Impious

How did evaluating samples give you get an "idea" for a product you'd like when you didn't even understand how that product works? Wouldn't need to understand how a certain product functions before you get an "idea" for a product design? You had to ask Don how CLD worked after you were promoting your product. So, how did you go about designing the product and it's performance aspects before you understood how CLD even functioned?

Yes, the slopes will combine. If you have exactly the same crossover frequency on both 2nd order filters the slope will be -24db/oct and the signal will be down -6db at the crossover frequency as opposed to -3db. This is exactly what a Linkwitz-Riley crossover filter is. Two cascaded 2nd order filters. If the xover frequencies are staggered, things are little different...but the filter slopes will still combine.

It's not overpriced. Economically if it were overpriced, it wouldn't sell. That's basic. But they do sell, and have for almost 10 years at their current price level. They are expensive, yes. But expensive and overpriced are not the same thing. Just because something is expensive, does not mean it's overpriced. And it's not "hype". They are very well performing drivers, and have been verified to be such for almost a decade. We could argue price vs performance and alternative options, but that's a separate matter. However it would probably not be the best subwoofer for this particular application. Which is also not related to it being either overpriced or "hype" Consumers dictate cost based on perception of value. JL had excellent marketing back in the day which has left name recognition now. The uninformed consumer equates big with good. Big motor, good, big surround, good, deep sub, good. Combine that with name recognition and people will pay whatever you want for them. JL prided themselves with 7 years of design that was ahead of it's time, and when it was released it was behind everybody else. That hasn't changed AT ALL over the last 10 years they've been sold. So why will people continue to buy it? The same reason Apple will continue to sell a POS for twice as much as a comparable product that works better, marketing and perception of value. They are overpriced for those who see the real value in them, not the status symbol in them. When I worked for a JL dealer and somebody came in and refused to have anything but JL and wanted a W7, we'd try to sell them a W6v2 because they were just as loud and sounded better. We'd only sell a W7 if they told us they were walking out of there with a W7. I'm not wanting to start this with you because it will turn into a 3 page discussion in which you fail at supporting your argument in any meaningful way and spend most of the time dodging the actual crux of the argument. I've learned my lesson there. My prior comment stands. Though I find your comment funny that they were ahead of the curve for 7 years when they were building essentially off-the-shelf drivers (which is why SPL was able to copy the original W6 to a tee, using cheaper lower quality parts was their downfall), but when they release one of the first high displacement low distortion drivers on the mainstream market they were behind everybody else.

It's not overpriced. Economically if it were overpriced, it wouldn't sell. That's basic. But they do sell, and have for almost 10 years at their current price level. They are expensive, yes. But expensive and overpriced are not the same thing. Just because something is expensive, does not mean it's overpriced. And it's not "hype". They are very well performing drivers, and have been verified to be such for almost a decade. We could argue price vs performance and alternative options, but that's a separate matter. However it would probably not be the best subwoofer for this particular application. Which is also not related to it being either overpriced or "hype"

You kids can have your PS3's and Xbox360's. I like to kick it old school, ColecoVision style circa 1982....with the original steering wheel ! Good shit.

Really? That's odd for for an SSF. I (incorrectly) assumed it would have been steeper. It would probably still be fine. But if you really want the added protection from the potential dumbass attack you can add an inline as Nick mentioned. Or you could model cone excursion in WinISD with an added 2nd order highpass filter to simulate your amps SSF.

What that graph tells me is that you have the Treo in the wrong enclosure. Your graph for the SSX looks fairly similar to the results from Unibox (Unibox doesn't show quite as big of a dip, but the shape is generally the same). And I realize Treo recommends 2.25cuft tuned to around 37hz (based on the F3 predicted by Unibox, since Treo only gives port dimensions and F3 and not actually recommended port tuning, and I'm too lazy to calculate it out). But keep in mind the recommended enclosure is only a single alignment and response out of a wide range of options, and Treo's goals for their recommended enclosure size may be something different than your goals. Treo's recommendation is not very smooth and poorly damped. I realize you aren't spot on Treo's recommended enclosure. But moral of the story is that enclosure has a lot to do with performance. I've played around and found some better options, I'll leave it up to you to see if you can do the same. Spend some time playing around with your new enclosure program and redesign an enclosure for the Treo and see what you think before you spend money on a new sub. Applied power can be important for predicting cone excursion levels, to make sure you aren't exceeding your subwoofers excursion capabilities and to determine how much power a driver may "require" for a given enclosure.

No. They are the same thing. And really it's just a fancy way of saying it's a highpass filter with a really low crossover frequency and generally a steep slope. No. And actually, since the SSF is simply a highpass crossover the crossover point is defined as the -3db point of the signal. So if you set it to your tuning frequency, you will actually be attenuating the output by -3db at the tuning frequency (and attentuating output above the tuning frequency also). Yes, you need to set to a point where the filter reduces the signal enough to keep the driver from overexcurting below tuning. There are a dozen "rules of thumb" that people go by. Probably the easiest thing to do is load your driver, enclosure and power into an enclosure simulation program and look at the excursion graph. Look at the point where the excursion for the driver exceeds Xmax. You would want to set the SSF somewhere around or slightly above that frequency. "Generally" you should be safe for about a half octave below tuning (half octave = frequency * .75) Yes, should be fine.

Read my first post in this thread. It pretty much covers your questions. Unless you were asking for specific subwoofer suggestions. In which case, you didn't provide enough information for us to assist you.

It's not like they aren't going to sell you one because you want to put it into a car instead of a house. Product placement wise, it makes more sense to be in the home audio marketed brand.

Yes, yes you are. You demonstrated that perfectly by actually filing the shipping claim (which is simply a delay tactic) a full 8 days after you stated in this thread that it had been done. Way to stay on top of things.....keep up the good work mate. Well, I have only 7 days before I am unable to dispute this. Maybe that was why he delayed it so long?? If you paid by paypal, I'd check with them and see if you can open a paypal dispute now that way it is in place pending the outcome of the shipping claim.

Yes, yes you are. You demonstrated that perfectly by actually filing the shipping claim (which is simply a delay tactic) a full 8 days after you stated in this thread that it had been done. Way to stay on top of things.....keep up the good work mate.

Kevin's name being drug through the mud has nothing to do with anything other than his own previous dealings, and his interaction here. If this were a first offense, chances are good most would give everyone involved a fair shake. But we are able to see the forest for the trees. Kevin's fucked up in the past. Plain and simple. He can't deny it, though I'm sure he wishes he were able to delete it from the internet. Here is his chance to show his shining new self. To show he's turned over a new leaf. Even if he has to eat a little money in the process, that's the price of trying to fix a tarnished reputation. But what has he done so far? So far he's denied any responsibility what-so-ever, and followed that up by threatening to stop his assistance in the matter if OP continues to post in this thread rather than keep the continuation of the transaction strictly to email (which is private, and much easier to cover one's tracks). Does it sound like a new Kevin? Nope. Sounds like the same old Kevin to me. He bitches about not having time to check the forums. If it were my name on the line, especially while trying to grow several new business, you'd bet your ass I'd stay on top of it out in the open. If that meant being inconvenienced, so be it. Then again, I wouldn't get myself into this situation to begin with. And if I did, I'd have already refunded money regardless of who was at fault to demonstrate my renewed commitment to good service and turning over a new leaf. And yes, somebody is out money. The guy with a non-working amp.

You are arguing semantics, not content. You are arguing semantics, not 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. 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. 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. 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.

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? 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. 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. 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'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

Refund the guy his money regardless of how/where the damage was done for no reason other than to demonstrate good faith towards the members of this forum. Given Kevin's past history, I'm under the assumption the amp was damaged prior to shipping. "The best indicator of future behavior, is past behavior" - Dr. Phil

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. 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. 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.

You apparently don't understand the difference in average power between a sinewave and squarewave.

World Champion in SQ for years had 6 L7 15"s....... And for quite some time the SQ champ (Gary Biggs) had a pair of SoloX 18's. What's your point? The 18's didn't even play till they did the SPL portion. When I competed in SQ I had a judge tell me there was too much bass from the subs in the back when the amp wasn't even on. I believe this was said because I did a 153 before that. Subs don't sound bad because of their shape, Xtant's hex sub actually sounds quite good. Both Eldridge and Biggs, as well as about a dozen other competitors, have used L7's as the subwoofers in their system for the SQ judging portion as well. Consider this, at what sound levels are the testing? How much are the drivers actually moving? Even if they are moving 1mm, that's not enough use of the suspension for anything to sound terrible. 120 isn't difficult to make sound good. 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. 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. 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. I'm not really sure what your actual point has been in this thread, as you seem to simply be playing devil's advocate. But my point is simply yes, it is possible to have an L7 that doesn't sound bad.

Stereo. Simple rule of thumb.....you need a "left" and a "right" for everything except the subwoofer. Midbass, midrange, treble (tweeters)....all stereo. You can still run the system from the single 4-channel amplifier.....it'll just require you use a passive crossover for the mids and tweeters instead of running active. I had a system like this a couple years ago and really loved the simplicity of it. Were you wanting a single amplifier for space reasons, simplicity reasons, or budget reasons?

Keep in mind the enclosure, vehicle and system tuning has as much to do with the sound as the subwoofer itself. Simply listening to a driver doesn't qualify someone to make factual statements about it's performance, nor does it mean you received an accurate representation of it's performance characteristics. Your experience might have been negative simply because the system was designed with SPL as the primary goal rather than maintaining relatively decent sound, or a dozen other factors. I'm not saying that the SoloX is necessarily the best driver for you, or the better option of the two. The Fi very well could be a better option for your goals. I'm simply clarifying that having "listened" to a driver is not as meaningful as people make it seem. This applies to all speakers, not just the SoloX. People misinterpret having "listened" to a speaker, or even owning one, as qualifying them to make factual statements about it's performance without considering the all of the factors involved in and contributing to that listening experience. What sounds like ass in one system might sound like magic in another.

World Champion in SQ for years had 6 L7 15"s....... And for quite some time the SQ champ (Gary Biggs) had a pair of SoloX 18's. What's your point? The 18's didn't even play till they did the SPL portion. When I competed in SQ I had a judge tell me there was too much bass from the subs in the back when the amp wasn't even on. I believe this was said because I did a 153 before that. Subs don't sound bad because of their shape, Xtant's hex sub actually sounds quite good. Both Eldridge and Biggs, as well as about a dozen other competitors, have used L7's as the subwoofers in their system for the SQ judging portion as well.

Or that the nut for the kompression fitting was taller than the block itself, so the nut would scrap the bottom plate when you tried to tighten it which made it a complete PITA to try to tighten or loosen the fitting I hated the kompression block I had and the kompression fitting (wire always felt loose). Knu products are cheap in price, and after using several of their blocks I know why........ Great CS, I'll give them that. But I won't be ordering anymore of their products.

I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from that story. Doesn't really demonstrate much of anything.

Can't run active with a mid and tweeter sharing a channel. Active requires each driver have it's own dedicated channel as the processing occurs at the preamp stage.