DIYiT

I orderd my 150 WRMS plate amp from mcminone.com for $49. I don't know if they have any deals like that right now however, as my amp was a buyout deal, but it doesn't hurt to look.

From Shawn: Please dont come to a manufacturers forum and try to sell them on another manufacturers product. Please dont think I am being rude, I am trying to do this in the most respectable fashion. I wouldnt do that to others, and wouldnt like it done here please.

Free time? What's that? I didn't know there was such a thing as free time... I am very happy that the poly 6.5's will eventually be returning in both variations as Scott mentioned. I have got a theater room here with 10 channels worth of 6.5 poly mid based 2-way speakers and they aren't going ANYWHERE. I love those things. The poly mid may not be considered truly full-range, but for a 6.5 it sure gets close. As it is, they already get up to ~8-10 kHz on-axis before they see any kind of major rolloff up top which is pretty impressive. There are already a lot of customers running them full-range for rear fill in their car setups. Chad Kuypers Ascendant Audio So get them back on the market already!! I'm looking to build myself some new speakers, I need components for the car, and a home theater for the parents.

Personally, after using HaVocs, I don't think I'll ever use my Avalanches again. What do you like so much better about the Havocs?

I guess I'm just coming at this from a different viewpoint than you... I'm more of a home audio guy, so a larger enclosure that I could flatten out behind a couch or beneath a bed would allow me to build a ported enclosure with a still reasonable port size to box ratio. However since most people here are looking at car use, I'd say a slim mount driver that could be built into decent 3 way setup would be very enticing. It just depends on which application you're looking at. For me in that case, I'd use a larger driver then. Do the math and try to tune a .5cuft enclosure to 20hz with enough port area. Your box is all port. Considering that this is the case, I'd expect that as an alternative stepping up to a driver that was optimized for a larger enclosure could actually end up smaller since the port length would be shorter. Of course, I am the kind of guy that wants to move into a house that I can run 4 MJ18's mounted IB for home audio so the 8 for home audio eludes me. edit: by no means am I trying to be antagonistic DIYiT No problem, ///M5. Personally, I'm one who believes in larger drivers (4 IB'd MJ18's would be excellent), however, there have been situations where I think building a subwoofer as a present for a friend or a family member would be nice, however, I know they don't appreciate function over form like I do , so it was my chance to stick my $.02 for a home audio orriented slimline, rather than a car audio one. Maybe if a compromise was met so that the sub would work in a .5 to .75 ft^3 enclosure ported only down to 30-35 Hz to augment small bookshelf type speakers (really, does home audio really need to strive for 20 Hz with an 8" subwoofer? Bring on the 15's instead!!) with a fairly flat frequency response, but at the same time work well in a car environment, I think we would have a very versatile sub, that could attract a lot of attention.

I guess I'm just comming at this from a different viewpoint than you... I'm more of a home audio guy, so a larger enclosure that I could flatten out behind a couch or beneath a bed would allow me to build a ported enclosure with a still reasonable port size to box ratio. However since most people here are looking at car use, I'd say a slim mount driver that could be built into decent 3 way setup would be very enticing. It just depends on which application you're looking at.

Unlike some of the others here, I don't see super small VAS as being the bottom line. While it is important, I see the minimum depth being the cause of greatest concern. If the driver is shallow enough, and still cheap enough, it could be used as a lower midbass driver in car doors, or used as a shallow subwoofer in homes, such as placing it beneath a bed, or behind a couch, while still being much more financially appetizing than $120 shallow mount subwoofers only meant for sealed use in cars. If you could design a shallow subwoofer, with a relatively low Fs, and specs that allow it to be used in a ported enclosure, I think you'd have a good market for small, hidden subwoofers in the home environment.

How likely are 15's in the new IXL range? This looks like a phenomenal driver, but the VAS is just too big.... a 15 would be more manageable. Otherwise, the MAW's it is.

I'd have to chime in with the Ascendant Audio Avalanche (15 & 18).

That would be unbelievably cool.

Would it be possible to repost or fix the links to the images on the Mach5 Testbed site? I want to see the graphs for the test of the MJ-18 that was posted July of last year. Thanks

I'm definitely in! I can't any reason not to join when I could get 2 MAW-15's for the price of one!

How are you comming up with a Qtc of ~0.54 in 1 cu ft? When I enter the data into WinISD, I get a Qtc of ~0.758. Is this a discrepency with WinISD calculations?

I'm fairly certain you could hit 120 dB with 700 watts to two 12" drivers. One of my friends has a single 12" Audiobahn and he can max out my RadioShack SPL meter at 126. Actually, I don't even have a car to put a sound system in; I'm only doing a home audio setup in my bedroom (when my parents lets me buy stuff), so I can't give any recommendations for car amps (Behringer EP2500 anybody ). Sorry.

I can't really give you much of an opinion on the amp, however, if you're going for spl over quality, I'd stay with the recommended 2 ft^3. However, if you're like me and want quality over quantity, I'd go with 2.2 or even larger to increase capability down low.

I'm looking forward to seeing how this things compare to the MJ-18. Car or HT oriented? and of course... PRICE?!?