audioque sdc2.5 12's

[bdogg81 0]

i will be putting a system in my wifes chrysler 300 and i was leaning towards audioque sdc 2.5 and a audioque 1200d, i will be using 2 subs in a ported enclosure, my question is how do audioque's hold up against say ssa or incriminator 187's

[cheese20323 13]

Well the IA's are not comparable a 300 watt driver to a 600 watt is not really comparable same goes for SSA's Dcon, If you want IA it is the Lethal Injection you want, sundown SA-12, Fi SSD are good options too.

[Kanaworm$ 292]

The SDC2.5 AQ's are ok as I had 1 15"

I went with IA LI series 15 and was night and day difference in SQ and output.

No experience with the amplifiers.

For similar money look into the Sundown SAX-1200D and a pair of the SA-12. I feel you will be happier with the power produced by the amplifer and the SQ and output of the subwoofers.

Check out the Sundown September Pre-Sale in the SSA Store.

The SSD series from Fi is another quality option in your price range.

[Sir-Lancelot 216]

If you want it to sound good, the AQ subs would not be my choice personally. They are a get loud type woofa.

Their recommended tuning should tell you that.

[sundownz 197]

I have an AQ SDC here at the shop and it looks like a well built sub -- but the suspension is ULTRA stiff and results in a high FS. In fact... it was similar to our Z v.2 even after some initial break-in.

Makes it a good driver to have "higher bass" output -- verified by testing -- but on the really low notes it trailed off.

Design philosophy is alot like the HDC3 -- which is almost 2.5x stiffer than an NS v.2 with similar break in times.

[PHATBOi 38]

I have an AQ SDC here at the shop and it looks like a well built sub -- but the suspension is ULTRA stiff and results in a high FS. In fact... it was similar to our Z v.2 even after some initial break-in.

Makes it a good driver to have "higher bass" output -- verified by testing -- but on the really low notes it trailed off.

Design philosophy is alot like the HDC3 -- which is almost 2.5x stiffer than an NS v.2 with similar break in times.

This may be off topic, but could an SA-15 still hit decent lows in a box 2.8^3 tuned at 36Hz? I see you recomend tuning at 35Hz was just curious how low it got tuned that high. Alot of people claim that the AQ subs can still get low at that tuning but I have yet to hear it personally, they always sound kinda hollow.

[Kanaworm$ 292]

The OP just posted up random topics so he could pad his post count and get his shit up for sale! Don't expect any replies!

[sundownz 197]

I have an AQ SDC here at the shop and it looks like a well built sub -- but the suspension is ULTRA stiff and results in a high FS. In fact... it was similar to our Z v.2 even after some initial break-in.

Makes it a good driver to have "higher bass" output -- verified by testing -- but on the really low notes it trailed off.

Design philosophy is alot like the HDC3 -- which is almost 2.5x stiffer than an NS v.2 with similar break in times.

This may be off topic, but could an SA-15 still hit decent lows in a box 2.8^3 tuned at 36Hz? I see you recomend tuning at 35Hz was just curious how low it got tuned that high. Alot of people claim that the AQ subs can still get low at that tuning but I have yet to hear it personally, they always sound kinda hollow.

That box would work fine for an SA-15.

Honestly... the AQ / DD design philosophy isn't targeted at super low bass. Extension to 40 Hz should be no issue but expect output to diminish under -- not to say they won't reproduce low bass but a softer driver will do it better.

[PHATBOi 38]

I have an AQ SDC here at the shop and it looks like a well built sub -- but the suspension is ULTRA stiff and results in a high FS. In fact... it was similar to our Z v.2 even after some initial break-in.

Makes it a good driver to have "higher bass" output -- verified by testing -- but on the really low notes it trailed off.

Design philosophy is alot like the HDC3 -- which is almost 2.5x stiffer than an NS v.2 with similar break in times.

This may be off topic, but could an SA-15 still hit decent lows in a box 2.8^3 tuned at 36Hz? I see you recomend tuning at 35Hz was just curious how low it got tuned that high. Alot of people claim that the AQ subs can still get low at that tuning but I have yet to hear it personally, they always sound kinda hollow.

That box would work fine for an SA-15.

Honestly... the AQ / DD design philosophy isn't targeted at super low bass. Extension to 40 Hz should be no issue but expect output to diminish under -- not to say they won't reproduce low bass but a softer driver will do it better.

Thanks Jacob. I really appreciate how you take time out to answer questions for us.

[JayR04 0]

AQ subs don't get love around these parts

[sundownz 197]

I wouldn't say that -- they simply have a very different design philosophy from most if not all of the vendors here on SSA. The suspensions on both the SDC and HDC are SUPER stiff.

[PHATBOi 38]

Most of us are into to all around sound and great lows instead of just getting loud. Don't get me wrong AQ subs are tanks that take a ton of power and put up amazing numbers, but just seem to lack in the sq department. We like to get loud, but still sound good doing it.

[Duran 387]

AQ subs don't get love around these parts

To some here they do, I prefer a strong low end so I don't run AQ or DD.

[Julian 641]

AQ subs don't get love around these parts

To some here they do, I prefer a strong low end so I don't run AQ or DD.

:werd_msword: