ncc74656

i didnt think it was as simple as reversing phase, that just didnt make sense to me... right now the founteks are nearly running solo as the crachendos are crossed over for very limited mid bass, they still sound muddy but im getting quite a bit of off phase sounds that are coming from behind the speaker. im throwing some sound absorption behind them tomorrow to see how that changes things. im still leaning towards replacing them as they are just to large... also its a nightmare trying to do ANY install improvements on those things... the founteks sound great as they are but they beam the higher frequencies (makes sense) and i have not tried them in pair with the hertz. one of my old tweets were blown and the other is on its last leg. i picked the hertz up after a great deal of research on line and looking at phase/frequency graphs other had published on them. they appeared to be a good driver from what i had read. could you give a short synopsis as to the reasoning behind the mismatch of tweet/mid please?

I feel I am confusing myself here. a subwoffer with dual voice coils has a rated wattage of 500W, that is for a single voice coil? if its for both voice coils is it rated at 500W in series or parallel? wiring a dual 1ohm sub that is rated at 200W in series means that sub can still take 200W as that's what the first voice coil sees. wiring a dual 1 ohm sub that is rated at 200W in parallel means it can take 400W as that is what the 2 coils can take together. am I right or wrong here in the way im explaining this? (again this is how it was just explained to me at work and now I feel confused.) if you have a dual 2 ohm sub you can wire that sub up to 4 ohm or down to 1 ohm right? is there any negative impact from wiring up vs down or vice versa? also, speaker companies list rated power for each coil and not both?

search for a local lumber yard, dont buy from menards, HD, or lowes - their prices are insane compared to a lumber yard.

lmao... how did you get that animation? thats perfect

im so pucking trying to not be an idiot with this but i really feel like i should just enroll in some electrical night classes and try to get some real education on the matter. the challenge of reading and interpreting on my own and then having misinformation be delivered at work is hands down the most challenging way of learning that i have ever experienced.

if what i was told today is right then i have been wrong about the very basics of car audio for many, many years. i dont see any links in your post.

how i have always looked at it is as follows: you have a dual 2 ohm sub rated at 400W. you can either go to 4 or 1 ohm on it and you must give it 400W of power or less @ what ever wattage your amp is stable at. if you have a 400W 4 ohm amp and run the sub at 1 ohm you are throwing a potential of 1600W at that sub now (assuming the amp does not pop right away) as you have removed all the resistance the amp is expecting to see on the circuit. vice versa is true when taking a 1 ohm up to 4 ohm. of course its not a linier change of exactly double or halved power and blah blah but still the basic concept is there. i was told this was wrong however as you never want to series your subs as that reduces there potential power due to the first voice coil being the limiting factor. so in series if 2 coils are each rated at 100W you can not get 200W out of hte sub but are stuck with 100W. is that true? also i had always thought the X wattage rating of a sub was simply the total power you could run at what ever ohm load you set up, not a measurement of each individual coil. the way it was explained to me today is a 100W dual voice coil sub is actually a 200W sub in parallel or a 100W sub in series and thats why you dont want to run series.

see thats very much what i was thinking but i had never thought to break down teh ratings for each coil before untill today. so let me lay out what happened so you can get a better idea of where im coming from. A customer wanted subs for his KX1200.1 so i offered a 15 CVR or 2 12CVR's and we decided on the 12's. well kicker rates there subs on final resistance and not per coil so its confusing as fuck and i dont know of any other company that does this shit.... in either case, i call up my distro store to check stock as i want the dual 4ohm sub so i can take 2 of them down to 2 ohm final load. we only have the 2 ohm sub up there so im thinking that its a dual 2 ohm coil so it wont work to get 2 ohm final out of it but it is already 2 ohm final at the single terminal so it would either be 1 ohm or 4 ohm... so i am asking my boss about it and he says that i should wire only in parallel as if i wire in series im burning up the voice coils as the sub will see greater wattage. now i think i understand that series would increase resistance and parallel would reduce it but then he is throwing in this (subs are rated per voice coil and not both coils together) bit and it threw me off. his exact explanation was "wiring a DVC 100W sub in series will limit the power rating to 100W as that is what hte first coil will see and it will get over loaded with power as the sub is intended to take 200W (100W per coil)" after more research i believe i should eb able to take the 2 ohm variant and change the switch they come with to 1 ohm, then wire the 2 1ohm subs up to 2 ohm. right? i have wired hundreds of subs before but this explanation of how subs work from my boss has really thrown me for a loop.

in my last post i laid out what i thought you were trying to say but now it makes more sense having read the rest of the responses. however at this point i do not see that we have a debate anymore as everyone appears to be agreeing on the physical principles and the only issue now is how everyone is interpreting/conveying the same notions.

I was thrown into the fire so to speak at work, designing and building a box for 2 phenox gold 12" subs and i found out our company policy today is to resin the entire inner box and glass the corners. I do not believe i have enough resin to coat the entire box so my question is this: does covering the box with resin or any section of the box improve its performance? should the corners be glassed and if so what is the best way to do this? i was shown a corner piece with resin and kitty hair pressed into it, it was not smoothed. i need to finish the box tomorrow.

honestly im not totally sure yet. my thoughts are that a center brace does make sense but is not required if hte rest of the box is stout enough. assuming the box is not flexing then the only concern towards a center port would be smoothing air flow between the 2 subs on either side. such as placing a triangle in teh center of hte port so as to make a 45 for the air to flow along and be directed upward towards the face of the port. i was looking into a port on the far side of hte face but i do not know how (if at all) one sub being close to the port than the other would change acoustics. if you need bracing i would just run a split box, if you want to play around with things or if someone on here says that a shared chamber would give more output then go with a shared chamber.

i have also been looking at dual subs in my system and have read many places that separate chambers are preferred. I believe the reasons for this are 2 fold: one is that if one sub fails then you are not immediately over loading the remaining sub due to lack of back pressure and second is that a split box allowed for a full front to back brace down the center of the box. i have never seen a prefab box with shared chambers (outside of ebay) and assume this is the reason. I do not believe there would be any output difference between shared or separate - all else being equal.

you can order a new cone from Fi, it is a full recone and not just the surround. last i checked they were 15 days out on parts and recones get filled last. that said if the surround is not totally destroyed you may be able to use the rubber shoe repair compound epoxy to repair it and glue it back together.

i believe the confusion lies not only in scale but in controlled mediums for examples. such as the slinky and rope bridge thing they used in teh video to describe how a wave moves are both ridged and tethered mediums for the wave to pass through. in much the same way that you see a concrete building ripple in an earth quake you see the examples in the video move up and down to transfer the waves energy from one side to another but you do not see the medium moving out of its horizontal spacial location. the second aspect is what you feel when you hear a speaker. take a massive speaker with large excursion in a ported box. i do not think the argument would be made that the air coming from the port is not moving. you could say that its not if you attempt to factor in combined movement through out a full reference wave length but that would again be misinterpreting the effects. when the sub pushes or pulls and you are close to the speaker you can feel the air blow in or out from the port and from teh cone. when you get farther away you no longer feel the air motion so you assume the air is no longer moving. this goes right back to the issue of scale. however the air movement is what enables you to hear the sound wave so far away and just like stated above the air is not bound to anything. the weak and strong forces that govern the movement of atoms play a part but its not like the air itself is in any way tethered like the example mediums used in teh start of hte video. the third aspect i think may be a confusion is the very definition of "movement". if we have air being blown by a leaf blower or air carrying a sound wave in both situations the air is moving but with a different amount of force and in a slightly different interaction. still both of these constitute as "air movement" however.

i seem to recall either FI or a member on here stating to use a Bl or BTL cut sheet for the SP4. i am getting my recone soon and want to build a plane vanilla box tuned to recommended spec to see what it sounds like. what cut sheet should be used with the SP4?

btl it is, i couldnt find anything confirming that so just wanted to check.

the hertz are in a display board with poly fill and sealed. the focals are in a focal built display board in a ported enclosure on a Jl amp.

i sell focals at my work along with many other brands and i truly can not understand why they are so expensive. our 1400.00 set of focal components sounds no better to me than our set of 200.00 hertz components. the hertz sound an ass load better than the rockfords and more accurate than the JL's imo but the point is that i can hear a 120.00 difference from the rockfords to the hertz, i can not hear a 1200.00 difference from the hertz to the focals. personally i would not recommend focals

a wave is a movement of water. a sound wave is a movement of air. a wave in any forum is an excitement of molecules. it is a frequency of the transmission of energy, whether that be acoustic, radiation, photonic, or aquatic, they are all in the same boat. when you throw a rock into a pond you have displaced the water (matter consisting of moliquies) in that location and force it outwards. the water that resided where that rock is now moving through to reach the bottom is pushed outwards and mixed with its surrounding water. the same happens with sound waves, the air is mixed, turned, and pushed from one point to another. if you place a rubber duck in the ocean it does not stay in one spot, it is pushed and moves along the waves. to say that water or any matter does not move because its not being directly bull dozed in one direction is false. a subwoffer does not evacuate all the air with in its box upon every bass note, nor does it even evacuate all of the air in its port chamber on every note but this air does move and does change. if you fill a box with smoke and play bass you will see the smoke dissipate as it is being moved in and out of the box along with new air.

shape of the box itself does not matter, in many ways having a uneven enclosure will aid in your build as it minimizes the accumulation of standing waves with int eh box. as for the port however you want it uniform. you will have different velocities with in the port space if you go with a port that is not symmetrical. i would seriously just use an aero port or build the port on a non angled section of hte box. alternatively you could build the port parallel with the angled section so as to have the port itself at an angle but being uniform in dimension and size.

given its a hifonics ill bet its a 6 or 12 db slope made with bailing wire...

I didn't use tnuts on mine as I don't care for them digging into MDF, all to often they fall out. I used a 1/4" steel ring that I threaded and cut to the same size as the outside lip of the sub. screwed that to the back side of the baffle and used machine screws to secure it.

if you are hearing excess noise from your 6.5 when you turn the bass back up I would assume you are giving full range to the mids, is that correct? does your current amp or head unit have a high pass filter on it so you can remove the >80hz frequencies from your mids? even if you have a passive cross over if you are sending high amounts of bass to your mids/highs it will cause distortion at high volumes. I experienced this on my passive setups until I got a deck that could Xover these. what M5 is trying to convey is to take things on your current setup one step at a time which is what it seems you are trying to do. in his previous post he is suggesting you utilize more processing vs replacing all your speakers. so if your deck is capable the next step would be to start EQing the mids/highs to balance them out and remove said distortion or unwanted sounds. once you know what frequencies are the problem you can start to change things (if needed) with the install to help boost performance. if you buy new speakers out right you will not have a solid reference point to learn from. you know how your current setup responds so its best to play with what you have until you get a handle on things.

I wish I had them... my battery was dead on my camera I can call the customer and see if he can send me some. my co worker also wants to see it.

i finished the box yesterday, a 3 day build in total. it sounded very nice and was very accurate with those phoenix gold's in it. the elite.1 was total over kill for those 2 subs though, gains next to zero had them maxed out. its rated at 3200W but its gotta be pushing way over that...