Why are the ID subs priced more than IDQ series?

[Justinw303 10+ year member]

I was looking around the ID website and I looked at both the models. The ID looks much better and seems to be built way better, AND has more Xmax. Why is it considered a step below the IDQ?

Click to read more...

 

[CBFryman2 5,000+ posts]

HUh?

 

[CBFryman2 5,000+ posts]

Oh,

Xmax isnt the end all factor and look at the sensetivities... //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[blackgeltabs 5,000+ posts]

IDv3 has more xmax than the IDQ, they're a toss up depending on what music you listen to and how much space you have. Find the ID forums on thier website, it will answer every question you have about their products //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[req 5,000+ posts]

the idq's have less manufacturing than the ID's

the new backplate and such things on the ID look like the reason for the price difference. as far as sonic- the idq's have more sq and smaller boxes, while the id has more spl [while remaining on the sq side of things] and have quite small box requirements as well [though not as small as the idq iirc]

 

[Justinw303 10+ year member]

Sorry about the confusion -- I meant why are the IDQ's more than the ID's...

The ID's look way better built and have the better Xmax.

 

[req 5,000+ posts]

well the idqs are better speakers. who said somthing has to have more bling to be higher quality?

the id's are only 84db 1w\1m efficency, whilst the idq is 94 - that right there is most likely the number one reason.

i have a pair of IDQ15v2's and they are some of the best sounding speakers ive ever heard with only 600w to the pair.

 

[Justinw303 10+ year member]

That's cool, I wasn't trying to say bling is better, but usually only low level speakers have that simple basket design and I found it odd that the lesser sub had the better designed basket. But I guess looks can be deceiving. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[Mr. Opportunist 10+ year member]

thats just a plastic cover over the magnet on the id's btw, it can be removed which takes away some depth, i know this because they are going in my doors for mid bass duty next month //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

That's cool, I wasn't trying to say bling is better, but usually only low level speakers have that simple basket design and I found it odd that the lesser sub had the better designed basket. But I guess looks can be deceiving. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Look at it this way.....The IDQ's basket serves it functionally just fine. It's a cost effective, off-the-shelf basket that works (functionally) with the overall design of the subwoofer. Is it really worth a price increase on the subwoofer just to use a custom or fancier basket, when it wouldn't do a thing for the performance of the subwoofer?

 

[helotaxi 5,000+ posts]

the id's are only 84db 1w\1m efficency, whilst the idq is 94 - that right there is most likely the number one reason.

Have you ever looked at the standard for sensitivity measurements and really though about how useless that spec is when looking at subs?

What does efficiency at 1000 Hz matter when a speaker is only played below 150ish Hz?

In most cases the factors that lead to a high sensitivity are not factors that make for a good sub.