need clarification on reasons...

High Society · Post by **High Society** » Sun Apr 02, 2006 11:25 pm

Don't really get these designs, maybe the smarties on here can help...

This is supposed to be a shallow mount sub, But why so much surround? If it's for lots of excursion, and you're limited on space. That doesn't seem right.

This ones for Joe;

This is why I'm real mad, I thought the oval design was inferior to round cones?

And this just goes out to all the ricers!

OnYrMrk · Post by **OnYrMrk** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:29 am

Matt, I love the new Utopia Be Series! I just can't justify the $7k they want for that set of components....yet.

Bwcad1 · Post by **Bwcad1** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:53 am

those brutus subs preform well and yea the color is kinda gay but they do preform.

William from NOLA · Post by **William from NOLA** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:59 am

I think the oval subs has to do with the mentality that 6x9's are better than 6.5's. The appearance of having a larger cone area I guess is the main selling point.

One could also speculate that it is for people without much vertical space in the trunk.

Excuses excuses :)

Post by **GlassWolf** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 2:17 pm

actually if those 6x9 subs work in IB, they'd work well in a rear deck as free air subs for people who "don't want to use a sub" due to lack of space, or the wife, or whatever.
great "solution" subs

Ryan from Ohio · Post by **Ryan from Ohio** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 2:46 pm

WTF to the earthquake sub...

I never accounted surround material into the T/S Sd spec...

You may have to with that sub! lmao

mikechec9 · Post by **mikechec9** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 2:55 pm

Ryan from Ohio wrote:WTF to the earthquake sub...
I never accounted surround material into the T/S Sd spec...
You may have to with that sub! lmao

As well you shouldn't, imo. That thing is bound to sound like a patty melt in a tail pipe. (I'm from Atlanta :) )

I recall the review on those Boston Ovals. They're essentially 10" subs pulled apart to fit in the rear deck. Admittedly a space saving device, as previously alluded to.

joeyc · Post by **joeyc** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 3:01 pm

only pic worth a crap to me is the be x-over, rest is...well...wacky might be a good word

Post by **GlassWolf** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:48 pm

I think that sub is more of a flat piston design from the look of it, which would use the whole surface of the sub to move air pretty much.
probably not really high output but it'd work well in spots like a single cab S-10

geolemon · Post by **geolemon** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:53 pm

Are you sure those first two pictures are the same product?
Earthquake has a flat-piston sub with a super-shallow mounting depth - I used to sell them! (they came pre-loaded in certain space-constrained Pro Box enclosures).
IT had a very rigid, somewhat interestingly shaped plastic piston, with a traditional surround.

If you told me the top picture was Earthquake's new passive radiator - with a heavy small disc at the center- I wouldn't be nearly as surprised.
IF that's a sub, I can't even imagine a benefit.

Methinks someone is having too much fun with Photoshop.

Same with that Boston sub...
...it's not a 6x9, I don't believe. I thought they were making full-size (ie. 12" ) subs that way now, to try to capture some of the "round subs aren't cool" bandwagon that Kicker started with the L7's... since Kicker patented the surround on squares, you've got to do something, to make subs that stack right tight next to one another, right?

But the quint-stack of magnets screams photoshop to me too.