Attention all members!
Have a cool ride? Then show it off on our website! All vehicles welcome!
Have a cool ride? Then show it off on our website! All vehicles welcome!
new xxx vid
- GlassWolf
- Master of My Domain
- Posts: 6725
- Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 4:00 am
- Location: Columbia, SC
- Contact:
problem: it requires energy to flex sheet metal.
where does that energy come from? your audio system.
where would that energy be better used? INSIDE your car, producing audible sound.
Translation? Flexing roof = wasted energy = loss of SPL and SQ.
Resonating metal does not a good acoustic environment make.

where does that energy come from? your audio system.
where would that energy be better used? INSIDE your car, producing audible sound.
Translation? Flexing roof = wasted energy = loss of SPL and SQ.
Resonating metal does not a good acoustic environment make.

GlassWolf (aka KikiTheCat)
moderator-administrator
-
audiobass10
- Master of My Domain
- Posts: 1076
- Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 8:00 am
- Location: Cape Coral, Florida
That may seem correct in theory, but in real world tests..preventing the flex of a roof and or hatch can sometimes lose you SPL.GlassWolf wrote:problem: it requires energy to flex sheet metal.
where does that energy come from? your audio system.
where would that energy be better used? INSIDE your car, producing audible sound.
Translation? Flexing roof = wasted energy = loss of SPL and SQ.
Resonating metal does not a good acoustic environment make.
![]()
- GlassWolf
- Master of My Domain
- Posts: 6725
- Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 4:00 am
- Location: Columbia, SC
- Contact:
what you're seeing is most probably the sound deadener absorbing the energy instead of reflecting it (lack of hard reflective surfaces) which will give a more 'dead' and natural response, but the reflections may help with the SPL. Either way, thin sheet metal resonating is still losing energy, and sound outside the car, is sound that's not inside the car.
Fairly hard to argue that.
Fairly hard to argue that.

GlassWolf (aka KikiTheCat)
moderator-administrator
-
audiobass10
- Master of My Domain
- Posts: 1076
- Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 8:00 am
- Location: Cape Coral, Florida
Yea, I wasn't arguing that part..I was just talking in terms of SPL. You're bound to loose energy somewhere.GlassWolf wrote:what you're seeing is most probably the sound deadener absorbing the energy instead of reflecting it (lack of hard reflective surfaces) which will give a more 'dead' and natural response, but the reflections may help with the SPL. Either way, thin sheet metal resonating is still losing energy, and sound outside the car, is sound that's not inside the car.
Fairly hard to argue that.
90% of the people gawking at 54mm of x-max will throw it in a ported box and kill off the advantages.
54mm x-max= a potential (but not likely) 3db increase compared to a 27mm x-max subwoofer. A 27mm x-max will get (potentially) 3db louder than a 13.5mm subwoofer. So we have a woofer that has about the same output as two midline subwoofers of similar design, most likely with much less total power at that and much higher buying cost.
54mm x-max= a potential (but not likely) 3db increase compared to a 27mm x-max subwoofer. A 27mm x-max will get (potentially) 3db louder than a 13.5mm subwoofer. So we have a woofer that has about the same output as two midline subwoofers of similar design, most likely with much less total power at that and much higher buying cost.


