Electrodynamic

JL was going to sue them - their early "a" basket was too close to JL's patent(s) on their W7 basket. So what happened to the original tooling and labor involved in the early "a" basket? Poof. They had to re-tool a basket to avoid JL's patent(s). Exactly. I don't know either. But I do love rolling up to car audio competitions and seeing other drivers completely whipping arse against W7's. The closest anyone at a competition with W7's had 2 13W7's, two 1000/1's and a host of other JL goodies...they came within 9 dB of Hoss. I.e. Hoss was 9 dB louder...with about 1/4 the cost in equipment. They do have great hype...and great acronyms on their web page. *edit* Here's the Audiojunkies.com link: http://www.audiojunkies.com/blog/305/jl-au...gement-concerns

Right, that enclosure is just fine for great performance. The other question/post regarded a sealed box size of 3.3 cubes. You can port it in an enclosure that large.

An early price estimate hasn't been released yet. When we get the prototype in (should be within this month) we will publish preliminary pricing. Trust me, information will come ASAP!! We won't keep you guys in the dark.

Going with new Mag's over new BM's will almost always guarantee better sound quality. The new Mag is our flagship driver and has always out-performed the competition for a true SQ woofer with great SPL abilities. The new BM's are simply designed for lower power, smaller enclosures, and a LOT shallower mounting depth. Great SQ will still accompany the BM's, but the Mag is still going to sound better in the proper application. The BM's will work in 0.5 cubes, where as the Mag won't. The new BM's are also a lower power handling driver at 500 watts RMS whereas the new Mags can handle up to 1000 watts RMS. Note that it is power handling - not how much is necessary to get good performance. When the prototypes arrive we will do side-by-side SPL testing and listening sessions between the new Mag and old Mag and publish the results complete with power input, box size, tuning frequency when ported, etc. And the same goes for the BM's.

Once again, very impressive Marcos!

3.3 cubes sealed is plenty big enough - there is absolutely no reason to go larger. The driver meets its "perfect" box alignment in less than 2 cubes, but it performs the best right at 2.5 cubes. Making the box larger is only going to raise your F3 but extend your F10...which will do you no good listening to music.

Jesus Neil!! LOL! Very good post my man, very good post. Just something to add to Neil's post - When it comes to loudspeaker distortion in general (which it appears that a lot of people are finally starting to learn involves more than just the motor), the cone can add to differences in sound reproduction. If it makes it easier, imagine holding a 2'x2' piece of thin aluminum and striking it with a screw driver. Now imaging a 2'x2' piece of dense cardboard and striking it with a screw driver. Which one will resonate more and at what frequencies? I know that was a very bad example because it's going off the deep end as far as comparissons go, but you should get the idea. On a MUCH smaller scale, loudspeaker cone distortion is analyzed with similar goals in mind (to see what materials resonate at what frequencies, how much they resonate, from what areas of the cone do they resonate from, and how it all affects the sound that the speaker creates). From our subwoofer testing, aluminum diphragms have a tendency to resonate at a frequency and level which the user can hear, whereas paper or poly doesn't. Aluminum's resonances tend to be much more severe than paper or poly. Even though they might be higher up the scale (3'rd order vs. 2'nd order), aluminum still resonates with the same, if not higher, peaks as paper in those registers. Technically, those harmonics can creep down into the subwoofers playback. Albeit at a very attenuated level...but it's still there. And those little "additions" can add to the sound your subwoofer plays back. Having said that, there are some very neat poly's out now-a-days. Polk is using a "puffed" poly that is claimed to strengthen the cone by adding air to the poly mixture/forming process making it stronger without adding a considerable amount of weight. I like the idea of that cone a LOT...especially when it comes to a car audio mid/woofer (I'm referring to Polk's big-boy 6.5" component set). Anyway, without digressing it all comes down to what you are willing to tolerate - from an enginerring standpoint and from the consumer standpoint. Take a marine speaker for example. Paper would not be a wise choice. Aluminum, poly, carbon fiber, fiberglass, etc should be used instead. It's a no-brainer really. But for car audio or home audio, it's really a choice. The battle is always the least amount of added distortion from the cone with the highest strength-to-weight ratio. For us, it's paper. We thought the paper cones we used on the previous Mag's were good, but they're just pretty good compared to the new cone we're using. But as Neil and Jim said, cone choice is MUCH more critical in midranges and tweeters than subwoofers. It's still important for subwoofers, but just not as important as a midrange/tweeter.

Excuse me if I'm jumping into this thread a bit late, but how about going back to what Jim and a few others asked? How about upgrading your factory speakers with at least a pair of coaxes? For the cause of better sound I'll throw you a pair of Audax 5.25's for $40 shipped. But seriously, lets look at what you could get with a "budget" system ($1k full systems are refered to as budget systems): Used HU on here or another forum: $125 RCA/amp kit on here or another forum: $50 Coaxes: <$50 Solid little amplifier: $300 Good quality subwoofer: $300 And you said the box and installation is covered. So far I've got $825 and that can be had shipped to your door if you look for about an hour in the classifieds section of this, and other forums. Now, I would upgrade your fronts as far as monetarily possible. Even if you run them off a HU, a really good set of coaxes will make a huge difference. If you go another route and go for a 4 channel that you can bridge two channels on to make it a 3 channel, then you've got the potential for seperates up front (powered off the amp), good power for a sub, and you'll be much happier IMO.

Yep, that will be a perfect amount of power for a pair of new Mags.

Mags are sold out (new one's anyway), but if you want to post in the classifieds section you need to follow the rules and gain enough posts first. Thread closed!

Well it doesn't surprise me that the SS's don't add up to the XXX's. The new Mags are going to sound better than the current Mag's and do it in slightly smaller boxes. They'll keep up with everything you can throw at them. You won't have to worry about them only sounding good on certain types of music because if the new Mag doesn't keep up, then your program material is messed up to begin with. I'll give you my listening impressions (Jacob from Sundown is going to be there also) when I get the prototype in, but I'm anticipating my impressions being better than the current Mag. And yeah, in 1 cube sealed you can fit 3 new Mag's in the space you can fit two other 12's...and you'll still be lighter with 3 Mag's vs. two other 12's. We do have an anechoic frequency response of the Mag and it's impressive to say the least. Upper-frequency extension is un-heard-of for a higher power handling, high-stroke, superwoofer...which means that it will blend sooooo well with your front stage. I can't wait until it gets here!! PS: I'll publish the graph pretty soon. Look for it on AudioJunkies also.

Yep, I plan on having a group of subs to measure and test against the new Mag once the proto arrives. But LFE should be the same as the current Mag, so by the numbers it should dive lower or have a similar F3 to the ID MAX.

The new Mag's will be available as a 12" only and will be dual 2 Ohm only. There are plenty of amplifiers out there that do 750-1000 watts at 1 Ohm and/or 1500-2000 watts at 2 Ohm (for a pair or Mags), and with the mounting depth shrunken to 5.5" the new 12" Mag's are going to be able to fit in places the old Mag's couldn't.

In the same size box and power, yes. Now, the new Mag's are going to be more enclosure specific. They won't hold over 1000 watts in larger enclosures like the current/previous Mag's can. But in 1 cube sealed and 1.5 cubes ported, output should shape up to be on par with the current mag in the same box.

Nope, no tall surround to increase sd. It's not worth it. Linearity of tall surrounds suck and I'm not willing to sacrifice that much non-linearity just to gain a hairs bredth more sd. In the long run, it really doesn't matter if you have 2 more square inches than the other guy...especially when it comes to the sound quality of the driver. The foam surround we are using on the Mag is very linear and very durable...and of course improved over the previous model. But yes to everything else you listed. You hit the nail on the head with the list you posted. The driver is also going to weigh about 1/2 what the previous generation did. Look to see the new Mag weighing in at about 18-20 lbs. That's a big difference compared to 30-32 lbs.

They're coming. Kinda hard to pics of something we don't have yet. Trust me, pics will be posted a day after we receive the prototype. The day-of receiving is reserved for our reps.

Ok, thread closed. Extra t-shirts have been ordered, so they will be here in the next few weeks and then they'll start being shipped.

Merry Christmas everyone!!!!!!! The first 5 people to reply to this thread will get a free T-shirt shipped to them after Xmas. Happy holidays!

Well, that's it guys. Thanks to all of those who sent me PM's, as you will be seeing your shirts before too much longer (keep in mind we have to get more made in order to fill all the orders).

Actually I just checked and we're running low on shirts, sooo.... How about to anyone who wants a T-shirt, email me or PM me today (or if you've responded to this email yesterday and said that you want a t-shirt you will be sent a shirt) and let me know what size you wear and I'll send you a free t-shirt when we get more in (shouldn't be any longer than 2 weeks). So basically, free t-shirts today for everyone who replies and wants one!! :) Merry Christmas!!!

Actually I've only received 4 PM's/emails so far, so technically that makes you #5.

Man, that was quick! 3 shirts already!! Oh, to those who have replied and to the next two that will reply after me, either email me or PM me your mailing addresses so I can get those shirts out to you. If you prefer a certain size, let me know in your message.

What M5 said, when you shrink your enclosure size your power handling goes up and you loose bottom end. Put it in a larger enclosure and you gain bottom end and loose power handling.

In theory (and common practice) 2 12's should be 3 dB instantly louder than 1 12 with the same amount of power. Unless the amplifier was cutting power substantially (remember you're going from a 1 Ohm load with one driver to a 1/2 Ohm or 2 Ohm load with a pair) there is no reason you shouldn't have seen an instant increase in output. And a single 15 is going to triumph over a single 12, but it shouldn't be that much louder than dual 12's (unless you're talking about a ported single 15 vs. two 12's sealed - then the 15 should be louder). I just looked on JL's web page and see that they are claiming 1000 watts from 1.5 Ohms all the way up to 4 Ohms. Interesting. I have four 15's in the living room of my house and I still loved the output of two 12" Mag's in the Integra - so maybe it was just personal preference with you, who knows. In the same vehicle, multiple drivers can make up for the lack of surface area compared to a single larger driver though. In different vehicles, it's a whole different story.

Dual 2 Ohm only.