Jump to content
Lschevy

loudest $300 sub

Recommended Posts

That must be why in drop in tests, SA's are significantly louder, stay together, and sound better. Thanks for clearing that up.

Did you really just say drop in tests? The boxes needed for the AQ woofers varies ALOT to what a SA woofer would need, so if the box is optimized for the SA then of course it would do better.

Just made your self look ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sound level testing is (should be) done at a level loud enough to accurately reproduce the source material. Considering they are listening to real music and not commercial pop/rap/etc, the subbass actually extends very low in frequency. So while the bass may not be "loud" by peak SPL standards, the excursion required to reach the required listening level can actually be fairly significant....certainly significantly greater than 1mm for anyone running one or two typical sized subwoofers (as both Biggs and Eldridge did. Biggs had a single 10L7 in the dash, Eldridge used a pair of 12L7's sealed). There's a difference between 120db at 60hz and 120db at 20hz.

Yes, there is a difference, but there is also things like cabin gain that promote SPL gain on lower frequencies. The point being made is that in no instance is the sub being maxed out, or even close to it. Most of where your bad sound comes from where the BL curve tapers off or other components like spiders and surrounds are stressed. This is assuming the cone is stable.

Tapering of the BL curve depends on the driver. Just because the driver isn't operating at Xmax doesn't mean the driver is linear in all regards.

But, take a vehicle like Biggs' car. With a single 10L7 you would need all of it's Xmax to reach 120db at 20hz, that's with accounting for cabin gain. You are argue 120db isn't loud....but that doesn't mean the sub isn't working hard.

Also keep in mind both Biggs and Eldridge were competing in the top-tier classes at large national events and world finals. They were competing against what would ideally be the best sounding cars in the competition format, and these are typically not the type of events where a judge perceives too much bass from subs that aren't on and whatnot. Sounding "good" won't necessarily be good enough at that level of competition. That said, anyone that's seen me post knows I don't put a lot of faith into competition results. But the fact that they were able to be used in winning systems at that level of competition at the least points to the fact that they don't sound bad, unlike the underlined statement in the quote up there indicated.

Have you competed in SQ or been an SQ judge yourself? I've done both, and seen psycho-acoustics at work. SQ is purely subjective, and I've seen people get scored because of what equipment they ran before they even turned it on. The same applies for who it is. If you're known for sounding good, it immediately sounds better. I tell people to never show what equipment they are running if possible, and if they have to, wait till the judge is done with the score sheet.

You are doing nothing but speculating here. I can't respond to speculation.

And true "SQ" is not purely subjective. Sound quality is accuracy to the source material and/or original event. This is, ideally, non-subjective. Personal preference is entirely subjective. What one finds pleasing is different than what might technically be more accurate. SQ competitions fall somewhere between the two, how close to one side or the other depends on a lot of factors. Hence the reason I don't put much weight on them.

You say not it's hard to make a sub sound good at 120db....I'd say it's impossible to make a sub sound good at the high SPL levels most people on the forums use to judge/compare the "sound quality" of a subwoofer (and more times than not it's in a fart-cannon of an enclosure). One sub may agree with your personal subjective preference while another may not.....but neither of them are going to sound good at those levels.

At a certain point, nothing sounds good. It's simply too loud for human ears to sound as good as it did at a lower level. In fact, humans often perceive a dirty or clipped sound as louder because it's more harsh on the ear, which equates to what something too loud does. If it's crystal clear, you won't be able to tell how loud it is till you have a reference point. This seldom occurs with bass because of the amount of pressure involved on the ear drum.

Umm....okay? Was that your lengthy way of agreeing with me?

I'm still not sure what your point in this thread is. Instead of responding to my posts....just tell me your point. You appeared to start off arguing that just because a vehicle had L7's it doesn't mean they were used. I tell you they were. You come back with "Well yeah, but it's so quiet everything sounds good." Not disagreeing with me that they can be made to sound not bad, but "qualifying" it. You still don't seem to be disagreeing with me, but are still arguing some point with me....I just can't figure out what that point actually is.

I guess if you can find a way to articulate the purpose of your posts here, please do so. Otherwise this whole endeavor is becoming extremely useless as we seem to be circling in agreement with you making some pretty unclear points along the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you really just say drop in tests? The boxes needed for the AQ woofers varies ALOT to what a SA woofer would need, so if the box is optimized for the SA then of course it would do better.

Just made your self look ignorant.

On the contrary, you just made yourself look ignorant. You're assuming people went from SA's TO AQ's. This was not the case. SA's were put into the AQ boxes. So I guess the SA's are WAY better because they do better in the wrong box when the AQ as an optimal box.

Tapering of the BL curve depends on the driver. Just because the driver isn't operating at Xmax doesn't mean the driver is linear in all regards.

But, take a vehicle like Biggs' car. With a single 10L7 you would need all of it's Xmax to reach 120db at 20hz, that's with accounting for cabin gain. You are argue 120db isn't loud....but that doesn't mean the sub isn't working hard.

Thanks for emphasizing what I just said. I said the BL curve dapers, I didn't say it doesn't taper TILL full excursion. If it did, it would be something like XBL^2 or a really overhung design. Last I checked, the only part of judging that happens at 20 hz is RTA, which isn't anybody in the car, and can sound like total ass and doesn't matter because it's RTA.

And true "SQ" is not purely subjective. Sound quality is accuracy to the source material and/or original event. This is, ideally, non-subjective. Personal preference is entirely subjective. What one finds pleasing is different than what might technically be more accurate. SQ competitions fall somewhere between the two, how close to one side or the other depends on a lot of factors. Hence the reason I don't put much weight on them.

You just said exactly why SQ is subjective. 1 person can think something is more accurate than another, which is their opinion..... which is subjective. If it wasn't subjective, everybody would score the same at every show with every judge if the system never changed. One year at SBN 1 judges scores were thrown out all together. Why? Because there were 2 or 3 guys that scored approximately 50% lower than the other 2 judges. The judge didnt like those people, so he scored them low. Does that happen in SPL? No. Why? Because SPL isn't subjective, what it does is what it does. In a subjective format, you can fall victim to psycho-acoustics, a poor judge, politics, etc.

Umm....okay? Was that your lengthy way of agreeing with me?

No, you said L7's sound good, I said at a certain point nothing sounds good and at low levels it's not difficult to make a sub sound good.

I'm still not sure what your point in this thread is. Instead of responding to my posts....just tell me your point. You appeared to start off arguing that just because a vehicle had L7's it doesn't mean they were used. I tell you they were. You come back with "Well yeah, but it's so quiet everything sounds good." Not disagreeing with me that they can be made to sound not bad, but "qualifying" it. You still don't seem to be disagreeing with me, but are still arguing some point with me....I just can't figure out what that point actually is.

I guess if you can find a way to articulate the purpose of your posts here, please do so. Otherwise this whole endeavor is becoming extremely useless as we seem to be circling in agreement with you making some pretty unclear points along the way.

You should try reading for content, not context. If you can't understand when subs are and are not used, and at what point things go bad, I can't help ya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you really just say drop in tests? The boxes needed for the AQ woofers varies ALOT to what a SA woofer would need, so if the box is optimized for the SA then of course it would do better.

Just made your self look ignorant.

On the contrary, you just made yourself look ignorant. You're assuming people went from SA's TO AQ's. This was not the case. SA's were put into the AQ boxes. So I guess the SA's are WAY better because they do better in the wrong box when the AQ as an optimal box.

Actually that's quite an accomplishment, way to prove him right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you really just say drop in tests? The boxes needed for the AQ woofers varies ALOT to what a SA woofer would need, so if the box is optimized for the SA then of course it would do better.

Just made your self look ignorant.

On the contrary, you just made yourself look ignorant. You're assuming people went from SA's TO AQ's. This was not the case. SA's were put into the AQ boxes. So I guess the SA's are WAY better because they do better in the wrong box when the AQ as an optimal box.

Actually that's quite an accomplishment, way to prove him right.

So he's saying the box was better for the SA's, showing the people didn't know how to make the AQ's work right.

This guy is a fuck nut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tapering of the BL curve depends on the driver. Just because the driver isn't operating at Xmax doesn't mean the driver is linear in all regards.

But, take a vehicle like Biggs' car. With a single 10L7 you would need all of it's Xmax to reach 120db at 20hz, that's with accounting for cabin gain. You are argue 120db isn't loud....but that doesn't mean the sub isn't working hard.

Thanks for emphasizing what I just said. I said the BL curve dapers, I didn't say it doesn't taper TILL full excursion.

Emphasizing what you just said? What the hell are you talking about? You said: "The point being made is that in no instance is the sub being maxed out, or even close to it. Most of where your bad sound comes from where the BL curve tapers off or other components like spiders and surrounds are stressed."

I pointed out that even if the sub is not being "maxed out", there will still be non-linearities introduced as most BL/Cms curves taper long before the sub is "maxed out" (your comment implies otherwise).....and then provided an example of a scenario where the sub would, in fact, be "maxed out". Neither of my statements remotely support yours. Now you're just making stuff up.

Let's go back and look at this convo from the beginning (paraphrasing):

Bassahaulic: The SQ champion used L7's

You: Yeah but that doesn't mean they were used for SQ judging

Me: Yes they were

You: Yeah but subs only move 1mm since the peak SPL is so low, so everything sounds good

Me: Just because peak SPL is low doesn't mean the sub isn't working hard

You: Yeah but things don't sound bad until the sub is maxed and the BL tapers off,and none of these subs are maxed out

Me: The linearity of a driver can degrade long before Xmax is reached and the sub is "maxed out", and here's an example of a sub that would be operating at or near Xmax

You: Thanks for proving my point.

What ?! How does that make sense to you?

Last I checked, the only part of judging that happens at 20 hz is RTA, which isn't anybody in the car, and can sound like total ass and doesn't matter because it's RTA.

And you would be wrong. Songs on the IASCA CD have musical content used during the SQ judging portion that drop into the 20hz region and below (Planet Kryptonite has an 18hz organ, for example).

I guess you need to go back and check again.

And true "SQ" is not purely subjective. Sound quality is accuracy to the source material and/or original event. This is, ideally, non-subjective. Personal preference is entirely subjective. What one finds pleasing is different than what might technically be more accurate. SQ competitions fall somewhere between the two, how close to one side or the other depends on a lot of factors. Hence the reason I don't put much weight on them.

You just said exactly why SQ is subjective. 1 person can think something is more accurate than another, which is their opinion..... which is subjective. If it wasn't subjective, everybody would score the same at every show with every judge if the system never changed. One year at SBN 1 judges scores were thrown out all together. Why? Because there were 2 or 3 guys that scored approximately 50% lower than the other 2 judges. The judge didnt like those people, so he scored them low. Does that happen in SPL? No. Why? Because SPL isn't subjective, what it does is what it does. In a subjective format, you can fall victim to psycho-acoustics, a poor judge, politics, etc.

Ok. I'll make this really simple. Prove with actual substantive evidence that the subbass of any of the winning vehicles that used L7 was either inferior to the other vehicles, or that there was bias in the judging. Stop talking and prove it. Othewise you're just talking out of your ass. You can't, so stop trying.

I'm not saying that the fact they were used makes them the best subbass drivers. Rather, simply that they at least don't sound bad.

Umm....okay? Was that your lengthy way of agreeing with me?

No, you said L7's sound good, I said at a certain point nothing sounds good and at low levels it's not difficult to make a sub sound good.

Go back and reread the convo. Let's start from here:

In Biggs vehicle the 10L7 would have needed to operate at or near Xmax, and it was a winning competition vehicle. (Your previous statements were that subs don't work very hard in these installs [proven wrong], and that things don't start going bad until Xmax where the sub is stressed therefore they all sound good [not quite]). So, I just provided an example contradictory to your "points".

Your turn.

You should try reading for content, not context. If you can't understand when subs are and are not used, and at what point things go bad, I can't help ya.

You've yet to provide any useful content, so it's extremely difficult to realize what point you are trying to make. I fully understand when subs are or are not used, and fully understand at what point things go bad. From this conversation, I can't say the same for you. You started out claiming the L7's weren't used. I pointed out they were. You claim they are so quiet that everything sounds good (and claim only 1mm of excursion is necessary....LOL), I point out that subs work a lot harder in these installs than you are trying to portray.

So, let me rephrase. If you can find a way to provide some useful content, please do so. Because so far.....you haven't.

I can't believe I just had a 2 page discussion with someone over the simple point.....L7's don't necessarily sound bad :suicide-santa:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tapering of the BL curve depends on the driver. Just because the driver isn't operating at Xmax doesn't mean the driver is linear in all regards.

But, take a vehicle like Biggs' car. With a single 10L7 you would need all of it's Xmax to reach 120db at 20hz, that's with accounting for cabin gain. You are argue 120db isn't loud....but that doesn't mean the sub isn't working hard.

Thanks for emphasizing what I just said. I said the BL curve dapers, I didn't say it doesn't taper TILL full excursion.

Emphasizing what you just said? What the hell are you talking about? You said: "The point being made is that in no instance is the sub being maxed out, or even close to it. Most of where your bad sound comes from where the BL curve tapers off or other components like spiders and surrounds are stressed."

I pointed out that even if the sub is not being "maxed out", there will still be non-linearities introduced as most BL/Cms curves taper long before the sub is "maxed out" (your comment implies otherwise).....and then provided an example of a scenario where the sub would, in fact, be "maxed out". Neither of my statements remotely support yours. Now you're just making stuff up.

Let's go back and look at this convo from the beginning (paraphrasing):

Bassahaulic: The SQ champion used L7's

You: Yeah but that doesn't mean they were used for SQ judging

Me: Yes they were

You: Yeah but subs only move 1mm since the peak SPL is so low, so everything sounds good

Me: Just because peak SPL is low doesn't mean the sub isn't working hard

You: Yeah but things don't sound bad until the sub is maxed and the BL tapers off,and none of these subs are maxed out

Me: The linearity of a driver can degrade long before Xmax is reached and the sub is "maxed out", and here's an example of a sub that would be operating at or near Xmax

You: Thanks for proving my point.

What ?! How does that make sense to you?

Last I checked, the only part of judging that happens at 20 hz is RTA, which isn't anybody in the car, and can sound like total ass and doesn't matter because it's RTA.

And you would be wrong. Songs on the IASCA CD have musical content used during the SQ judging portion that drop into the 20hz region and below (Planet Kryptonite has an 18hz organ, for example).

I guess you need to go back and check again.

And true "SQ" is not purely subjective. Sound quality is accuracy to the source material and/or original event. This is, ideally, non-subjective. Personal preference is entirely subjective. What one finds pleasing is different than what might technically be more accurate. SQ competitions fall somewhere between the two, how close to one side or the other depends on a lot of factors. Hence the reason I don't put much weight on them.

You just said exactly why SQ is subjective. 1 person can think something is more accurate than another, which is their opinion..... which is subjective. If it wasn't subjective, everybody would score the same at every show with every judge if the system never changed. One year at SBN 1 judges scores were thrown out all together. Why? Because there were 2 or 3 guys that scored approximately 50% lower than the other 2 judges. The judge didnt like those people, so he scored them low. Does that happen in SPL? No. Why? Because SPL isn't subjective, what it does is what it does. In a subjective format, you can fall victim to psycho-acoustics, a poor judge, politics, etc.

Ok. I'll make this really simple. Prove with actual substantive evidence that the subbass of any of the winning vehicles that used L7 was either inferior to the other vehicles, or that there was bias in the judging. Stop talking and prove it. Othewise you're just talking out of your ass. You can't, so stop trying.

I'm not saying that the fact they were used makes them the best subbass drivers. Rather, simply that they at least don't sound bad.

Umm....okay? Was that your lengthy way of agreeing with me?

No, you said L7's sound good, I said at a certain point nothing sounds good and at low levels it's not difficult to make a sub sound good.

Go back and reread the convo. Let's start from here:

In Biggs vehicle the 10L7 would have needed to operate at or near Xmax, and it was a winning competition vehicle. (Your previous statements were that subs don't work very hard in these installs [proven wrong], and that things don't start going bad until Xmax where the sub is stressed therefore they all sound good [not quite]). So, I just provided an example contradictory to your "points".

Your turn.

You should try reading for content, not context. If you can't understand when subs are and are not used, and at what point things go bad, I can't help ya.

You've yet to provide any useful content, so it's extremely difficult to realize what point you are trying to make. I fully understand when subs are or are not used, and fully understand at what point things go bad. From this conversation, I can't say the same for you. You started out claiming the L7's weren't used. I pointed out they were. You claim they are so quiet that everything sounds good (and claim only 1mm of excursion is necessary....LOL), I point out that subs work a lot harder in these installs than you are trying to portray.

So, let me rephrase. If you can find a way to provide some useful content, please do so. Because so far.....you haven't.

I can't believe I just had a 2 page discussion with someone over the simple point.....L7's don't necessarily sound bad :suicide-santa:

Rick rolled? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. It looks like your question started a shit storm. Like everyone said, it's your install and power etc. that determine how loud, not just the sub. That being said, I'm a pretty big fan of my Fi bl 12. I payed $ 284 for it, brand new

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So he's saying the box was better for the SA's, showing the people didn't know how to make the AQ's work right.

This guy is a fuck nut.

So when the product you like gets outperformed by something else, it's the owners fault for not making a better box? It's not possible that another product actually is better?

Emphasizing what you just said? What the hell are you talking about? You said: "The point being made is that in no instance is the sub being maxed out, or even close to it. Most of where your bad sound comes from where the BL curve tapers off or other components like spiders and surrounds are stressed."

I pointed out that even if the sub is not being "maxed out", there will still be non-linearities introduced as most BL/Cms curves taper long before the sub is "maxed out" (your comment implies otherwise).....and then provided an example of a scenario where the sub would, in fact, be "maxed out". Neither of my statements remotely support yours. Now you're just making stuff up.

Re-read what I typed. There is a critical word in there, "or", meaning things could be stressed and there is an alternative scenario. That scenario was the BL curve and its non-linearities. I'm not making anything up, you're selectively reading.

Let's go back and look at this convo from the beginning (paraphrasing):

Bassahaulic: The SQ champion used L7's

You: Yeah but that doesn't mean they were used for SQ judging

Me: Yes they were

You: Yeah but subs only move 1mm since the peak SPL is so low, so everything sounds good

Me: Just because peak SPL is low doesn't mean the sub isn't working hard

You: Yeah but things don't sound bad until the sub is maxed and the BL tapers off,and none of these subs are maxed out

Me: The linearity of a driver can degrade long before Xmax is reached and the sub is "maxed out", and here's an example of a sub that would be operating at or near Xmax

You: Thanks for proving my point.

What ?! How does that make sense to you?

It would make sense if you paraphrased correctly. You're replacing "or" with "and" which COMPLETELY changes the meaning. You should change your username to Fox News.

Last I checked, the only part of judging that happens at 20 hz is RTA, which isn't anybody in the car, and can sound like total ass and doesn't matter because it's RTA.

And you would be wrong. Songs on the IASCA CD have musical content used during the SQ judging portion that drop into the 20hz region and below (Planet Kryptonite has an 18hz organ, for example).

I guess you need to go back and check again.

Oh thats right, IASCA is the only SQ organization in the world, my mistake.

Ok. I'll make this really simple. Prove with actual substantive evidence that the subbass of any of the winning vehicles that used L7 was either inferior to the other vehicles, or that there was bias in the judging. Stop talking and prove it. Othewise you're just talking out of your ass. You can't, so stop trying.

I'm not saying that the fact they were used makes them the best subbass drivers. Rather, simply that they at least don't sound bad.

Prove it wasn't, that goes both ways. When it's proven a judge is biased, they aren't judges anymore. No matter how you think they don't sound bad, there isn't a single consumer that uses them in that fashion. No kid buys a pair of L7 12's and goes "I'm gonna do my best to not go over 120 dB".

Go back and reread the convo. Let's start from here:

In Biggs vehicle the 10L7 would have needed to operate at or near Xmax, and it was a winning competition vehicle. (Your previous statements were that subs don't work very hard in these installs [proven wrong], and that things don't start going bad until Xmax where the sub is stressed therefore they all sound good [not quite]). So, I just provided an example contradictory to your "points".

Your turn.

Where's your video of the sub working in those cars? Where's your Klippel data for that sub? Where's your literacy test proving you know the difference between "or" and "and"? You haven't proven they "work hard" or that you comprehend sentences I type. You've proven nothing but how to talk about an install you don't know about.

You've yet to provide any useful content, so it's extremely difficult to realize what point you are trying to make. I fully understand when subs are or are not used, and fully understand at what point things go bad. From this conversation, I can't say the same for you. You started out claiming the L7's weren't used. I pointed out they were. You claim they are so quiet that everything sounds good (and claim only 1mm of excursion is necessary....LOL), I point out that subs work a lot harder in these installs than you are trying to portray.

So, let me rephrase. If you can find a way to provide some useful content, please do so. Because so far.....you haven't.

I can't believe I just had a 2 page discussion with someone over the simple point.....L7's don't necessarily sound bad :suicide-santa:

I've provided real information. When the owner of the car tells me "those don't play during judging" I'm gonna say they're right. When are you going to post your proof the subs are used AND move more than a tiny bit? You're the SQ messiah, so back it up, don't just talk about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this got waaaay offtopic .

a good woofer is a good woofer , dont care who build it .

for sq : an enclosure that allows the woofer to extend down sufficiantly and as flat as possible ,terminate the cars peak resonance without eq' ing as much as possible ,

getting your car free of any resonances that make you locate the sub , if you can't fully accomplish that, mount the woofer up front .

sounds easy ?

just eq'ing everything out will make your system sound like shit so it comes down to craftsmanship , good ears , time, a good rta and actually knowing how the music in question is supposed to sound like.

that extra 100 bucks spend on a woofer really is secondary

did the topicstarter find his woofer ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like to say it is mainly install dependent.

Please can we get this back on topic.

And for the L7 thing: "To each his own." -What may sound "good" to one person, may sound "bad" to another. It is all in the listener's ear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-read what I typed. There is a critical word in there, "or", meaning things could be stressed and there is an alternative scenario. That scenario was the BL curve and its non-linearities. I'm not making anything up, you're selectively reading.

You are arguing semantics, not content.

It would make sense if you paraphrased correctly. You're replacing "or" with "and" which COMPLETELY changes the meaning. You should change your username to Fox News.

You are arguing semantics, not content.

Oh thats right, IASCA is the only SQ organization in the world, my mistake.

Oh that's right, they competed in IASCA. So I guess it's relevant to consider the source material for a competition organization in which they competed.

Prove it wasn't, that goes both ways. When it's proven a judge is biased, they aren't judges anymore. No matter how you think they don't sound bad, there isn't a single consumer that uses them in that fashion.

The competition results are the only "proof" I need to provide for this part of the discussion. If you think the results are askew, it's your task to prove (not speculate) how and why.

No kid buys a pair of L7 12's and goes "I'm gonna do my best to not go over 120 dB".

The original comment was that there is no way to make a L7 sound good. Apparently there is, as people have done it.

You are trying to argue something different. Though there is no saying that the L7 wouldn't still have provided acceptable performance at sound levels over 120db.

Where's your video of the sub working in those cars? Where's your Klippel data for that sub? Where's your literacy test proving you know the difference between "or" and "and"? You haven't proven they "work hard" or that you comprehend sentences I type. You've proven nothing but how to talk about an install you don't know about.

I've provided real information. When the owner of the car tells me "those don't play during judging" I'm gonna say they're right. When are you going to post your proof the subs are used AND move more than a tiny bit? You're the SQ messiah, so back it up, don't just talk about it.

This is where it became evident that you realized your argument has failed to support your "point". You can't respond to my questions, so you come back with the "well why don't you prove...." followed by weakly veiled personal attacks.

Since you can't actually respond to any of my statements with relevant information, and your inability to actually dispute that L7's don't necessarily sound bad (which was my only point), my involvement in this conversation ends with this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are arguing semantics, not content.

When you change words, you change the content.

Oh that's right, they competed in IASCA. So I guess it's relevant to consider the source material for a competition organization in which they competed.

And they also competed in MECA and USACi. Also consider the fact that just because the disc includes the material, doesn't mean they scored well on it. If they didn't have a perfect score, that portion very well could have been the deduction.

The competition results are the only "proof" I need to provide for this part of the discussion. If you think the results are askew, it's your task to prove (not speculate) how and why.

Winning doesn't prove what equipment was or was not used. That doesn't prove there wasn't bias judging either.

No kid buys a pair of L7 12's and goes "I'm gonna do my best to not go over 120 dB".
The original comment was that there is no way to make a L7 sound good. Apparently there is, as people have done it.

You are trying to argue something different. Though there is no saying that the L7 wouldn't still have provided acceptable performance at sound levels over 120db.

You haven't proven they've been used in judging to say people have made them sound good. I never said they couldn't sound good, but there's nothing to back it up.

This is where it became evident that you realized your argument has failed to support your "point". You can't respond to my questions, so you come back with the "well why don't you prove...." followed by weakly veiled personal attacks.

Since you can't actually respond to any of my statements with relevant information, and your inability to actually dispute that L7's don't necessarily sound bad (which was my only point), my involvement in this conversation ends with this post.

I've been supporting my point, but as you've proven, you aren't reading it and/or changing words so you can argue like you have a fan club to impress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ibanender, what is your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ibanender, what is your point?

There's no point in arguing with somebody who can't read or comprehend sentences because frogs are purple?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ibanender, what is your point?

because frogs are purple

Okay, at least that is how it is coming across

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an 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 easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×