come listen to my setup. Then you can discredit me all you want. Or better yet, come prove me wrong; show me the light, oh wise one.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

 

[R34P3R 10+ year member]

Takes one to know one...
No one is putting a gun to your head to read my posts. Come listen to my setup. Then you can discredit me all you want. Or better yet, come prove me wrong; show me the light, oh wise one.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

Can I get on that waiting list? Would love to hear some X's. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

If you ever plan a trip up to our great state, let me know.

We have....um.....horses?

 

[wickedwitt 10+ year member]

Can I get on that waiting list? Would love to hear some X's. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gifIf you ever plan a trip up to our great state, let me know.

We have....um.....horses?

Will do, lol. If I take too long to head up that way, I may have to show you four of them walled on a Warhorse.

When I get some time next weekend I'll post a proper flex vid of these things on this thread. I was demoing it this weekend for some peeps, had a Chrysler Sebring soft top 2 parking spots over flapping:naughty:

 

[GM4WALLS 10+ year member]

I wasn't clear, but I kind of meant in the last 10 years, when there hasn't been any money in doing anything new. Companies did all kinds of stuff all the way up to the late 90's, because there was a huge market of people spending 5-10k on a system. I bet there's a 98% decrease in the amount of people who lay that kind of money into their stuff vs. people who do 'bass specials'.

The square subs are more than 10 years old. The LVS came out roughly the same time as the original square Kickers (give or take 6 months). The Pheonix Cyclone is much younger than that. Aluminum voice coils, woven tinsel leads, ect. are all realatively new technologies when looking at the grand scheme of things. To say Kicker is the only company, or even one of the only companies spending money to develop new technology in the last 10 years is simply not true. Better than that, I will ask you what new technology Kicker has developed in the last ten years?

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Kicker has moved in a direction that does not fit my tastes. Kicker has always been notorious for leaning more towards output oriented products than towards SQ ones. But this trend became too wide for me to really appreciate their 'top of the line' subs when they went to the square design.

Square subs. By now, most people here already understand the design problems inherent in square cones. The corners are further away from the t-joint, where the energy/motion from the voice coil transfers to the cone. And the centers of each flat side of the square is closer to the t-joint. This means uneven forces around the edge of the cone. This uneven force/stress will tend to want to make the cone's shape warp under high excursion. The way Kicker offset this problem was to add those huge ridges in the cones (thought they were just for looks?). But this fix adds to the moving mass of the driver.

Round cones' shape makes it completely immune to this problem.

But you say that price is payed in full by the added benefit of more cone area, right? A 12" square cone approaches the cone area of a 15" round cone. But, the square coned sub also requires a larger enclosure than the average round 12" sub. You dont just get that added cone for free, it comes at the cost of requiring a larger box, just like adding cone area to a round sub. So its my view that if I want a sub with the cone area of a 15, I'll just buy a round 15, not a 12" square.

Square cones really only have two, fairly obscure, true benefits over round cones. One is in the event you dont have the height on your baffle board to accommodate a 15" round, but you do have the 12" needed for the square driver (and also have the space required behind the driver to give it enough internal volume). And two, if you are building a wall in which you will literally butt one sub up against the other, squares fit together much more efficiently than circles do.

The CVX is a decent sub, but for years Ive hoped Kicker would come out with a really top notch round sub, and take emphasis off their square-cone-marketing mentality. I rememebr when Tracey from Kicker use to frequent this board, I thought I had him convinced to make that happen (and name it the audioholic series muhaha), but it just never happened.

 

[wickedwitt 10+ year member]

Kicker has moved in a direction that does not fit my tastes. Kicker has always been notorious for leaning more towards output oriented products than towards SQ ones. But this trend became too wide for me to really appreciate their 'top of the line' subs when they went to the square design.
Square subs. By now, most people here already understand the design problems inherent in square cones. The corners are further away from the t-joint, where the energy/motion from the voice coil transfers to the cone. And the centers of each flat side of the square is closer to the t-joint. This means uneven forces around the edge of the cone. This uneven force/stress will tend to want to make the cone's shape warp under high excursion. The way Kicker offset this problem was to add those huge ridges in the cones (thought they were just for looks?). But this fix adds to the moving mass of the driver.

Round cones' shape makes it completely immune to this problem.

But you say that price is payed in full by the added benefit of more cone area, right? A 12" square cone approaches the cone area of a 15" round cone. But, the square coned sub also requires a larger enclosure than the average round 12" sub. You dont just get that added cone for free, it comes at the cost of requiring a larger box, just like adding cone area to a round sub. So its my view that if I want a sub with the cone area of a 15, I'll just buy a round 15, not a 12" square.

Square cones really only have two, fairly obscure, true benefits over round cones. One is in the event you dont have the height on your baffle board to accommodate a 15" round, but you do have the 12" needed for the square driver (and also have the space required behind the driver to give it enough internal volume). And two, if you are building a wall in which you will literally butt one sub up against the other, squares fit together much more efficiently than circles do.

The CVX is a decent sub, but for years Ive hoped Kicker would come out with a really top notch round sub, and take emphasis off their square-cone-marketing mentality. I rememebr when Tracey from Kicker use to frequent this board, I thought I had him convinced to make that happen (and name it the audioholic series muhaha), but it just never happened.

Tracey Focht?

The thing I've noticed about the squares is that they still have the inherent qualities of the similar sized sub. In other words, while approaching the cone area of a 15, a square 12 still acts like a 12. The cones keep up with metal in ways a 15 or 18 never could. I don't care how impressive the sub, a 15 sub starts sounding muddy in large enclosures where the 12 squares are immune to this. The square cone was made exactly for all that stuff you said you disliked. It was made to be more efficient use of the box and cabin area. I've never seen my Xs warp like many many round subs have during vids on here (Skar vids are a prime example, they look like jello) Always knew the ridges were for cone stability, but what added weight they have for the cone, they make up for in a lighter surround material and different mechanics. A round surround has more inertia than the square surround equivalent, therefore inhibiting the motor just as much as the heavier square cone.

 

[GM4WALLS 10+ year member]

Kicker has moved in a direction that does not fit my tastes. Kicker has always been notorious for leaning more towards output oriented products than towards SQ ones. But this trend became too wide for me to really appreciate their 'top of the line' subs when they went to the square design.
Square subs. By now, most people here already understand the design problems inherent in square cones. The corners are further away from the t-joint, where the energy/motion from the voice coil transfers to the cone. And the centers of each flat side of the square is closer to the t-joint. This means uneven forces around the edge of the cone. This uneven force/stress will tend to want to make the cone's shape warp under high excursion. The way Kicker offset this problem was to add those huge ridges in the cones (thought they were just for looks?). But this fix adds to the moving mass of the driver.

Round cones' shape makes it completely immune to this problem.

But you say that price is payed in full by the added benefit of more cone area, right? A 12" square cone approaches the cone area of a 15" round cone. But, the square coned sub also requires a larger enclosure than the average round 12" sub. You dont just get that added cone for free, it comes at the cost of requiring a larger box, just like adding cone area to a round sub. So its my view that if I want a sub with the cone area of a 15, I'll just buy a round 15, not a 12" square.

Square cones really only have two, fairly obscure, true benefits over round cones. One is in the event you dont have the height on your baffle board to accommodate a 15" round, but you do have the 12" needed for the square driver (and also have the space required behind the driver to give it enough internal volume). And two, if you are building a wall in which you will literally butt one sub up against the other, squares fit together much more efficiently than circles do.

The CVX is a decent sub, but for years Ive hoped Kicker would come out with a really top notch round sub, and take emphasis off their square-cone-marketing mentality. I rememebr when Tracey from Kicker use to frequent this board, I thought I had him convinced to make that happen (and name it the audioholic series muhaha), but it just never happened.

This is the reason I stand 100% behind my statement that they haven't made a decent sounding sub since the round Solobaric. My first system way back in 1992 was a pair of Kicker 12" in my 280 ZX... I had em' for two weeks, when a guy from a local shop made me an offer. He would swap out my Kickers for a set of Cerwin Vega 12" subs in a straight up trade to prove I would like the Vegas better... the only stipulation was I let him put a banner across the windshield with his shops name on it. The MSRP was higher on the Vegas, so I went ahead with the deal. I loved the Cerwin Vegas, they were louder and cleaner then my Kickers, so I swapped them out. I watched him burn the Kickers in his parking lot in front of some customers. Ah, the good ol'days!

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Tracey Focht?
The thing I've noticed about the squares is that they still have the inherent qualities of the similar sized sub. In other words, while approaching the cone area of a 15, a square 12 still acts like a 12. The cones keep up with metal in ways a 15 or 18 never could. I don't care how impressive the sub, a 15 sub starts sounding muddy in large enclosures where the 12 squares are immune to this. The square cone was made exactly for all that stuff you said you disliked. It was made to be more efficient use of the box and cabin area. I've never seen my Xs warp like many many round subs have during vids on here (Skar vids are a prime example, they look like jello) Always knew the ridges were for cone stability, but what added weight they have for the cone, they make up for in a lighter surround material and different mechanics. A round surround has more inertia than the square surround equivalent, therefore inhibiting the motor just as much as the heavier square cone.

What property of a 12" cone makes it inherently better to keep up with rapid material? Explain your theory to me, so I can explain how its wrong.

Please explain how a round surround has more inertia than its square counterpart, when a 12" square has a considerably larger circumference than a 12" circle.

The conical shape is stronger than a square in this application, due to the explanation I provided above. Its simple geometry and a little bit of physics.