Impious

I guess I misinterpreted this statement you made; "This is something we developed over 2 years ago and never sold." We developed generally does not mean it was something presented to you by a 3rd party and you passed on it......it means your company developed the product but decided not to take it to market.

No problem. It really won't be very difficult. I'm no expert on deadener, but I'll try to explain to the best of my abilities. Hopefully Don will chime in aswell as some point. First, you said; "all sound deadener really does is add mass" That in-and-of itself demonstrates that you don't understand how constrained layer dampers (CLD) function. There is a reason they call them constrained layer dampers and not just "mass panels". Constrained layer dampers function due to the interaction of the viscoelastic layer and the contraining layer. The quality and thickness of both the viscoelastic layer and the constraining layer will determine how well the product performs. It does also add mass to the panel that lowers the panels resonance, but that certainly is not "all it really does" as you incorrectly stated. For a brief overview of how CLD works, see HERE To my understanding, because of how constrained layer dampers function each additional layer is increasingly less effective than the layer adhered directly to the host panel. Which means for panel damping it is best to use a single layer of the best damper you can find than multiple layers of inferior deadeners (which are inferior in their deadening properties to begin with). The additional layers may decrease noise transmission, but at that point you are wasting time and money for a benefit that can be had through cheaper and more effective means (MLV, etc). I believe there are also other issues such as open vs. closed termination, but I'm not well versed so I'll simply mention it here incase you decide to research further on your own. Lastly, your "the more you use the better" statement has already been dismantled over the years by people like John (FoxPro5) and Don (Rudy/Rudeboy). Effectively and adequately reducing vibration and resonance in a panel generally does not require 100% coverage and multiple layers of CLD. There is a point of diminishing returns where you are spending time and money on an expensive product for little to no additional damping benefits. Again, you may see some decrease in noise transmission by covering everything and using multiple layers of CLD to do it, but then you are using the wrong product for the job and better results could be achieved more cost effectively by using proper barrier materials. That statement in and of itself doesn't make any sense. How can mass have nothing to do with a barrier but density does, when density is simply mass per unit volume? I would have to disagree that you are more knowledgeable about sound waves and deadening than M5 (it was his statement, not mine). See above. Already covered the inaccuracy contained in these types of statement. Ensolite is actually extremely poor at absorption, as are most closed cell foams. It diffuses better than it absorbs, and a single layer of typical thickness (1/8 - 1/4") is not thick enough to absorb a majority of the frequency range. Open cell foam is what you need if you want to absorb sound, and it's range of absorption frequencies will be related to it's thickness and a few other factors. If you want to absorb sound, Ensolite or any other CCF is not the right tool for the job. As a matter of fact, if you look on the SDS website they sell CCF as a decoupler, not as a sound absorption product as it's simply not effective for that use. It's hilarious that you think you understand sound deadening, frankly. I would suggest you spend some time on the various forums searching out posts by the above mentioned users, as they have shared a wealth of information on deadening and noise control over the years. None of which coincides with your current notion of "correct sound deadening".

Bear in mind that though they are similar products, Ant (SecondSkin) and Don (SDS) have different deadening philosophies. Don @ SDS is the individual who promotes the idea of 25% coverage, and as a result developed the CLD tiles to make it easier and more cost effective to achieve that goal. Ant claims he had developed the SPL tiles a year or two ago, yet interestingly didn't release them until after SDS started marketing their CLD tiles. I would highly recommend the CLD Tiles from SDS. Don is amazingly helpful and always provides useful information aimed at helping people achieve their goals rather than selling them more product. EDIT: I would like to point out that when I posted this response, I had not realized this thread was moved from the General forum to the SecondSkin subforum. Infact I think it was moved while I was responding.

Common psychoacoustic affect. The same reason people think their speakers/subwoofers "sound better" after some extended but arbitrary period of time and incorrectly attribute it to "break in". Your perception of the sound has changed as you've listened to it more.

ok my amplifier has no internal fusing and is around 2000 watts (i dont know how accurate hifonics amp ratings are) so do i need an 2nd fuse near the amp?? I see in your sig that you only have one amp. If that is true you'll will only need 1 fuse and that would be placed near the battery. Now the fuse you put in the holder would be rated for what the amp needs to be protected, and not the wire. But if you have two amps this is a different story. Wrong. The fuse right next to the battery protects the wire, not the amp. Thats why it is right after the battery and not right before the amp. The fuse before the amp, protects the amp. KU40 just explained this. What exactly would this 2nd fuse near the amplifier be protecting that the primary fuse near the battery could not protect against, given it was rated appropriately to protect amplifier and wire rather than sized for the wire only? If the amplifier has onboard fuses, then the fuse near the battery only needs to be rated appropriately for the wire. If the amplifier doesn't have onboard fuses, then the fuse near the battery needs to be rated sufficiently to protect both wire and amplifier (which ever is less....which if you used the correct gauge wire will be the amplifier). A 2nd fuse on the same wire seems unnecessarily redundant. It's not protecting anything the primary fuse couldn't.

Doors have many problems that kickpanels address and improve upon. Don't use your performance from a door to indicate performance in kickpanels. Also, "low" is a relative term. Good kickpanels will still allow for a soundstage above the dash. Good kickpanels with intelligent use of processing will allow just as high a soundstage as anything else. There are several problems with separating the tweeters. It can take more advanced processing and skill to obtain good results due to a few different reasons, and as M5 pointed out there are issues with reflective surfaces.

You have much to learn young Jedi. x2 Not saying Raammat is bad. If you search around you'll see I've highly recommended it on many occasions. One of the better "bang for your buck" deadeners on the market. But your understanding is severely lacking.

If you are not using an install that has close to equal pathlengths between you and both the left and right midrange and midbass drivers.....you will want, scratch that, need time alignment. And if you are going active, adjustable slopes are extremely useful. I don't believe the DQXS offers either of those features.

Well, then I guess your comment was even more meaningless than I originally thought if you were talking simply about the physical size of the magnet. I guess I interpretted your comment to mean motor strength rather than physical dimensions. That's only because you haven't said much that was right Is there some magic speaker genie who I can summon to allow this? Because otherwise, chances are good I will not hear a pair anytime in the short term or reasonable long term future. Why? Because 1) I have no need for a 4" driver, so I am not going to waste (yes, waste) $300 on a pair of drivers I literally have no use for simply so I can say I've heard them and 2) I live in a geographical car audio void absent of any meaningful audio "community". If, however, you wanted to send me your L4's for a demo I would gladly give them a listen. There's much more useful information contained in a quality objective overview of a driver than there is in a subjective evaluation (especially one conducted in something as uncontrolled as one particular vehicle installation)......if you understand the numbers and what they are telling you. There is a reason every driver on the market goes through a variety and multitude of modeling and measurements before a single person listens to them. Subjective "listening" isn't that useful for driver evaluation unless you are seeking one individuals opinion of them in the particular scenario in which they were demoed. In what way are the T/S parameters amazing? I don't know if I've ever seen the word "amazing" used to describe T/S parameters before....

While I don't know the quality of your "ear" so to speak...i.e. I have no idea what you will and will not like...you can get some damn fine performing drivers for much less than either Hybrid or Scanspeak. You could complete your entire 3-way front stage for probably not a lot more than a single pair of L4's and much less than a pair of 12m's, and quite possibly would end up just as happy. I would especially suggest this route if this is your first foray into either an active setup or into the finer side of sound quality. No need to break the bank on a "first" setup that's going to take a lot of learning to get right anyways. Once you get more skilled in the art you could decide if stepping up into more expensive drivers is worth the plunge (which it may not be....as I said, a lot of reasonably priced drivers really do perform quite well). If you want to look for some sites that list driver results, you can start here; http://www.zaphaudio.com http://www.audioheuristics.org/ http://www.diymobile...s-driver-specs/ All of them provide measurements on tested drivers along with some commentary to help you figure out what you're looking at. Should help point you in the direction of which affordable drivers also perform well. EDIT: Forgot to mention, you could use some of that saved speaker money on a different processor. The W505 will control the H701, and depending on install locations you would likely benefit from the H701's time alignment and adjustable slopes (neither of which I believe the Audiocontrol offers). Used H701's can be had for a decent price.

Why wouldn't I? The comments I made, and claims you've made, have nothing to do with whether or not I have heard them. BL independently is a pretty worthless spec.....You brought it into the conversation, and actually ended up being wrong on the basis of the L4's motor strength compared to the 12m. And as I mentioned above, the "reason" you brought it into the conversation wasn't accurate either. So I guess the question is.....if we both agree it's not an important number, why did you bring it up as a supposed strong point in favor of the L4? They are useful when used as intended, but only if you understand what they are telling you and the intention of their use. Which I again question on your end. Go back through my posts, and count the number of negative comments I made against Hybrid. The sole negative comment you can find was based directly on the mediocre objective results of the L3 as I indicated above. You can keep claiming I have some bias against the company if you wish, but it doesn't really make any sense if you actually read my posts. My posts have been directly questioning your comments and requested verification of your comments.....neither of which I received. You apparently aren't very familiar with Zaph Nor of the validity and usefulness of qualified third party independent measurements.

No, I gave the Qts as measured by Zaph Audio, as I specifically stated in my post. The Qms of the 12m isn't even close to .52 I'm more than a bit confused as to how you could misinterpret me, when I specifically stated that it was the Qts of the 12m as measured by Zaph. http://www.zaphaudio...st/compare.html the Qms or moving mass of the L4 is half of that of the 12m. The L4 does have a lower stated Qms and moving mass......but I'm failing to see the point of you mentioning that as it doesn't make one driver better or worse than the other. I have heard both in sponsored team installs that were both top-notch. I spoke with both installers, and also demoed both vehicles. One vehicle was using scanspeak drivers and the other hybrid drivers. the scanspeak driver had a LPF on it at 4khz because it got extremely sharp and unnatural above that range. not a big deal as tweeters are used for that range anyway, but for versatility the L4's ability to play up and through 17khz perfectly clean is an advantage. on the low-end, the 12m drops off pretty hard ~140 hz. and it even struggles at ~160 hz. the 8" drivers used in the scanspeak install were xover at 160 as that was the lowest installer felt was still reproduced efficiently by the scanspeak. the L4 was crossovered down at least to 125 hz in the three team hybrid demo's I got. and one of them had it rolling off naturally on a 12db/slope at 100hz. That is quite impressive for a 4" mid. Unfortunately how two different installers used one particular driver in their particular installations does not characterize the drivers as a whole.....simply how they were used in that particular install, in that particular vehicle, tuned by that particular installer. It's not a valid comparison, hence the usefulness of objective measurements. Just to give a different example of how experiences for different people in different installations will vary.....Many people who have used the JBL 2118H will tell you that they are no good below 80hz, yet Mark Eldridge used them in his vehicle down to 40hz. i say nowhere near the power capabilites because of audible clarity loss and distortion levels of the 12m at higher volumes. The L4's, although recommended to xover at 140 hz at higher levels remains perfectly clean and clear with even more than the rated 175 watts of power. (note at this volume it is hardly an SQ demo, but does show capabilities of the drivers) Again, I request a valid reference for this statement. Saying "because that's what I heard" is not a valid reference, especially when comparing two different installations in two different vehicles. Again I will mention the usefulness of objective measurements. the L4 is the only midrange on the market to stay within 2 db SPL on the response curve within its recommended xover points or frequency response. Again, I request independent objective measurements that confirm this. the scanspeak, like the average midrange varies by 5db. that is a huge difference. Zaph's graph I posted earlier shows it's within 3db from approx 150hz to approx 7.5khz. While Scanspeak doesn't really provide "recommended xover points" as they are more in the OEM/DIY market, I'd say that reasonably covers the range most 4" drivers are used within, and 3db is a standard range of acceptability. the L4 uses a lighter motor structure and larger magnet resulting in less moving mass and higher control. audiblly the results are a quicker smoother response and the ability to play the very high frequencies. What marketing literature did you get that from? The L4 may have lower Mms, but the 12m has higher motor force (both in terms of strictly BL and BL^2/Re). So the L4 does not have a "larger magnet" (i.e. stronger motor). Regardless, your first sentences does not prove the second. The more you attempt to discuss the driver objectively, the easier it is to see you don't actually understand it. I don't understand why you guys, who to my knowledge, may be wrong and do not want to assume, but to my knowledge are not SQ experts and do not spend much time with SQ. While nobody here is an "expert", you would be horribly wrong to presume that many of us here are not interested in the quality of sound moreso than quantity. Hybrid has proven itself as a world class audio driver since the beginning of the company. I did extensive research and had the opportunity to get a few demos from many amazing SQ cars, and in the end I chose Hybrid Audio. I will agree that great sounding speakers and what you think the best sounding speakers is very much personal opinion, which is why I have made several recommendations to the OP. IMO Hybrid is and until I find something better to me the best out there. especially for the money. if you disagree and like something fine, Are you getting paid for all of the marketing you provide them? If not, you should be. but it is quite obvious I can back up my reasoning Actually, you have yet to back up your reasoning with anything substantial. Thus far it's all been a subjective marketing-propaganda type of approach from you, and when more objective details are brought up you generally provide nothing useful or don't understand the subject matter. I will say I find it funny how when Hybrid Audio is a part of the SSA forum it's a great speaker, and now they are not, everytime I mention it someone that is adament SSA has to try and cut them down. I'm not here to try and influence anyone to feel that what I feel is the best they should also, and I don't understand why you guys are seeming to do just that. If you could provide anything objective that backed up your opinion, I'd be all for it. Thus far, you've failed to do so. And if you go back and read my posts, the only negative comment I have made against Hybrid is that the one driver I've seen objectively tested wasn't really anything special. So far I've simply been asking you to provide some kind of real support for your comments....which you've really yet to do. So far they only thing you've really provided is that 1) you've listened to them and liked them, and 2) they've won some trophies. BTW: Name what hybrid vehicle any of you have sat in and demoed. Name them, please, I would love to know. None. I would also love to know what drivers you believe are the best and then show results of any good sized SQ competition in the last few years where they have proven themselves, and dont' give the trophies don't mean anything BS, they aren't everything, but you can def. get an idea of what is worth running and what isn't by going to competitions. You would have to be extremely ignorant or naive to believe there is a "best" anything. So it's a relatively stupid question to begin with. But, to throw you a bone....when the weather gets warm again (doubt I'll have time to finish the system before winter) I will be using Image Dynamics CD2Neo full body horns (which have been used in dozens of award winning and world-championship sound quality vehicles) with a pair of either JBL 2118H mids (used by the likes of Mark Eldridge and Dr. Doug Winker, et al, to win many sound quality trophies, awards and world-championships) or CSS Trio8's (they are newcomers to the speaker world so they have no pedigree). I have both of the mids, plan to try them both and see which I prefer.

no, the 12m doesn't have shit on the L4 I promise you. I would find that a little surprising, especially considering the (admittedly only) Hybrid I've seen objective measurements for wasn't anything particularly special. As a matter of fact, the L3 was bested in that particular case by a ~$30 midrange. With a comment like that I'd question if you even understood Q. Although, FWIW, the measurements for the 12m on Zaph's site show a Qts of .52 and Fs of 88hz.....pretty darn similar to the advertised T/S of the L4. So how similar their Q's are is going to depend on the actual measured parameters of the L4..... Reference for this statement? Just off a glance, I couldn't find winding length or layers for both for comparison, but I did find the L4 uses a 25.5mm coil diameter whereas the 12m uses a larger 38mm diameter coil. Regardless, higher power handling wouldn't inherently make it a "better" driver as power handling is an aspect that doesn't really affect the quality of the sound produced or necessarily indicate the L4 is capable of higher output in and of itself. Reference for this? Just off a glance I don't see a reason the 12m wouldn't be able to play as low or as high as the L4 within the reasonably intended bandwidth a 4" driver would be used in. Every driver has a "rainbow" response curve in that it falls off on the top and bottom. Here is the measured response of the 12m by Zaph; http://www.zaphaudio...12M4631G-FR.gif I'd say that's pretty flat within the passband that a 4" driver would typically be used. FWIW, here is the FR of the L3 taken by npdang on DIYMA; http://diymobileaudi...3/legatiafr.JPG That we can both agree on.

And to make it worse, Bring It On is the only thing on TV right now. Kirsten Dunst is hideous.

So, I like totally can't sleep right now. Almost 1:30am....not tired. This sucks.

Indeed

I'm not familiar with the acoustics of a Silverado....but my kicks didn't have any problems with stage height

Cigarettes, yes. I've been telling myself for a couple years that I'm going to quit. Hasn't happened yet. I guess you could say I quit trying to quit.

Magnet weight will tell you absolutely nothing about how good a subwoofer is. A 50lb turd is still a turd.

My electrical is a stock alternator and Kinetik 1800HC battery, and I could play my system full bore at night with the AC on high with little to no dimming. A power cap wouldn't be the fix for electrical issues anyways....but how your vehicle reacts is going to depend on 1) the condition and strength of your electrical system and b) how you use the amplifier. I wasn't using it's full power capability because I didn't need to (components won't handle a full 250w continuous, so the front channels weren't close to actually outputting 250w and an IB sub doesn't need a full 500w to reach it's mechanical limits). 11.75 In. x 15.25 In. x 3.75 In. Here is where mine was mounted....took up virtually no trunkspace as it was tucked in an open "cubby" http://www.soundsolu...post__p__410136 Anyways.....I'm not trying to sell you this amp...LOL. If you think the Alpine fits your needs better, by all means go for it. But you asked for options on amps that could run the system so I thought I would throw it out there.

It's not aluminum tinned or coated. That's completely different. 90% of CCA wire is aluminum. It's an aluminum wire with a thin coating of copper to help protect against oxidation. The sole purpose of doing it this way is to reduce the cost of the wire. There are no performance benefits...aluminum is simply a worse conductor than copper.

FYI, the KLM is thicker because it is Copper Clad Aluminum (CCA), which inherently has higher resistance and worse conductivity. If the KLM were the same thickness as the Stinger, then it would have higher resistance and more voltage drop. So they had to make the wire thicker to compensate for and offset this higher resistance. KLM is not thicker because it's better...it's thicker because it needs to be to compensate for it's own performance deficiencies compared to the pure copper cable. Edit: And from looking @ Knu's website, they've replaced the KLM with KLMX which has the same surface area as their copper products...which means it is inferior in performance to anything that's 100% copper of equivalent gauge. They now state on their website the KLMX is designed for lighter current loads.

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/classifieds/67318-f-s-mb-quart-qaa-4250-a.html Not sure if you are opposed to buying used, and I have no relationship with or to the seller so I can't vouch for him personally....but that amp is a BEAST. 250w x 4 @ 4ohm or 2ohm, rear channels are 500w @ 4ohm or 8ohm bridged. They were built by Rockford when RF owned MBQ and had an MSRP of $1999. It's large (height wise) and heavy (~20lbs), but it has power to spare. I ran one for about 6 months, front 2 channels to a set of passive components and rear channels bridged to a single IB sub, and really liked it as an "all-in-one" amplifier running the whole system without compromising on power.

http://www.german-maestro.de/EN/