sa-8 or sa-15

[97T5WAGON 4]

what would be louder 3 sa-8s in 1.8-2.0 cubes @ 35hz with 500 to each sub or 1 sa-15 in 3 cubes @ 35hz with 900-1200watts this will be in a 850 wagon subs up port back. trying to go for numbers and sound ok

[stevemead08 752]

id say the 3 SA-8s

[ibanender 2]

3 8's is less displacement and the power gain is negligible. The 8's would be more efficient though. If you're wanting to tune below 35 hz, do the 15.

[manrossdamn 57]

Cone area?

More power to the 8's then the single fifteen, and to ibanender, you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

[hrtbrk1 2]

when wanting to play lower, cone area is king

Edited January 31, 2011 by hrtbrk1

[ibanender 2]

Cone area?

More power to the 8's then the single fifteen, and to ibanender, you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

More cone area in a single 15 than three 8's, and the 15 has more excursion than an 8 as well. That's why I used the term "displacement". An SA15 has 48% more displacement when you consider cone area and excursion. Again, this is assuming you're running all of them at full stroke. The SA8's would have significantly more motor force and would be more efficient, as well as 50% more power. In theory, the power and efficiency make up for the displacement differences, making things nearly equal. Oh wait, that's what I said before.....

You do know I had SA8's 4 months before they shipped and help develop them right? There is only 1 person that knows more about SA8's than me, and that's the person that designed it. It's not a matter of smaller sub vs bigger sub, it's THAT sub in particular when tuned below 35 hz loses output very quickly across the board. The difference between a 30 hz tune and 35 hz tune in the same box was 5 dB peaking within a few hz. When the Fs is 44 hz, you can't expect it to play 30 with exceptional output, even in a 30 hz tune.

I'd hate to talk about something on the forum and actually have experience with it rather than regurgitating simulated graphs and what other people say that also have no experience.......

[ibanender 2]

when wanting to play lower, cone area is king

Playing low, and playing low obnoxiously are different things.

[manrossdamn 57]

Dang.

You're a angry fool

[ssh 924]

Off-topic, but OP, do you have a build log on your volvo? I'd love to see it

I'm looking at the v70s and v40s for my next car.

[js84_02 0]

I have done testing on 3 sa-8's and 2-15's and 1-15. In my 01 explorer sport, so far on clamped 2000 watt power, I have gotten 1 15 the loudest. Strictly spl. Daily I never built another box for my 3-8's, but I do like my 15 on music better than I do the 8's.

[Randal Johnson 544]

Cone area?

More power to the 8's then the single fifteen, and to ibanender, you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

More cone area in a single 15 than three 8's, and the 15 has more excursion than an 8 as well. That's why I used the term "displacement". An SA15 has 48% more displacement when you consider cone area and excursion. Again, this is assuming you're running all of them at full stroke. The SA8's would have significantly more motor force and would be more efficient, as well as 50% more power. In theory, the power and efficiency make up for the displacement differences, making things nearly equal. Oh wait, that's what I said before.....

You do know I had SA8's 4 months before they shipped and help develop them right? There is only 1 person that knows more about SA8's than me, and that's the person that designed it. It's not a matter of smaller sub vs bigger sub, it's THAT sub in particular when tuned below 35 hz loses output very quickly across the board. The difference between a 30 hz tune and 35 hz tune in the same box was 5 dB peaking within a few hz. When the Fs is 44 hz, you can't expect it to play 30 with exceptional output, even in a 30 hz tune.

I'd hate to talk about something on the forum and actually have experience with it rather than regurgitating simulated graphs and what other people say that also have no experience.......

My 10s have no problem performing well playing in the low 20s htz range with considerable amount of spl too ...

To the op, i rather see 4 8s rather than 3 ... Just my suggestion please ...

[ibanender 2]

Dang.

You're a angry fool

I have a low tolerance for ignorance.

I have done testing on 3 sa-8's and 2-15's and 1-15. In my 01 explorer sport, so far on clamped 2000 watt power, I have gotten 1 15 the loudest. Strictly spl. Daily I never built another box for my 3-8's, but I do like my 15 on music better than I do the 8's.

By chance were they SA15's or another 15?

Cone area?

More power to the 8's then the single fifteen, and to ibanender, you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

More cone area in a single 15 than three 8's, and the 15 has more excursion than an 8 as well. That's why I used the term "displacement". An SA15 has 48% more displacement when you consider cone area and excursion. Again, this is assuming you're running all of them at full stroke. The SA8's would have significantly more motor force and would be more efficient, as well as 50% more power. In theory, the power and efficiency make up for the displacement differences, making things nearly equal. Oh wait, that's what I said before.....

You do know I had SA8's 4 months before they shipped and help develop them right? There is only 1 person that knows more about SA8's than me, and that's the person that designed it. It's not a matter of smaller sub vs bigger sub, it's THAT sub in particular when tuned below 35 hz loses output very quickly across the board. The difference between a 30 hz tune and 35 hz tune in the same box was 5 dB peaking within a few hz. When the Fs is 44 hz, you can't expect it to play 30 with exceptional output, even in a 30 hz tune.

I'd hate to talk about something on the forum and actually have experience with it rather than regurgitating simulated graphs and what other people say that also have no experience.......

My 10s have no problem performing well playing in the low 20s htz range with considerable amount of spl too ...

To the op, i rather see 4 8s rather than 3 ... Just my suggestion please ...

Your 10's aren't SA8's.

Edited February 2, 2011 by ibanender

[stovebolt6 3]

what would be louder 3 sa-8s in 1.8-2.0 cubes @ 35hz with 500 to each sub or 1 sa-15 in 3 cubes @ 35hz with 900-1200watts this will be in a 850 wagon subs up port back. trying to go for numbers and sound ok

what kind of vehicle?

if the trunk is rather small you may actually end up louder with the three eights , because the nclosure will take up less space in the trunk, although you wont know unless you tried it both ways.

reason i mention is i remember a sq car back in 96 that ran jl, and for his first season he was rocking a w6 18, and the next season changed out to three w6 8's and gained considerably, he didn't meter it, but i remember he said he had to back the gain on the amp down alot. he thought maybe it was because the box for the 18 was so large it actually blocked the sound from traveling into the cabin.

[Randal Johnson 544]

My 10s have no problem performing well playing in the low 20s htz range with considerable amount of spl too ...

To the op, i rather see 4 8s rather than 3 ... Just my suggestion please ...

Your 10's aren't SA8's.

I know this ... thanks.

[RAM_Designs 25]

you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

Totally different woofers, yes, you can make that argument(still, not very often). But within the same woofer line you'll be hard pressed to find any situation where the 8" version will have better low-end extension than the 15" version.

Edited February 2, 2011 by RAM_Designs

[hrtbrk1 2]

you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

Totally different woofers, yes, you can make that argument(still, not very often). But within the same woofer line you'll be hard pressed to find any situation where the 8" version will have better low-end extension than the 15" version.

thank you. too many limitations for 8's to play low...

Edited February 2, 2011 by hrtbrk1

[ibanender 2]

you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

Totally different woofers, yes, you can make that argument(still, not very often). But within the same woofer line you'll be hard pressed to find any situation where the 8" version will have better low-end extension than the 15" version.

Very true. Another thing to consider is "low" is subjective. Traditionally in terms of audio, "playing low" is "bass" which is 1-100 hz. For me personally, sub 40 hz is "low". Some people think it's not low till it's in the 20's.

[ibanender 2]

you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

Totally different woofers, yes, you can make that argument(still, not very often). But within the same woofer line you'll be hard pressed to find any situation where the 8" version will have better low-end extension than the 15" version.

thank you. too many limitations for 8's to play low...

Enlighten us on your reasons.

[swift 501]

I personally would much rather have one 15 then multiple 8's. But in the end its all up to what you want.

[hrtbrk1 2]

you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

Totally different woofers, yes, you can make that argument(still, not very often). But within the same woofer line you'll be hard pressed to find any situation where the 8" version will have better low-end extension than the 15" version.

thank you. too many limitations for 8's to play low...

Enlighten us on your reasons.

well you stated that sub40s was low to you...to me thats not very low...so i guess it is a difference in preference

limitations...

spider diameter

throw,

xmax,

sd...

[ibanender 2]

you do know that the myth of bigger subs playing lower has been proven false?

Totally different woofers, yes, you can make that argument(still, not very often). But within the same woofer line you'll be hard pressed to find any situation where the 8" version will have better low-end extension than the 15" version.

thank you. too many limitations for 8's to play low...

Enlighten us on your reasons.

well you stated that sub40s was low to you...to me thats not very low...so i guess it is a difference in preference

limitations...

spider diameter

throw,

xmax,

sd...

OK, now explain why you feel spider diameter, which is a direct relation to throw, which IS xmax makes it play low or not. Hell, explain Sd too.

I'll warn you, you just said PA 18's don't play below 40 hz and this never happened

[sundownz 197]

Hey kids, be nice

Sean - You and Emmanuel can duke it out if he makes it out here this summer

[Duran 387]

You guys are getting mixed up with terms, they will play the SAME frequencies, the only difference is the volume at which those frequencies are reproduced, that does not mean one size has "better low-end extension" than the other.

[jcarter1885 995]

You guys are getting mixed up with terms, they will play the SAME frequencies, the only difference is the volume at which those frequencies are reproduced, that does not mean one size has "better low-end extension" than the other.

It just means one will have more low-end output over the other, all size subs can usually plya the same frequencies as stated above.

[hrtbrk1 2]

You guys are getting mixed up with terms, they will play the SAME frequencies, the only difference is the volume at which those frequencies are reproduced, that does not mean one size has "better low-end extension" than the other.

It just means one will have more low-end output over the other, all size subs can usually plya the same frequencies as stated above.

yeh i guess we did mix up terms and understanding lol...i meant to say that an 8 will have a harder time being loud in low freq compared to a 15