edouble101

Measurements would be easy. I would think subjective listening would require multiple people with trained ears and then a final conclusion for the test to be valid. Based on product descriptions the soft parts used for the sp4 and evil are the same. The difference seems to be in the motor. The motor and the soft parts yield the same t/s parameters on both drivers. How much of a difference in maximum spl output and sound quality could there be between these two drivers?

Had to of been differences in the install and vehicle they were installed in. So are you suggesting that if we placed two different drivers that had the exact or nearly exact t/s paramerters in a controled environment, that they will sound the same musically? Good question. I have never heard of such a test. Certainly would be interesting.

Had to of been differences in the install and vehicle they were installed in.

I am searching the market for my next sub system. I am considering and comparing a lot of different drivers. Unless I am not seeing it the Evil and SP4 model nearly exactly the same. Enclosure size, power handling and xmax (along with the rest of the specs) are also nearly identical. The biggest difference is cost. What is different in the design purpose? And btw I didn't neg rep you. Both are 18" same power, same enclosure (within manufacturer specs)

I read it. I didn't see any mention of specifics enclosure parameters. Such as tuning and airspace relationship of the different spaces.

The designs are exactly the same. There is a reason why the area of the opening is the size it is. I highly doubt it's forth order. JL's boxes normally have a shallower rolloff. Without modeling I'd guess its more than likely closer to 2nd order. Is it possible to design an enclosure similar to these?

I never said that the new enclosure was a bandpass. It is a forth order though (not a forth order bandpass). Their old design looks like a bandpass.

What makes this enclosure perform any better than a normal forth order enclosure? Or this old style. Just a forth order bandpass?

Yes.

lol

No but when one side goes out ill switch them around and it will just be one side not working..... not sure about the sound. . When there would be weird sound coming through lets say on my tweeters if I faded them out on my eq there would be a staticy/poping sound still... but then I unhook the rca and it goes away......... then ill get a new set of rca's and it will be cool for a little bit...... I have been working in my trunk a while and unhooking and hooking them up alot No but when one side goes out ill switch them around and it will just be one side not working..... not sure about the sound. . When there would be weird sound coming through lets say on my tweeters if I faded them out on my eq there would be a staticy/poping sound still... but then I unhook the rca and it goes away......... then ill get a new set of rca's and it will be cool for a little bit...... I have been working in my trunk a while and unhooking and hooking them up alot Cant say for sure it is your rca's without checking them. You should have zero resistance from one rca end to the other (neg to neg or pos to pos). Sure it isn't your amp?

ID horn bodies are designed to be mounted under the dash. They use the dash contour for sound dispersion. You could place your midbass drivers behind you. Staging will certainly be affected. Some installs use midbass in the rear quarter panels (similar to your approach) and a dedicated midrange in the kicks with horns under the dash. I personally never listened to an install like this but a few that have seem to like it. Your legs will be squished mounting an enclosed large diameter midbass in the doors. It will stick out much farther than you are thinking. Your horn mounting sounds like a good start. I assume you are using a large body ID horns since you say you can cross them at 800hz (the horn body dictates the high pass freq not the driver). Place tape on top of the horn body and use a protractor to draw a 20 degree angle (this the angle of the horn face in relationship to the driver, mini body is 30 degrees that is why they say they "cross fire harder") from the face through the compression driver opening. Place the horn body in your mounting location. You can then extend the line you drew on the horn with a string. The string or imaginary line should aim to the opposite side head or ear. Example: passenger horn to driver's side right ear and driver's horn to passenger side left ear. This will help you determine if the depth of the horn under that dash is correct. Vertically the horn bodies have to be parallel to the floor boards. I prefer all-in-one units although a p-eq is hard to come by unless you have a separate dsp. But that is another topic.

How do you know it is the rca cable that is faulting? Do you check them with a dvm?

For the best soundstage and imaging kick panel mounted midbass/midrange when used with horns. As always what are you willing to compromise?

You could always use the icon in a sealed enclosure if you do not have the room for a properly designed ported enclosure.

Here is another reason why midbass/midrange in doors is not optimal. You will need to cross the midbass/midrange above or around 800hz. Having these drivers mounted in your doors will pull your soundstage down. Think of it as a rainbow. The majority of your midrange frequencies coming from your dash area and the lower midrange coming from your doors. Really depends on how critical you want to be about achieving the best soundstage.

You will not be able to use the mini dsp and also power your horns from the h/u. The horns would not see any processing then, which they need. I can tell you from experience ported enclosures in the door are very hard to get right. It is much easier to build ported pods in the kick panel area. There are numerous 8-10" drivers that come to mind that will work well in -1^3ft ported enclosures for your install.

I guess a single page pulled from a book with a couple pictures is a lot to read these days. If you clicked on the link you would see a page refrenced lol

 How is this so? I assume kerfing the inner port wall (opening) would kind of act in a expanding wave type deal. But if only at the edge..how would an inch or so distance of port opening kerf be more effective than kerfing the entire inner wall(s) of the port? My goal with kerfing is to create a more efficient path for air to travel, increasing port air velocity and lessening resistance from the traditional 90degree L-Port design. I am not an engineer in fluid mechanics but I would think it would be more beneficial to decrease turbulence at the mouth of the port. Any bends throughout the port length are typically cut at a forty five degree angle to reduce turbulence. Which is standard practice for many speaker enclosure designers. What is most important is that your port is properly designed for your enclosure. Is there legitimate turbulence at the mouth though? I dont know. I assumed since it is coming from a confined space into an open space that turbulence(resistance to flow?) would be minimal at the mouth. But yes, I did try to calculate port volume as accurately as possible for my setup. This excerpt explains port turbulence at the mouth of the port http://books.google.com/books?id=Twu0oHE1ukgC&pg=PA82&lpg=PA82&dq=subwoofer+port+turbulence&source=bl&ots=CmScq2T7PB&sig=54zGZg59cPG50S2PMbFg_OJh0vU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bziKUZHiJ4_e4AOSq4GAAQ&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBg

How is this so? I assume kerfing the inner port wall (opening) would kind of act in a expanding wave type deal. But if only at the edge..how would an inch or so distance of port opening kerf be more effective than kerfing the entire inner wall(s) of the port? My goal with kerfing is to create a more efficient path for air to travel, increasing port air velocity and lessening resistance from the traditional 90degree L-Port design. I am not an engineer in fluid mechanics but I would think it would be more beneficial to decrease turbulence at the mouth of the port. Any bends throughout the port length are typically cut at a forty five degree angle to reduce turbulence. Which is standard practice for many speaker enclosure designers. What is most important is that your port is properly designed for your enclosure.

I didnt think so. Thanks for the reply.

I will be using four Phoenix Gold ZPA amplifiers in my next build. Two of the ZPA 0.5 will be used to power my subwoofers. I am considering two ICON 15". All four of my ZPA have v2 mods as well as cap replacement and the two 0.5 wil have upgraded power supply components. At a 4 ohm mono load the 0.5's output is around 1200w, at 2 ohm mono output is around 1600w. Since these are class a/b amplifiers current draw increases fairly significantly at 2 ohms mono. Do you think I should use these amps at 4 or 2 ohm mono load? I would think that the damping factor would also be lower at 2 ohm mono. This is a daily install and the design goal is more SQ orientated than SPL. BTW I can uograde to a 390a alternator if needed. Vehicle is a 2013 Chevy Traverse.