Beware! Skar Audio poor customer service

[Impious 1,476]

Being devil's advocate again, I'm looking at "parameters" posted by JL Audio as per their website and spec sheet and the T/S parameters seem to be very limited. They haven't listed everything. Are they a scam too?

You must not have tried very hard. Everything needed to accurately model the subwoofer is listed. And just as importantly their parameters for various products have been independently verified to be accurate.

Free Air Resonance (Fs) 27.97 Hz Electrical “Q” (Qes) 0.534 Mechanical “Q” (Qms) 7.678 Total Speaker “Q” (Qts) 0.5 Equivalent Compliance (Vas) 2.806 cu ft / 79.47 L One-Way Linear Excursion (Xmax)* 0.510 in / 13.0 mm Reference Efficiency (no) 0.31% Efficiency (1 W / 1 m)** 87.15 dB SPL Effective Piston Area (Sd) 80.600 sq in / 0.0520 sq m DC Resistance (Re) 1.658 Ω

Aware me cuz i'm thinking about buying a 12W3v3 but would like someone to model it for me first.

Wait....I thought you didn't need modeling? I thought you didn't need T/S parameters? I thought you tried a sub and relied on your subjective interpretation?

Buy the sub, try it in every possible enclosure then use your subjective experience there to determine whether or not it works for you.

[pioneer 14]

Thought i'd get help from the modelling gurus on the forum, guess not. Probably a forum for slander and general hating.

Anywho's...ya'll saying basically that Skar doesn't list the parameters need to model a sub?

[///M5 2,833]

Thought i'd get help from the modelling gurus on the forum, guess not. Probably a forum for slander and general hating.

Anywho's...ya'll saying basically that Skar doesn't list the parameters need to model a sub?

Model a skar sub once, then you'll understand. Or considering this is about Skar service why not ask Kevin too? I'm sure that'd be a treat.

I assume you are just trying to be an ass and don't actually want help. Of course if you did you'd make a thread that follows the noob posting guidelines. If not, you won't get it as without that information no one can truly help you.

[pioneer 14]

It shouldn't really have taken 20 seconds to say, they model it. That is how your car is designed, the motherboard in your pc, your phone, your HVAC, pretty much everything you own. Guess what step two is? Build it and test to see if it matches the model. Sound familiar? Even in the 60's they modeled, just couldn't do it on a computer and had to do the calculation by hand. If you prefer you can migrate back to the technology of the 40's and arbitrarily build something and claim success. Just be rather backwoods if you ask me. Of course, guess whose stuff is not modeled? Guess who doesn't understand models? Guess who doesn't even know what to do once the prototype is built? Add to that a wretched customer service history and again let's all get in line to support this guy. Seriously wtf? Are you that blind?

No, ur wrong, when a new plane is designed, somebody draws it on a piece of paper, then mindless workers try and try hundreds of versions until they get lucky and one flies.

Actually many prototypes (of anything) are built and tested until they get it right, attempted troll fail.

I'm not against modelling, I'm just saying it shouldn't be the end all and be the ONLY way one can determine how good a sub is because some socially awkward phaggot sits behind a keyboard and says HEY! this sub is crap because LEAP told me so.

I don't know where in science it states that expected results based on a model is always the final and true result, why do people even conduct experiments if they already know the end result? lol. What's the point of trying to prove hypotheses?

Guess you all never heard of subjectivity and relativity etc, especially in the car audio where there are many uncontrollable factors to consider at any given point in time.

[Adrian_D 520]

Thought i'd get help from the modelling gurus on the forum, guess not. Probably a forum for slander and general hating.

Anywho's...ya'll saying basically that Skar doesn't list the parameters need to model a sub?

You sure are thick, the abominable Skar owner posted specs which did not make any sense, were completely off (just like saying the voice coil was 2" in diameter but 20mm in diameter).

It shouldn't really have taken 20 seconds to say, they model it. That is how your car is designed, the motherboard in your pc, your phone, your HVAC, pretty much everything you own. Guess what step two is? Build it and test to see if it matches the model. Sound familiar? Even in the 60's they modeled, just couldn't do it on a computer and had to do the calculation by hand. If you prefer you can migrate back to the technology of the 40's and arbitrarily build something and claim success. Just be rather backwoods if you ask me. Of course, guess whose stuff is not modeled? Guess who doesn't understand models? Guess who doesn't even know what to do once the prototype is built? Add to that a wretched customer service history and again let's all get in line to support this guy. Seriously wtf? Are you that blind?

No, ur wrong, when a new plane is designed, somebody draws it on a piece of paper, then mindless workers try and try hundreds of versions until they get lucky and one flies.

Actually many prototypes (of anything) are built and tested until they get it right, attempted troll fail.

I'm not against modelling, I'm just saying it shouldn't be the end all and be the ONLY way one can determine how good a sub is because some socially awkward phaggot sits behind a keyboard and says HEY! this sub is crap because LEAP told me so.

I don't know where in science it states that expected results based on a model is always the final and true result, why do people even conduct experiments if they already know the end result? lol. What's the point of trying to prove hypotheses?

Guess you all never heard of subjectivity and relativity etc, especially in the car audio where there are many uncontrollable factors to consider at any given point in time.

Aaaaand we're basically one step away from saying theory does not apply. What the heck did I post earlier?

Obviously we should change your username to numbnuts. If I model a sub and CAN'T obtain the results I want in the space I have, why the fuck would I dream that maybe, just maybe the gods of audio will smile to me it will sound good. Why the fuck couldn't I tell it sucks if it models like crap in what space I have?

Really, you are the species which I loathe, you totally push away parameters.

Edited February 10, 2013 by Adrian 3.0

[///M5 2,833]

It shouldn't really have taken 20 seconds to say, they model it. That is how your car is designed, the motherboard in your pc, your phone, your HVAC, pretty much everything you own. Guess what step two is? Build it and test to see if it matches the model. Sound familiar? Even in the 60's they modeled, just couldn't do it on a computer and had to do the calculation by hand. If you prefer you can migrate back to the technology of the 40's and arbitrarily build something and claim success. Just be rather backwoods if you ask me. Of course, guess whose stuff is not modeled? Guess who doesn't understand models? Guess who doesn't even know what to do once the prototype is built? Add to that a wretched customer service history and again let's all get in line to support this guy. Seriously wtf? Are you that blind?

No, ur wrong, when a new plane is designed, somebody draws it on a piece of paper, then mindless workers try and try hundreds of versions until they get lucky and one flies.

Actually many prototypes (of anything) are built and tested until they get it right, attempted troll fail.

I'm not against modelling, I'm just saying it shouldn't be the end all and be the ONLY way one can determine how good a sub is because some socially awkward phaggot sits behind a keyboard and says HEY! this sub is crap because LEAP told me so.

I don't know where in science it states that expected results based on a model is always the final and true result, why do people even conduct experiments if they already know the end result? lol. What's the point of trying to prove hypotheses?

Guess you all never heard of subjectivity and relativity etc, especially in the car audio where there are many uncontrollable factors to consider at any given point in time.

The experimental is done to verify/update the model. Depending on the complexity of the product being designed modelling isn't very accurate. This is particularly true when boundary conditions are new.

Companies that make prototypes that fail can blame their engineering. It's obviously poor. Not really that normal these days. Sure there are always updates but even on ultra complex devices like planes, automobiles and the like it is rather minor what is done. They test for two reasons. One is improving NVH characteristics as material property modeling falls apart at higher frequencies because the complexity of parts and features that are spaced at those wavelengths make things complex, the other reason is for liability. Making sure you make something that lasts and doesn't fail in a way to create a liability is huge. In the audio industry, where really there hasn't been any major development in raw drivers in more than 40 years the modeling is pretty solid. If it isn't you can blame the engineer.

I realize I am talking to a trolling log, but am wondering what your point is. You keep alluding to things you know nothing about, but I am not sure why. Also curious how it pertains to Skar customer service.

[mlcantin 32]

I love talking to Kevin of Skar Audio! I have long phone conversations with him

[pioneer 14]

OK so i'm thick, kool. Seeing I know nothing, tell me what exactly doesn't make "sense" based on the specs posted on skar's site/spec sheet.

Not only for me, but for everyone else who is following this thread wondering WTF is happening here.

[EPerez 236]

Im pretty sure everyone knows whats happening. You obviously dont understand anything anyone is telling you.

[Sencheezy 689]

dbl post

Edited February 10, 2013 by Sencheezy

[Sencheezy 689]

[nervewrecker 0]

Pioneer, show us the response curve of the sub and box combo that kevin gave you for your vvx 10".

iirc you gave me it and I did model it....but lets see what you have first then i'll post what I have cuz initially I thought I made a mistake somewhere.

[Impious 1,476]

OK so i'm thick, kool. Seeing I know nothing, tell me what exactly doesn't make "sense" based on the specs posted on skar's site/spec sheet. Not only for me, but for everyone else who is following this thread wondering WTF is happening here.

Regarding the "Pro Audio" speakers he released, I had to ask this question 2x and he never even responded, but several weeks after my initial inquiry he did finally change the T/S specs for them. You can see by the dates below that on 10/24 he posted specs to the website and as of 11/15 he still hadn't changed them....

Since your didn't address my question/comment in the other thread that is now locked nor has the information on the website changed, I'll repost it here in hopes you actually address my post. I'm sure your present and potential customers would appreciate accurate T/S parameters for your product(s).

T/S Are on the SkarAudio.com site!

And those T/S parameters make absolutely no sense at all. The variances are large enough to not even be close to considered errors due to averaging over a production run. They're just wrong.

The PAX-6.5, for example.

Re of 4ohms? I've never seen a speaker with an Re of 4ohms....nominal impedance, yes. But not Re. I'm going to presume it's 4ohm nominal and it's Re is somewhere in the 3.X range?

Second, a Qes of 1.758 and a Qts of .412 ? Even with nothing but a rudimentary understanding of T/S we can tell those numbers don't match up. Qes is the main determinant of Qts....those two numbers should be much closer. Qts should be more in the vicinity of 1.4

You list N_o as .19% and SPL 89.8db. Based on the listed Fs, Qes and Vas the N_o calculates out to be 1.28% and SPL 93db. A N_o of .19% would equate to a sensitivity of 84.8db, not 89.8db. So, in short, none of those numbers match up.

Your units for compliance are wrong, or your decimal is in the wrong spot. I'm assuming it's really .090742 mm/N

Based on the listed Vas and Cms, the Sd would be around 446cm^2, which is not much smaller than a 12" driver and obviously not correct.

Based on Mms and Cms, Fs should be 126hz, not 97hz.

That's not an all encompassing list, but a brief summary. In short.....those parameters are physically impossible and make no sense together whatsoever.

After he corrected the specs (several weeks after my initial inquiry), I don't know if they are accurate but atleast they are reasonably mathematically consistent. Here are my problems with the drivers:

No everyone wanted t/s numbers an there they are. Curious what the people with knowledge thought about them.

Honest opinion? They are turds. I don't see a single circumstance in which there isn't much better options available.

Here's the problem, they wanted something they could call "pro audio" and looked "pro audio" by appearance but didn't want the lack of midbass problem pro audio drivers suffer in most car audio style installations (unfortunately they failed miserably on both counts). So they used pro audio style soft parts with a low mass and in this case looks like slightly less compliant suspension so they have the "pro audio" look and also the high Fs (actually a higher Fs than a lot of true pro audio drivers). But they then tried to compensate for the lack of midbass output in most pro audio drivers by raising the Q....but they went too far and ended up with an extremely weak and underdamped motor. The downside to this is that the weak motor killed the efficiency and gave the driver way too high of a Q. The result is a driver with a really high Fs, average sensitivity and almost unusably high Qts. So it's going to have a giant peak early in the midbass followed by a steep roll off. And because the driver is highly resonant you are not going to be able to get tight, articulate midbass out of the driver.....it's going to be exaggerated and muddy, and it's still not going to have the low frequency extension of a normal driver. This driver is basically off the shelf a driver stuffed in WAY TOO SMALL of an enclosure; think about what happens to a subwoofer when you shove it in way too small of a sealed enclosure, and that is equivalently what this thing is even when it's IB in your door. DO NOT use them in an enclosure or sealed kickpanels....simply not going to work.

If you were after a true pro audio driver, this isn't it. The weak motor killed the efficiency, it's really not much more efficient than a standard driver. So if you want pro audio efficiency, you will need to stick with the traditional pro audio offerings and this driver doesn't fit in that category. On the other hand, if you weren't after a pro audio driver I still don't see a use for this driver as a "normal" driver is going to have nearly the same efficiency and without such ridiculous parameters....they'll have a lower Fs, much lower Q and as a result won't have the over-exaggerated midbass response and huge peak with an early roll off of this driver. So if you weren't after a pro driver, there are still much better options than these. As such, I don't see any real use for these drivers as no matter which way you want to go, there are much better options available.

Driver design is all about trade-offs and which set of trade-offs fit a particular goal. Unfortunately the designers of this driver chose absolutely ridiculous trade-offs and essentially made a driver that doesn't fit well in any category and is easily bested by a large number of drivers no matter the performance goals of the user.

I know certain people aren't going to believe this: But there is truly no brand-bias in my comments here. This is strictly looking at the T/S parameters, I'd say exactly the same thing no matter what name was on the dust cap.

I'd be curious what the Xmax is on the PAX though. Given the low Mms I can't imagine they used a coil much longer than the typical pro audio driver so they probably have pretty anemic excursion as well, which would completely defeat the purpose of that high Q midbass peak as they would be exceeding Xmax throughout that peak with reasonable amounts of power...well below their rated power handling. Which means you would either need to highpass them high to keep excursion under control or EQ that peak down to a reasonable level to keep them usable in that range.

He also had to go back and change the specs he released on the bullet tweeters after he released them and we questioned him on them, though he didn't actually answer any of our questions he just went back and changed some of the specs.

[///M5 2,833]

There is no benefit of slapping together randomly off the shelf chinese parts and calling it a driver. In particular when you let someone choose which ones with absolutely no knowledge or understanding of anything. If you've ever seen a ported box design that just doesn't work for a woofer, imagine designing a woofer like that box was designed. Monster fail.

[StreetLegal 119]

Skar products is available in Trinidad, and a lot of people get ripped off by the local distributer and also with a garbage product. I know a few distributers roam this forum in the dark ..lol... you can be one of them haha just saying.

How exactly they're being ripped off by the local distributor though?

That's a very easy thing to do in that part of the world.

Skar products is available in Trinidad, and a lot of people get ripped off by the local distributer and also with a garbage product. I know a few distributers roam this forum in the dark ..lol... you can be one of them haha just saying.

Stayed out of this untill this Piost I AM the local distributor for SKAR AUDIO in Trinidad AKA OffshoreMarketing on Tuner i Would love to know how i am ripping off people? before u go out there and Defame my Character i Would LOVE to see you back up this statement with PROOF? . If you cant then i guess your just another hater who is angry that ppl in Trinidad Loving Skar products />/>/> Or your probably a dealer for another brand who's going out of business or something.

If the cap fit, then wear it !

No dealer here.

Edited February 11, 2013 by StreetLegal

[pioneer 14]

Pioneer, show us the response curve of the sub and box combo that kevin gave you for your vvx 10". iirc you gave me it and I did model it....but lets see what you have first then i'll post what I have cuz initially I thought I made a mistake somewhere.

Wrong person, I never owned a VVX-10 and Kevin never designed any box for me.

[RPM 0]

wheres your proof son who did i rip off? bring proof or else stfu

Skar products is available in Trinidad, and a lot of people get ripped off by the local distributer and also with a garbage product. I know a few distributers roam this forum in the dark ..lol... you can be one of them haha just saying.

How exactly they're being ripped off by the local distributor though?

That's a very easy thing to do in that part of the world.

Skar products is available in Trinidad, and a lot of people get ripped off by the local distributer and also with a garbage product. I know a few distributers roam this forum in the dark ..lol... you can be one of them haha just saying.

Stayed out of this untill this Piost I AM the local distributor for SKAR AUDIO in Trinidad AKA OffshoreMarketing on Tuner i Would love to know how i am ripping off people? before u go out there and Defame my Character i Would LOVE to see you back up this statement with PROOF? . If you cant then i guess your just another hater who is angry that ppl in Trinidad Loving Skar products />/>/> Or your probably a dealer for another brand who's going out of business or something.

If the cap fit, then wear it ! No dealer here.

[pioneer 14]

OK so i'm thick, kool. Seeing I know nothing, tell me what exactly doesn't make "sense" based on the specs posted on skar's site/spec sheet. Not only for me, but for everyone else who is following this thread wondering WTF is happening here.

Regarding the "Pro Audio" speakers he released, I had to ask this question 2x and he never even responded, but several weeks after my initial inquiry he did finally change the T/S specs for them. You can see by the dates below that on 10/24 he posted specs to the website and as of 11/15 he still hadn't changed them....

Since your didn't address my question/comment in the other thread that is now locked nor has the information on the website changed, I'll repost it here in hopes you actually address my post. I'm sure your present and potential customers would appreciate accurate T/S parameters for your product(s).

T/S Are on the SkarAudio.com site!

And those T/S parameters make absolutely no sense at all. The variances are large enough to not even be close to considered errors due to averaging over a production run. They're just wrong. The PAX-6.5, for example. Re of 4ohms? I've never seen a speaker with an Re of 4ohms....nominal impedance, yes. But not Re. I'm going to presume it's 4ohm nominal and it's Re is somewhere in the 3.X range? Second, a Qes of 1.758 and a Qts of .412 ? Even with nothing but a rudimentary understanding of T/S we can tell those numbers don't match up. Qes is the main determinant of Qts....those two numbers should be much closer. Qts should be more in the vicinity of 1.4 You list N_o as .19% and SPL 89.8db. Based on the listed Fs, Qes and Vas the N_o calculates out to be 1.28% and SPL 93db. A N_o of .19% would equate to a sensitivity of 84.8db, not 89.8db. So, in short, none of those numbers match up. Your units for compliance are wrong, or your decimal is in the wrong spot. I'm assuming it's really .090742 mm/N Based on the listed Vas and Cms, the Sd would be around 446cm^2, which is not much smaller than a 12" driver and obviously not correct. Based on Mms and Cms, Fs should be 126hz, not 97hz. That's not an all encompassing list, but a brief summary. In short.....those parameters are physically impossible and make no sense together whatsoever.

After he corrected the specs (several weeks after my initial inquiry), I don't know if they are accurate but atleast they are reasonably mathematically consistent. Here are my problems with the drivers:

No everyone wanted t/s numbers an there they are. Curious what the people with knowledge thought about them.

Honest opinion? They are turds. I don't see a single circumstance in which there isn't much better options available. Here's the problem, they wanted something they could call "pro audio" and looked "pro audio" by appearance but didn't want the lack of midbass problem pro audio drivers suffer in most car audio style installations (unfortunately they failed miserably on both counts). So they used pro audio style soft parts with a low mass and in this case looks like slightly less compliant suspension so they have the "pro audio" look and also the high Fs (actually a higher Fs than a lot of true pro audio drivers). But they then tried to compensate for the lack of midbass output in most pro audio drivers by raising the Q....but they went too far and ended up with an extremely weak and underdamped motor. The downside to this is that the weak motor killed the efficiency and gave the driver way too high of a Q. The result is a driver with a really high Fs, average sensitivity and almost unusably high Qts. So it's going to have a giant peak early in the midbass followed by a steep roll off. And because the driver is highly resonant you are not going to be able to get tight, articulate midbass out of the driver.....it's going to be exaggerated and muddy, and it's still not going to have the low frequency extension of a normal driver. This driver is basically off the shelf a driver stuffed in WAY TOO SMALL of an enclosure; think about what happens to a subwoofer when you shove it in way too small of a sealed enclosure, and that is equivalently what this thing is even when it's IB in your door. DO NOT use them in an enclosure or sealed kickpanels....simply not going to work. If you were after a true pro audio driver, this isn't it. The weak motor killed the efficiency, it's really not much more efficient than a standard driver. So if you want pro audio efficiency, you will need to stick with the traditional pro audio offerings and this driver doesn't fit in that category. On the other hand, if you weren't after a pro audio driver I still don't see a use for this driver as a "normal" driver is going to have nearly the same efficiency and without such ridiculous parameters....they'll have a lower Fs, much lower Q and as a result won't have the over-exaggerated midbass response and huge peak with an early roll off of this driver. So if you weren't after a pro driver, there are still much better options than these. As such, I don't see any real use for these drivers as no matter which way you want to go, there are much better options available. Driver design is all about trade-offs and which set of trade-offs fit a particular goal. Unfortunately the designers of this driver chose absolutely ridiculous trade-offs and essentially made a driver that doesn't fit well in any category and is easily bested by a large number of drivers no matter the performance goals of the user. I know certain people aren't going to believe this: But there is truly no brand-bias in my comments here. This is strictly looking at the T/S parameters, I'd say exactly the same thing no matter what name was on the dust cap.

I'd be curious what the Xmax is on the PAX though. Given the low Mms I can't imagine they used a coil much longer than the typical pro audio driver so they probably have pretty anemic excursion as well, which would completely defeat the purpose of that high Q midbass peak as they would be exceeding Xmax throughout that peak with reasonable amounts of power...well below their rated power handling. Which means you would either need to highpass them high to keep excursion under control or EQ that peak down to a reasonable level to keep them usable in that range.

He also had to go back and change the specs he released on the bullet tweeters after he released them and we questioned him on them, though he didn't actually answer any of our questions he just went back and changed some of the specs.

First sensible post wrt to allegations.

Other guys here sound like keyboard thugs.

[pioneer 14]

Skar products is available in Trinidad, and a lot of people get ripped off by the local distributer and also with a garbage product. I know a few distributers roam this forum in the dark ..lol... you can be one of them haha just saying.

How exactly they're being ripped off by the local distributor though?

That's a very easy thing to do in that part of the world.

Well, it seems to be even easier in your part of the world seeing so many people buying into these "skam" products, posting how much they like em on forums and youtube etc etc etc. Are you saying americans/canadians are that dumb?

Jakes on you phaggot lol

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

OK so i'm thick, kool. Seeing I know nothing, tell me what exactly doesn't make "sense" based on the specs posted on skar's site/spec sheet. Not only for me, but for everyone else who is following this thread wondering WTF is happening here.

Regarding the "Pro Audio" speakers he released, I had to ask this question 2x and he never even responded, but several weeks after my initial inquiry he did finally change the T/S specs for them. You can see by the dates below that on 10/24 he posted specs to the website and as of 11/15 he still hadn't changed them....

Since your didn't address my question/comment in the other thread that is now locked nor has the information on the website changed, I'll repost it here in hopes you actually address my post. I'm sure your present and potential customers would appreciate accurate T/S parameters for your product(s).

T/S Are on the SkarAudio.com site!

And those T/S parameters make absolutely no sense at all. The variances are large enough to not even be close to considered errors due to averaging over a production run. They're just wrong. The PAX-6.5, for example. Re of 4ohms? I've never seen a speaker with an Re of 4ohms....nominal impedance, yes. But not Re. I'm going to presume it's 4ohm nominal and it's Re is somewhere in the 3.X range? Second, a Qes of 1.758 and a Qts of .412 ? Even with nothing but a rudimentary understanding of T/S we can tell those numbers don't match up. Qes is the main determinant of Qts....those two numbers should be much closer. Qts should be more in the vicinity of 1.4 You list N_o as .19% and SPL 89.8db. Based on the listed Fs, Qes and Vas the N_o calculates out to be 1.28% and SPL 93db. A N_o of .19% would equate to a sensitivity of 84.8db, not 89.8db. So, in short, none of those numbers match up. Your units for compliance are wrong, or your decimal is in the wrong spot. I'm assuming it's really .090742 mm/N Based on the listed Vas and Cms, the Sd would be around 446cm^2, which is not much smaller than a 12" driver and obviously not correct. Based on Mms and Cms, Fs should be 126hz, not 97hz. That's not an all encompassing list, but a brief summary. In short.....those parameters are physically impossible and make no sense together whatsoever.

After he corrected the specs (several weeks after my initial inquiry), I don't know if they are accurate but atleast they are reasonably mathematically consistent. Here are my problems with the drivers:

No everyone wanted t/s numbers an there they are. Curious what the people with knowledge thought about them.

Honest opinion? They are turds. I don't see a single circumstance in which there isn't much better options available. Here's the problem, they wanted something they could call "pro audio" and looked "pro audio" by appearance but didn't want the lack of midbass problem pro audio drivers suffer in most car audio style installations (unfortunately they failed miserably on both counts). So they used pro audio style soft parts with a low mass and in this case looks like slightly less compliant suspension so they have the "pro audio" look and also the high Fs (actually a higher Fs than a lot of true pro audio drivers). But they then tried to compensate for the lack of midbass output in most pro audio drivers by raising the Q....but they went too far and ended up with an extremely weak and underdamped motor. The downside to this is that the weak motor killed the efficiency and gave the driver way too high of a Q. The result is a driver with a really high Fs, average sensitivity and almost unusably high Qts. So it's going to have a giant peak early in the midbass followed by a steep roll off. And because the driver is highly resonant you are not going to be able to get tight, articulate midbass out of the driver.....it's going to be exaggerated and muddy, and it's still not going to have the low frequency extension of a normal driver. This driver is basically off the shelf a driver stuffed in WAY TOO SMALL of an enclosure; think about what happens to a subwoofer when you shove it in way too small of a sealed enclosure, and that is equivalently what this thing is even when it's IB in your door. DO NOT use them in an enclosure or sealed kickpanels....simply not going to work. If you were after a true pro audio driver, this isn't it. The weak motor killed the efficiency, it's really not much more efficient than a standard driver. So if you want pro audio efficiency, you will need to stick with the traditional pro audio offerings and this driver doesn't fit in that category. On the other hand, if you weren't after a pro audio driver I still don't see a use for this driver as a "normal" driver is going to have nearly the same efficiency and without such ridiculous parameters....they'll have a lower Fs, much lower Q and as a result won't have the over-exaggerated midbass response and huge peak with an early roll off of this driver. So if you weren't after a pro driver, there are still much better options than these. As such, I don't see any real use for these drivers as no matter which way you want to go, there are much better options available. Driver design is all about trade-offs and which set of trade-offs fit a particular goal. Unfortunately the designers of this driver chose absolutely ridiculous trade-offs and essentially made a driver that doesn't fit well in any category and is easily bested by a large number of drivers no matter the performance goals of the user. I know certain people aren't going to believe this: But there is truly no brand-bias in my comments here. This is strictly looking at the T/S parameters, I'd say exactly the same thing no matter what name was on the dust cap.

I'd be curious what the Xmax is on the PAX though. Given the low Mms I can't imagine they used a coil much longer than the typical pro audio driver so they probably have pretty anemic excursion as well, which would completely defeat the purpose of that high Q midbass peak as they would be exceeding Xmax throughout that peak with reasonable amounts of power...well below their rated power handling. Which means you would either need to highpass them high to keep excursion under control or EQ that peak down to a reasonable level to keep them usable in that range.

He also had to go back and change the specs he released on the bullet tweeters after he released them and we questioned him on them, though he didn't actually answer any of our questions he just went back and changed some of the specs.

First sensible post wrt to allegations. Other guys here sound like keyboard thugs.

That could not be more incorrect.

[///M5 2,833]

First sensible post wrt to allegations. Other guys here sound like keyboard thugs.

You've been asked to search and look around yourself multiple times. Had you, you'd already have found that and more.

[jonbearsmt 919]

did you just say you wanna jack off on fags?

your a weird little dude,

but hey what ever your into..

[nervewrecker 0]

Pioneer, show us the response curve of the sub and box combo that kevin gave you for your vvx 10". iirc you gave me it and I did model it....but lets see what you have first then i'll post what I have cuz initially I thought I made a mistake somewhere.

Wrong person, I never owned a VVX-10 and Kevin never designed any box for me.

sorry, a 12.

yes, you told me you using the same specs as Kevin, I asked you for it inch for inch as well as port area (diameter) and length.

Remember we was discussing how the vent hole on the back plate was small on your sub compared to mine and you inboxed me the info that it has a unique cooling design that Jacob had a part to play in?

Have you forgotten the night you went all Sherlock Holmes on me and went so far as to dig for my subwoofer's invoice to see what I got?

Edited February 11, 2013 by nervewrecker

[nervewrecker 0]

who is streetlegal btw?

I have to give jack his jacket and admit rpm gives good service and knows about what he is selling, dont got no complaints about him.

Come to think of it I dont got any about the local image dynamics dealer either.

[Frostedflakejake 148]

First sensible post wrt to allegations.

Other guys here sound like keyboard thugs.

...i linked you to the pages with those quotes pages ago. You said you read them.

Sigh.