Impious

If you were willing to go with a different midbass driver, I have a semi-crazy idea that might work with those panels (with time alignment). Use the forward-most hole for the Audax PR170M0, and the rear-most hole for a midbass driver. Seal off the other holes, and I would probably try to enclose the midrange so it wasn't affected by the midbass. You might be able to get away with dual midbass per side in the rear-most holes if you weren't using something with a ton of midbass output. I don't think those Beyna drivers would work though, and that Audax driver doesn't play low at all since the motor is basically even-hung. You would have to make sure to keep the midbass in the pure midbass range. You would basically be using a midbass arrangement that approximated this: http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/technical-advanced-car-audio-discussion/150134-crazy-imaging-stock-system.html The midrange will be well within it's piston range since you are using horns, so aiming won't matter. Just have to use TA to get everything properly aligned. Never tried it myself, so no promises. But theoretically it could work just fine.

Please tell me you didn't learn that at the shop !!At DC (like your cars electrical system) the current flows through the ENTIRE thickness of the cable. With AC (like sine waves, music, or your home electrical system) the current flows through the entire thickness of the cable at low frequencies. As frequency increases it gradually begins flowing through less of the cable thickness and more towards the surface of the cable. HOWEVER, over the audio bandwidth (up to 20khz) the current still flows through the majority of the cable thickness. Skin effect for our purposes can literally be ignored. It does not exist with DC and with AC, over the audio bandwidth, it is not a factor. It's a non-issue for us. It doesn't become a real consideration until the MHz range (think radio frequencies). The ONLY thing strand count affects for our purposes is flexibility. It doesn't flow more current. The only thing you need to be concerned with is conductor cross sectional area (other than the difference between OFC and CCA), and no matter how many strands the wire has true 0ga wire will have the same conductor cross sectional area. And conductor cross sectional area can not be measured simply by measuring the overall diameter of the wire in the jacket for multistrand wire like so many people on the internet try to do.

You can't reliably. Hell, I didn't even mention the fact that not only is power compression not readily predictable, but the difference in power will have a different affect on the change in Re which will affect the "warm" TSP, and the difference in excursion will change the "large signal" TSP due to difference in the nonlinear behavior......both of which combine to affect the "real world" response to something other than what WinISD modeled to begin with. So it's not just power compression busting your balls on this one. There are many factors which will change the outcome, none of which are reliably predicted without either your own Klippel machine or a hell of a lot more information from the manufacturer.

In an ideal, perfect world......yes. One thing that isn't accounted for is the difference in power compression. Having four drivers would allow each driver to receive half the power compared to only running a pair. Due to this, the four drivers would experience less power compression. How big or small of a difference this creates is going to depend on many factors. And since no car audio manufacturer that I know of publishes power compression figures (Quentin is close with his Ethos since he's publicly stated how much power compression there is at rated power, but a lot of pro audio manufacturer's publish power compression vs power input over several ranges), it would be difficult to predict. But it's theoretically possible for power compression to tip the balance from "negligible" to "audible". Then there is the other consideration of the four drivers having less excursion, which would lead to lower distortion. The difference is relatively minor still though in this particular comparison. On the other hand, in the case of the Xcon, it only costs an extra $20 or so to step up to the next size compared to the many hundreds of dollars it would cost to purchase 4 drivers instead of 2. So the cost-benefit is probably not there.

Finally got mine sent out yesterday. Should be there tomorrow. I had a few more than I thought.

If you need the certification for your job I can understand. But if you actually want to learn about acoustics you would be far better off starting with the LSDC. I've met a fair share of MECP certified installers who couldn't tell the difference between acoustics and their asshole, even the higher level certifications. Last time I looked at it, which was years ago, it was much more focused on actual installing than the acoustical and electrical side of things. Because they are ignorant and don't know any better. It's one of those things that got popular on the internet as a result of money-see monkey-do mentality. You'll notice the absence of much "clamp testing" on this site, and a prevalence of them on other sites. That's not by accident. It's because members here are smart enough to understand the lack of useful information they provide and their frivolousness, other sites promote them because those sites and their members allow ignorance and misinformation to run rampant. Not really. Depending on the method of measurement(!), it at least attempts to account for distortion. How well it does that is a topic of debate for another time. I wouldn't put a whole lot of weight into an SMD test either.By the way, the SMD isn't stupid expensive compared to devices designed to properly and accurately measure power (among other things), as those machines cost tens of thousands of dollars. Pretty true statement, actually.

Multi-channel, lots of power, pure gain block, single reasonably sized chassis. Leviathan is close, but not quite there yet.

You don't need a scope to set amplifiers. Clamp tests are a worthless exercise as they don't account for distortion properly, equipment accuracy, or the reactive nature of the load. You don't need a scope. If you need something for troubleshooting, a good DMM and POSSIBLY an ammeter will get you by just fine. But you want a scope for all of the wrong reasons. You don't need one, it would be a waste of money and make you think you are measuring things you aren't.

Why do you want them?

I dont need none of you guys help, i have what i need now. You think you have what you need, but you don't actually possess the knowledge to know otherwise. If you did you could have simply answered M5's questions instead of just regurgitating what someone else told you. So far you haven't actually stated anything yourself, just that "someone" told you this, and "another guy" told you that. Monkey-see, monkey-do.Between that and your statements about the DD1, it's pretty obvious you don't "know" what you think you do.

Have you tried sourcing MLV in your area?

Um, no. Clearly you also don't understand the use or limitations of a DD1.

You do realize that any enclosure with a high pass roll off that approximates 24db/oct is a 4th order alignment, correct? Just using the term 4th order is extremely vague. A band pass enclosure can be 4th order, but not all 4th orders are band pass enclosures. A standard ported enclosure is also a 4th order alignment. So when you simply say you want a "4th order" it could just as easily mean a ported enclosure as it does a band pass enclosure, or any other enclosure alignment that results in a 24db/oct roll off.

What 4 channel do you have? What is your sub setup? What does your budget look like? What vehicle?

Depends how crazy you want to get with it. I know someone on another forum bought close-out aluminum foil and wrapped it around a cardboard frame until he got to a density pretty equal to that of MLV. There are other ways to do it, might have to get creative though. Unfortunately I don't know off hand of anything readily available that is equivalent to MLV in mass/density other than lead sheets as Sean pointed out. Are you looking for alternatives due to pricing or availability...or both?

If you are referring to a component versus a coaxial, the decent component systems typically use higher quality drivers that will perform significantly better. And while the crossover on most component sets is usually very generic, they are better than the virtual lack of any crossover that most coaxials have as most coaxials simply allow the mid to roll off naturally with no lowpass and the tweeter is usually high passed with a simple in-line cap. Mmmm.... Not a good plan either. More details of the budget, goals and current system.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Transmission+line+enclosure

Honestly signal to noise ratio is one of those unimportant specs. It would be very rare to find any piece of aftermarket stereo equipment with a signal to noise ratio low enough to make an audible difference. Not to mention the spec can be manipulated through the measurement method, so unless you know exactly how it was measured it's pretty meaningless. That said, I'm always game for a good Jennifer Aniston's tits reference.

Which drives traffic to his site and promotes his brand, both of which benefit his brand without paying for advertising.....which is spam He's more than welcome to contact an administrator and become an advertiser or supporting vendor, then he may post whatever he chooses in his section. If he's not willing to do that, then he's simply here to steal space and bandwidth for personal gain. Which makes him a spammer.

You want to go ported. Almost none of the "T lines" people are putting in a vehicle are true "T lines", nor do the users understand why they would even want to use one over a standard ported enclosure.

Almost every one of his posts on this forum has been promoting or advertising one of his business ventures. That is spam. It's no different than any other non-supporting vendor or business coming on here to promote/sell their products....which are all likewise treated as they should be, as spam.If they want to advertise, then they need to pay the same fees as every other supporting vendor and/or advertisement on the site. Allowing non-supporting vendors to advertise undermines the supporting vendors and other advertisers who pay to be here.

For the Rms in T/S parameters, the "ms" is actually supposed to be written in subscript, i.e. Rms where for Root Mean Squared it's all written in standard capitalized script RMS or all lowercase rms. The problem is not everything can format subscript properly or for shorthand people are too lazy, so the Rms is written Rms.To make matters worse RMS power is actually an inaccurate term. RMS power was for whatever reason the term picked up by the audio world, but electrically and mathematically it doesn't exist and is a useless term and value. The term we should be using is average continuous power, Pavg because VRMS * IRMS = Pavg, not RMS power. RMS power doesn't exist. So in reality the RMS power figure every audio company states is an imaginary value since RMS power isn't a real electrical or meaningful term.

In addition to the above posts, a y-splitter does NOT halve the voltage. If you had 10V output and connected a y-splitter, each "leg" of the splitter would still provide 10V.

Each picture represents one of the designers who worked on designing the amp. As stated, they are the engineers "signatures"

Pics in the tutu?The nightmares wouldn't be worth it