Impious

Even if he's doing a boat load of mids, there's no reason to have more than a single pair of tweeters. If they are truly 109db sensitive then 30w per driver will get a single pair of them loud enough to begin deafening you, literally deafening. That's ~128db over the very sensitive range of human hearing. Though depending on his system layout and such, using a "supertweeter" may be far less than ideal.

Just because you've seen "some guys" running 1kw per driver, doesn't mean it's a good idea for everyone to try. There's zero audible difference between 1kw and 1200w. Do you presently have an amplifier, or is this a new system/install?

Two of those tweeters in your doors isn't a great idea. No reason to need more than a single pair. What mids are you using them with and how/where do you plan on crossing them?

I'd keep the Peerless. Not sure what tweeters but 1.2Khz is pretty low even for a large format. Realistically you'll probably end up more in the 2khz range. Really no reason to run a tweeter down that low if you have a mid that can cover that range well. Lessen the distortion from the tweeter & probably better FR as well.

What type of crossover point are you looking at? How low can the tweeter play? Generally speaking if you are using them in stock locations I would recommend the 7" over an 8" for a 2-way application due to the slightly improved off-axis response of the 7" driver.....unless you are using an extremely low crossover point. And no offense to Jacob but personally I would put a little more faith into the engineers at DST. I'm sure many are pleased with the sound of the Sundown Pro's, but if I were a betting man I would put my $$ on the Peerless to perform better overall.

I would second that opinion.

I just had a talk with someone "high up in the industry" a couple nights ago. Apparently, what is left of TC is all built in China now. Such a shame. Yeah, I know. Unfortunately they are still asking Made in the USA prices for them. I've not messed with any of them to know if quality has dropped off. I gotta say though, some of the Audiomobile drivers do look interesting. The Stealth series looks pretty cool, underhung shallow mount. Mass SL is another underhung design. The Mass HD has good Xmax as do the Status drivers (but being the NRT design, I'm going to guess they are going to be $1k+ range for price similar to the TC NRT motors)

If you are asking how to physically use the unit, read these as I suggested: http://www.sound-bet...DQXS_Manual.pdf http://rs.audiocontr..._38//DDC_OM.pdf If you are asking how to properly set them.....again, you don't really have the resources to do anything useful with them right now. Something to keep in mind when you are "playing" around with it.....every 3db increase in level requires double the power from the amplifier. I.E. by boosting frequencies on the DQXS it's possible to drive the amplifier into the clipping, which could potentially damage your speakers. +5db requires the amplifier increase power by a factor of ~3.25x.

You could try to retrofit hydraulic struts like are used to support hoods. They run ~$15 at an auto parts store. But as Ryan said, be careful removing them. They are tensioned.

Hence the reason I for the most part avoid "this vs that" or closed end question type of threads. More times than not the OP already has their mind set on something. Doesn't matter what's suggested in the thread, they will go with their original plan. Waste of time & effort.

Interesting to see something from them, but still not a whole lot of info there. Though I find it interesting they have a 13" & 16" drivers, and based on the Sd those aren't typos. From what I've seen & from the info there, appears atleast the upper level drivers are TC sources.....which means they are probably going to be TC prices. Which for the upper level drivers is not going to be cheap. The Neo Radial designs from TC are $1k+ per driver.

Honestly the DQXS is extreme overkill for your system, and it sounds like it's far above your knowledge level in terms of use. My personal suggestion would be to ditch it. It will be more of a burden than a benefit. And, unfortunately, there is no easy way to explain how to set the EQ bands. That unit has enough EQ bands that about the only way to use it meaningfully is with a quality measurement system to show you where the problems are & what needs to be done to correct them. Otherwise you're just throwing darts at a board. You could sit in your car for a week tweaking all of the various bands by ear and probably end up with no better sounding system than when you began. IMO you would be much further ahead improving the quality of your system design than anything you could accomplish with the DQXS. Decrease the number of speakers, improve the quality of the speakers and installation, simply the processing/processor chain, etc etc.

That's still an extremely vague question, and unfortunately the DQXS has enough settings that we are not going to be able to help you set each one appropriately for your system over the internet. There are too many variables. What particular features are you having trouble setting? Do you understand what those features are and how to use them properly? EDIT: We posted at the same time, and apparently the answer to my latter question would probably be "no". A good place to start would be the read the manual cover to cover. Once you are done, read it again cover to cover. Then go out to the unit, with the manual, and read it again cover to cover while using the unit so you work through the controls and how to use the unit.

IMO for the cost of the recone, if you found one, plus the cost of a basket, if you need one, plus the cost of shipping.......you could probably spend not much more money (probably less money) and purchase a new or used driver of substantially better performance than you'll ever get out of that MA motor. You have to remember you can't just throw random parts together "because they fit" and end up with something that not only functions but functions well. Chances are you won't find an original recone for that driver. None of the major internet reconers (Fi, PSI, etc) are going to stock 1.5" coils, or the parts to fit a 1.5" coil. So they would have to get one custom wound, which they either 1) aren't going to do, or 2) isn't going to be worth it cost wise. Plus the issue of finding cones/spiders/etc to handle such a coil. Which means you are going to get a cobbled together parts driver that is more difficult to predict resulting performance on. Why? It's not worth it. That driver fully functioning in original form wasn't a good driver. That driver, if you could even get it reconed, isn't going to be a good driver. You're wasting effort. Throw them in the trash & move on to something better. I can't make it any more clear.

Have any doors in need of a good door stop? You could probably find someone to recone them into something functional. But most of the "typical" places you'll be sent for a recone are probably not going to stock a 1.5" coil or the spiders to fit such a small coil. In the event you found one, I have a doubt the cost to recone them will be worth it. Not sure what basket those use, but that could turn out to be another issue. Find something fun to do with them. I've built a clock and a lamp out of old speaker parts for shits and giggles. But I wouldn't waste the money to try to repair them.

That is a fairly idiotic objection to be using as a basis to be constantly posting negative comments in SSA threads when you come to realize how frequently this happens not just in car audio, but in most products in the world. It is common practice in every industry, including car audio. Just because SSA doesn't completely design the driver doesn't mean they don't have input into various aspects of the design and test/make improvements upon prototypes before sending the driver to production. The only difference compared to most other car audio brands is that SSA has a buildhouse that will build per order and ship directly to the customer, which by the way saves the consumer $$ as SSA doesn't have to pay freight to have a large order shipped to their facility, where they would need to pay rent on a warehouse to store the merchandise and then pay employees to manage that inventory.

Why in the hell would you even want to have your Fi subwoofer reconed by PSI? Send it to Fi. Get it reconed properly with the original parts.

I remember reading somewhere where Nick (Of Fi Audio) explained that not only does clipping cause an increase in power but also limits the sub's ability to cool itself because of the movement of the sub mimics that of a square wave (it sits and collects heat, then slams in reverse and sits and collects heat) instead of a sine wave (where it would slow down at the peaks and valleys and always be moving). Of course the speaker itself can't go from rest -> peak-> valley instantly so it does cool, but not as much as it would normally. *take all of this information with a grain of salt as I am working from pure memory and don't fully understand all the concepts here. But I think I have a basic understand of what's going on. With the high inductance of most subwoofers I would doubt the "travel" of the subwoofer itself varies much with a fully clipped signal compared to a pure sine wave. Clipping increases average power over time. Average power over time is what damages drivers if that average power over time exceeds the driver's thermal or mechanical limits. Clipping didn't damage the driver, the increased average power over time did. Yes, the average power over time increased because of clipping, but the clipping isn't what did the damage. Clipping below the threshold of the drivers thermal or mechanical limits won't do any damage. I.E. comments like above; "even low power with a lot of distortion is bad on a sub" are nonsense. I don't know why the topic of clipping is always made to be more complicated than it is.

Ported enclosures affect the low frequency response, not the high frequency response. High frequency response is limited by the driver's inductance or the lowpass filter, not the enclosure. This is why enclosure programs don't model the upper frequency response of this enclosure type unless you apply an electronic filter or allow the program to adjust response based on inductance. The driver is least efficient at tuning where impedance is minimum, making power input maximum, and cone excursion is minimum, causing output from the driver to be at it's minimum. I can't think of a better description of inefficiency. Depending on where inductance begins to cause impedance to rise it's possible for impedance to drop low again after the upper impedance hump but output from the driver is also higher than it is at tuning making the driver by definition more efficient than it is at tuning. At lower frequencies the system is more efficient because of the port, but that doesn't mean the driver is more efficient. Again, the ported enclosure doesn't limit the "range" with regard to high frequency response.....that's limited by the inductance and lowpass filter. Yes, the cone is traveling a lesser distance (excursion), but as you mentioned it's also traveling faster.....which is going to aid in cooling. Although, as I mentioned above, if your concern is power input versus excursion/frequency then your largest concern should be about operating the driver at and very near tuning which is typically a low frequency (which means it's vibrating "slower" than a higher frequency) with impedance at it's minimum (which means power input is maximum) and cone excursion is minimum (mean it's cone travel is minimum). Based on your qualifications the driver has a much higher likelihood of being damaged at or near tuning than it does at higher frequencies. Better start setting that SSF a lot higher...... Because the typical cause is either the gain or bass boost. A ported enclosure is a 4th order. I'm presuming you mean 4th order bandpass. By definition a bandpass has a narrower bandwidth than a ported enclosure. That's what the name means; it's limits the range of frequencies (band) it allows to pass into the listening environment. As efficiency of the bandpass enclosure increases, the passband decreases.

Sorry, but that was a fairly round about way of saying you agree with what myself & Alton said. I really fail to see how you "proved" anything other than you can make up answers to questions that you created and you can fill in the blanks that you created. Although I do find it humorous that for #2 you start with "depending on his budget" & then recommend $5K+ worth of "upgrades".....seems the main thing you accomplished was fitting the mold I outlined here:

I have a feeling playing this game will probably turn out to be a poor decision on my part, we'll see. If I were a typical stereo shop employee working on commission I would determine the customers budget, talk him into spending 15-25% more than his budget for items he "absolutely needs", and then sell him anything and everything I could in order to maximize commission/sales figures. Gotta pay the bills somehow. If we are operating on the basis that "honesty is the best policy", I wouldn't sell any of them more power (well, except the last guy as he apparently doesn't have an amp, so any power would be "more power". Though I'd only sell him what's necessary to reach his output goals with the selected subwoofer in the selected enclosure for his needs, unless we are going for the "headroom" route). I'll focus on #2 because I'm assuming that's the bated "more power" question. I'll also assume that "regular street competitor" means he's a parking lot hero showing off for his friends and not competing in an organization since no specific class or competition organization was mentioned. The reason I wouldn't sell him more power is because I fail to see the cost and time effectiveness compared to the return on investment audibly. By the time you factor in power compression you would need to more than double his power output, plus the associated upgrades to the electrical system and wiring to even approach something considered "audible". What's the cost on that? Potentially several grand, before labor cost if it's necessary? Just to have an audible change. Equivalent yields could easily be gained by evaluating his enclosure design relating to his goals/constraints/listening habits/etc, evaluating the subwoofer selection for his enclosure space & other constraints, acceptable alterations to the vehicle, system settings, current electrical system, etc etc. Adding power generally has the highest cost and the lowest return on increase in output, and that ratio only gets worse as you move up in power. You reach the the point of diminishing returns much more quickly in this area when we are focused on increases in audible output. About the only time I really see "more power" as an acceptable answer is 1) SPL competitors seeking every .1db on a meter, by all means upgrade power until you can't gain anymore or you reach your class limitations, 2) the unusual & extreme circumstances where someone is running a mega-small amplifier on a mega-power subwoofer & looking to gain output. Increasing from 300w to 2000w on something like a BTL should obviously net positive audible gain....but really how many people with a BTL are presently running 300w on a permanent, full time basis and can't figure out why they aren't as loud as other BTL owners? Once you get up into the multiple kilowatt range to start, I fail to see the advantage of increasing power for anything not chasing numbers on a meter when gains couldn't already be made more efficiently and effectively by other means. The required increase in power and added expense doesn't make sense for a daily driver, unless it's an unofficial penis measuring contest based on amplifier power. There's more than one way to skin a cat. There's not so much a "right" and "wrong".....responses will fall on a scale between more effective/lowest cost to lower effectiveness/highest cost. You'll have a hard time convincing me "more power", in all but extreme cases, is not going to fall on the latter end of that scale. Just because cone area can not be increased in a specific scenario doesn't mean there aren't other avenues to pursue outside of "add more power" that will yield not only more effective results, but also do so at a lower cost.

I've been preaching that for years.

That's because you measured resistance. What you need to measure is inductance, which is not a feature most DMM's offer. Glad it's working for you again though.

It's a small inductor. The problem is going to be determining the value if you try to replace it. Ideally you would be able to find a part # or information printed on it. It really doesn't look like it unwound at all.....IDK, as a temp fix I'd maybe see if you could put a drop of epoxy to reattach the coil to the base & then resolder the connection. If that doesn't work you'll have to pull the inductor out & see if there is information printed on the bottom of it.

You would need to atleast get measurements of the spider & surround landings as well as the size of the coil and gap clearance. It would depend on whether or not the relevant dimensions & geometry can be matched with off-the-shelf parts.