Leaderboard

Good shit man! Wouldn't have put a different woofer in there!

Hmmm, I never knew. I did know my previous components were 4ohm and I also believe my coaxials are too. I figured I was ordering right. Thanks for the tip

Reminds me of an avocado I bought a while back. Good looking stuff.

I believe nearfield would be 6" - 12" ish in front of the cone. Edit: I've seen people do closer, so really I don't know. I've seen some people in the HT crowd doing 12" (not saying they are correct), but also ran into this: http://www.claudionegro.com/sw/swacoustic/nearfield/nearfield.html So yeah I don't know wtf I'm talking about. Perhaps the cook book would shed some light.

Start by displaying your 1/3 octaves AS third octaves and not narrow bands. If you can't in that software, I'd stop measuring. Use random excitation and do at least 100 averages. Measure in the near field first. I know you want to know what your ears will hear, but you need to focus on what the enclosure will do. Make sure to use complex averaging as phase is important. Shut everything off but a single driver for measurement. I'd also first shut off ALL processing. I'd recommend some reading on 1/3 octaves as well. Currently you are measuring at ONLY 4 points below your crossover frequency and displaying way more than 4. That makes ZERO sense. Obviously the 5th being up at 500Hz is rolling off based on your crossover and since that is only the center point it's squishing your response. Either way, for this driver a measurement system does you pretty much no good. You have an output problem with a driver that is in a far from optimal enclosure and it's too be expected. Your mids/tweet plans are going to be just as ugly. I'd seriously rethink them.

I'm sure you'll get there man.

I feel ya with my 59.9

I don't know about anybody else, but I found the dialogue between Impious and pro-rabbit far more entertaining and informative than the original poster and his refusal to listen to anybody other than his lame-ass shop!

this thing looks so loud, i bet its alot of fun.. but tell me.. how does it drive now? lol i bet it needs that big ass turbo now to get on the hwy way!! it will be fun to watch you tweek it and play with it and get your 160!

Thanks Eric, I am practicing with this new camera. There were no hit and miss engines there today. In September at Penns Cave you will see them making ice cream, apple cider, and other things. We go there every year too. My Grandpa builds hit-and-miss engines. I grew up hearing them at eating ice cream turned by them. I have a lot of camera books laying around that I read and no longer need. PM me if you are interested, just pay shipping.

Nice pics! Did you eat ice cream made from a hit-and-miss engine?

i would think that hole would be hurting my score... We can foam it or use some foil tape or deadener. We can get some high temp foam to work well.

should be happy with those zcons love my 18's!

holy shit I think I might have gotten a phone interview

Impedance changes based on frequency, enclosure, temperature of the voice coil, etc etc. But the goal of the DMM method isn't to set the gain based on the impedance of your subwoofer. What you are attempting to accomplish with the DMM method is setting the gain based on the output voltage of the amplifier at a known power output at a known impedance, namely the impedance the amplifier's output power was rated at. If the amplifier is rated 100 @ 4ohm and you are attempting to set the gain....in theory it doesn't matter if your subwoofer is 4ohm, 3ohm, 2ohm, 1.3ohm, 3.6ohm, etc. What you need to know is what rail voltage the amplifier should be operating at, and adjusting the gain control of the amplifier to achieve that rail voltage. Ideally the output voltage of the amplifier would actually be independent of impedance. If the amplifier is rated at 100w @ 4ohm, that means the amplifier is capable of operating with a 20v rail voltage. In a perfect world, this voltage (20V) would remain the same no matter what impedance load was connected to the other side. The actual power output would depend on the load, as that determines the current output and ultimately the power output, but the rail voltage itself wouldn't change. So, in a perfect world, all we need to know is where the output voltage of the amplifier should be, and we determine this based on the rated power (which is a specific power output into a specific impedance load) and not what the impedance of the load is that is actually being connected. In practice it does matter as there are some design features and losses that occur within an amplifier that affect it's ability to maintain that rail voltage at higher power/higher current output situations. In many amplifiers the output voltage will decrease as impedance decreases, which decreases it's power output (normally due to current output constraints, power supply constraints, etc etc). But, again, we can use the rated power to approximate where the rail voltage should be for the approximate nominal impedance of the load we are connecting. It won't be perfect, but it doesn't need to be as small differences won't be noticeable in either direction. Another issue is where rated power falls in relation to actual power output. The amp might be capable of more or less power than it's actually rated for into the specific impedance it was rated at. In all but the most extreme circumstances they will be different but not by an excessively large amount. That means the voltage setting could be a little high or a little low....but again, small differences won't matter. The larger issue for me is the level of the test tone. If you use a 0db test tone (which most people use/recommend), 90% of people will end up unhappy with the result and think the need to buy a more powerful amplifier. Since music hardly spends any time at 0db, you will have a very low average power output from the amplifier. With a -6db or -10db test tone (depending on circumstances), the DMM method is good enough to get the gain set to a level that is relatively safe and leave most people happy. The problem is, you could probably do just as well by setting it by ear....so why bother? There are other issues as well that overall just make setting the gain by ear the easiest and best solution a majority of the time.

Well ive had it 2 weeks...first week i demoed it like 4 times in my backyard and once at work...and the second week there was a hole in ma truck and i fixed it so i cant bump until the glass glue dries up...so no i havent done what u just accused me of doing...thats my nice answer...here is the fucked up one...way to accuse someone without even knowing what that person is about...i paid for the system and ill pay for all the glass anyone wants to break....comes with the territory...and thanx for kicking me while im down bro...punk POS!!!!

That means she makes more money now right? Always good to have a sugar mamma.

Tire... Weren't you a big Sony guy? site sucks.. but price is good... http://www.caraudio.com/forums/amplifier-classifieds/547184-lnib-sony-mobile-es-3546-a.html

The only person making it an issue is you. The only person bringing it up on a weekly basis is you. The only person posting it in every thread about SSA subwoofers is you. The only person who fails to understand they are not rebadged Fi subwoofers is you. The problem.....is you. Nick's post above demonstrates that they are not copies as the differences he outlined are everything that matters in a subwoofer, and proves you are wrong. That is coming straight from the guy who built them. Now if you could kindly wipe the sand from your vagina and stop bringing it up constantly as you've just been proven wrong, that would be great.

Actually he said outwardly the motors appeared to be similar. That says nothing about similarities within the motor, and frankly he doesn't even give any external measurements of the motor itself to confirm they are anything more than similar in appearance. Also, if you look at the actual measured T/S parameters you can see they are different drivers. The Xcon has a higher Q, lower Fs, lower Le and higher Mms. Plus the Xcon has slightly more linear excursion and I believe higher thermal power handling as well. It is still an Fi copy with a couple alterations. Quoted "Any differences from the Q are probably in the voice coil itself and the gap geometry and possibly the pole piece machining." Coil is different, suspension is different, magnet ID is different, dust cap is different, gap is different, pole piece is different, back plate is different, cooling is different. You can step off of your soap box now. -the guy thats built hundreds of them.

Actually he said outwardly the motors appeared to be similar. That says nothing about similarities within the motor, and frankly he doesn't even give any external measurements of the motor itself to confirm they are anything more than similar in appearance. Also, if you look at the actual measured T/S parameters you can see they are different drivers. The Xcon has a higher Q, lower Fs, lower Le and higher Mms. Plus the Xcon has slightly more linear excursion and I believe higher thermal power handling as well. It is still an Fi copy with a couple alterations. Quoted "Any differences from the Q are probably in the voice coil itself and the gap geometry and possibly the pole piece machining." Are the external dimensions of the motor identical? He doesn't say, and I don't honestly know. I'm guessing you don't either. So it appears both you and he are basing that on nothing more than the outward appearance of the motor. Even if the outward dimensions are similar doesn't mean they are identical. T/S parameters show they aren't identical. Thermal power ratings show they aren't identical. The voice coil, gap geometry and pole machining and other features are what matters in the motor, not how similar they look externally. Yes, there is going to be some similarities. That doesn't make them copies. I don't understand why you feel the need to bring this up on a weekly basis? We get it. You think they are copies just because they are built at the same buildhouse, even though they are clearly not identical drivers. Did you do this to Sundown when they were using off the shelf boards? Follow Jacob around and post in every thread about how it's a copy of XYZ? Do you tell Kevin at Skar about how similiar his subs are to Sundown because they are designed by the same person? Or post in every Arc thread about all of the other brands that use their boards? Or is this a special fetish you have for SSA?