Shallow Delta Midbass (11.5mm of xmax)

[Eldorado 0]

Have you seen the old RL-i 8's ?

They had a very high roll surround. Much more stroke in the suround than the woofer could actually do. I kinda liked it.

Maybe its diferent with subwoofers because they arent on axis with anything....who knows.

About the foolish comment....Peformance>looks and you know that

[SoundSplinter 1]

Off-topic: Heh, the high roll on the original RL-i8 was done in large part due to parts limitation (also the reason why it took so long to get the revamped drivers out) - and as you indicated, it was entirely unecessary for the excursion the driver would create (though yes, it did look pretty freaky cool ).

On-topic (kinda): Welcome to the forums Matt and Matlow! These new mids you got comin' out look to be quite the niceness. I'm finally getting around to installing those crossovers you made, Dylan, along with the Dayton reference midwoofer and tweet combo. Can't wait - but as I'm a total slut when it comes to aesthetics.. I am in fact waiting until I get the box finished up proper before I throw 'em in and let 'em wang

Since I am such a cam whore, and it seems the people be cryin' for eye candy -

here's a little somethin' somethin', genuine OlogyAudio crossovers goin' into my ~0.6 cu ft cabs

Best of business to you all!

[///M5 2,833]

A review will follow please. Looks nice and I am sure they will pair nicely with an Rlp or Rls.

[Matthew_Rich 0]

Have you seen the old RL-i 8's ?

They had a very high roll surround. Much more stroke in the suround than the woofer could actually do. I kinda liked it.

Maybe its diferent with subwoofers because they arent on axis with anything....who knows.

About the foolish comment....Peformance>looks and you know that

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

with anything about 300hz and above you will notice the surround being inverted and out of the way.... it's why people LOVE flat surrounds... inverted is even better when you get this kind of excursion... overall if looks were the point then yes... we can attach them correctly without problems... and any OEM people have this choice... I just like my speakers being the best possible

Edited February 23, 2006 by Matthew_Rich

[Matthew_Rich 0]

Off-topic: Heh, the high roll on the original RL-i8 was done in large part due to parts limitation (also the reason why it took so long to get the revamped drivers out) - and as you indicated, it was entirely unecessary for the excursion the driver would create (though yes, it did look pretty freaky cool ).

On-topic (kinda): Welcome to the forums Matt and Matlow!  These new mids you got comin' out look to be quite the niceness.  I'm finally getting around to installing those crossovers you made, Dylan, along with the Dayton reference midwoofer and tweet combo.  Can't wait - but as I'm a total slut when it comes to aesthetics.. I am in fact waiting until I get the box finished up proper before I throw 'em in and let 'em wang

Since I am such a cam whore, and it seems the people be cryin' for eye candy -

here's a little somethin' somethin', genuine OlogyAudio crossovers goin' into my ~0.6 cu ft cabs 

Best of business to you all!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

looking very good I hope dylan did you right

[Eldorado 0]

Have you seen the old RL-i 8's ?

They had a very high roll surround. Much more stroke in the suround than the woofer could actually do. I kinda liked it.

Maybe its diferent with subwoofers because they arent on axis with anything....who knows.

About the foolish comment....Peformance>looks and you know that

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

with anything about 300hz and above you will notice the surround being inverted and out of the way.... it's why people LOVE flat surrounds... inverted is even better when you get this kind of excursion... overall if looks were the point then yes... we can attach them correctly without problems... and any OEM people have this choice... I just like my speakers being the best possible

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Flat surrounds are old school.

[flakko 1]

so these would compare with the arco poly mids no?

[Dylan Matlow 0]

so these would compare with the arco poly mids no?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes you could compare the two...

The Delta's f3 (anechoic -- Obviously you will get some gain in car and the f3s will drop for both...) is almost an octave lower when installed IB... ~54hz vs ~90hz. Needless to say they will have different overall sounds.

The AA poly midrange will have a lower f3 in a sealed box smaller than .3cuft when compared to the Delta

The Delta wins in .3cuft and larger... There is also a peak above Fb ranging from 2-3.2 dB in .3-.6 cuft boxes that gives the effect of some extra slam in the midbass.

The Delta has a very shallow mounting depth

Xmax is the same

Both have copper sleeve on pole

Paper vs Poly...

The AA is less expensive.

That is pretty much the run down... I'd call them comparable, they are both very inexpensive for what you get... It just depends on what your goals are which you want...

We traded performance in boxes smaller than .3cuft for more sensitivity and lower f3s IB or in moderate-large sealed boxes

[flakko 1]

kay glad to have an honest opinion lol

[flakko 1]

em so whats the update on these?