Car Audio Central - Ultimate Car Audio Forum and Community

Preach on brother Kiki! Man I wish I could work along side you for a year or so. I could absorb so much knowledge I wouldn't know what to do with myself. Until then I'll have to keep teaching myself and reading your posts.

KikiTheCat wrote:Raul, basing the worth of a sub on it's cost has merit to a point, as long as that isn't your only criterium.

precisely my point... to be more specific, to discredit a driver based on price alone is what I directly criticize...

R&D, materials, etc all cost money. The more you put into the development and build quality of any driver, the more it's going to cost.
Better materials cost more money. Depending on the driver, this can be especially true. Tweeters are a good example, if you look at some of the best tweeters, they tend to be in the three or four digit range each.

In the Car Audio market, very few manufacturers build their own drivers... Diamond Audio is one of the few that I know for sure does (I used to be a Diamond\Alpine Dealer)... yes they get their materials from other sources (Eton HEX cones) but they do build & design their own drivers... unlike the likes of Alpine & CDT (picked as examples) who OEM their speaker lines, slap their name on it & then charge a premium that is obviously not related based on performance but rather brand recognition. When you look at available drivers direct from the manufacturer that are similar for much less, you can't help but wonder...

As for speaker distortion, speakers produce by far more distortion than any other component of an audio system, quite often ranging upwards of 50% distortion, so comparing any speaker based on distortion isn't really a good idea.

Far be it from me to try an pass on to everyone that graphs tell the whole story, but it does take a good measuring driver to sound good... Granted, the performance differences may be minimal, but when you factor in costs I will take a 1% better performing driver for $50 less (for the sake of setting an example).

Then as a moderator yourself, consider how many times you see enthusiast come on the boards wanting opinnions on excellent performing drivers... 99% of the time they are splitting hairs... Hey if that the norm, by all means lets break out the graphs to get a visual aid... using this criteria is much more concrete than opinions based on experiences that we can hardly begin to duplicate in our own 'different' car environments... Know what I mean?

I do agree that the motor topology and overall specs on the driver matter most of all, but how many people here really have that firm of an understanding of driver design to put that information to good use? you, me, Jon, and about 3 or 4 others perhaps on this site? Note, that's an abnormally high percentage of the typical demographic as well. I'd be surprised if I had one really knowledgeable person walk into my store every two weeks when I was doing sales and installing.

Not disagreeing with you here... but I see no reason in your arguement to not try to educate our fellow audio enthusiast that don't know... I was not born with the knowledge... So likewise the others willing can learn as well...

I would be amused to see that Peerless tested against a XXX using the XBL2 motor though, since the XXX has outlandishly good linearity at high excursion, and offers a terrific BL to boot.. efficiency not withstanding.

I have personally been disappointed & feel the hype behind the great technology does not offer any advantage in SQ to warrant the high price of the XXX subs... But I will admit that sub is capable of high output performance I am not interested in... So the way I am judging the sub is this way... as far as SQ goes, it offers no advantage tonally over the Peerless XLS, XXLS, Diamond Audio M6, Dayton Titanic MkIII & Dayton Reference. What is does indeed have an advantage on is composure @ high output... but under normal listening levels, all the subs I mentioned are as good, if not better, and a much better value... And I think value is an important criteria & in most cases THE most important criteria...

On the Midrange front... the XBL2 Tech failed to fulfill its promise in the XXX mids\midbass... perhaps they need to redesign that particular driver... it does make for a great mid-bass & it delivers there quite well... but its physical proportions are insane & a Peerless XLS 8" a much better alternative in infinite baffle designs... Not to mention, I believe the driver is recommended to be used in a sealed enclosure.
https://secure26.hostgator.com/~npdang/ ... .php?t=406

My opinions are mine... I don't expect anyone to take them as Gods word... I encourage all to research & go to shows & experience all that you can... In my initial post my intention was to prove that in the car audio world costs are more closely related to name than performance & a good way to exploit that fact is by comparing them to raw drivers...

I love when this happends, the nerds take over my theads. :)

Hmmm, peerless eh? I'll look into that. 5" mounting depth right?

"On the Midrange front... the XBL2 Tech failed to fulfill its promise in the XXX mids\midbass... perhaps they need to redesign that particular driver"

Mainly from a standpoint of materials technology, energy storage shows up in the intended freq. range for both the XXX mid and the Extremis mids. I'd rather see a driver perform well on a waterfall plot than a distortion or a FR test, especially when talking about car audio. But then you're comparing linear and non-linear distortion, two different animals. I feel the SEAS magnesium cone drivers are a superior choice for anyone wanting clean, transparent midrange reproduction, which is my main emphasis in any audio system. I'd like to see some XBL^2 designs that focus on a dedicated drivers for a narrower band, any speaker is still going to see limitations due to the size. Like Dan Wiggins said about the Extremis, it isn't the best midrange, it isn't the best midbass, but it is one of the best midwoofers you can get. I'd like to see a dedicated midrange driver that aims for enough excursion (2mm one way would be plenty for a midrange driver) with the benefit of the flat BL curve and low inductance that XBL^2 offers. I think the inherent low distortion of the motor topology is screaming for a metal cone, if not for anything but bragging rights :) .

audiocr381ve wrote: Hmmm, peerless eh? I'll look into that. 5" mounting depth right?

The Peerless 830491 is aprox just over 3.75" in Depth...

sorry, was offline for a couple days building some PCs for people.
anyway in regards to companies building their own drivers, dynaudio is another who does all of their own work in house.
you did remind me though that I'd love to start a thread listing companies and who builds their amplifiers, or their speakers etc.. then compile a list for the faq section.
it'd be good reference. same for who owns which companies, like power craptastik owning soundstream etc.

as far as the XXX speakers though, I was referring to their subs, which I still adore. I never have been a proponent of their component sets though. I think there's better stuff out there for the money.
Namely Dyn and Rainbow to name two (granted rainbow is basicallySEAS)

I think (don't hold me to it) Rainbow licenses the SEAS motor topology and that's the extent of it. You can see the similarity in the Platinum and Reference lines.

I agree, though. I still feel Adire and RE need a little more work to get up to the level of SEAS, Scan-speak, Dynaudio, and Rainbow in terms of midrange performance. Subwoofers, it's a different story.