Impious

Seems like there's some reason I don't like Adassa, but they've been MIA long enough that I don't recall what it is. Oh, and I'll call BS on that power rating for any extended period of time. It's not a true "RMS" rating. Burps maybe.

http://www.rockfordcorp.com/ Never heard of lightning audio, why wouldn't Rockford just put their name on it? Thanks for that though^ will definitely work! Lightning has been around a long time. Rockford owns Lightning Audio.

Fixed.

http://www.monsterca...tor_Article.pdf DAMPING FACTOR By Richard Clark At a recent AUTOSOUND 2000 manufacturer sponsored seminar, we were asked to comment on the subject of amplifier damping factor. I was extremely surprised to find how much importance was attached to this single specification. Since most folks are a little unclear as to the true meaning of damping factor, we're presenting the following article. First of all, let's discuss the items that enter into the damping factor calculation. At the heart of this calculation is the output impedance of the amplifier. Most all-modern feedback type amps are of the variety known as constant voltage. This means that they will deliver a constant voltage regardless of their load - at least in theory. Sooner or later the limits of the amplifier's design will prohibit its constant voltage characteristics. It is this constant voltage output characteristic that permits modern car audio amplifiers to deliver more power into a 2 Ohm load than into a 4 Ohm load. A perfect amplifier should be able to double its power every time its output load is halved. Remember, Power = E x E divided by R. As an example, examine the following chart: 8 Ohms = 25 Watts 4 Ohms = 50 Watts 2 Ohms = 100 Watts 1 Ohm = 200 Watts .5 Ohm = 400 Watts .25 Ohm = 800 Watts .0125 Ohm = 1600 Watts If an amplifier were theoretically perfect, then it would be capable of the type of performance described in the chart. However, there are many factors that influence this capability. First there is the power supply section of the amplifier. Even if an amplifier had an unlimited power supply with output transistors that could handle the current, the design would still not be able to achieve the theoretically perfect output. The reason being that we do not have access to theoretically perfect components. Never lose sight of the fact that real components in real amplifiers are subject to real losses. These losses are a result of junction losses; IR drops in connections and losses in resistances and reactance. Losses in the output stages essentially form a voltage divider on the output of the amplifier. This drop is always in series with the load and can be indicated as in Figure N. In the design of an amplifier, the feedback network is usually wrapped around the section with the most losses. These losses can be greatly minimized due to the fact that the feedback node is constantly being corrected. This can be depicted as in Figure O. Output Impedance Determines Damping Factor If the output impedance of an amplifier is extremely low, the effect of loading on the output of the amplifier will be minimal. This means that it will not experience a voltage loss across its own output impedance. This output impedance does more than determine the effect of loading on the amp. It also determines its damping factor. Whenever a signal is fed into a loudspeaker the cone of the speaker will move. Since the cone has mass, there will be mass in motion. Mass in motion means momentum. When the signal is removed from the loudspeaker, the momentum of the cone causes the energy stored in the cone to be fed back into the amplifier. If our perfect amplifier were connected to this speaker, the loudspeaker would be trying to produce a voltage into 0 Ohms. Remember, a perfect amplifier has an output impedance of 0 Ohms which is essentially a short circuit. A voltage cannot be developed across 0 Ohms because it would require an infinite amount of current. It is this same infinite amount of energy that would now be trying to prevent the speaker cone from moving. If such were the case, we would certainly have a "tight" sounding speaker with absolutely no hangover. The good news is that quality amplifiers have very low output impedances. We are very pleased to report that there are many car audio amplifiers on the market with output impedances on the order of .01 Ohms or less! Calculating Damping Factor Let's clarify a few points before starting our calculations. The frequency of the measurement and the impedance of the load need to be specified. For example, the use of a 1 KHz signal and a load impedance of 4 Ohms would be a typical specification. DEFINITION = A good definition of damping factor would the ratio of the output impedance of the amplifier to the impedance of the load specified at a given frequency. An amplifier with an output impedance of 0.5 Ohm will have a damping factor of 8 when connected to a theoretically perfect 4 Ohm loudspeaker (i.e. purely inductive voice coil.) since 4/.5 = 8. The following chart assumes such a 4 Ohm speaker: Output Impedance Damping Factor 4 Ohms 1 2 Ohms 2 1 Ohm 4 .5 Ohm 8 .25 Ohm 16 .125 Ohm 32 .062 Ohm 64 .031 Ohm 128 .0015 Ohm 256 .0007 Ohm 512 .0003 Ohm 1024 .00015 Ohm 2048 .00007 Ohm 4096 .00003 Ohm 8192 Now, for the bad news; it is easy to see how a race to produce such a high damping factor led to a specification so often quoted by salespeople. The numbers on modern amplifiers (with lots of feedback) can get very large and they are easy to compare. Sometimes we can get caught up in these big numbers and we totally miss the point. Effective Damping Factor (EDF) In the case of damping factor, I believe that it could be compared to the old saying of not being able to see the forest because of all the trees. The only thing that really matters is Effective Damping Factor (EDF). Effective Damping Factor more accurately describes the interaction between a real amplifier and a real speaker. Unfortunately real speakers have a real problem with EDF. This is due primarily to the DC resistance of the voice coil. When we calculate the EDF of an amplifier and speaker, it is absolutely necessary that we include this DC resistance into the formula. Figure P illustrates the inclusion of the speaker's impedance into the EDF. The actual impedance of the speaker may be 4 Ohms. If we measure the voice coil of this speaker, we will probably find that it has a DC resistance of about 3 Ohms. When calculating the EDF effect on this speaker, we must add the 3 Ohms of DC resistance as if it were a resistor between the output of the amp and the voice coil of the speaker. Remember the resistive part of the speaker is the part where the signal is turned into heat. No work is actually done in this resistance. The inductive element of the voice coil is the only part that does work to create sound. This is one reason speakers are so inefficient. Most of the voice coil is a resistive element that can do no work. Someday if we develop room temperature superconductors and can afford to use them for voice coils, we are going to see some really efficient speakers. From the damping factor chart it is obvious that the most damping we can expect from our amp/speaker combination is only about two. An amplifier with a damping factor exceeding 10 times this amount is no longer going to play a significant role in this overall calculation. This would yield a practical limit on amplifier damping requirements to about twenty. There are times when the actual damping factor can exceed this number; one such case would be that of a dynamic loudspeaker in resonance. As we have learned, at resonance a loudspeaker's impedance is at a maximum level. At resonance, the DC element stays the same and only the reactance increases. This means that the ratio gets larger and the DC element becomes a smaller percentage of the total. For example, if the speaker impedance at resonance increased to 40 Ohms and the DC resistance was still 3 Ohms and the amplifier were .1 Ohms, and then the actual damping could be 40/3.1, or 13. This is certainly much better than 2, but quite a bit short of the 100, 200, or 500 claimed by salesmen who unknowingly think this factor so important. Fortunately for most loudspeakers this extra damping happens where they need it the most. This is because at resonance, speakers typically are very uncontrolled and have the least mechanical damping. It is also this factor that enables us to be able to connect speakers in series and not have to worry about losing damping. The actual impedance of the loudspeakers in series is doubled, but the ratio to the amplifier must also be increased by a factor of 2 to 1. The result is no change in performance. It is quite possible that this information may be in stark contrast to current marketing trends. However this does not change the fact that this information is accurate. The best way to achieve total control over speaker movement is with a servo system. Only armed with a quality servo system can effective damping characteristics be achieved. A servo essentially puts the loudspeaker in the corrective feedback loop of the amplifier. This topic will be the subject of a future article.

Even with a -10db tone I would still expect to see ~1.4V from the preamp outputs. Are you sure you had your DMM set on the correct setting? Depending on what range you have the DMM set to it might have been representing a voltage of 1.88V even though it was only showing ".188" on the display. And yes with a -10db tone the gain is going to need to be set pretty high to get significant output when playing the test tone. On the flip side you get a lot more average power from the amp when playing music compared to a gain setting based on tones recorded at louder levels.

Pretty well sums it up.

By the same token since music is transient and dynamic and average power with music is significantly lower, breaking in a driver shouldn't be a concern either, correct? You can't play both sides. If break in is recommended because of the innate fear of insufficient coil cooling due to restricted excursion, the same would necessarily apply to ported enclosures as conditions are exactly the same. As you said, Murphy's Law. Better safe than sorry, correct? And since CMS is the only fundamental parameter to change due to break in, the relevant parameters change proportionally to each other and the net affect on overall system response is negligible and well below the audible threshold. And almost everyone I know of who routinely tests drivers breaks them in prior to testing, although most of them do so (including Vance Dickason according to his statements in the LSDC) simply to verify that the driver is fully and correctly functioning and not so much for the parameter change. Regardless, I don't think anyone is arguing that parameter change due to break in doesn't occur. It certainly does. The question is whether or not a specific "break in" period needs to be performed on a driver prior to use. The answer is absolutely not. And in all but the most extreme cases the net change in system response is unaffected by the shift in parameters due to break in since the ratio of the parameters stays relatively constant pre- and post-break in. About the only situation I can think of where break in would be a necessity is SPL competitors who need a specific change in T/S parameters, as the difference could potentially be measurable on a microphone and a few tenths can be the difference between 1st place and 2nd.

Some amps can produce full output with as little as .2V input, so if he was playing a tone entirely possible he was able to get full output from the amp with the gain jacked to max. Others go as low as .5V range, so again it would be fairly substantial output from the sub with the gain all the way up.

Was the DMM set to DC Volts instead of AC Volts when you measured the outputs? That or the HU is not functioning properly. Are you sure there weren't any settings in the HU that were adjusted in a manor that would negatively affect your measurement?

Ampacity is independent of wire length. It's based on the cross-sectional area of the wire and the thermal capacity of the insulation. Wire gauge charts recommend larger gauge wire as the run gets longer due to voltage drop, not ampacity limits. Also ampacity decreases based on environmental conditions (i.e. areas with restricted airflow or multiple runs of wire grouped together) as the ability to dissipate heat decreases or heat buildup is increased. Most charts assume maximum heat dissipation conditions when rating ampacity. I knew there was voltage drop, but thought the issue was heat, even if the insulation was "super", still thought there would be some limit to the metal itself. No, the issue is voltage drop. Typically most charts used in automotive applications reference minimum wire gauge for a given length and current in relation to a maximum acceptable voltage drop of .5V, not a current or thermal limit. The limit of the metal itself is referred to as the fusing current. Generally speaking the insulation will begin to be compromised long before the melting point of the metal wire itself is reached.

So I presume you also do not advocate ported enclosures since excursion is minimized at tuning where impedance is also at it's minimum, thereby increasing the risk of thermal failure? Also, a 10% change in T/S parameters is well within the manufacturing tolerances. Pull any two drivers off an assembly line and the parameters can vary by as much as (or more than) 10%.

Ampacity is independent of wire length. It's based on the cross-sectional area of the wire and the thermal capacity of the insulation. Wire gauge charts recommend larger gauge wire as the run gets longer due to voltage drop, not ampacity limits. Also ampacity decreases based on environmental conditions (i.e. areas with restricted airflow or multiple runs of wire grouped together) as the ability to dissipate heat decreases or heat buildup is increased. Most charts assume maximum heat dissipation conditions when rating ampacity.

The DIYMA Klippel? ID hasn't had that for a while. But there are also alternatives like Red Rock Acoustics.....though it's presumably very expensive & I would doubt you would really see much (read: any) return on that investment. My guess would be that Erin (bikinpunk.....the current possessor of the DIYMA Klippel) would test it for you if you sent him one. Issue there is a novice behind the controls potentially skewing results. Nothing against Erin, he's energetic about the Klippel, improving himself and the results on a daily basis and seems to really be the first one since npdang to actually care about benefiting the community with it again. But still a novice.

That amp would fine for powering speakers. A little lower power than I prefer, but if you're not looking to be heard down the block it would do just fine.

I can not even express to you how terrible my farts smell today. No idea why, didn't eat anything funky yesterday or today. I've even made the dogs get up & leave the room once or twice.

The best headunit is the one that fits your needs within your budget.

Might not be a terrible idea to break into active with the Anarchy and some tweeters, and if it doesn't entirely fit your needs work your way up from there as your budget and skill level allow.

it stops lower frequency's from getting to you sub...so if you set it to 30htz it wont play below 30htz To add to what Jmac said.....a SSF is nothing more than a highpass crossover with a very low crossover frequency. It abides by all of the standard rules for crossovers. Which means it doesn't "stop" anything. It simply attenuates frequencies at an increasing rate (the slope) below a certain frequency determined by the crossover frequency (which is the -3db or -6db point of the signal depending on the type of crossover/SSF). If the SSF is set to 30hz, the driver will still play frequencies below 30hz but they will be attenuated in level. Where the SSF needs set really has more to do with the driver, enclosure, music selections and power than it does the arbitrary 3-5hz below tuning figure typically given as an answer. Though I understand why some companies suggest that.....to keep their return rate lower due to unknowledgeable customers setting the SSF too low instead of more conservatively and blowing things up constantly. Plug your driver, enclosure and power into any program which will graph cone excursion and look at excursion of the driver. WinISD would even allow you to graph the response and excursion with a given filter applied.....that will tell you a lot about what's going on.

I wouldn't recommend running 3-way as your first attempt at active. It's possibly a recipe for disaster. Get oriented with active with a 2-way system before you attempt diving it a 3-way. I don't think running full ranges instead of a tweeter would be a great idea for you or your system. Again, much more difficult to setup and tune due to their sensitivity to aiming and generally less forgiving FR, and quite honestly I think you would probably end up blowing them. It just makes things unnecessarily more difficult when the Anarchy's are fully capable of running in a standard 2-way system with a tweeter. If your headunit allows for active processing, just use that and forget about using the xovers in the amps. Start out with a standard 2-way system with the Anarchy's and a set of tweeters. Overall this will more simple and easier to setup on your first try. Just keep in mind that although the Anarchy is a high excursion 6.5" driver........it's still only a 6.5" driver. It will still be possible (easy, in fact, especially if you are trying to "keep up" with a pair of Zcons going balls to the wall) to push the driver to and/or past it's limits. It may not be the magic fix to your problem. From how you describe your installation it would appear your problem is quite possibly due to a lack of excursion capabilities of your current driver. The Anarchy will improve this, but maybe not to the level of your needs. I think we need to take a step back and define exactly what your needs and goals are along with what your knowledge, skills and budget will allow.

Exactly what I was going to say. Changing color and doing it right would be much more expensive. Well lets keep this in perspective, I am not restoring a classic car. lol I should be able to do either one and stay within my budget. Like I said I just want a really nice paint job not THE best EVER. lol You'd still have to do door jams/etc. It's not a whole lot more materials but it's more prep and prep time, which is more labor cost. I doubt it would be a $15K job like his friend but still, more money is more money. I would do satin white simply to save the added expense of a complete color. But then again, I'm a cheapass and wouldn't pay to repaint any of my vehicles.

Exactly what I was going to say. Changing color and doing it right would be much more expensive.

Why do you have a component set running at 120 lpf? How do you know this? What processor do you have? I presumed he just typed LPF instead of HPF. For true midbass frequencies, having the speakers located in front of you doesn't really matter. But you would still want them as wide as possible.....under or directly behind the seats are both generally poor options.I don't see why you shouldn't be able to get performance under 120hz with them unless you are simply pushing them significantly past their output limitations. Are you playing them at an excessively loud level when they appear to start bottoming out? Completely disagree Impious. Midbass freqs should definitely be played by front stage drivers. Your comment on having midbass drivers as wide as possible is contradictory to your previous statement Midbass drivers are best mounted in the doors with proper deadening. Disagree if you wish, but you would be wrong. And the statements are not the least bit contradictory. If you think they are, then you are not reading them properly. We localize midbass in the lateral plane only (i.e. left to right). We don't localize it on a vertical plane (high and low), and we don't localize it "front to back". Midbass is localized by way of what's known as Interaural Time Difference (ITD). That is, the brain localizes midbass laterally due a difference in the time arrival of the sound wave between the left ear and right ear. ITD dominates our localization ques in the frequency bandwidth where the wavelengths of the soundwave are longer than the distance between our two ears. Our ears have no hearing mechanism by which to differentiate "front" from "rear" in the midbass frequencies. The wavelengths are too large compared to our hearing mechanisms to locate them vertically or "front to back". Generally the more ITD you can generate, the wider the potential imaging. From this very basic knowledge, a couple things can be extracted. First, any midbass location that results in identical ITD will be indistinguishable to the ear....above you, below you, in front of you, behind you, it doesn't matter......as long as the ITD stays the same, your ears and your brain won't know the difference. Second thing we should notice is that the WORST location for a midbass is at a location that results in an ITD of or close to zero; that would be DIRECTLY in front of you, DIRECTLY behind you, or directly above or below you. Since "imaging" in the lateral plane is a function of ITD, the "best" midbass location is a location that results in optimal ITD. Which is why I previously stated that you want the speakers located as wide as possible, to allow for proper ITD. So yes, you can mount midbass drivers behind you....your brain doesn't know the difference. Mount the drivers as wide as possible to maximize ITD. Which means, for example, if the ITD from some given location on the front doors and some given location on the rear doors are identical, you could mount the speakers in either location and you wouldn't be able to tell a difference. Now, a few caveats to this: First, hearing rattling/buzzing/etc as a result of the midbass speakers exciting panel resonances (door panels, etc) or other noises will ruin the illusion. Second, the speakers must only be operated within the bandwidth where ITD is the mode of localization. If you operate the driver outside of this bandwidth (this includes driver distortion, etc), then other factors will begin to contribute to our localization of the sound. Proper time alignment of the midbass drivers will need to be maintained with the other drivers in the system as well as between the midbass drivers themselves. Lastly (I think), this does not take into consideration the effects of other factors such as reflections, frequency response anomalies, etc as those will be a case-by-case basis. All that said....claiming midbass in the front doors is the "best" location is extremely generalized and I wouldn't necessarily agree.

First post of the new year? I got 12:00am exactly, bitches! Well, EST. I guess it is somewhat relative to where you live.

That Cee Lo fucker or what his name is just completely butchered Lennon's Imagine. What a disgrace.