Leaderboard

OK.... so generally the lower the Fs, the larger the Vas? It seems the tighter the suspension, the higher the Fs, which would be a decreased Cms correct? So Vas would increase with more Sd obviously, and a higher Fs driver, that would lower Cms, decreases Vas. This all assumes that Mms is the same. As Cms decreases (suspension gets tighter), the Fs would increase and Vas decrease. And as Cms increases (suspension gets looser), Fs would decrease and Vas would increase. As you said, this assumes Mms (and Sd) remain constant. Not sure if it was simply a misstatement; But a lower Mms would increase Fs. It's mass on a spring. The more mass you have on the end of a spring, the slower it will resonant. I wouldn't go so far as to say that a lighter cone = lower Vd. Generally yes a decrease in Sd will be accompanied by a decrease in Mms assuming the same cone material and thickness is used. And a smaller Sd would yield a smaller Vd. But Mms is more than just the mass of the cone. Mms is the mass of the moving assembly (cone, coil, former, etc) including acoustic load. A driver with a long coil overhung motor could have a higher Mms than a driver of the same materials but using a short-coil motor topology like XBL^2 even though they may have the same Xmax. This is a case of not drawing too many conclusions from the "all things equal" scenario. Low Mms + Low Cms would = higher Fs (light mass on a tight spring = higher resonant frequency). Or, think of it this way...since both Mms and Cms are in the denominator, Fs will be inversely proportional to both Cms and Mms. If those go down, Fs will go up. If those go up, Fs will go down. Started off good, think you may have trailed off a little there towards the latter part

Get whichever you can afford. They're almost all quality batteries. I personally prefer XS Power.

I want to take short time aside to thank Don and his company Sound Deadener Showdown for making great products. He was VERY helpful on telling me what i need and did not try to sell me more the what was necessary to make an extra buck, i recommend his company products to anybody that really wants a quite ride. The products: 16 CLD Tiles 1 roll Extruded Butyl Rope 1 sheet 1/4" CCF The CLD Tiles went on my doors real nicely, they were easy to cut and shape with scissors.. but not so much with a box cutter lol The Extruded Butyl Rope can stretch FAAAAAAAAAAAAR as fuck! i took about a piece the size of my thumb and pulled it about 6-12 feet -- just for shits and giggles. The rope will NOT stick to ANYTHING with a dirty surface so make sure you have it clean! The 1/4" CCF is VERY NICE foam!! Has a nice thick compact feel to it, i put a piece of foam against my mouth to see if any air passes through... nope, that shit had my cheeks about to explode haha Overall i am very happy i picked this company for my baby!

To elaborate more, fructose HAS to go through the liver to digest if I remember biology right. We don't want that in this case, it would steal blood and insulin from the muscles. Also it will be much easier to convert to fat. I read one study where they found that some 30% of all fructose is turned into triglycerides. Though the liver is the main production plant for IGF I don't think it's nesicarry to send it fructose.

This is a loaded question. I honestly think that if you worked HARD then the sugar you take in will have an extreme low likely hood of being deposited as fat. This rest of this will deviate from the original goal a bit. That goal being performance increase and less pain and faster recovery time, but it does tie in. Unless you're doing a ketogenic type diet I am convinced that overall the sugar after a HARD and depleating work out will result in only a better overall body comp. The sugar in this instance is really only used to force insulin and IGF like compounds into play. They will help shuttle nutrients to the places they need to go. It has a verry low likely hood of converting to fat as the muscles you just work will have so much more blood flow. This is why body builder type guys are always worried about their "pump" and the timing of it. It's getting the max blood into that area as blood caries amino's and the materials to repair the muscles you just broke down. On a big picture scale building more muscle will always result in burning more fat than just trying to burn fat all the time. The more muscle you have the more calories you can burn while resting. Short term fat loss benefits would also be if you have more muscle you can train that much harder. Thus burning more every time you put the muscle to work again Longer term is that if you get sick or injured a larger muscle supply means more to break down and stay healthy/alive and you will have higher recovery performance.

Start with something insanely basic. 1 cup of this Bodybuilding.com - NOW Dextrose Powder - Corn Sugar! On sale now! With one scoop(provided in the tub) of this Bodybuilding.com - Syntrax Nectar - Best Tasting Protein! On sale now! That syntax looks good, and the dextrose is cheap, I may just try some out. I have some protein poweders building up at my place but they are cheap lol Nectrar tastes good. Like fruit. I always got apple myself. I used to take plain yogurt and add a scoop of the nectar product and that would be a really good breakfast. Then I got cheap as I was going through so much protein with 3 shakes a day so I switched to sci fit. It didn't taste half as good but it is dirt cheap. Thankfully I have always had an iron stomach and no protein ever bothered it. Some guys I knew could only have specific types that cost big $$$$. Is it bad to mix the protein powder with milk instead of water? I've found that it makes it taste 1,000 times better. I know it's lactose and not glucose, so a bit different sugar and perhaps not optimal? However, I've also found that it basically makes it impossible to do any more workout afterward because the milk just sits in my stomach and gives me a sideache. I'm not an advanced supplement guy, I only do the simple whey protein powder right after I lift. In this case, for post work out I don't like milk. It would add other vitamins/nutrients that you may not desire after a work out. For someone trying to learn what does and does not work, throwing in an extra variable isn't optimal. For me right after squats I would really dislike milk in my stomach unless it's ICE cold. The protein I linked called nectar tastes like fruit juice, it really does. It has a bit of after taste if you were to mix it alone, but not much at all. Also you will be adding even more sweetness and better mouth feel with the dextrose. That all said I have used milk as a post work out mixer just fine. Other than what I just mentioned there are a few things that tell me it's not "optimal" after a work out. A few reasons why..... lactose. Lactose doesn't spike insulin as much as dextrose. The higher the GI index the better. Lactose is 46. Dextrose is 100. Calcium. Calcium is important. Really important. I just don't think it is right after a work out. We were designed well by evolution. We need more calcium than any other mineral/vitamin(by volume), so if we take vitamins and calcium together there is a theory(studies too) that say calcium is "cherry picked" for digestion and other vitamins might be left out. In this case then the extra nutrients in milk might give show a larger or smaller benefit than if you left the milk out. Fat. Even skim milk has fat in it, and post work out, the less fat the better. Some people respond to it, but fat slows digestion. We want digestion as fast as possible. I know I'm nitpicking, but I have tried everything out there. For a starting point find out the perfect sugar:protein combo for your body and then modify it with different things.

All frequiencies are suppost to blend together as if 1 driver is playing everything.

Some good reading on subwoofer alignments! The Subwoofer DIY Page

Most of the time when someone farts around with a DMM trying "set thier gain" they have wasted time... Lol.. Then, if they think they have done it right, most of the time they have just given themselves a false sense of security and thier next thread is "My FI Q stopped working, how do I get my money back???" I am not trying to come off ass a smartass, it is just hard not to sound that way when you read this everyday on car audio forums for 10 years...... There doesn't need to be an article on this. The gain control sets the voltage gain of the amplifier. That's it. If you need more info, google "Amplifier Voltage Gain" there will be plenty of information there.... To be honest, these days at least, you don't even need a gain adjustment (as far as the sub amps are concerned) 99% of the time. It is just one more thing in the signal chain to foul up someone...... And if you are so running the ragged edge of power handling that if you ever so slightly drive your amplifier into clipping and this single event causes the slight increase in power to fry your sub, you have other problems and shouldn't blame this on snything but yourself...

Not cooling methods. Your best bet would be to download a box building program and look at impedance graphs in various enclosures for a given sub and see for yourself. But modeling up my sub, ported box size plays little part in maximum impedance rise. However, increasing tuning frequency increases the bump in impedance near the tuning frequency, but the upper impedance hump, 5-10 hz above tuning, decreases with increased tuning frequency. In a sealed box, impedance rise is higher in larger boxes and also moves lower in frequency as box size increases.

Take a look at the Box designs under the XCON technical section ... Sound Solutions Audio - 18" XCON Optimal Ported Enclosure

Back at you ::

Good to see ppl agreeing,lol. Anyways I voted everybody up +1 for helping in this topic. (execpt myself).

If you have winISD or some comparable box program, pull up the same sub in both a sealed and ported enclosure. The low frequencies that a sealed enclosure excels over a ported one are LOW. As in, sub-25 hz. Otherwise Orion is wrong, perceived loudness is definitely louder in ported boxes with 99% of music, because most of the "low" bass in songs is in the 30-50 hz range, where ported boxes bloat the frequency response and crush sealed boxes for SPL. Those frequencies are the ones usually perceived to be louder to humans.

Ugh... Here are some xcon sealed or ported - SSA Car Audio Forum 1 SSD 18" ported or 2 SSD 18" sealed - SSA Car Audio Forum Sealed or ported? - SSA Car Audio Forum sealed and ported? - SSA Car Audio Forum Want to know more. Use the search button

Just got me this little bad boy With one of these.

Well I guess a severe compromise is in order for right now. I can save money in the future and go the ID ultra route. So I guess I should either go passive or maybe a 7 or 8 midbass and a tweeter I can cross pretty low. Either way I want to mount in the kicks and angle towards the passenger and the other side angle at myself, unless having them on-axis to a point head high between the passenger and myself would work better. If I do a passive, I could do a nice two way, or three way with a larger midbass and keep it in the door, leaving the mid and tweet in the kick. Out of those choices, what is looking the best for more than average midbass and less harsh, natural highs? Most likely I guess I would be looking at an oversized soft dome tweeter possibly. Something like a Vifa 25XTBG60-04, Morel CAT 308, or even a Dayton RS28A (even though it has an aluminum dome I heard it is not harsh in an automotive environment), plus they all seem to have a relatively high power handling to make up for the lack in efficiency. For mids I would need something with response to about 60-70 Hz I am guessing which shouldnt be hard for an 8, but response above 3-4kHz while still providing more than average output may be a limiting factor. I am still open to the idea of multiple mids too. Thanks. Horns only go up in price from the IDs. Wayyyyyy up...think $2k apiece. A 3-way is hard to do...but...there is a Hertz 3-way passive kit out there (one for sale on DIYMA now). What's killing your options is needing to play low and high. That's what led me to the H Audios. They're only 6.5s but can play low and match with dang near any tweeter since they can go to 4kHz. I was going to go with a 3" full range from 400Hz on up but that is a lot of frequencies to play. Instead, I'm going to cross them high where the Ebonys leave off...probably 2k-ish. That avoids crossing in the vocal range which leads to other issues. Cancellation depends on what's happening. In home theater, for example, you can run subs facing each other in an infinite baffle manifold, and that cancellation can stop vibrations It's better to have to EQ "down" rather than "up," so if you can minimize a peak and shift it to a place where there's a dip, it's all good For a "loud" 3"er, gotta get one with Xmax, big-ish Vas, and higher Qts so it can go in a bigger enclosure. Most of these smaller ones only take 15w and have an Xmax of less than 3mm. There is a Fostex out there that does 6mm I think. Time for some education Zaph|Audio Know how to read FR graphs?

when I started working out I would drink amino acid sludge from twin lab. This stuff. LPP Protein Regular | Twinlab Or something close that probably tasted worse. It was basically acid, digestive envimes and milk protein.

There's much more to it than that. First, cone area and Xmax are multiplied to arrive at a parameter known as Vd, or volume displacement. This is the amount of linear air displacement the driver is capable of achieving. The higher the Vd, the higher linear output capabilities the driver has as a larger Vd means the driver is capable of displacing more air. Second, don't confuse Xmax with excursion. They are different. Excursion is how far the cone is physically moving. Xmax is the maximum amount of linear excursion the driver is capable of achieving. Excursion is the amount of movement, Xmax is the limit of how much of that movement is "linear". Generally a driver operating at Xmax will have ~10% THD. This is typically the highest amount of acceptable performance. As you exceed Xmax it's generally considered that the distortion performance would be at an unacceptable level (among other things). In sealed enclosures, Vd is one of the important factors along with alignment and the driver's parameters in determining output capabilities. All things equal, the driver with the higher Vd will have higher output. In reality, things are never equal. So you have to look at the response of the driver in a given alignment along with your environment and available power. Having a higher Vd isn't any good if you don't have the requisite power to reach Xmax or if the driver is in an alignment that begins to roll off at a high frequency. Having a higher Vd is only a capability of higher output; whether or not you will be able to realize that higher output is dependent upon several other factors. In terms of low frequency performance, you're required to increase displacement by a factor of 4 in order to maintain a given SPL level one octave lower in frequency. This means that you need to displace 4x the air at 25hz as you do at 50hz to maintain the same SPL level at both frequencies. You can see how having a higher Xmax could be beneficial as displacement requirements increase substantially in lower frequencies. In the low frequencies Vd can be very important as it can very much limit how much linear output your system will be able to achieve. Luckily in car audio we have substantial cabin gain in the low frequencies as well, so we can maintain SPL levels at lower frequencies without having to quadruple our displacement. A 12db gain at 25hz compared to 50hz, for example, is equivalent to quadrupling your displacement. So if you have a 12db gain at 25hz compared to 50hz in your vehicle, you've already accomplished the feat. Generally you want the most cone area you can reasonably place within your space, environment and enclosure requirements. Why? A driver with a larger cone area will displace a greater amount of air for a given excursion level. This means that it takes less excursion to reach a given SPL level with more cone area. This, in turn, means that the driver(s) would ideally be operating further within it's linear range at that SPL level which, ideally, reduces distortion. This ofcourse assumes the drivers are of similar distortion performance as distortion performance will vary based on driver designs. For example, one driver may still have less distortion at 15mm than another more poorly designed driver (from a distortion perspective) driver operating at 10mm. The reason Xmax "doesn't matter" for SPL is because 1) the subwoofers are generally "burped" near tuning where excursion is minimized and 2) Xmax is a linear parameter....people competing in SPL don't really care about having higher distortion due to possibly exceeding Xmax. But that doesn't mean Xmax is not important in ported enclosures. Xmax is not a limitation on how far the driver can physically move , only on how much of that movement is linear. Also, going back to what we said about power and alignment; Xmax does not tell you how much excursion you will have in your alignment with your power. And that is what ultimately determines how much output you will have from the enclosure, any enclosure. Vd is still "important" in ported enclosure as it still helps determine which driver has the capability for higher linear output, but you have to look at your power and alignment to determine which will ultimately have higher excursion, and hence output, in use. In a ported enclosure generally enclosure size and tuning are going to have a significant impact on low frequency response and excursion with regards to frequency; but that doesn't make Xmax irrelevant for daily listening. About a half octave above tuning, the enclosure will behave similarly to a sealed enclosure meaning excursion will increase to a point that is similar to that of a sealed enclosure. Xmax may become important in this region where it's possible to reach or exceed the Xmax of the driver. That post feels like it was one giant ramble.....hopefully it makes sense.

Send it in..it's not going to fix itself. You can go on the website and order a recone and go ahead and pay for the return shipping to you. It is under the recones section of the website. It's not going to be a warranty issue regardless as it is definitely classified under abuse...the warranty only covers manufacturing defect...which is what all warranty's cover. If you drive your brand new car into a wall at 70mph I don't think the dealership is going to give you a brand new car when you get that one towed in Send it in once you order the recone off of the website and select "Send in sub"..it will charge you for the return shipping and everything is automated that way. Fi Car Audio - Recones 5450 Cameron Street #102 Las Vegas, Nv 89118 When we get it in we'll get it reconed and back out to you, but you must change how you set everything up..otherwise you'll be right back here again with the same story.

I was thinking door if I went bigger, like an 8, but that is going to take a lot of modification to my door. I was thinking maybe two 7s or 6.5s in the door but don't know how that normally works out. I would be kind of concerned with the loss of detail in the upper freq, thats one of the reasons I was originally thinking a 3 way. I wouldn't mind untilizing a horn though, it would have to be a mini though, there isn't much space below my dash on the passenger side. I was hoping to have good staging as well, don't know how possible that is with this type of setup. Although, I have heard that horns really raise the soundstage, or maybe that they had better imaging, I can't remember which one. Would the full range provide the SPL that I am going for as well? imo the loss of detail is pretty minor as the focus is more on bringing the midbass up to par. if you feel your lacking anything significant you could easily integrate a small tweeter next to the mid but this is probably not needed. running multiple midbasses in the doors would work ok, i would not suggest the same for a midrange. there are good options for shallower ~8 inch options as well. i know nothing of horns.. someone else should be able to help there. good staging is completely possible. all in the install you should have no problem getting enough volume out of a fullrange.

if your serious about midbass i recommend a real nice 8 inch, peerless sls for example. currently im running 8in sls in my doors and a 3 inch full range on axis in the a-pillers. a set up like mine may be more favorable for you for afew reason. the first is that it allows you to choose a monster midbass and not have to worry about tweeter intergration because a full range can play down lower. another reason is that full range drivers are smaller and cost a bit less then using horns or some other exotic solutions. also a midrange, imo, is easy to work with since its crossed low, some where between 300-500 hz, unlike a midrange and tweeter which is crossed higher. downsides to this are some loss of upper freq. details, depending on driver choice this may not be to noticeable. another problem is finding a mounting location that isnt obtrusive. currently mine are mounted in pvc endcaps, which i found in the plumping hardware section, till i deside on a mounting angle and fiber glass them.

You lost the battle to pyschoacoustics. Thata fine I HAVENT BEEN THE FIRST NOR THE LAST! Take them and keep them. Lol, you CAN'T hear the difference on a sub no way no how. Whatever you say. I'm just a dumbass with a $15,000 collection of junk. Since I'm full of it I would Love for you to call up Steve Mantz and tell him that and see what his response is. Call us at the factory Monday-Thursday (Yes we work a 4 day week) at (805)-526-5315 PST Believe me I could give 2 shits whether you believe me or not! LOL, you do realize that Steve's new amps are class D full range. And I don't believe you at all. No way in hell you can hear the difference in a sub amp. If you really can go prove Richard Clark wrong and take home some money.

SO in other words you have your gain set to high and are wondering why your mids are bottoming out. IF ALL recordings in the WHOLE WORLD were recorded at the same level then maybe you would be good, but they are not. I say your gain should be real close to 1/6 gain bc that is roughly 100 watts rms w/ a 4 volt input on you 320 watt rms ARC amp. Your speakers are rated @ 100 watts rms, your amp is rated at 320 watts rms. Let me explain how I came up with this math, which is for reference only and not exact.

what a waste of time