Looking for ideas for a small amplifer for a set of component speakers

[xtremerevolution]

are you saying that JL and Boston have knocked a home run out the park? hitting low with massive excursion is what gives these woofers the SQ in the lowest frequencies with all that SPL. it is a competition that was won by the patent holder of the lightest and strongest cone design. would that be the maker of the W cone or ID?

 

http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_subs_pages.php?page_id=37

 

Dear god, I'm going to go insane if you bring in more JL W supremacy into this thread. No, it is not the lightest cone by a massive long shot. There are other woven glass and woven fiber cones that are lighter. No, it is not the only patented design on the planet that performs very well, and no, it is not the best subwoofer ever made. Also, no, the ability to hit massive SPL at low frequencies is absolutely no indication of SQ. In fact, its a very small indication of SQ, and only one of the criteria an SQ judge will listen to when judging a sound system. Its only an indication of SPL. Furthermore, its damn near useless if your aim is SQ as you don't need to hit 20hz at sickening SPL levels anyway. You appear to have a very big misunderstanding of the difference between SQ and SPL. SQ is not defined as "violent."

Edited June 14, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[Garrett Powered]

those cones you speak of are not designed to withstand the violent piston-like cone movement (excursion) generated by the giant motor structures used in modern low hitting SQ systems. It is not like I am ONLY into JL. Boston is great as well.

 

Fs3 technology is advertised as being cheap enough for any manufacturer to afford but the cone has to be extremely light AND strong obviously to be reliable.

[xtremerevolution]

those cones you speak of are not designed to withstand the violent piston-like cone movement (excursion) generated by the giant motor structures used in modern low hitting SQ systems. It is not like I am ONLY into JL. Boston is great as well.

 

Fs3 technology is advertised as being cheap enough for any manufacturer to afford but the cone has to be extremely light AND strong obviously to be reliable.

 

If its cheap enough to afford, why has it been "advertised" for the last 2 years and it hasn't become mainstream?

 

You're making my head hurt. Don't you get it? You don't need to hit extremely low notes to have SQ. I'm doubting if you really know what makes a good SQ system. Seems like you believe SQ is being able to hit 20hz (or below, God knows why since you can't even hear it) at 140db+ (after cabin gain is factored in). Do you listen to the rest of your music at 140db all the way up to 2khz? I'd love to see you try. You'd probably need a few pro horns and pro 18" midbass drivers. I'll make sure to call the ambulance so you can be rushed to the ER after your ears start bleeding or you pass out. I'm not sure you realize that being able to hit that low, that loud, is not at all musical. That's SPL technology, not SQ technology. SQ is the accurate reproduction of a recording.

 

Massive excursion drivers create SPL, not SQ, and you don't need to have an extremely light cone to have that high of an excursion. Instead, you need a large coil and a strong motor.

 

Here's an example of your glorified Fs3 "technology", where you can blatantly hear the distortion from the subs extending way past their xmax.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FdObLEvVK8

 

If you call that SQ, I seriously have nothing else to say to you.

 

Here's another where yet again, you can blatantly hear the distortion.

 

 

That's for SPL buddy. That "technology" has absolutely no place in the same sentence as SQ. When you can get me a Klippel measurement of an Fs3 equipped driver, we'll talk, but for now, its nothing more than a subwoofer cone flapping around uncontrollably. Hell, I'll bet it doesn't even have the ability to produce powerful bass notes, or someone in some SPL competition would have used it in the past, oh, 4 years its been around.

 

Funny, everywhere I search, I can't find any updates of this "technology" past somewhere in 2009. I wonder if its so great, why nobody's bothered with it. I think we both know the answer to that; it probably sounds like shit.

 

 

Oh look, another video made by the guys. I wonder why they don't actually let you hear the cone itself moving. Probably because, yet again, it sounds like shit. I love how the guy leaves his email toward the end of the video; felt_not_heard@yahoo.com, because clearly, sound must be felt, not heard. Give me a break.

 

This "technology" is pure bullshit.

 

I seriously wonder why you even waste my time with this crap, and why you question every damn thing I say as if you're the one with experience designing speakers and sub boxes.

Edited June 15, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[Garrett Powered]

I haven't seen any videos of JL's prototype with audio. I couldn't tell you if it sounds like shit.

 

I can tell you I want one if and when it is offered for sale. just like when I was the first person in town to actually purchase a W7 from the dealer here. talk about bullshit, you go around here claiming you are the expert on every subject on this forum and in the world. yet you have never owned or heard a w7 in real life or anything with Fs3 technology and you already know they sound like shit? that makes no sense to me and I think you are cool for liking speakers and stuff still but please speak only of what you personally know and have experimented with or else you really don't know.

 

and I have built many boxes so I still don't know why you keep saying that.

[xtremerevolution]

I haven't seen any videos of JL's prototype with audio. I couldn't tell you if it sounds like shit.

 

I can tell you I want one if and when it is offered for sale. just like when I was the first person in town to actually purchase a W7 from the dealer here. talk about bullshit, you go around here claiming you are the expert on every subject on this forum and in the world. yet you have never owned or heard a w7 in real life or anything with Fs3 technology and you already know they sound like shit? that makes no sense to me and I think you are cool for liking speakers and stuff still but please speak only of what you personally know and have experimented with or else you really don't know.

 

and I have built many boxes so I still don't know why you keep saying that.

 

I'm going to state this as fact, not opinion. You have absolutely no idea how subwoofers work. You have absolutely no idea how sub boxes work. You have no idea what distortion is and what it sounds like. I DARE you to post what you have on diyma and see how many people tell you off.

 

Go ahead and buy the first one that never comes out. Like I said, its been 2 years since they last posted a video of their supposed technology, and nobody has one.

 

You're all impressed by a massive excursion as if it means something. I don't claim I'm the expert on every subject, but I do know more about home and car audio than probably anyone on this forum, especially you. I have heard a W7 in real life and I own an IDMax, which many including myself believe to sound better than a W7 as far as SQ goes. The reason why I don't own a W7 is because I have priorities in my life and spending over $600 for a subwoofer isn't one of them.

 

Fs3 "technology" is pure bullshit. I'm baffled that you don't see the obvious. I know they sound like shit because I hear the distortion more than I hear the "bass" they produce by large margin in every video where they dare play the sound of the actual "subwoofer" playing.

 

I speak of what I know. If it sounds like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, its a duck. This Fs3 "technology" has been out for 4 freakin years yet I have not seen a single person use anything of any resemblance for SPL or SQ competition. In fact, not a single person on diyma has one. Go ahead, be the first to waste your money because you refuse to do the research.

 

I don't care how many boxes you've built, you don't know the first thing about designing them or how they work. You know how to read the specs of the manufacturers' website and put together an MDF box. I'm sorry if this offends you but its the truth. You proved it earlier (in either this thread or the other one) when you said that ported boxes distort the sound and lower the frequency.

 

I'm sorry to the moderators and whoever else is reading this, but you've really started to irritate me and I'm sick and tired of having to prove my point on elementary subjects. I don't need to have heard these retarded "subwoofers" to know they sound like shit. I can see it from the design and I can hear it in the videos. These people haven't revolutionized anything. It is painfully obvious that there is an insane amount of distortion coming out of these, yet you maintain that they're the epitome of sound quality. Please do some research before you come back and tell me I'm wrong. This is getting really old.

[Garrett Powered]

lots of technology is out there that is not in use yet. disruptive technologies are known to make individual investors wealthy. while a small percentage are successful, I see JL and Boston as the leaders in the industry and they both have prototypes showcasing Fs3 technology. what more proof do you need that it doesn't sound like shit?

 

yes I said it distorts, and I still believe that any "sub" woofer that cuts off the lowest frequencies so you can't even experience them at all is distorting what you could be experiencing. so until one of your voodoo ported water soluble wood glue boxes proves it can handle the power of a real sub, stop saying I have no idea what I am talking about. a W7 would blow your box apart if it was sealed and that is a fact.

[Garrett Powered]

and don't come back with "It will not blow apart because I am a designer" because you do NOT know, you have not done any real life experiments with the sub. I have though. I "researched" and have real life experience with a real subwoofer that I paid $1000 hard earned dollars for.

[Garrett Powered]

by the way, the W7 was like 4 years in the making if I remember correctly by the time I could get my hands on one, so this assumption alone would not be enough for me to try and dismiss it all as quackery.

[xtremerevolution]

Most people who have no clue what they're talking about usually either keep quiet or try to learn, not start arguing with someone who has proven they know what they're talking about and will prove them wrong repeatedly. You have this wild notion that because you own a JL W7, you suddenly know everything there is to know about subwoofers and sub boxes, or at least that's the impression you give off with how much you argue with me about topics you have absolutely no authority on.

 

lots of technology is out there that is not in use yet.

disruptive technologies are known to make individual investors wealthy. while a small percentage are successful, I see JL and Boston as the leaders in the industry and they both have prototypes showcasing Fs3 technology. what more proof do you need that it doesn't sound like shit?

 

Yes, lots of technologies aren't in use yet. However, when a working model was produced in 2007 and absolutely nothing is on the market by 2011 in this fast paced economy, it *should* make you wonder, not dream.

 

Boston and JL are not the only players in the market. The only reason why you mention them is because Boston and JL were the only cones on the subs in the videos you saw, and because you own a JL W7 and are a JL supremacist.

 

JL and Boston did not showcase the subs. Try again. Just because you saw a JL dust cap and a Boston cone doesn't mean they were made by JL or Boston. These were made by private individuals. Did you not even watch the video or read my last post. The guy left his email for you! "felt_not_heard@yahoo.com." It wasn't "Fs3technology@bostonacoustics.com" or "fs3subwoofers@jlaudio.com." Instead, it was some idiot's yahoo email address. anyone can take a small sub and glue two larger surrounds together and make it look like something "new."

 

But since you maintain that even after hearing the distortion in the videos you deny that it exists, I'm going to google the definition for you.

 

"distortion, in electronics, undesired change in an electric signal waveform as it passes from the input to the output of some system or device. In an audio system, distortion results in poor reproduction of recorded or transmitted sound."

 

What you heard in the video was neither bass nor the camera's microphone. In fact, I can reproduce the exact same sound with my IDMax10 if I push it past its xmax and the voice coil leaves the magnetic gap. Its called distortion. Stop arguing with me on elementary topics you don't even understand.

 

yes I said it distorts, and I still believe that any "sub" woofer that cuts off the lowest frequencies so yoat u can't even experience them all is distorting what you could be experiencing. so until one of your voodoo ported water soluble wood glue boxes proves it can handle the power of a real sub, stop saying I have no idea what I am talking about. a W7 would blow your box apart if it was sealed and that is a fact.

Again, open up a thousand dictionaries and read the word distortion till it sinks in. A box does not distort. In fact, it doesn't even cut off frequencies. I posted a chart of my IDQ15 ported box to show you the modeled frequency response. Where does it cut off frequencies? In fact, I've attached 6 MORE sub graphs I've modeled.

 

I'm going to repeat myself, and unless you care to do the research and find some nonexisting materials that prove me wrong, I'd appreciate it if you stopped spewing bullshit across this forum.

 

Vented boxes accentuate a tuned frequency range to increase output. They do not cut off any frequency. At around the tuning frequency, excursion is controlled and the output comes from the port. I have excursion modeling I can post to prove it. THERE IS NO DISTORTION!!! SPL competitors use ported boxes because it improves output significantly. JL Audio themselves offer both a sealed and ported box alignment. '

 

What the fuck are you talking about with "voodoo ported water soluble wood boxes." Seriously, what the fuck are you talking about? God damn dude, its one thing to not know what the hell you're talking about, but its another thing entirely to claim to know and then tell me I'm an idiot as if you do know what you're talking about.

 

Fuck, here, if you don't believe me, from crutchflield.com

 

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-xRyYsZRFd47/learn/learningcenter/car/subwoofers_enclosures.html

 

They say: "Ported boxes: For forceful bass

Ported boxes use a vent (called a port) to reinforce low bass response. You get more output than you would from a sealed box at any given amplifier wattage. Some people prefer the sound of ported boxes for rock, heavy metal, or any hard-driving music. Ported boxes can deliver deeper bass than sealed boxes, though they need to be much larger than sealed enclosures to accomplish that."

 

Yet you maintain that sealed boxes provide the violent bass. Turns out, ported boxes provide MORE forcefull and violent bass than sealed boxes, which is why, as I mentioned, SPL competitors use them. Proven wrong again. Do I need to post more links?

 

My boxes do handle the power of a real sub. My IDMax is rated for the same 1000W that your W7 is. Why do you have such a difficulty realizing that? JL Audio themselves recommend an MDF box with a 1" thick baffle. I built mine with a 1.5" thick baffle and internal reinforcement. Tell me exactly how my box is any different? I use the wood glue mixture to seal the outside of the box from moisture. Some people use fiberglass resin to do the same thing. Do you really not even know how wood glue works? Do I have to define the word sealed? I would LOVE to see your JL W7 break my box apart. So far, I've used my boxes as jackstands for my cars and they haven't broken apart. What did you build yours out of, iron? Mine are MDF, and I will give ANYONE here $50 if they can glue two pieces of MDF together with titebond II wood glue, clamp them down, let them dry overnight, and then break them apart the next day. ITS IMPOSSIBLE. The MDF will fail before the wood glue does.

 

By the way, MY BOX IS SEALED. I posted pictures of it in my project thread a long time ago. .9 cubic feet net. I didn't say I used a ported box, I said I designed them. I chose a sealed box for a more linear response after modeling cabin gain. I didn't want a boomy, peaky response that many ported boxes can create. My home theater sub though is ported. In fact, most home theater subs are ported.

 

Want me to prove it? Since you're so hung up on Boston Acoustics, here are a few ported powered subwoofers they sell:

 

http://www.bostonacoustics.com/CPS-8Wi-Wireless-Ready-Subwoofer-P397.aspx

http://www.bostonacoustics.com/BT1100-P74.aspx

http://www.bostonacoustics.com/CPS-10Wi-Wireless-Ready-Subwoofer-P394.aspx

 

Do I need to post more, or am I getting through to you?

 

As for frequencies being cut off so you can't experience them, do tell me what frequencies those are. You tried to play off the 5hz card earlier and I proved you wrong, recorded music only goes down to 41hz unless you're playing a pipe organ and you go down to 18hz. I don't know of anyone who plays pipe organ music in their car. Synthesized rap generally goes down into the low 30's, high 20's, with some dubstep type material going down into the mid and low 20's, but nothing below 20hz. Why? Because its not music if you can't hear it. A sub is a speaker, and a speaker's purpose is to reproduce *audible* frequencies. The only time you hit below 20hz (in 95%+ of cases) is with home theater in special effects such as explosions, things you have no use for in a car. So remind me why I should give a shit that I use a subsonic filter to cut off any frequencies below 20hz when you can't even hear them?

 

For the record, ported boxes don't cut off frequencies. High pass filters "cut off" frequencies to protect the sub from unloading below the tuning frequency.

 

and don't come back with "It will not blow apart because I am a designer" because you do NOT know, you have not done any real life experiments with the sub. I have though. I "researched" and have real life experience with a real subwoofer that I paid $1000 hard earned dollars for.

 

It will not blow apart because fucking shit, it will not blow apart. I don't have to do any real life experience with a JL w7. Their website recommends a 1" thick baffle and 3/4" MDF. I make a 1.5" thick baffle with 3/4" MDF. Explain to me how my box, which is more beefed up than JL's recommended box for the W7, would blow apart. Seriously, I would love to hear your logic on this one. I don't give a crap how much you spent on that sub, and I'll bet the only research you did was reading their website or a few review websites. Did I ever say it was a bad sub? No, I never did, but fuck, its not blowing apart a clamped and glued MDF box with a 1.5" thick baffle.

 

You should probably call up these places and tell them that your almighty JL subwoofer would blow their boxes apart. Let me know how many hang up the phone immediatley, and how many start laughing.

 

http://www.klausaudio.com/shop/custom-enclosures/single-13w7-subwoofer-boxes.php

 

Call JL audio too while you're at it, because obviously the 1" baffle they specify on their site is too small. We all need your monstrous 5" baffle (which by the way is nearly the depth of the basket post mounting and chokes the hell out of the sub):

 

http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_subs_enclusure.php?series_id=10

 

Clearly they don't know their own subwoofer and you could teach them a thing or two. Might also want to tell them not to list their ported box spec on the site because, well, it distorts.

 

You have real life experience with that sub? Doing what, listening to it? Do tell, I want to know what real life experience you have that is remotely applicable to your self proclaimed expertise on this subject.

Edited June 15, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[xtremerevolution]

by the way, the W7 was like 4 years in the making if I remember correctly by the time I could get my hands on one, so this assumption alone would not be enough for me to try and dismiss it all as quackery.

 

No, it wasn't that assumption alone, you are 100% correct. It was the distortion I blatantly heard in the video and the fact that they had a working model 4 years ago yet here we are 4 years later and all we have is youtube videos. No professional email address, no website, no information aside from a few random websites. Nothing for 4 years, yet its ground breaking, revolutionary technology? No SPL charts, just excursion videos. No distortion measurements, no T/S parameters, nothing. Keep in mind, they had these things running apparently perfectly...

 

Once you've bought that, I also have some oceanfront property I'd like to sell you in arizona, from which you can sea. Buy now and I'll throw the golden gate in free.

 

For the record, I can pop a boston acoustics dust cap or cone on any subwoofer I want and glue two surrounds together to make a stupid high excursion, then get rid of the suspension and use a light spring coil instead and get the same results.

 

Here's more from techtalk.partsexpress.com:

 

"There's a good reason why more subs don't do that. Using both those surrounds together eats up a ton of cone area, which invokes a penalty in Sd. Since bass is all about swept volume, not necessarily excursion, the wider your surround is, the less cone area is left for a given amount of Xmax, so displacement decreases instead of increasing."

 

http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=218240

 

Ah shit, I found something more. Someone confirming the exact same thing I said before.

 

"old videos...its mostly hype...huge gap, high distortion, horrible linearity"

 

"likes aznboi say, it has very high distortion. most of its use in car audio. phil the sound of it is "pub..pub" LOL here is a new bass note. but someone may want the new bass.LOL"

 

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/132114-fs3-suspension.html

 

How many more forums do I have to dig through to prove to you that this "technology" sounds like shit. I wasn't born yesterday, and I'm not an idiot. You may have experience with *one* very good sub, but that means jack shit. The fact that you once had $1000 to burn on a sub means nothing to me.

[xtremerevolution]

Oh, by the way, want massive SPL? Look at subs by Digital Designs, Sundown Audio, Fi, JBL,

 

Some more include the Soundstream XXX, the Orion HCCA.

 

If you want truly violent subs, some of those Digital Designs subs make a JL 13W7 look like a child's toy when it comes to pure, raw SPL.

 

Have a look through this thread:

 

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-spl-forum/93114-post-your-subwoofer-pics.html

 

Funny how few people use a JL W7 sub. I think I may have seen like 2 or 3.

 

Why on Earth, if the JL W7 is the best subwoofer on the planet, would people use it so rarely. Let me guess, you know something they don't in all your "ported boxes change frequencies and cause distortion" and "my W7 would break your subwoofer box apart" wisdom?

Edited June 15, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[Garrett Powered]

the double surround is not the Fs3 technology. apparently it minimizes stress on the motor structure somehow for durability under extreme excursion.

 

I have not seen the JL prototype in a sealed enclosure with any rap music playing on it, they showed some test tones playing but no audio and they were free air tests. to discredit an experiment before hearing is almost expected for any disruptive technology and short sellers are always relying on this tactic which is fine by me. the entrepreneurial spirit of a few visionary investors in this emerging game changer will be rewarded if the technology prevails.

 

parts express knows nothing about it, they don't sell them. those clowns on that forum didn't say much and don't have them. what's your point? you found out nothing and are still rattling off about what you and I know nothing about really. saying "there is a reason more don't use double surround" is off topic, that is not the Fs3 suspension you big dummy. what Fs3 does is provide linearity and reduce stress on the MOTOR structure. the double surround is how they achieve all that excursion, and displacement of air.

 

I love Parts express because they are very knowledgeable about items they carry. list specs that other sellers rely on having hidden, but his point is invalid in the sense that space is limited in many situations.

[xtremerevolution]

the double surround is not the Fs3 technology. apparently it minimizes stress on the motor structure somehow for durability under extreme excursion.

 

I have not seen the JL prototype in a sealed enclosure with any rap music playing on it, they showed some test tones playing but no audio and they were free air tests. to discredit an experiment before hearing is almost expected for any disruptive technology and short sellers are always relying on this tactic which is fine by me. the entrepreneurial spirit of a few visionary investors in this emerging game changer will be rewarded if the technology prevails.

 

parts express knows nothing about it, they don't sell them. those clowns on that forum didn't say much and don't have them. what's your point? you found out nothing and are still rattling off about what you and I know nothing about really. saying "there is a reason more don't use double surround" is off topic, that is not the Fs3 suspension you big dummy. what Fs3 does is provide linearity and reduce stress on the MOTOR structure. the double surround is how they achieve all that excursion, and displacement of air.

 

I love Parts express because they are very knowledgeable about items they carry. list specs that other sellers rely on having hidden, but his point is invalid in the sense that space is limited in many situations.

 

Seriously, where do you get this information? Wherever you're getting it from, stop reading, because you're severely misinformed. Either stop reading, or post some links so we can all see. So far all you posted is one youtube video (and youtube videos are all that exist regarding this so called technology).

 

The double surround is not to reduce stress on the motor. Technically, the motor structure refers to the coil and the magnetic structure, so I missed the part where there's any stress. Reliability? Give me a break. The only way a subwoofer becomes "unreliable" is if you put too much power through it and either bottom out the coil or overheat it. The surround is supposed to provide absolutely no resistance so that's not experiencing any stress or effect on the cone. Its there to seal the cone to the basket and with the surround, align the coil and former as it travels through the motor structure. The reason why there's a double thick surround is because its impossible to have that high of an excursion without it. Your driver would (assuming the motor is powerful enough) tear the surround because its not long enough. It stretches as the cone pushes outward and it can only stretch so far. Why is it that you fail miserably to understand the most fundamental concepts about how a subwoofer works?

 

Dude, I discredit it because of the BLATANTLY OBVIOUS DISTORTION. Turn up your volume till your ears hurt and listen to the video in the back of the car again. It sounds like shit because its mostly distortion. The voice coil is out of the range of the magnetic gap for the vast majority of the time. A fundamental knowledge of how subwoofers work would demonstrates that its impossible. You obviously don't have that fundamental knowledge. Go read a book or do some online research on how speakers and subwoofers work.

 

This is not an emerging game changer for the reasons stated above. Why do you insist that this is the best thing since sliced bread with absolutely NO evidence that it does anything right? Dear God, we have large excursion, every other company on this planet must have missed something that these guys figured out in their garage. You think JL doesn't have a large staff of very well paid engineers who thought of making a massive excursion on the W7 and instead made limited to the 32mm that the 13W7 has? Why not 64mm?

 

I posted a parts express FORUM, run by experts who design speakers. Did you even read the responses? Its a forum, like this one. It has absolutely nothing to do with partsexpress the company. For the record, those "clowns" on that forum know 10x more than you will ever know about speaker and subwoofer design than you will ever know. These people do this for a living. I think they know a little more than you do.

 

All you saw was a few videos of massive excursion. You saw absolutely no graphs, no charts, no real music being played, nothing. All you heard was a test tone with a stupidly high amount of distortion. You supposedly know how the Fs3 suspension works yet there are no resources but what you read on youtube video comments. You defend this technology as if its been proven. You're so impressed by this massive excursion that you never sat to think "does it actually sound good?"

 

Your first flaw is that you assumed that excursion is all you need to create a great sounding sub. Why does an amazing SQ sub like the Morel Ultimo have only ~13mm of xmax? Why does your JL W7 have the xmax it does instead of 2x that much? Why didn't they use a larger surround, a longer former, and a larger coil, larger motor structure? Do these questions never cross your mind? Do you just see some large excursion made by some hackjob newbies in their garage and assume its revolutionary, game changing technology?

 

How is his point invalid?

 

"There's a good reason why more subs don't do that. Using both those surrounds together eats up a ton of cone area, which invokes a penalty in Sd. Since bass is all about swept volume, not necessarily excursion, the wider your surround is, the less cone area is left for a given amount of Xmax, so displacement decreases instead of increasing."

I would love to hear you explain this one. As you increase the size of the surround, you decrease the area of the cone, thereby decreasing the amount of air you move. Edited June 15, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[RobertISaar]

is this where i mention rotary woofers?

[Breakdown]

This thread kinda reminds me of the "What car should I buy thread that was locked, retired and put in the hall of fame . . . except for the fact that the shoe is on the other foot.

 

Kinda sad actually.

[xtremerevolution]

This thread kinda reminds me of the "What car should I buy thread that was locked, retired and put in the hall of fame . . . except for the fact that the shoe is on the other foot.

 

Kinda sad actually.

 

Entirely different scenario. I disagreed and the OP backed me up that he thought my information was helpful, after I had been flamed and insulted by various members and moderators for what turned out to be no good reason aside from me disagreeing with a few "special" members. Many changes were made to the forum shortly afterward, and several people left and joined gmforum.com after seeing the moderators' actions in that thread. It wasn't anywhere close. At least in that thread, factual information was posted by both parties. I'd hardly say the same about this one. The thought of that thread still leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

 

I'm trying extremely hard not to be rude and insulting, but is very difficult to not let a few irritating comments slide through when someone blatantly insists that he's right after being proven wrong repeatedly.

Edited June 15, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[xtremerevolution]

Here's more in case people can't figure out who actually knows what they're talking about.

 

http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?p=1744329#post1744329

 

Wolf on that forum knows 10x more than even I do about speaker design. He has designed and published more speakers than I probably ever will. This guy is an Einstein of speaker design.

[xtremerevolution]

From techtalk.pe

 

Looks healthy, would probably score well with Klippel testing.

 

 

I don't like being told I'm wrong, but I accept it when I'm proven wrong. I even more dislike being told I'm wrong by someone who doesn't even know fundamental concepts of topics he's arguing with me against. I despise it to a great degree when I'm told I'm wrong by someone I've proven wrong repeatedly on that very same topic.

 

Don't come to me talking as if you know exactly what you're talking about when you haven't the slightest clue how a subwoofer or a subwoofer box works and what distortion is or sounds like.

Edited June 15, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[Breakdown]

I'm trying extremely hard not to be rude and insulting, but is very difficult to not let a few irritating comments slide through when someone blatantly insists that he's right after being proven wrong repeatedly.

 

You aren't trying hard enough. I don't understand as much as either of you two, I love my speakers and I'll chime in when I feel that a little of my "so-called" expertise/experience with what I have is warranted.

 

Let your opinions speak for themselves. Much like you would like for other people to do to you, there's no reason to put other people, and the ideas that they value down (unless they have completely idiotic ideas like white supremacy and ideas how putting speakers in the microwave helps performance - we'll save that one for next Dayton meet).

 

I'd be willing to bet that this "Wolf" guy on this other forum who supposedly knows 10 Times more about speakers than you do, probably wouldn't take a smelly crap all over your ideas, even if he knew that they were wrong . . . and I'm not saying that they are.

 

I'm trying extremely hard not to be rude and insulting, but is very difficult to not let a few irritating comments slide through when someone blatantly insists that he's right after being proven wrong repeatedly.

 

 

This REALLY sounds familiar!!

 

 

 

 

 

But whatever. . . . . . . I'm not condeming you, either of you . . . . pencils have erasers, just please try and have some respect for other people's opinions, and the other people who have them.

[xtremerevolution]

You aren't trying hard enough. I don't understand as much as either of you two, I love my speakers and I'll chime in when I feel that a little of my "so-called" expertise/experience with what I have is warranted.

 

Let your opinions speak for themselves. Much like you would like for other people to do to you, there's no reason to put other people, and the ideas that they value down (unless they have completely idiotic ideas like white supremacy and ideas how putting speakers in the microwave helps performance - we'll save that one for next Dayton meet).

 

I'd be willing to bet that this "Wolf" guy on this other forum who supposedly knows 10 Times more about speakers than you do, probably wouldn't take a smelly crap all over your ideas, even if he knew that they were wrong . . . and I'm not saying that they are.

 

Yeah, I could have been nicer, but had someone done their research prior to attempting to argue with me, I wouldn't have had to respond as annoyed as I did.

 

 

This REALLY sounds familiar!!

 

 

 

 

 

But whatever. . . . . . . I'm not condeming you, either of you . . . . pencils have erasers, just please try and have some respect for other people's opinions, and the other people who have them.

 

They're not opinions when you're being argued with. That's an argument.

 

"Fs3 technology" is a pretty idiotic idea (hell, its in the urban dictionary), and telling me that ported boxes create distortion is equally idiotic once you take a beginner's look at how they work. No, he wouldn't take a smelly crap, but I wouldn't argue with him either. When he says something, I listen because he's proven he knows what he's talking about.

 

Its one thing to have an opinion, and I respect opinion, but when you're stating opinion as fact to try to prove me wrong, that's an entirely different situation. When you're telling me that your subwoofer can break my sub box apart and implying that I don't know shit about building sub boxes, it becomes personal. That's not just opinion.

 

I don't claim to know everything, but I'll be damned if I'm going to be argued with by someone who doesn't know the first thing about fundamental speaker and box design. Its like going up to a nuclear physicist and telling him he's wrong, that he should be using kool-aid to keep the nuclear power plant from overheating because the powder has magical heat transferring abilities.

 

It really is on that level.

Edited June 15, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[xtremerevolution]

Might I mention that sound quality is not an opinion, but a science. The accurate reproduction of musical frequencies as they were recorded can be measured, and speakers can be designed with that in mind. This is a science that opinion has no place in. There is no gray area. The only gray area is what "sounds good" to some people. Some people prefer massive amounts of distortion so long as they can be heard from a block away, and that's fine, we like to call it SPL and we let people have their short lived fun.

 

You try going to a math convention (if something like that exists) profusely insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 and see what kind of responses you get. You very quickly become a nuisance and you would likely piss off a lot of people and get kicked out after about an hour, if you last that long. That, or they dismiss you as mentally disadvantaged and put you in a corner with a coloring book.

Edited June 15, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[xtremerevolution]

Oh, and by the way.

 

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/general-car-audio-discussion-no-question-dumb/107607-fs3-technology.html

[White93z34]

I'm going to reluctantly lock this. Lets be honest the discussion is going no where and its come down to bickering back and fourth.

 

If someone can give me a compelling argument about why this should continue I'll listen but for now....