Imagine the possibilities of an SPL vehicle that actually imaged well and sounded good from 80hz and up! (when you weren't playing the system at 150db, as nothing will sound "good" at that output level)

This is what I want.

Then a good start would be researching my suggestions

So here is the question I pose. What is the point in giving your subs as everyone always says if squeezing that extra couple hundred watts in there makes no audible difference? Not trying to argue because I don't know enough about this subject to argue it just curious.

For most daily driver systems there really isn't any point. It makes some people feel like they have a bigger dingaling I suppose, and it's "cooler" to say you have 2500w instead of 2kw.

In SPL systems it makes sense to pump every last watt through the system as .1db could be the difference between 1st and 2nd.

But for daily systems......no.

the reason for the coil issue was i went a lil to hard on the sub when i got the saz1500......and the sub was still brand new so i learned my lesson to break em in first

No, "break in" has absolutely nothing at all to do with the damage. What you did was apparently overpower the driver. "Break in" is never necessary. Maintaining control of the power you are delivering to the subwoofer, however, is always necessary.

And yes, only a recone will fix it.

So uh, Brad, how bout a link to some good horns?

A pair of good used CD2's can usually be scored for fair prices and are the highest efficiency of the lot.

Be careful with CD1e's.....the new v3 version linked above to their website use actual compression drivers, though I don't know much more about them, but the prior models used cheap piezo drivers and aren't true HLCD.

I really liked my Illusion Audio CH1's, but they are hard to find and difficult to work with as they had metal horn bodies.

And just so we're clear, i'd love for someone to prove me wrong.. and now just prove me wrong by comparing something like a concert or giving me specs of drivers and what they're capable of.. prove me wrong by showing us, so we know it can be done. Show us installs that have it done, links, videos, pictures, stats, something other then your words and thoughts.

While I can't say whether or not a single comp set will "keep up" to your level, I've always kind of thought the way SPL guys go about it is a bit idiotic.

HLCD + large midbass would be the way to go, IMO. Much more simplistic setup, and one that actually possesses the acoustic capabilities of maintaining good, accurate sound at the same time. Imagine the possibilities of an SPL vehicle that actually imaged well and sounded good from 80hz and up! (when you weren't playing the system at 150db, as nothing will sound "good" at that output level)

For one, HLCD are capable of getting loud enough to literally deafen you. Literally, deafen you. If you think 150db of subbass is loud, consider what ~130db of midrange would sound like (if you don't know the difference in your hearing's sensitivity between subbass and midrange, look up the Equal Loudness Curve). And you'd only need ~50wpc to do it. So from about 800hz and up (for a non-minibodied horn), you won't have to worry about being "drowned out" as the HLCD should cause you physical pain long before you had any problems from the subwoofers.

Now let's look at the midwoofer. You currently have a trio of 6.5" drivers. The average 6.5" driver is going to have an Sd of around 135cm^2 from what I've seen. If we replaced the trio of 6.5's with a single 10" midbass (Sd ~345cm^2 for the 10" drivers without large subwoofer-type surrounds), you'd only lose about 15% in cone area, which for a given excursion level is a difference of only 1.4db......or just barely in the realm of noticeable audibility. There are some other things to consider, like the possibility of the 10" midbass having a larger Xmax increasing output potential in the midbass region and the possibility of lower power compression, etc. But if we just keep everything equal for the sake of discussion, the realistic difference between a single 10" midbass and a trio of 6.5" drivers is going to be almost negligible. Chances are pretty good that at the output levels you're describing, you won't notice a difference.

So there you have it. A pretty simple 4 speaker system that would be more than adequate for your output needs and actually be able to retain some semblance of good sound at lower SPL levels with the right driver selection. No, I've not built a 150db setup because SPL just doesn't interest me all that much. And no, I don't any pictures or videos to show you because for whatever reason most SPL guys don't pursue this route (my guess would be first, it's not as impressive to open a door and see 2 speakers instead of 16 [since horns aren't very visible] and two, it's a simple case of "monkey see monkey do"). But that doesn't negate anything I've said in my post. Pictures might comfort you more than numbers, but the numbers aren't wrong just because they aren't accompanied by pretty pictures. If you have a way of disputing the numbers, I'd be much more interested in that than seeing pictures.

Oh.....I do kinda have one example. RC's GN had old school horns under the dash, 12" mids in the rear quarters and a pair of 15" subs at the rear seats....it is said to have been able to do over 135db full range, which is completely different than 135db in the subbass region. A true, consistent 130db in the midrange would get very painful very quickly, and much exposure would leave you with permanent hearing damage.

They sound good. Natural sound and they seem very good at revealing low level details. Very strong midbass until my processor took it away to deal with a huge resonance I had from the mounting location.

I really just haven't had time to do the same level of critical listening as I did on the CS60CF set.

And why is it that anyone who isn't absolutely awestruck by the subjective opinions made about Blues speakers and who aren't willing to accept them hook, line and sinker are labeled a "hater" by everyone in the Blues camp?

So now we're "haters" if we don't accept subjective opinions as God's written word and suggest that objective measurements are more useful?

Seriously though.....I've asked several times, but have yet to get a direct response to this question by anybody in the Blues camp.

I'm seriously interested in hearing the answer to why this is, as several different people have come in here who are quite obviously supporters of Blues who are up-in-arms that we are over here saying blasphemous things about Blues speakers, when we (the main posters in this thread; i.e. myself and M5) haven't commented about the sound of the speakers themselves at all, other than saying we aren't going to accept opinions about performance as facts.

This is so funny to read. All you haters must realize that hating on a product you have never even heard is obsurd to begin with. Not to mention, there is no reason to hate. If you don't want to spend the money to purchase these drivers....go somewhere else and purchase your speakers. Any rational person would at least listen to the speakers before making an opinion.

Isn't listening to speakers their intended purpose? They weren't designed for the purpose of you testing them so you can stare at measurements your ears clearly don't care about.

I can just imagine you wierdos sitting in your cars listening to whatever brand of speakers you run and thinking about parameters. Boy, you really are enjoying those speakers huh?

....And people judging how a speaker sounds by the way it looks

.....and people demanding parameters for a driver they have no interest in purchasing in the first place

......and people who arent rational.....meaning you could have a super woofer with parameters one could only dream of and these people would still have something bad to say. Now why would any company even humor you with parameters....none....why.....they are rational.

For someone so keen on using the term "rational", you seem to not understand it's definition.

Which line of argument seems most rational to you?

1. Increasing understanding of an object via methods that are reliable, repeatable, comparable and objective in nature.
2. Increasing understanding of an object via reliance upon opinions and experiences which are not reliable, are not repeatable, can not be used to make comparisons, and are subjective in nature and hence will vary from person to person.

Are you seriously trying to tell us that #2 is the more rational, logical means by which to operate? We would still be living in the dark ages if science hadn't developed a logical, rational method by which to discover facts about our world. Why on earth is a method that has allowed us to discover the secrets of the universe and taken us from the first electric grid to the Information Age in barely 100 years suddenly not sufficient to describe the operation of a loudspeaker?

And why is it that anyone who isn't absolutely awestruck by the subjective opinions made about Blues speakers and who aren't willing to accept them hook, line and sinker are labeled a "hater" by everyone in the Blues camp? I bet if you go through this entire 10 page thread, you could count the number of comments negative towards Blues on one hand.....and those comments were not made by the main people contributing to this thread in favor of objective information and against subjective information.

So now we're "haters" if we don't accept subjective opinions as God's written word and suggest that objective measurements are more useful? Simply stating that subjective opinions are exactly that, subjective, and as a result utterly meaningless is not saying that Blues speakers sound bad. I don't recall anyone who hasn't heard the speakers making one single comment about their sound. If there is a post in this thread, it would have to be a single post.

For the most part the later 5 pages has been a discussion of the differing benefits of objective versus subjective information.....that is, until a Blues supporter hops in, takes our posts out of contexts, complains about us "haters" not having heard the speakers and therefore we can't say they sound bad, so we need to stop saying they sound bad.....even though no one had even attempted to comment on their sound.......then we go back in a circle with said supporter about the differing benefits of objective versus subjective information.....then another Blues supports hops in, takes our posts out of contexts, complains about us "haters" not having heard the speakers and therefore we can't say they sound bad, so we need to stop saying they sound bad.....even though no one had even attempted to comment on their sound.......then we go back in a circle with said supporter about the differing benefits of objective versus subjective information.....Are we noticing a trend yet?

If you want to identify what has been the most irrational part of this thread....it would undoubtedly and without question be the responses made by the Blues supporters. The amount of defensive and confrontational posts coming from that end of the conversation, along with the amount of comments being taken completely out-of-context, simply because we aren't impressed by subjective opinions is absolutely astonishing, and quite frankly, laughable.

And really, the T/S parameter thing can be dropped. It was an off-hand comment made to briefly display the value of objective information as those are by far and away the most widely used objective information for loudspeakers. It really wasn't a central or even main point to the discussion......yet for some reason, the Blues guys keep circling back to it. The main point to the discussion is why subjective opinions aren't useful for telling anybody anything about the speakers performance.

But if understanding the value of objective measurements and a lack of willingness to accept subjective opinions as facts makes me a hater, then fine....I'll gladly be a hater.

Presumably, yes.

dude thanks for putting up with my stupidity.. i think i figured it out in idiot terms. I think my best bang for the buck would be to get another single BL (dual 2) and wire that puppy parallel which would show a 1ohm to the amp. now just to be sure that i am learning if i were to do that setup would that sub see the 1800w each coil or 900 each coil (wired parallel)?

oh yeah the birth sheet says 1153 @ 4 ohm, 1739 @ 2 ohm, and 1890 @ 1 ohm

BTW the only reason im asking is because i want to push that thing to the limits (gained down a little of course). right now my current BL (10" dual 1 in series) is in 1.3 cubes with 15sq in port area and sounds pretty good.. but I want great. i want to get all out of it that i can and it seems like it is currently being underpowered with the series configuration. so i figured i could purchase 1 more dual 1 add those 2 together and wire it parallel for a total 1ohm and still get close to full output from my amp.. just looking at what my available options are..

I think the part I bolded in red was a typo?

Like helotaxi said, the subwoofer being wired in series won't have anything at all to do with it being underpowered. And the difference between the amplifier's 2ohm power output and 1ohm power output is completely negligible and inaudible.

Also as helotaxi pointed out, you'll actually get slightly better performance out of each subwoofer if you purchase a 2nd dual 1ohm BL and run 2 subwoofers. In theory, adding a 2nd driver without increasing power would yield a 3db gain (keeping the alignment the same as well).....but you are probably experiencing fairly signficiant power compression with 1800w on a single driver. Adding a second will decrease the power to each subwoofer which will decrease power compression, which is a good thing. It would be possible for you to actually increase peak output by more than 3db due to the decrease in power compression, which robs the driver of output for a given amount of power input.

I'm glad to hear you are okay, but this is nobody's fault but your own. Man up. Are you kidding me that you are going to blame your own negligence on someone's inability to check a weather forecast or not dump water into the street? It's evident from your first post you were driving far too fast and not for the conditions. Use this as a learning experience. Seriously.

Have you ever hit ice before? Do you understand what happens when your tires hit ice? From the way you posted, it doesn't seem like this is the case. When my tires hit the ice, they began to spin. Now, keep in mind that my tires are spinning. So when I hit dry pavement, and my traction returned, my car accelerated uncontrollably. This is what sent me over the curb and into a light pole.

Living in NE IN and driving in adverse weather my entire life, I can pretty much tell you that is NOT what happens when you hit ice unless you kept your foot to the floor the entire time.

I don't know what happened, but from driving on ice literally hundreds and hundreds of times.....I've never in my life experienced what you are describing.

Do you have to use an amp?

No, it's not required. But if nothing else, I'd try to talk them into atleast a small 50w x 2 amp for the comps, that or save some money and go with coaxials for all 4 speakers instead.

For example, here is a US Acoustics on ebay for $25+shipping. I've not dealt with that seller before, but he's been selling refurb'd US Acoustics on ebay for years.

Like I said, I missed that you said you have the "Constant Power" amp.

So yes, at 2ohm your amplifier is outputting 1800w to the subwoofer.

At 1ohm the 1800w will be divided equally between the subwoofers.

Impious, RF isn't doing the normal rating scheme, they are rating full power (1500W) into both 2ohm and 1ohm.

http://www.rockfordf...en_US&p_status=

Don't mind me.....just sleeping at the wheel.

I missed he said he had the Constant Power amps

Then yes, I fucked up. Your sub is getting the 1500w (1800w if you go by the birthsheet) right now, with half of that going to each coil.

Wired to 1ohm, each sub would receive 750w (900w if you go by the birthsheet)

What?

No.

It's receiving 100% of the amplifiers 2ohm power output (assuming you have the gain set correctly), which is probably 900w @ 2ohm.

Ohms law. You should review these before you ask anymore questions.

Read Me 1

Read Me 2

First off happy holidays to you guys. and i appreciate all of the help and knowledge you guys are teaching the inexperienced like myself.. ok.. so right now im running 1 10" Fi Bl (dual 1 ohm) in series to a RF 1500bd cp @ 2 ohms. So its getting close to 1800w (per the birth sheet) so if i decided to add a second and wire it series/parallel down to 1 ohm does that mean that the birth sheet 1800 something w that the amp gives at 1 ohm will be divided equally? (so each sub will get 1800 something divided by 2)

If your current sub is wired to 2ohm, then it's not getting 1800w, it would be receiving half of that.

And yes, if you wire two subs of the same impedance together they will each receive half of the power.

so what you are saying is that its receiving the 1800 total (900 each voice coil)??

No, your current sub is not.

It is receiving 900w (based on your 1800w figure), with each voice coil receiving half of that. So 450w to each voice coil, 900w total to the sub.

When you get a 2nd sub and wire to 1ohm, then each subwoofer will receive 900w, 1800w total to the pair.

The amplifier outputs power based on the final impedance of the connected load. 2ohm final load (two 1ohm coils in series) equals 2ohm power output (around 900w @ 2ohm based on 1800w @ 1ohm). That power is then divided equally to each individual load (in this case with 1 subwoofer, each voice coil, since each voice coil is the same impedance).

First off happy holidays to you guys. and i appreciate all of the help and knowledge you guys are teaching the inexperienced like myself.. ok.. so right now im running 1 10" Fi Bl (dual 1 ohm) in series to a RF 1500bd cp @ 2 ohms. So its getting close to 1800w (per the birth sheet) so if i decided to add a second and wire it series/parallel down to 1 ohm does that mean that the birth sheet 1800 something w that the amp gives at 1 ohm will be divided equally? (so each sub will get 1800 something divided by 2)

If your current sub is wired to 2ohm, then it's not getting 1800w, it would be receiving half of that.

And yes, if you wire two subs of the same impedance together they will each receive half of the power.

I think all of the newer XBL2 subs have more modular, cheaper motors. I think those original motors like on the Tumult and early XXXs was designed/machined as form follows function. When Adire switched to the next gen motors for all of thier stuff, they kind of went on a cost savings route. I see the same thing on the DIY cable stuff.

Not that the new stuff is inferior by any means, I just think those first woofers were Dan Wiggins expression of a no cost compromise subwoofer...

Hard to tell from the picture, but to me it looks like this driver also uses the two-part top plate. I'd gander a guess that even it if was designed similar to the original, it probably uses the same newer assembly/construction method as all of the other XBL drivers. I don't know of any XBL driver currently being produced that doesn't use that style of motor assembly.

Yes, you would need a DMM to set the SSF with any kind of accuracy.

How you are setting the SSF to specific frequencies?

Two explanations for the difference in output at >30hz with the SSF set below that. First, an SSF is nothing more than a highpass filter. The crossover point for the SSF is the -3db point for the filter. So even though it is set to 25hz, it is going to begin attenuating frequencies well above 25hz. Second, depending on how you are setting the SSF, you might not be setting it as accurately as you think.

As far as what is "safe". There's no real answer. It depends on how much power you are running and the excursion levels of your driver in the enclosure. This can be predicted with any enclosure modeling program. Generally there is going to be *some* frequency range below tuning that the drivers excursion will remain with it's linear limits, and then a wider frequency range below tuning that the driver will stay within it's mechanical limits. But where those ranges fall is dependent upon your power level and enclosure.

Another issue could be that the amplifier is clipping and/or if the passive crossovers have built-in tweeter protection, you could be triggering the tweeter protection.

Amplifier clipping in the treble will subjectively sound like a dulling of the sound. And tweeter protection will reduce the power to the tweeter, which will affect it's output relative to the mid.

I would check the line driver (the box connected to the factory speaker wires) to see if it has a gain control and see where that is set, then also check to see where the amplifier's gain is set.

You need to at minimum state a budget.

Sure bro ... Anything is possible ...

But I'm wondering, aim a driver at a listener, how is the system gonna stage ?? ... Oh yea, I forgot, bandaid it with processing and time alignment ... I guess That's why they came up with single seat judging ... I'd rather a system to sound great from anywhere in the vehicle, playing any kind of music ...

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, so I'm not "arguing" per say, just offering a different point of view. (I like to play devils advocate)

If you try to optimize the stereo for both seats in an automobile, you are necessarily going to have to make sacrifices to the sound for both seats as well. It's a trade-off, you can't have the best of both worlds. You can't optimize performance at both listening positions.

On the other hand, if you optimize for a single seat you can reduce the number of sacrifices you are going to have to make to the sound at that one listening position. Sure, one of the trade-offs is that it sounds like monkey butt from the passenger seat.....but if that means better sound in the drivers seat, where most of us involved in car audio sit....than many consider that a beneficial trade-off.

Good sound in two seats, or better sound in one seat.

what im saying is ... that there has been many times where i have swapped amps out either for my self or a customer and it was a noticable change in out put, while only changing rms claimed amps withen 500 watts or so.

so yes... im sayin that it can be noticed by ear... maybe not by everyone.. maybe not in a blind test.. but its not in my mind. i can asure you of that.

and yes i have a termlab that also backs me up. if need be.

There is a measurable difference in 500w of power at any level. Just because something is measurable doesn't mean it's audible, and if it is measurable and audible you still didn't isolate the reasons for the difference. So the termlab results are pretty meaningless

And a 500w power difference doesn't mean anything either. I'd surely bet you could hear a difference in a 500w power difference if we start with a power level of 500w, for example. So that's a pretty meaningless example as well.

And of course you can exchange amplifiers close in power rating and hear a difference. Hell, you can exchange amplifiers rated for the same power and hear a difference. You can exchange two identical amplifiers and hear a difference.

That doesn't mean there was an audible difference in the amplifiers, but rather in the settings. These are two different things completely and should not be confused.

I listen to my system enough I could tell the difference when the amps were switched out.(Cadence to SAE1200) I did a 139.6 with the SAE-1200D on the TermLab and the SAZ-1500D sounds louder to me but haven't had a chance to meter it yet. If I meet up with Hugo or Jon I'll see if we can do a run. I'll bet the numbers go up.

Listening to the system "a lot" really has nothing to do with it. There are limits to the threshold of human hearing.

I'll bet the numbers go up as well, as there is certainly a measurable difference in 300w of power. A noticeably audible difference due to 300w difference in power is less likely, although changes in all of the variables involved certainly allows for there to be a change in sound when exchanging amplifiers.