Impious

Yeah...I just caught that link from ECA. Must say, they do indeed look interesting.....if price is reasonable, I will probably pick a pair up just to screw around with

Keep in mind that it adds an average of 3db over the entire bandwidth Depending on the design, the ported box may be 6db+ over sealed at and near the ported box's peak.

You have to be one skilled mofo to wire a D2 sub into a 6ohm load........

Well...that's the reason I put these Next comps in Now that I have a "regular" component set in, I can take my horns out and work on actually installing them properly without having to worry about having them back in at the end of each day. So, next on the to-do list is properly install my horns, get my sub box finished (going in a "special" location ), then it'll be time to start the doors And, to be quite honest with you.....I've been putting it off because it is going to be mountains of work, and I'm quite the procrastinator.... And about the midbass problem with the Next's; yeah, I know I could do some things to correct it....but being as these are just temporary, I'm not going to be putting that much work into them When I install some in the van (probably won't be till next summer) I'll put more effort into correcting the midbass.

Installed my Next FLS 6 6.5" shallow mount components today. I decided to install the FLS's rather than the "regular" ALS comps because I have a fetish for shallow-mount designs and seeing how they perform Only have about 30 minutes with them so far.....put them through some tracks I'm familiar with and tossed in my IASCA test disk for a few tracks. Installed them in my doors; mid ran infinite baffle, tweeter in the stock location about 6" down from the sail-panel. Powered through the passives off of two channels of my Coustic DR-514 (50w RMS per side). HU is an Eclipse 8053. Low end is taken care of by a 12" Rl-p. First impressions: Tonality is pretty darn good. Midrange was smooth, pretty accurate and, for the most part, on par with my Coustic DR 306P's I was running previously. Midbass, while lacking, was tight and dead on. Not nearly as impactful as I prefer, but pleasant sounding in it's own right. Would be nice if they had more midbass output though. They handled a crossover point of 63hz @ 12db/oct very well mechanically (had the volume up to 70 out of 80 and they didn't bottom out [or "top out" I guess you would call it, since the magnet is in front of the cone ]). Though midbass did clear up a TON when I switched the xover to 80hz @ 18db. So, this is where I left 'er set. Tweeter; detailed, but slightly harsh and had hints of sibilance and poor decay. Things like cymbal crashes had good initial tonality and impact (on the harsh side, but not bad).....but seemed to have very slow decay. Though, I have a feeling some of this is due to install location. They are fairly on-axis just below the sail panel. Far from ideal.....if installed more off-axis and, say, down in kicks, I think a lot of the problems will be far less apparent. Overall not bad. Have their flaws; midbass output is lacking and the tweeter seems to have a few issues (could be install related though).....but I'd put them up against most $200-$250 sets on the market and feel they would compete well with them. And, considering I paid less than 1/5 of that price, I'd say it's an excellent value for the money

And I thought I had a collection........ I still would have went with a dbx DriveRack PA instead though

Oh, BTW: http://forum.elitecaraudio.com/showthread....03&pagenumber=1 "Image Dynamics Tech" is Matt Borgardt of Image Dynamics.

The "misalignment" issue is because the IDMax have a very tight gap. So if you cause the coil/former to move away from center (say you press down on the cone with uneven pressure, which is a no-no regardless of subwoofer), then you will likely scrap the coil. As for a 15" IDMax; they have been "working on it" for about the past 6 years. IIRC the CA&E directory for 1999 actually listed a 15" IDMax because they were anticipating releasing it. However, if you know anything about how quickly ID releases new products, this "delay" should not be suprising. They are notoriously slow at releasing new products. They have been "working on" a 15" IDMax and a IDOne processor for years now. Back in September they said all they needed to do yet was select packaging for the new CTX line and they would be released; here we are 9 months later and still no CTX line (can't imagine it can take this long to pick out packaging). And now ofcourse they are "working on" a new IDQv3 and IDMax v4 (they actually have a few working prototypes of the v4!! Though it's odd that they can start designing a v4, yet still not release a 15" v3). I have a pair of blown 12" IDMax sitting in my room right now I didn't blow them, I bought them this way. Recones are $95 each + shipping....so when it's all said and done, I'll have a pair of brand new and warrantied 12" IDmax's for less than $200 each I made a smartass lowball offer of $50 for the pair in a "I blew my subs" thread; and they guy actually accepted it!!!!

Nope I'm going to install one pair in my car here this weekend since I'm taking the horns out for a while so I can work on "properly" installing them, and this way I'll still have decent sound while the horns are out. But as soon as the horns are back in, they'll be coming back out. Bought them mainly for the wifey's van, and then a few spares to sit around incase anything blows (since they are so cheap ). And I've always been interested in shallow mount designs (no idea why, just always intrigued me), so I wanted to see how these Next shallow mounts performed.

Got my speakers in http://www.soundsolutionsaudio.com/forum/i...?showtopic=3227 Anyways.....my real reason for posting in this thread: On the label, it had the shippers name as "Alumapro".....what is up with that?? Anyways....fast shipper He is over in a neighboring state, so I got my stuff next day

Hmmmm......What do we have here??? Oh......I see And here's a shot of the whole family 5 sets of speakers for $156 shipped, can't beat that with a stick the size of Texas. Going to be a fun next couple of days testing those puppies out

I have heard that Eric Holdaway "beat" the test (was able to detect which amp was which), but that RC started making excuses, claimed the test was invalid and refused to pay him.

Any review yet??

You could always wrap the felt around the tinsel lead instead of the putting it on the cone. Should have the same effect, and then it won't matter which it is slapping against

Only once....? Damn I've been playing this all wrong. The Hammer BTW, did you happen to see this: http://www.carsound.com/UBB/ultimatebb.php...t=009930#000000

Yeah, but nobody listens to you........ Sorry Kent, didn't remember you'd said that when I typed my response

Well, the impulse bug got me. Ordered 4 sets of comps (two of the ALS 6.5" and two of the shallow mount 6.5") and a pair of co-axials just for chits and giggles. So, we'll see how they do Really shouldn't have spent the money. But fvck it, you only live once, might aswell have a little bit of fun while you're here...........Just means I gotta wait a little bit longer to send in my IDmax to get reconed.

ya, what'd i say? That you like men in a sexual way. Sorry, I meant Aneon

E-mailed the guy and got his price lists. Seriously think I may pick up some stuff Couple comp sets, co-axials aswell as amps.

As I said; the Rl-p models horribly. Their box program is correct; using those specs, a .54cuft enclosure should give you a Qtc of .707 (trust me, I just did it by hand using the formulas). However, this box size is not actually accurate for the Rl-p (for whatever reason). So, you can't use those formula's/box programs to accurately predict the best enclosure for the Rl-p The best thing to do is look at the recommendations by SS for the Rl-p, which in this case happens to be ~.75cuft to 1.5cuft. So, if you want something a little more "punchy" and "tight", go with a box size on the smaller side of the recommendation range (.8-1.15cuft would be good). If you want something with a little more bottom end, flatter frequency response and little better transient response, go with something on the larger side of the recommendation range (~1.15cuft - 1.5cuft would be good). If you want performance close to that of a Qtc .707, aim for the middle (as Acid said, somewhere around 1 - 1.25cuft)

FYI: The Rl-p models pretty horribly in most box programs. So, that box size it gave them was no where near accurate.

I always like ECA's for sale forum (currently down for revision). Small community, so most everybody knew everybody else, and they typically had the higher end/good old school gear for sale there. Carsound is probably my 2nd favorite. Again, because it's mainly higher end gear, awesome old school stuff and harder to find gear. So, those are my main two since that's the type of equipment I usually look for. Not that I can afford any of it, but it allows me to falsely keep my hopes up.

Finally got around to sending you an e-mail about getting into the demo ring for the Rl-s

Ok, Ok....it was really because of my quiet desire to be as cool as Kent Obviously I'm still working on it