Ok fellas, if you read my other post you know my sub is blown. So, now the question is what to buy now. I liked my kicker comp VR 15, but it wasnt as loud as i liked. I have:
1000 watt Kenwood mono amp to run the subs on
(http://www.kenwoodusa.com/product/product.jsp?productTypeId=11&sortBy=price&productId=2481)
JVC Mp3/CD player (http://131542.brightwebsite.com/store/show_product/?product_id=2647632)
1988 Honda 4 door w/ fold down seats
What do you guys think would go best with that combo. A friend of mine has 2 MTX 6000's 15 inch subs with a kenwood 640 watt amp in a similar honda and its very loud. I was thinking perhaps 2 MTX 6000 12's? Give me some feedback guys, id appreciate it.
Replies (34)
swez on 02/24/2004 17:49:34
Realistically, that amp will only put out 450 watts RMS of clean power. Not bad... but maybe you'll want to off it for a better amp. If not, a more efficient sub will help.
Comp VR's are pretty low efficieny and really need a large enclosure to get them pumping to full capacity. MTX 6000's are not much different... looks massive, but very low efficiency here too. Take a potent amp to get them yappin too.
There are some great subs out there for a few bucks more than the MTX 6000 series, but superior in SQ & SPL. Depending on your budget and the size of your current box, we may be able to show you several high performance subs that may fit your exisiting box.
What are the physical dimensions of your present box? H,W & D.
Most subs will sound good in the right enclosure. But a quality sub in a well matched box is how the game is played. Having a large enough amp to feed the monster in the back, make a big difference too.
FYI: It is better to have an amp that is rated with higher RMS watts then your sub(s) as they can usually take 20% more clean power without a hitch. Going the other way, a potent sub and a whimpy amp will usually result in sub destruction due to excess clipping.
Swez
Black_Rob on 02/24/2004 19:14:03
Thanks again Swez. Maybe you can help me with more specific stuff. I plan to buy new subs and an enclosure. Im trying to figure out what would go best with my amp. I was thinking possibly two 12's. What do you think would sound the best in the back of a fold down seat honda accord. What Ohm and rms should i look for to match up with my kenwood 1000 watt amp. If you could suggest any certain brands i'd appreciate it. The area i live in is big on Kicker, MTX, JL, and Audiobahn. Any input would be appreciated. Im not necessarily looking to win a competition, just something that would be louder than my CompVR15 setup was.
Munchiesyumm on 02/24/2004 22:32:59
wow this sucks.. I made a HUGE write up and it deleted.
I'll make a quick relist of products
(2 12's)
Phoenix Gold R12D $69.00
RMS Power Range : 250 Watts
Impedance: 2 Ohm
Alpine SWS-1241 $89.00
RMS Power Range : 50-200 Watts
Sealed box volume: 0.85-1.5 cubic feet
Impedance: 2 Ohm
Just a couple options for low cost high quality subwoofers. These both would be good choices. You got to remember I am trying to find subwoofers to match up with your amp. It's hard finding them too! Two low power high quality 12's is not that easy to come by so I hope this helps.
For single 12 check out JBL power subwoofers!
uochronos on 02/24/2004 23:02:37
ya i had a big write up too seems anytime i spend more then 20 minutes looking up stuff and writing it down it tends not to post so anytime its a big post i write it in word pad then copy it over. hehe.
anyway back to the question at hand... 450 is a decent amount of power to work with i think with the right subs in a proper ported box we can get you the sound you want..
JL for instance has the 12W3v2 2 of these in a ported box would sound booming and there power range is just about right for that amp just dont be cranking the gain way high.
also the alpines that Munchies mentioned would work good. although i would suggest a ported box because that would net you a bit more power sound from the speakers.
also elemental designs has the e8A.44 i know these are small subs but in a ported enclosure with there specs they should sound really nice and with an rms of 150-300rms in a ported box they should sound good with your amp.
also audiobahn although i have never used them has a decent amount of subs with 200watts rms although i dont know how any of them sound. so does mtx although again i have never used any of them. i just browsed both of these companies web sites though and they do have many subs with RMS ratines in the 200-250watst range.
also you could always go with a single 15" or 12" sub.
a single elemental designs k series 12" would sound nice
a single JL 12W6v2 would also sound nice
also a single alpine 15" R or S series would be a good sub if it was the type R it would need to be in a ported box since thats about 50watts rms more then your amp can put out in a sealed box.
also again audiobahn and mtx had several subs that wher5e 12" and 15" in the 400watts rms range.
hope this is help full
P.S.
the sites i looked at where
www.thezeb.com
www.mtxaudio.com
www.edesignaudio.com
www.alpine-usa.com
www.jlaudio.com
swez on 02/25/2004 02:59:23
Yep, the guys have covered many of the popular subs we recommend. Infinity makes a few very nice subs too. The Reference series (300 RMS) is good for SQ & SPL and a modest budget... but they sound very good. The Kappa series or Perfect series is also a good option if you want a more potent sub kit. Just make sure you get the 4 ohm SVC version if you go with a pair of 10's or 12's. In parallel, you'll net 2 ohms which is the right match for your amp. (ebay)
Also, Adire makes a very nice sub. The Shiva Mark III or IV is a low cost , potent 12" DVC. This come is 8+8 VC, so a pair in full parallel will get you nice results. These are rated at 650 rms each, so if you ever moved up to a larger amp... no problem. ($125.00 each) www.adireaudio.com
How much space do you have for a box back there? Ported will be a few dB louder than sealed, but larger too. Most 12's do well in 0.85 - 1.2 cf sealed enclosures. If you go ported, more like 2.0cf/sub.
Swez
PS Subzone makes some very good enclosures. Reasonable prices and can get them at www.thezeb.com or Http://Ikesound.com
Black_Rob on 02/25/2004 12:47:48
OK, so here is what i have my search narrowed down to:
MTX Thunder 6000 (2 - 12"s)
Alpine Type R (2 - 12"s)
JL W3 (2 - 12"s)
Any other suggestions would be great.
Now, what OHM subwoofers should i get? 2 ohm or 4 ohm? Also, should i wire them parrallel or series. (Mono amp remember)
PS If i seem like an idiot im sorry. I come from a town where people just buy Subs with Huge RMS ratings and whatever amp is expensive at Best Buy. Im not great with specifics.
swez on 02/25/2004 14:22:26
Well, rest assured, we are good at specifics and details, so you don't have to be a rocket scientist to get good results.
I would rule out the MTX 6000 series as you really don't have the amp to get them up to full potential. These are nice looking subs, but performace of the other 2 mention are notably better for the money.
The Alpine type R 2+2 ohm DVC is what you'll need here to get the proper 2 ohm load performance from your amp.
The JL 12w3v2 2+2 DVC is your best choice here. More expensive, but a very good SQ/SPL sub. One of the best all around performers in the merket today... if you don't mind the JL price. This set is overkill for the amp mentioned (300 RMS/sub) but they are good if you upgrade to a larger amp sometime. Ebay is a good online source for lower prices, but you will not have a JL warrantee... only the sellers willingness to take them back if they fail.
OK, I looked at your amp link site and here are the key details:
AMP: KAC-8101D
POWER RATINGS:
- Maximum Output Power: 1000 Watts ( peak watts...not what real world power ratings are judged by)
- Power Output at 2 Ohms, at 14.4V (100Hz, 0.5% THD):
400 Watts x 1
- Power Output at 4 Ohms, at 14.4V (20Hz - 200Hz, 0.5% THD):
200 Watts x 1
FYI: RMS or continous power figures are the specs that tell the whole story. Better amps rate between 12.5 and 13.5 volts input source, not 14.4 volts.
Realistically, this sub amp will deliver about 350 - 375 watts of clean music (RMS) power. MSRP is $350.00 and way too much money for a Class D of this power rating. Good features yes, power to drive a pair of HD subs... not quiet..
To be honest, if you stay with this amp, consider 1 potent 4+4 DVC sub for this amp. If your goal is to upgrade to a larger amp later, then a pair of JL's or Alpine Type R's noted, makes sense.
Am not trying press you into a larger amp. Just advising that this amp is not what you think it is. Buying a single sub that matches this amp best, would be:
Alpine Type R http://www.ikesound.com/product-product_id/407 12" DVC, 4+4 , 300 RMS ($100.00)
http://www.ikesound.com/product-product_id/407 15" DVC 4+4 15" DVC, 4+4, 500 RMS ($179.00)
Each will give you a 2 ohm load when wired in parallel. The 15" may drop right in to your current enclosure.
Details: SWR15 41 DVC:
Key Features:
Kevlar®-infused pulp cone
1-1/4" Santoprene rubber surround
dual 4-ohm voice coils
frequency response 22-1,000 Hz
power range 200-500 watts RMS
peak power handling 1,500 watts
sensitivity 89 dB
4-ohm impedance
top-mount depth 8-3/4"
sealed box volume: 1.3-2.5 cubic feet
ported box volume: 1.5-3.0 cubic feet
Infinity would also be a good choice and have similar power ratings and pricing.
1. http://www.justwoofers.com/Woofer_Pages/Infinity/infinity_
KappaDVC.htm
12" DVC, 4+4, 300 RMS ($105.00 ea)
2. http://www.justwoofers.com/Woofer_Pages/Infinity/infinity_
KappaPerfectDVC.htm
12" DVC, 4+4, 350 RMS ($165.00 ea.)
3. http://www.justwoofers.com/Woofer_Pages/Infinity/infinity_
Reference.htm
1220W 12", 4 ohm SVC, 300 RMS/sub so you'll need a pair here ($65.00 ebay or lower)
4. http://www.etronics.com/product.asp?stk_code=inf1230w&store=&catid=369
1230w, SVC 4 ohm SVC, 300 RMS per sub, use 2 here (~$60.00/sub)
Hope that helps... I would not hesitate to use a single Alpine SWR-1541D or a pir of Infinity Reference 12's if you want dual subs here.
Swez
Black_Rob on 02/25/2004 18:29:41
How much of a difference would there be from the single voice coil and dual voice coil Infinity Kappas.
Also, I am into rap, so I just need something that booms. My friends 2 15" MTX 6000's really pound. And hes pushing them with an 840 watt 2channel kenwood amp. That is where i go the MTX 6000 idea. Are the infinities and type R's going to give me the most pounding for my dollar, or are there other subs that have less sound quality but more pound. I just need something to make the mirrors rattle :)
uochronos on 02/25/2004 18:36:18
well i have 2 type R 10" subs powered by 550watts and they shake my mirrors and my rear slide window in my truck... infinities are going to sound great too. you dont really have enough power to push 2 of these speakers though. with your current amp your probaly going to end up blowing them in the long run.
Black_Rob on 02/25/2004 18:50:18
Ok here we go again, you guys got me thinking, haha.
Im gonna name subs and combonations and you tell me what you think will be louder, not necessarily sound quality. (hooked up to the kenwood amp mentioned above)
My old Kicker CompVR 15" vs Alpine Type R 15"
2 MTX Thunder 6000 12's vs Alpine Type R 15"
JL W-3 15" vs Alpine Type R 15"
and
2 Type R 12's vs 1 Type R 15
(how much of a difference between these two)
Those are what i have it narrowed down to.
uochronos on 02/25/2004 19:21:24
for #1 i would say the alpine type r 15 simply because its a more effiecient sub and well use the power your giving it better.
for #2 i would say the same simply because the MTX is not an effiecient sub and the alpine well use what your giving it better.
for #3 i would say the 15W3v2 would be a great sub its effiecient and loud
this last one is tough. properly powered 2 12" alpines owuld be louder then a single 15" but you cant properly power them so they would end up being the same or even less with the 2 12".
again i would like to warn you that with all these subs listed you are going to be under powering them the JL audio 15W3v2 or alpine type R 15" would be your best bets from ones listed but even then you are slightly over powering them and if you turn your gain up to far you well blow a sub again.
uochronos on 02/25/2004 19:22:19
also i would like to add that a good custom box can mak all the differnce. for instance a JL 15W3v2 in a custom ported box would sound great on your amp probaly.
Black_Rob on 02/25/2004 19:23:27
What do you think about the speak matchups swez .... and am i gonna be overpowering the alpine 15" ?
swez on 02/25/2004 19:24:29
My old Kicker CompVR 15" vs Alpine Type R 15" (Alpine by far)
2 MTX Thunder 6000 12's vs Alpine Type R 15" (Alpine again)
JL W-3 15" vs Alpine Type R 15" (toss up... both are very good but you will pay a lot more for the JL 15W3v2)
2 Type R 12's vs 1 Type R 15 (more cone area with a pair of 12's here. Just make sure you use the 2+2 DVC if you go 2x12)
The main difference between 12" and 15"... the 2x12's have more cone area to move more air. Port them and they can get pretty loud on a modest amp.
The 15" will go lower, may be a tad more efficient too, a ported enclosure will net both low and loud.
Swez
Munchiesyumm on 02/25/2004 20:28:46
You’re considering buying JL subwoofers… But you wouldn’t want to do an amp upgrade? I have seen some pretty high prices on those JL subs…
The amplifier is rated 400 x1 at 14.4v a standard car cannot supply that much power to the amplifier eating away at what you’re really getting.
So here is the scenario if you had a car that could put out 14.4v and you only get 200w RMS to each sub? I don’t know how to do the math to tell the true rating but expect a large drop 50w +
You’re considering buying subwoofers (2) that will take 300w + RMS (each) to power them with 150 – 170w RMS (each). You’re only setting your self up to upgrade the amplifier later. It gets me worried of the amp clipping. Wouldn’t you agree this is why the Kicker blew up?
uochronos on 02/25/2004 21:21:29
at the 13.5 or so he is probvaly getting it well probaly get i think 50 watts less so thats 350watts to work with... i honestly think a single 12W3v2 or 15W3v2 in custom ported box or a alpine type R 15 in a custom ported enclosure would be his best bet from whats been listed. any of the subs listed if there where 2 of them would not be able to be pushed by this amp well at all and probaly end up with them blown also. this amp just doesnt have enough juice to push to huge subs....
some thing to think about rob when thinking about subs
1: 2 subs are not always better then one
2: putting 500watts to 1 sub well net about the same as putting 250watts each to 2 subs of the same make.
3: running one subs at 250watts well net you only 3db less then running 2 of them at 250watts each.
4: putting a sub in a proper ported enclosure can net you 3db+ to that speaker
5: everytime you double the power you only gain aproxamtly 3db
so a single sub can net you just as much sound at 350watts as if you where running 2 subs at 175watts each. as long as you put it in the right box.
i hope this clears some things up... and helps you understand what your looking for in a sub... also just upgrading your amp could help you get what you want... avionixx has on sale a tsunami amp 1100watts rms at 1ohm for sale for only 220$ this plus a decent set of subs would do alot.... munchies was right JL subs are a fortune it would get you mroe what you want if you spent some on a better amp and then spent some on some subs.
hope this helps.
~chronos
swez on 02/26/2004 09:49:08
Yep, well stated case in point there C!
IMHO, if you stay with your current amp, go with a single ported 15 Alpine DVC (4+4) sub. That will give much better performance than what you had with the Comp VR. (SQ & SPL)
However, if you are seriously thinking about a larger amp... say 600 RMS or more, pick out that amp and work the subs off the power and ohms ratings of the amp. A Class D or Class T amp is more efficient and will draw less power than a typical 2 channel Class A/B amp.
You are at a wall or crossroads here... which direction you choose should be based on your ultimate sound goals and budget and what will fit into your vehicle well. Choose that direction first, then press on with the plans we have laid out for you.
Swez
PS For under $700.00, we can show you some very nice gear to upgrade to... and you can do it in stages so it won't take a huge bite out of your wallet at one time.
cplkittle on 02/26/2004 09:57:58
I have noticed a few here that are using diamond. If you have a little extra money to spend, these are some awesome subs!
Black_Rob on 02/26/2004 23:20:44
Ok thanks guys.. i think im gona go with the 15" Type R DVC 4+4 ... Just curious .. why a 4+4 instead of a 2+2 ?? Dont i want a lower impedence with the mono amp ? (again, im new. haha)
uochronos on 02/27/2004 04:43:09
np glad to awnser any question rob we where all new once. 2+2 compared to 4+4.... 2+2 can either net you 1ohm or 4ohms mattering if you run it in parellel or series.... and a 4+4 can net you a 2ohm or 8ohm load.... since your amp is 2ohm stable you would want a 4+4 to net you the 2ohm laod you need... now if you had a 1ohm stable amp and only wanted one sub we would suggest a 2+2 to net you a 1ohm load.
does that make since to you? if not just ask for clarification on any of it. and dont worry about being new to the car audio game. no question is dumb and we only learn from asking or messing up. i learn something new here almost everyday myself.
Black_Rob on 02/27/2004 08:56:09
I see, thanks. I just thought that my amp was One ohm stable since it was mono.
cplkittle on 02/27/2004 09:26:33
The lower the impedence (ohms) the more watts you can get from the amp.
Ohms is a measure of resistance. Each amplifier has a certain capacity of power that it can produce. Putting that power into a speaker that has 4 ohms of resistance causes some loss of power due to heat. In a 2 ohm speaker, there is less resistance, therefore less heat, and the amp is able to push more of its capacity through the voice coils, thus more watts to the speaker with less resistance.
swez on 02/27/2004 09:27:18
Not this amp... 2 ohms is the lowest it can go. That's why we have been so careful in giving you a select grouping of sub options. We don't want to see you buy the wrong product and be unhappy with the performance.
Really, the details matter a lot more than you can guess...being new, we are really going the extra mile to get you to the best sound possible without breaking your wallet.
Swez
asplundher on 02/28/2004 12:05:37
This one aspect is rarely mentioned but too, can be of importance in selecting a power range. Most manufacturers will give a sealed box recommendation that will decrease the power rating of the given woofer. Most recommendations are at a Qtc of .7. Maximum power handling and Spl occurs at Qtc of 1.1; then decreases as the box Q is lowered. The reason for the lowered Q is for a wider & smoother frequency response. Hence at the lowered Q power requirements will also be decreased somewhat; allowing a lesser amp to utilized.
cplkittle on 02/28/2004 16:21:08
That is a tricky balance to acheive though. As SPL goes up, SQ comes down. The butterworth response that you mentioned, or Qtc of .707, is considered throughout the car audio industry as optimal. Giving the perfect balance of maximum response with minimal cutoff.
In english, the larger the box, the less power it takes to push the driver, and a lower frequency can be achieved at the cost of SQ.
The smaller the box the more accurate, but more power is needed to reach the same volume.
asplundher on 02/29/2004 07:53:53
Exactly! However the point that I'm making is there no such thing as the perfect (optimum) box that all should use.
Each different make of vehicle has a different transfer function. The optimum would be one that takes advantage of that function for that particular car, which would mean there is more than one "optimum".
Wether it be a high Qtc, low, or anywhere in between; it will also relate to how much power that particular install will require likewise.
Perfect example: in my 240sx there is a large bump around 40hz and 190hz. If I use a low Qtc as specified (.686), then the 40hz is exaggerated and the subs sound like one of those one note systems. Yet with a higher Qtc (.9) with a F3 of around the mid 60's, the frequency response is flatter and a bit more power can be pushed to the subs.
I'm a firm believer in designing the box particular to the car instead of using the manufacturers recommendations, which may change the power handling.
swez on 02/29/2004 08:21:07
Agreed! The type of vehicle makes a big difference as does trunk loaded VS open vehicle. The "Q" factor is different and we can compensate by adjusting the box parameters or using EQ to tone down the hot spots & boost the weak zones.
Swez
cplkittle on 02/29/2004 09:23:09
so is there a commom standard that can be used to determine what Qtc would be best for vehicles in relation to cabin space?
maybe a basic breakdown of suggestions for small cars, medium size sedans, small SUVs, large SUVs & small vans, and large vans? Should I raise the Qtc for larger cars or for smaller cars?
asplundher on 02/29/2004 10:09:10
There is the tricky part, for each scenario will present a different result. You would need to know what frequency your car exaggerates and how much.
One thing you could do is have prior knowledge of how your car responds (transfer function) from previous installs. There are some programs that include transfer function/ cabin gain but, most people do not have one.
There is a chapter in Vance Dickasons Loudspeaker Design Cookbook 6th Edition that touches on that subject. It could give you an idea of how to apply that to your particular application. Yet, it only shows certain vehicles and sizes as an example.
If it is possible, you could run some sweeps and figure out what yours is around by listening to which frequencies are the most strongest. Then build the box that will best utilize the boost and give you a flatter response.
The main mistake most will make is they will try to get a lower F3, which will give even more boost of transfer function and cause it to be a "one note" system. Sometimes you should move in the opposite direction (higher Qtc) and/ or use some type of signal procesing.
swez on 02/29/2004 13:59:58
Care to clarify and expand this detail as I am a bit rusty on it now. Let's use an open air application where there is a large room and the subs are reasonably flat in the 40-100 Hz range.
A Qtc of 0.7 is ideal right? But what happens if Qtc goes up or down due to enclosure design... then what might we expect?
A. Oversized enclosure, sealed/ported
B. Undersized enclosure, sealed/ported
Qtc if < 0.7 will sound like???
Qtc if >0.7 ditto???
Swez
Refresh my rusty cobwebs please.. tks
asplundher on 03/3/2004 05:17:42
In a large room a Qtc of .7 would be acceptable. The flat response is what you would be wanting. All is okay.
Now let's put that same sub/box combo in a auto environment. Now let's say the acoustics of the auto has a natural boost (transfer function) in frequency of 12db around 40hz. With the subs natural roll-off being flat down to 40hz added to the boost of 12 at 40hz , the response in the auto is no longer flat, right? So now you have a response that peaks 12db higher at around 40hz lower end, thus a "one note box". All other frequencies will be drowned out by the boost. Yet, at this Q level you have also decreased power handling somewhat.
The natural way to compensate for the auto's boost would be to use a box design with a higher Qtc value. So let's say you are now running it at Qtc .9 that has a higher roll-off and a natural boost in frequency of around 70hz to 100hz. Now let's say F3 is around 60hz and 40hz is down by at least 8 to 12db. With the added transfer function of 12db 40hz, the response is of the lower end is now almost even with the upper end, thus a "flatter" response and increased spl. At this .9 Qtc the power handling has also be increased say 80 watts more than the .7 qtc.
As for ported this will not apply for you cannot adjust Q level. If you set the f3 above the transfer function it will only play down to f3 and all lower frequenies will be out of phase as you know. Only a signal processor will be helpfull in attaining a flatter response unless you are willing to give up some lower end with a higher f3 setup.
All this is just an example for real world applications will differ in slopes, frequencies, and such. However, this should give you a general idea of what happens.
swez on 03/3/2004 09:08:46
OK, getting the picture here... higher "Q" than 0.7 is desirable for high SQ installs. No extra DSP may be needed for a resonably flat response as the enclosure is now smaller and limits low end output by using Betterworth transfer function slopes.
Also, with a higher Q, (smaller enclosure) there is less airspace, more pressure inside the box to restrict cone excursion (X-max) to allow more power (watts) to be used by the sub... but not all the boom. F3 will be higher and slope will be part of the tranfer function and Q of the box/sub combined.
Thanks Aspl,
Swez
asplundher on 03/4/2004 19:14:38
Don't get me wrong. A Qtc of .7 can attribute to sound quality when needed. I have had installs that needed a low Q value to offset a high Q transfer function. It just all depends on the car's acoustics.
It's just that sometimes, if not most, the affect on power handling is not taken into account when the parameters of a sealed box are changed. I wish manufacters would include the difference in power handling when they give the "recommended" box for a given sub. I believe that aspect often contributes to driver failure when one assumes that it will still handle it's advertised rating.
swez on 03/4/2004 19:55:43
So true... if X-max is reached well before rated power as is common with many subs, 75% of rated power can still result in driver failures. It all has to do with size of enclosure and how hard the sub is pushed.
Swez
1000 watt Kenwood mono amp to run the subs on
(http://www.kenwoodusa.com/product/product.jsp?productTypeId=11&sortBy=price&productId=2481)
JVC Mp3/CD player (http://131542.brightwebsite.com/store/show_product/?product_id=2647632)
1988 Honda 4 door w/ fold down seats
What do you guys think would go best with that combo. A friend of mine has 2 MTX 6000's 15 inch subs with a kenwood 640 watt amp in a similar honda and its very loud. I was thinking perhaps 2 MTX 6000 12's? Give me some feedback guys, id appreciate it.
Replies (34)
swez on 02/24/2004 17:49:34
Realistically, that amp will only put out 450 watts RMS of clean power. Not bad... but maybe you'll want to off it for a better amp. If not, a more efficient sub will help.
Comp VR's are pretty low efficieny and really need a large enclosure to get them pumping to full capacity. MTX 6000's are not much different... looks massive, but very low efficiency here too. Take a potent amp to get them yappin too.
There are some great subs out there for a few bucks more than the MTX 6000 series, but superior in SQ & SPL. Depending on your budget and the size of your current box, we may be able to show you several high performance subs that may fit your exisiting box.
What are the physical dimensions of your present box? H,W & D.
Most subs will sound good in the right enclosure. But a quality sub in a well matched box is how the game is played. Having a large enough amp to feed the monster in the back, make a big difference too.
FYI: It is better to have an amp that is rated with higher RMS watts then your sub(s) as they can usually take 20% more clean power without a hitch. Going the other way, a potent sub and a whimpy amp will usually result in sub destruction due to excess clipping.
Swez
Black_Rob on 02/24/2004 19:14:03
Thanks again Swez. Maybe you can help me with more specific stuff. I plan to buy new subs and an enclosure. Im trying to figure out what would go best with my amp. I was thinking possibly two 12's. What do you think would sound the best in the back of a fold down seat honda accord. What Ohm and rms should i look for to match up with my kenwood 1000 watt amp. If you could suggest any certain brands i'd appreciate it. The area i live in is big on Kicker, MTX, JL, and Audiobahn. Any input would be appreciated. Im not necessarily looking to win a competition, just something that would be louder than my CompVR15 setup was.
Munchiesyumm on 02/24/2004 22:32:59
wow this sucks.. I made a HUGE write up and it deleted.
I'll make a quick relist of products
(2 12's)
Phoenix Gold R12D $69.00
RMS Power Range : 250 Watts
Impedance: 2 Ohm
Alpine SWS-1241 $89.00
RMS Power Range : 50-200 Watts
Sealed box volume: 0.85-1.5 cubic feet
Impedance: 2 Ohm
Just a couple options for low cost high quality subwoofers. These both would be good choices. You got to remember I am trying to find subwoofers to match up with your amp. It's hard finding them too! Two low power high quality 12's is not that easy to come by so I hope this helps.
For single 12 check out JBL power subwoofers!
uochronos on 02/24/2004 23:02:37
ya i had a big write up too seems anytime i spend more then 20 minutes looking up stuff and writing it down it tends not to post so anytime its a big post i write it in word pad then copy it over. hehe.
anyway back to the question at hand... 450 is a decent amount of power to work with i think with the right subs in a proper ported box we can get you the sound you want..
JL for instance has the 12W3v2 2 of these in a ported box would sound booming and there power range is just about right for that amp just dont be cranking the gain way high.
also the alpines that Munchies mentioned would work good. although i would suggest a ported box because that would net you a bit more power sound from the speakers.
also elemental designs has the e8A.44 i know these are small subs but in a ported enclosure with there specs they should sound really nice and with an rms of 150-300rms in a ported box they should sound good with your amp.
also audiobahn although i have never used them has a decent amount of subs with 200watts rms although i dont know how any of them sound. so does mtx although again i have never used any of them. i just browsed both of these companies web sites though and they do have many subs with RMS ratines in the 200-250watst range.
also you could always go with a single 15" or 12" sub.
a single elemental designs k series 12" would sound nice
a single JL 12W6v2 would also sound nice
also a single alpine 15" R or S series would be a good sub if it was the type R it would need to be in a ported box since thats about 50watts rms more then your amp can put out in a sealed box.
also again audiobahn and mtx had several subs that wher5e 12" and 15" in the 400watts rms range.
hope this is help full
P.S.
the sites i looked at where
www.thezeb.com
www.mtxaudio.com
www.edesignaudio.com
www.alpine-usa.com
www.jlaudio.com
swez on 02/25/2004 02:59:23
Yep, the guys have covered many of the popular subs we recommend. Infinity makes a few very nice subs too. The Reference series (300 RMS) is good for SQ & SPL and a modest budget... but they sound very good. The Kappa series or Perfect series is also a good option if you want a more potent sub kit. Just make sure you get the 4 ohm SVC version if you go with a pair of 10's or 12's. In parallel, you'll net 2 ohms which is the right match for your amp. (ebay)
Also, Adire makes a very nice sub. The Shiva Mark III or IV is a low cost , potent 12" DVC. This come is 8+8 VC, so a pair in full parallel will get you nice results. These are rated at 650 rms each, so if you ever moved up to a larger amp... no problem. ($125.00 each) www.adireaudio.com
How much space do you have for a box back there? Ported will be a few dB louder than sealed, but larger too. Most 12's do well in 0.85 - 1.2 cf sealed enclosures. If you go ported, more like 2.0cf/sub.
Swez
PS Subzone makes some very good enclosures. Reasonable prices and can get them at www.thezeb.com or Http://Ikesound.com
Black_Rob on 02/25/2004 12:47:48
OK, so here is what i have my search narrowed down to:
MTX Thunder 6000 (2 - 12"s)
Alpine Type R (2 - 12"s)
JL W3 (2 - 12"s)
Any other suggestions would be great.
Now, what OHM subwoofers should i get? 2 ohm or 4 ohm? Also, should i wire them parrallel or series. (Mono amp remember)
PS If i seem like an idiot im sorry. I come from a town where people just buy Subs with Huge RMS ratings and whatever amp is expensive at Best Buy. Im not great with specifics.
swez on 02/25/2004 14:22:26
Well, rest assured, we are good at specifics and details, so you don't have to be a rocket scientist to get good results.
I would rule out the MTX 6000 series as you really don't have the amp to get them up to full potential. These are nice looking subs, but performace of the other 2 mention are notably better for the money.
The Alpine type R 2+2 ohm DVC is what you'll need here to get the proper 2 ohm load performance from your amp.
The JL 12w3v2 2+2 DVC is your best choice here. More expensive, but a very good SQ/SPL sub. One of the best all around performers in the merket today... if you don't mind the JL price. This set is overkill for the amp mentioned (300 RMS/sub) but they are good if you upgrade to a larger amp sometime. Ebay is a good online source for lower prices, but you will not have a JL warrantee... only the sellers willingness to take them back if they fail.
OK, I looked at your amp link site and here are the key details:
AMP: KAC-8101D
POWER RATINGS:
- Maximum Output Power: 1000 Watts ( peak watts...not what real world power ratings are judged by)
- Power Output at 2 Ohms, at 14.4V (100Hz, 0.5% THD):
400 Watts x 1
- Power Output at 4 Ohms, at 14.4V (20Hz - 200Hz, 0.5% THD):
200 Watts x 1
FYI: RMS or continous power figures are the specs that tell the whole story. Better amps rate between 12.5 and 13.5 volts input source, not 14.4 volts.
Realistically, this sub amp will deliver about 350 - 375 watts of clean music (RMS) power. MSRP is $350.00 and way too much money for a Class D of this power rating. Good features yes, power to drive a pair of HD subs... not quiet..
To be honest, if you stay with this amp, consider 1 potent 4+4 DVC sub for this amp. If your goal is to upgrade to a larger amp later, then a pair of JL's or Alpine Type R's noted, makes sense.
Am not trying press you into a larger amp. Just advising that this amp is not what you think it is. Buying a single sub that matches this amp best, would be:
Alpine Type R http://www.ikesound.com/product-product_id/407 12" DVC, 4+4 , 300 RMS ($100.00)
http://www.ikesound.com/product-product_id/407 15" DVC 4+4 15" DVC, 4+4, 500 RMS ($179.00)
Each will give you a 2 ohm load when wired in parallel. The 15" may drop right in to your current enclosure.
Details: SWR15 41 DVC:
Key Features:
Kevlar®-infused pulp cone
1-1/4" Santoprene rubber surround
dual 4-ohm voice coils
frequency response 22-1,000 Hz
power range 200-500 watts RMS
peak power handling 1,500 watts
sensitivity 89 dB
4-ohm impedance
top-mount depth 8-3/4"
sealed box volume: 1.3-2.5 cubic feet
ported box volume: 1.5-3.0 cubic feet
Infinity would also be a good choice and have similar power ratings and pricing.
1. http://www.justwoofers.com/Woofer_Pages/Infinity/infinity_
KappaDVC.htm
12" DVC, 4+4, 300 RMS ($105.00 ea)
2. http://www.justwoofers.com/Woofer_Pages/Infinity/infinity_
KappaPerfectDVC.htm
12" DVC, 4+4, 350 RMS ($165.00 ea.)
3. http://www.justwoofers.com/Woofer_Pages/Infinity/infinity_
Reference.htm
1220W 12", 4 ohm SVC, 300 RMS/sub so you'll need a pair here ($65.00 ebay or lower)
4. http://www.etronics.com/product.asp?stk_code=inf1230w&store=&catid=369
1230w, SVC 4 ohm SVC, 300 RMS per sub, use 2 here (~$60.00/sub)
Hope that helps... I would not hesitate to use a single Alpine SWR-1541D or a pir of Infinity Reference 12's if you want dual subs here.
Swez
Black_Rob on 02/25/2004 18:29:41
How much of a difference would there be from the single voice coil and dual voice coil Infinity Kappas.
Also, I am into rap, so I just need something that booms. My friends 2 15" MTX 6000's really pound. And hes pushing them with an 840 watt 2channel kenwood amp. That is where i go the MTX 6000 idea. Are the infinities and type R's going to give me the most pounding for my dollar, or are there other subs that have less sound quality but more pound. I just need something to make the mirrors rattle :)
uochronos on 02/25/2004 18:36:18
well i have 2 type R 10" subs powered by 550watts and they shake my mirrors and my rear slide window in my truck... infinities are going to sound great too. you dont really have enough power to push 2 of these speakers though. with your current amp your probaly going to end up blowing them in the long run.
Black_Rob on 02/25/2004 18:50:18
Ok here we go again, you guys got me thinking, haha.
Im gonna name subs and combonations and you tell me what you think will be louder, not necessarily sound quality. (hooked up to the kenwood amp mentioned above)
My old Kicker CompVR 15" vs Alpine Type R 15"
2 MTX Thunder 6000 12's vs Alpine Type R 15"
JL W-3 15" vs Alpine Type R 15"
and
2 Type R 12's vs 1 Type R 15
(how much of a difference between these two)
Those are what i have it narrowed down to.
uochronos on 02/25/2004 19:21:24
for #1 i would say the alpine type r 15 simply because its a more effiecient sub and well use the power your giving it better.
for #2 i would say the same simply because the MTX is not an effiecient sub and the alpine well use what your giving it better.
for #3 i would say the 15W3v2 would be a great sub its effiecient and loud
this last one is tough. properly powered 2 12" alpines owuld be louder then a single 15" but you cant properly power them so they would end up being the same or even less with the 2 12".
again i would like to warn you that with all these subs listed you are going to be under powering them the JL audio 15W3v2 or alpine type R 15" would be your best bets from ones listed but even then you are slightly over powering them and if you turn your gain up to far you well blow a sub again.
uochronos on 02/25/2004 19:22:19
also i would like to add that a good custom box can mak all the differnce. for instance a JL 15W3v2 in a custom ported box would sound great on your amp probaly.
Black_Rob on 02/25/2004 19:23:27
What do you think about the speak matchups swez .... and am i gonna be overpowering the alpine 15" ?
swez on 02/25/2004 19:24:29
My old Kicker CompVR 15" vs Alpine Type R 15" (Alpine by far)
2 MTX Thunder 6000 12's vs Alpine Type R 15" (Alpine again)
JL W-3 15" vs Alpine Type R 15" (toss up... both are very good but you will pay a lot more for the JL 15W3v2)
2 Type R 12's vs 1 Type R 15 (more cone area with a pair of 12's here. Just make sure you use the 2+2 DVC if you go 2x12)
The main difference between 12" and 15"... the 2x12's have more cone area to move more air. Port them and they can get pretty loud on a modest amp.
The 15" will go lower, may be a tad more efficient too, a ported enclosure will net both low and loud.
Swez
Munchiesyumm on 02/25/2004 20:28:46
You’re considering buying JL subwoofers… But you wouldn’t want to do an amp upgrade? I have seen some pretty high prices on those JL subs…
The amplifier is rated 400 x1 at 14.4v a standard car cannot supply that much power to the amplifier eating away at what you’re really getting.
So here is the scenario if you had a car that could put out 14.4v and you only get 200w RMS to each sub? I don’t know how to do the math to tell the true rating but expect a large drop 50w +
You’re considering buying subwoofers (2) that will take 300w + RMS (each) to power them with 150 – 170w RMS (each). You’re only setting your self up to upgrade the amplifier later. It gets me worried of the amp clipping. Wouldn’t you agree this is why the Kicker blew up?
uochronos on 02/25/2004 21:21:29
at the 13.5 or so he is probvaly getting it well probaly get i think 50 watts less so thats 350watts to work with... i honestly think a single 12W3v2 or 15W3v2 in custom ported box or a alpine type R 15 in a custom ported enclosure would be his best bet from whats been listed. any of the subs listed if there where 2 of them would not be able to be pushed by this amp well at all and probaly end up with them blown also. this amp just doesnt have enough juice to push to huge subs....
some thing to think about rob when thinking about subs
1: 2 subs are not always better then one
2: putting 500watts to 1 sub well net about the same as putting 250watts each to 2 subs of the same make.
3: running one subs at 250watts well net you only 3db less then running 2 of them at 250watts each.
4: putting a sub in a proper ported enclosure can net you 3db+ to that speaker
5: everytime you double the power you only gain aproxamtly 3db
so a single sub can net you just as much sound at 350watts as if you where running 2 subs at 175watts each. as long as you put it in the right box.
i hope this clears some things up... and helps you understand what your looking for in a sub... also just upgrading your amp could help you get what you want... avionixx has on sale a tsunami amp 1100watts rms at 1ohm for sale for only 220$ this plus a decent set of subs would do alot.... munchies was right JL subs are a fortune it would get you mroe what you want if you spent some on a better amp and then spent some on some subs.
hope this helps.
~chronos
swez on 02/26/2004 09:49:08
Yep, well stated case in point there C!
IMHO, if you stay with your current amp, go with a single ported 15 Alpine DVC (4+4) sub. That will give much better performance than what you had with the Comp VR. (SQ & SPL)
However, if you are seriously thinking about a larger amp... say 600 RMS or more, pick out that amp and work the subs off the power and ohms ratings of the amp. A Class D or Class T amp is more efficient and will draw less power than a typical 2 channel Class A/B amp.
You are at a wall or crossroads here... which direction you choose should be based on your ultimate sound goals and budget and what will fit into your vehicle well. Choose that direction first, then press on with the plans we have laid out for you.
Swez
PS For under $700.00, we can show you some very nice gear to upgrade to... and you can do it in stages so it won't take a huge bite out of your wallet at one time.
cplkittle on 02/26/2004 09:57:58
I have noticed a few here that are using diamond. If you have a little extra money to spend, these are some awesome subs!
Black_Rob on 02/26/2004 23:20:44
Ok thanks guys.. i think im gona go with the 15" Type R DVC 4+4 ... Just curious .. why a 4+4 instead of a 2+2 ?? Dont i want a lower impedence with the mono amp ? (again, im new. haha)
uochronos on 02/27/2004 04:43:09
np glad to awnser any question rob we where all new once. 2+2 compared to 4+4.... 2+2 can either net you 1ohm or 4ohms mattering if you run it in parellel or series.... and a 4+4 can net you a 2ohm or 8ohm load.... since your amp is 2ohm stable you would want a 4+4 to net you the 2ohm laod you need... now if you had a 1ohm stable amp and only wanted one sub we would suggest a 2+2 to net you a 1ohm load.
does that make since to you? if not just ask for clarification on any of it. and dont worry about being new to the car audio game. no question is dumb and we only learn from asking or messing up. i learn something new here almost everyday myself.
Black_Rob on 02/27/2004 08:56:09
I see, thanks. I just thought that my amp was One ohm stable since it was mono.
cplkittle on 02/27/2004 09:26:33
The lower the impedence (ohms) the more watts you can get from the amp.
Ohms is a measure of resistance. Each amplifier has a certain capacity of power that it can produce. Putting that power into a speaker that has 4 ohms of resistance causes some loss of power due to heat. In a 2 ohm speaker, there is less resistance, therefore less heat, and the amp is able to push more of its capacity through the voice coils, thus more watts to the speaker with less resistance.
swez on 02/27/2004 09:27:18
Not this amp... 2 ohms is the lowest it can go. That's why we have been so careful in giving you a select grouping of sub options. We don't want to see you buy the wrong product and be unhappy with the performance.
Really, the details matter a lot more than you can guess...being new, we are really going the extra mile to get you to the best sound possible without breaking your wallet.
Swez
asplundher on 02/28/2004 12:05:37
This one aspect is rarely mentioned but too, can be of importance in selecting a power range. Most manufacturers will give a sealed box recommendation that will decrease the power rating of the given woofer. Most recommendations are at a Qtc of .7. Maximum power handling and Spl occurs at Qtc of 1.1; then decreases as the box Q is lowered. The reason for the lowered Q is for a wider & smoother frequency response. Hence at the lowered Q power requirements will also be decreased somewhat; allowing a lesser amp to utilized.
cplkittle on 02/28/2004 16:21:08
That is a tricky balance to acheive though. As SPL goes up, SQ comes down. The butterworth response that you mentioned, or Qtc of .707, is considered throughout the car audio industry as optimal. Giving the perfect balance of maximum response with minimal cutoff.
In english, the larger the box, the less power it takes to push the driver, and a lower frequency can be achieved at the cost of SQ.
The smaller the box the more accurate, but more power is needed to reach the same volume.
asplundher on 02/29/2004 07:53:53
Exactly! However the point that I'm making is there no such thing as the perfect (optimum) box that all should use.
Each different make of vehicle has a different transfer function. The optimum would be one that takes advantage of that function for that particular car, which would mean there is more than one "optimum".
Wether it be a high Qtc, low, or anywhere in between; it will also relate to how much power that particular install will require likewise.
Perfect example: in my 240sx there is a large bump around 40hz and 190hz. If I use a low Qtc as specified (.686), then the 40hz is exaggerated and the subs sound like one of those one note systems. Yet with a higher Qtc (.9) with a F3 of around the mid 60's, the frequency response is flatter and a bit more power can be pushed to the subs.
I'm a firm believer in designing the box particular to the car instead of using the manufacturers recommendations, which may change the power handling.
swez on 02/29/2004 08:21:07
Agreed! The type of vehicle makes a big difference as does trunk loaded VS open vehicle. The "Q" factor is different and we can compensate by adjusting the box parameters or using EQ to tone down the hot spots & boost the weak zones.
Swez
cplkittle on 02/29/2004 09:23:09
so is there a commom standard that can be used to determine what Qtc would be best for vehicles in relation to cabin space?
maybe a basic breakdown of suggestions for small cars, medium size sedans, small SUVs, large SUVs & small vans, and large vans? Should I raise the Qtc for larger cars or for smaller cars?
asplundher on 02/29/2004 10:09:10
There is the tricky part, for each scenario will present a different result. You would need to know what frequency your car exaggerates and how much.
One thing you could do is have prior knowledge of how your car responds (transfer function) from previous installs. There are some programs that include transfer function/ cabin gain but, most people do not have one.
There is a chapter in Vance Dickasons Loudspeaker Design Cookbook 6th Edition that touches on that subject. It could give you an idea of how to apply that to your particular application. Yet, it only shows certain vehicles and sizes as an example.
If it is possible, you could run some sweeps and figure out what yours is around by listening to which frequencies are the most strongest. Then build the box that will best utilize the boost and give you a flatter response.
The main mistake most will make is they will try to get a lower F3, which will give even more boost of transfer function and cause it to be a "one note" system. Sometimes you should move in the opposite direction (higher Qtc) and/ or use some type of signal procesing.
swez on 02/29/2004 13:59:58
Care to clarify and expand this detail as I am a bit rusty on it now. Let's use an open air application where there is a large room and the subs are reasonably flat in the 40-100 Hz range.
A Qtc of 0.7 is ideal right? But what happens if Qtc goes up or down due to enclosure design... then what might we expect?
A. Oversized enclosure, sealed/ported
B. Undersized enclosure, sealed/ported
Qtc if < 0.7 will sound like???
Qtc if >0.7 ditto???
Swez
Refresh my rusty cobwebs please.. tks
asplundher on 03/3/2004 05:17:42
In a large room a Qtc of .7 would be acceptable. The flat response is what you would be wanting. All is okay.
Now let's put that same sub/box combo in a auto environment. Now let's say the acoustics of the auto has a natural boost (transfer function) in frequency of 12db around 40hz. With the subs natural roll-off being flat down to 40hz added to the boost of 12 at 40hz , the response in the auto is no longer flat, right? So now you have a response that peaks 12db higher at around 40hz lower end, thus a "one note box". All other frequencies will be drowned out by the boost. Yet, at this Q level you have also decreased power handling somewhat.
The natural way to compensate for the auto's boost would be to use a box design with a higher Qtc value. So let's say you are now running it at Qtc .9 that has a higher roll-off and a natural boost in frequency of around 70hz to 100hz. Now let's say F3 is around 60hz and 40hz is down by at least 8 to 12db. With the added transfer function of 12db 40hz, the response is of the lower end is now almost even with the upper end, thus a "flatter" response and increased spl. At this .9 Qtc the power handling has also be increased say 80 watts more than the .7 qtc.
As for ported this will not apply for you cannot adjust Q level. If you set the f3 above the transfer function it will only play down to f3 and all lower frequenies will be out of phase as you know. Only a signal processor will be helpfull in attaining a flatter response unless you are willing to give up some lower end with a higher f3 setup.
All this is just an example for real world applications will differ in slopes, frequencies, and such. However, this should give you a general idea of what happens.
swez on 03/3/2004 09:08:46
OK, getting the picture here... higher "Q" than 0.7 is desirable for high SQ installs. No extra DSP may be needed for a resonably flat response as the enclosure is now smaller and limits low end output by using Betterworth transfer function slopes.
Also, with a higher Q, (smaller enclosure) there is less airspace, more pressure inside the box to restrict cone excursion (X-max) to allow more power (watts) to be used by the sub... but not all the boom. F3 will be higher and slope will be part of the tranfer function and Q of the box/sub combined.
Thanks Aspl,
Swez
asplundher on 03/4/2004 19:14:38
Don't get me wrong. A Qtc of .7 can attribute to sound quality when needed. I have had installs that needed a low Q value to offset a high Q transfer function. It just all depends on the car's acoustics.
It's just that sometimes, if not most, the affect on power handling is not taken into account when the parameters of a sealed box are changed. I wish manufacters would include the difference in power handling when they give the "recommended" box for a given sub. I believe that aspect often contributes to driver failure when one assumes that it will still handle it's advertised rating.
swez on 03/4/2004 19:55:43
So true... if X-max is reached well before rated power as is common with many subs, 75% of rated power can still result in driver failures. It all has to do with size of enclosure and how hard the sub is pushed.
Swez
Copyright ClubKnowledge 2009 * All Rights Reserved
