Jump to content


mrray13

RL-p vs XXX

Recommended Posts

ok folks...

 

 

here goes an impromto comparsion between a proven talked about sub, the re XXX against a relative newcomer, the soundsplinter RL-p

 

 

first things first..some side by side pics...

 

rlpvsxxx0011hy.jpg

 

head on, they look like relatives...

 

 

 

rlpvsxxx0029jv.jpg

 

 

from the side, the xxx is deeper..8 1/4" compared to the rl-p 6 5/8"

 

 

 

rlpvsxxx0031pj.jpg

 

 

a little different angle... xxx 12 spoke venuzula, rl-p 4 spoke..

 

 

 

rlpvsxxx0044sh.jpg

 

a close up of the xxx terminal's..while i like the set screw design and 8 gauge input, i don't like the unwoven tinsel leads. for a sub with this kinda potential, i would've thought woven tinsel leads would have been in order

 

 

rlpvsxxx0050zi.jpg

 

 

the SS's spring loaded terminals....used by many...i actually lie the set screws of the xxx better (mike, are u reading this?) but the SS has woven in tinsel leads..which i like better then the xxx's

 

 

rlpvsxxx0065jl.jpg

 

 

the beef...the xxx has the bling, while the SS has the bring it on look..personal taste here...i like the no chit attitude of the black rl-p, but the xxx would be sweet inverted!

 

 

 

rlpvsxxx0072xn.jpg

 

 

another view of the magneets...

 

 

 

rlpvsxxx0083id.jpg

 

 

in the box next to the hifonics...the weight of this thing is something..like 58pds..makes for an interesting time installing it by urself in an vertical enviroment...lol

 

 

rlpvsxxx0090ju.jpg

 

 

close up in the box....

 

 

 

 

review in a minute...lol

 

 

 

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:


Your circles look like something a HMO doctor would do to a boob job ....
^^^ speaking about cbfryman's jigsaw ability

 

 

 

 

owner of Thread posts 11111 & 12345

teamssaudio1jpg8nw.jpg

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great pics so far. Cant wait for the rest of the review.


eric77banner8kd.jpg

soundsplinter rl-p 15 (145.1 dB @ 45 hz), 2.5 cu ft @ 28 hz, eD nine.1, NEXT VRz 2.200, NEXT VRz 2.400, Coustic XM-6, eD eu-650 mids, CDT tw-24 tweets, pioneer deh-6300, cadence ZX651, edead, knukonceptz

ALL SOLD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i remember david stating that they don't use woven leads because they are more reliable in the long run as is.

 

al


Fact 1: 79,000,000 people are engaged in intercourse right now.

Fact 2: 58,000,000 are kissing.

Fact 3: 37,000,000 are relaxing after having sex .

Fact 4: 1 lonely bugger is reading forums...- You hang in there sunshine! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like the box glasswork. i wish i could to that but my amp is going to be way too big for that


http://www.BassHeadsENT.net for all your custom enclosure needs

Offering build service and expertise in the Tampa area as well as enclosures shipped nationwide!

Robin@BassHeadsENT.net

391874_337578072933336_156931164331362_1166774_1531439123_n.jpg

 

Check this thread for all the build logs being posted.

http://www.caraudio.com/forums/supporting-vendors-%2Anew%2A/550131-bass-heads-entertainment-buildlog-hotlinks-thread.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(mike, are u reading this?)

 

Yup lol!;) I know, not me but oh well

 

You have small feet, we have the same chair.

 

Those things are sexy!

 

Does your back hurt from that trunk install?


:confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok..

 

on to the review..

 

 

this is based soley on three opinions..mine, my wife's and a good friend...we have all three heard both woofers in this set up...

 

 

speaking of which..the setup..

 

1.25ft^3 sealed enclosure pushed by an hifonics nemesis nx750..doing 750wrms(rated at 1 ohm)..crossover on amp set to 100hz, no subsonic...everything else factory monsoon in a 2004 grand prix.

 

 

so away we go...

 

 

ok..so i played everything from outkast's speakerboxx intro to def lepperd's vault album..

 

 

these subs sound sweet..they both keep up quite well with very little overhang. they are fun to watch and nice to listen too.

 

as to which has better sq..it's definitely a draw...u won't be disappointed with either one.

 

 

as to which plays lower, in this application, the rl-p wins hands down. my wife's exact words," it's (the xxx) doesn't go as low. the seats don't shake as much"....that was the opinion expressed by all three of us. so the rl-p wins here.

 

 

spl...while i don't have a meter...they were very close here. my wife couldn't tell a difference while ryan and myself both thought the xxx was louder as it went up in the frequencies. the xxx wins here, but not by much..of course a mic would be needed to tell the whole truth.

 

 

power handling...both handle the hifonics exceptionaly well. both could handle more power. the xxx is rated for more 1600wrms vs the rl-p's 500wrms. so by rating the xxx wins. i don't have anything that produces anymore power at one ohm, so i can't get into which sub can handle the most.

 

 

overall...it's a tossup. the lighter weight of the rl-p makes it easier to handle and it does play lower in this application. the xxx, due to power rating, should have the potential to get uite a bit louder and in this case seemed to be louder with the power on hand. the xxx might just need a bigger box in this case even though re recommends .8ft^3. it just doesn't reach real low sealed, even in 1.25ft^3.

 

 

if i had to pick a winner, it would be the rl-p. price, easier to handle and sq bieng a touch better due to the fact that it does play lower gives it the edge..in this application. more room, more power, the xxx is definitely a contender..no disrespect intended for this sub. after a few days of breakin, i'll update this review.....

 

 

maybe not as indepth as everyone would like, but i'm lazy..lol

 

 

 

 

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:


Your circles look like something a HMO doctor would do to a boob job ....
^^^ speaking about cbfryman's jigsaw ability

 

 

 

 

owner of Thread posts 11111 & 12345

teamssaudio1jpg8nw.jpg

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup lol!;) I know, not me but oh well

 

You have small feet, we have the same chair.

 

Those things are sexy!

 

Does your back hurt from that trunk install?

 

 

 

hey, i have average feet...size 11... :hilariou:

 

 

i only paid $15 for my chair..staples screwd up and charged me for something else...i think it was supposed to be $90..

 

 

my feet are sexy??? or the chairs??:boobies: :handclap:

 

 

 

 

 

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:


Your circles look like something a HMO doctor would do to a boob job ....
^^^ speaking about cbfryman's jigsaw ability

 

 

 

 

owner of Thread posts 11111 & 12345

teamssaudio1jpg8nw.jpg

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have that chair too! :veryexci:


eric77banner8kd.jpg

soundsplinter rl-p 15 (145.1 dB @ 45 hz), 2.5 cu ft @ 28 hz, eD nine.1, NEXT VRz 2.200, NEXT VRz 2.400, Coustic XM-6, eD eu-650 mids, CDT tw-24 tweets, pioneer deh-6300, cadence ZX651, edead, knukonceptz

ALL SOLD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your feet most definatley;)

 

IIRC, 50Hz and down is where the eXeXeX comes alive. Probally needed more airspace too. Good review though.


:confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your feet most definatley;)

 

IIRC, 50Hz and down is where the eXeXeX comes alive. Probally needed more airspace too. Good review though.

 

 

the rl-p swamped the xxx down that low...but ur right..i believe a bigger box would've helped the xxx....but in this app, the rl-p just played lower.

 

and remember, re recommends .8ft^3, i'm using 1.25ft^3..so the xxx should've went low and it did, just not as well as the rl-p..

 

 

 

 

my feet thank u!!

 

 

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:


Your circles look like something a HMO doctor would do to a boob job ....
^^^ speaking about cbfryman's jigsaw ability

 

 

 

 

owner of Thread posts 11111 & 12345

teamssaudio1jpg8nw.jpg

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve seen RE recommend a sealed range of 0.8-1.2 ft.^3 for that sub… the volumes on their website are apparently not optimal. (Placed for marketing reasons, perhaps? I’m not sure what Q they provide.) Be sure to do a follow-up when you build a larger box. ;)

 

However, I can vouch for the low extension of the RL-p. Due to amp difficulties, I’m only able to send my 15” ~300W for now, and it’s still able to grab hold and shake my seats and my chest quite effectively with a 20Hz wave. The efficiency surprised me. :) And although I have no personal experience with it, I would imagine that the XXX can do the same, even if it requires a larger enclosure.

 

I have a question in regard to your SQ listening. Since the benefits of XBL^2 become more pronounced as excursion increases, did you analyze the "quality" of bass at higher volumes, when distortion would theoretically affect the SS sub more than the XXX? I’d be curious to know if you could detect a real-world difference in a sub with Adire’s Bl optimizations versus one without…

 

Also, did the XXX receive any type of break-in? Some agree and others dismiss the necessity, but the two subs should be put on as level a playing field as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I’ve seen RE recommend a sealed range of 0.8-1.2 ft.^3 for that sub… the volumes on their website are apparently not optimal. (Placed for marketing reasons, perhaps? I’m not sure what Q they provide.) Be sure to do a follow-up when you build a larger box. ;)

 

i have to agree. in this app, the xxx suffered trying to get low...sounded suffocated. i don't understand the recommending of .8ft^3 when it is definitely not in the subs best sq interests.

 

However, I can vouch for the low extension of the RL-p. Due to amp difficulties, I’m only able to send my 15” ~300W for now, and it’s still able to grab hold and shake my seats and my chest quite effectively with a 20Hz wave. The efficiency surprised me. :) And although I have no personal experience with it, I would imagine that the XXX can do the same, even if it requires a larger enclosure.

 

again, i agree......the rl-p does a wonderful job shaking everything in the car in this enclosure, while again, the xxx sounded like it was suffocating. i believe a larger box will cure this..or a ported one.

 

I have a question in regard to your SQ listening. Since the benefits of XBL^2 become more pronounced as excursion increases, did you analyze the "quality" of bass at higher volumes, when distortion would theoretically affect the SS sub more than the XXX? I’d be curious to know if you could detect a real-world difference in a sub with Adire’s Bl optimizations versus one without…

 

three different sets of ears...radio cranked...all agreed on two things...the rl-p played lower and both subs sound awesome everywhere else. in all honesty, other then the low end, there just isn't that much difference. the xxx seemed to play louder, to two of us, but that was it. u know, i would say the xxx was a little crisper at higher freqs, but it was muddier at lower ones...again, i'd say box dependant. to most people, like my wife, there is absolutely no difference in sq other then the rl-p playing lower in this application.

 

Also, did the XXX receive any type of break-in? Some agree and others dismiss the necessity, but the two subs should be put on as level a playing field as possible.

 

not yet, but like i stated above..i'm going to leave the xxx in the box for awhile and in a few days or so, update the review.

 

 

 

 

all in all..both are excellent subs....budget and space are going to be the biggest considerations...lower budget or tighter confines..take the rl-p

 

little more money, more room and more power..take the xxx

 

 

both are excellent subs..both are great to have. in the case of my wife not wanting to lose much trunk space, the xxx suffers from the small box and the rl-p wins.

 

 

i am going to be building a ported enclosure and testing both in my pickup..hehe

 

 

same power (750wrms @ 4ohm) though i might just wire to one ohm(though my amp isn't one ohm stable) and throw 3000wrms at them.....for just a minute..hehe

 

 

 

 

 

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:


Your circles look like something a HMO doctor would do to a boob job ....
^^^ speaking about cbfryman's jigsaw ability

 

 

 

 

owner of Thread posts 11111 & 12345

teamssaudio1jpg8nw.jpg

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, price wise...the rl-p has got it beat i'd say. BUT, put the XXX in say....2.5 cubes NET @29hz or so....and even with the 750 wrms it shoudl amaze ya. But even if you had the 1600wrms in the sealed i bet it would make a difference.

 

But, i own a 18XXX as of the moment, and i will soo own an SS subwoofer. I'm looking at a single rl-i 10 for my brother, and an rl-i 12 for myself in my dorm stereo setup!!! WOOT

 

NG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, price wise...the rl-p has got it beat i'd say. BUT, put the XXX in say....2.5 cubes NET @29hz or so....and even with the 750 wrms it shoudl amaze ya. But even if you had the 1600wrms in the sealed i bet it would make a difference.

 

But, i own a 18XXX as of the moment, and i will soo own an SS subwoofer. I'm looking at a single rl-i 10 for my brother, and an rl-i 12 for myself in my dorm stereo setup!!! WOOT

 

NG

 

i'll find out this upcoming week..i'm going to build that almsot exact enclosure...and put both subs in it...

 

 

again...price and confines....lower budget, smaller confines..buy the rl-p

 

more room, more money..buy the xxx

 

 

u really can't go wrong with either...

 

that's also why i stress this application....1.25ft^3 sealed with 750wrms..the rl-p is a better driver, maybe not by much, but it is. in a different application, the xxx might just win...i'll let ya know next week..lol :thumbupw::2thumbs:

 

 

 

 

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:


Your circles look like something a HMO doctor would do to a boob job ....
^^^ speaking about cbfryman's jigsaw ability

 

 

 

 

owner of Thread posts 11111 & 12345

teamssaudio1jpg8nw.jpg

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are comparing a 1600 watt sub and a 500 watt sub, running a 750 watt amp. Much closer to the optimum power range of the RL-p. Clearly you are underpowering the XXX. XXX's are not the most efficient drivers in the world, they want well over 1000 watts to do their thing properly.


No speaker, in the history of speakers, has ever been blown by too little power. Ever. I don't care what your friend told you, he's a dirty liar.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are comparing a 1600 watt sub and a 500 watt sub, running a 750 watt amp. Much closer to the optimum power range of the RL-p. Clearly you are underpowering the XXX. XXX's are not the most efficient drivers in the world, they want well over 1000 watts to do their thing properly.

 

 

well, i've got a memphis 1500d...i'll run it at one ohm and give it 3000wrms...whatcha think?

 

 

 

btw..how will extra power help it reach lower? louder yes, lower?? explain this to me...

 

 

 

 

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:


Your circles look like something a HMO doctor would do to a boob job ....
^^^ speaking about cbfryman's jigsaw ability

 

 

 

 

owner of Thread posts 11111 & 12345

teamssaudio1jpg8nw.jpg

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee :peace:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lower the freq, the more displacement it takes to reproduce at the same output level. Hence large excursion subs tend to be low end monsters, when powered sufficiently to push the cone/suspension properly.

 

The XXX has a very stiff suspension (part of why its not too efficient). It has tons of excursion/displacement, but it takes alot of power to get em wanging. How many people do you see running XXX's at less than 1000 watts? Not too many. Point is, considering the power specs of each driver, you are right in the SS's sweet spot (slightly overpowered), but not even in the ballpark for the XXX's needs, especially considering its a relatively small sealed box (despite RE's recommendations).

 

Put the right power to the XXX's then compare them. SQ will go up (as it will once the sub's suspension loosens up), low end extension will perform better, and output will obviously increase. Why would you even compare output's considering how underpowered the XXX was? You said you thought the XXX had the edge but required a mic to really decide. Again you seem to ignore you were drastically underpowering the XXX, and not the SS, while trying to compare output's? That doesn't make common sense to me. If you double or even triple the power to the XXX, and put it in its sweet spot as the RL-p is at the 750, output will be dramatically higher for the XXX. If its even close at 750, the xxx will stomp it at 1800-2500 watts (way out of the SS's range).

 

This is not intended to disrespect the RL-p, nor the tester and his test. Im just trying to put a bit of perspective on things here, as they are a bit slanted in the RL-p's favor. :)


No speaker, in the history of speakers, has ever been blown by too little power. Ever. I don't care what your friend told you, he's a dirty liar.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

say we stepped up power to 1500w to the XXX, and added a second RL-p(1500w to the pair) would the swept volume of the 2-15's blow away the XXX or would it be close?


NEED A BOX DESIGN? PM ME

 

HEAD UNIT

860mp

ACTIVE FRONT STAGE

JBL GTO75.4 II

RE 6.5

VIFA XT25 ring radiator 1"

SUB STAGE

ega 1400d

3HP FI

STOLEN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The lower the freq, the more displacement it takes to reproduce at the same output level. Hence large excursion subs tend to be low end monsters, when powered sufficiently to push the cone/suspension properly.

 

The XXX has a very stiff suspension (part of why its not too efficient). It has tons of excursion/displacement, but it takes alot of power to get em wanging. How many people do you see running XXX's at less than 1000 watts? Not too many. Point is, considering the power specs of each driver, you are right in the SS's sweet spot (slightly overpowered), but not even in the ballpark for the XXX's needs, especially considering its a relatively small sealed box (despite RE's recommendations).

 

Put the right power to the XXX's then compare them. SQ will go up (as it will once the sub's suspension loosens up), low end extension will perform better, and output will obviously increase. Why would you even compare output's considering how underpowered the XXX was? You said you thought the XXX had the edge but required a mic to really decide. Again you seem to ignore you were drastically underpowering the XXX, and not the SS, while trying to compare output's? That doesn't make common sense to me. If you double or even triple the power to the XXX, and put it in its sweet spot as the RL-p is at the 750, output will be dramatically higher for the XXX. If its even close at 750, the xxx will stomp it at 1800-2500 watts (way out of the SS's range).

 

This is not intended to disrespect the RL-p, nor the tester and his test. Im just trying to put a bit of perspective on things here, as they are a bit slanted in the RL-p's favor. :)

 

The 500w power rating is pretty conservative for the RL-p. It uses a 2.3" long 4 layer 3" diameter VC, so it's thermal powerhandling is honestly going to be just as good as the XXX's.

 

1 watt efficiency of the drivers is pretty close. The XXX does have the advantage for maximum linear output, but admittedly would require more power to reach that point.

 

The RL-p isn't going to be at xmax in that box until you dip well below 20Hz. The XXX is actually going to be at pretty similar excursion levels, it just has more excursion left to give.

 

Technically, the XXX should have slightly better extension, since it has a higher Qes and higher Mms, and consequently, a lower F3 for any given alignment.

 

People also tend to grossly overestimate the mechanical powerhandling of the XXX in many enclosures. The XXX would hit xmax slightly below 25Hz in that box if you gave it a full 1.5-1.6kW, so you can't just keep piling on power and expect to keep gaining, at least not below 30Hz.

 

Lastly, remember, the XXX 12 only has about 18% more displacement than the RL-p, so it's only capable of about 1dB more linear output, at most.

 

The XXX will have lower overall distortion throughout it's excursion range, but to say it will "kill" the RL-p in linear output is just blatantly false...


Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

- George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
say we stepped up power to 1500w to the XXX, and added a second RL-p(1500w to the pair) would the swept volume of the 2-15's blow away the XXX or would it be close?

 

The pair of RL-p's would have a LOT more output, and they'd have less distortion as well, since there would be a pair of them. You'd be looking at about 4.6L vs 2.8L, so the RL-ps would be capable of getting a bit over 2dB louder than the single XXX.


Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

- George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create a free account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's free & easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×