Can Incriminator Audio Flatlynes handle 900-1000W RMS

[Blackula31 0]

I am getting 2 - 12" Flatlynes for a daily driver (Sealed... will also be upgrading from a Sundown SAZ-1000D to the Sundown 3500D...

What I want to do is get 2 of the Dual 2-ohm and run them @ 2 Ohms on the 3500D... I guess I would be putting about 900-1000watts RMS on them... can they handle that?

Enclosure

Each sub will be in a sealed enclosure with with 1.12 cubes of space after discplacement...

[S.DeYoung 968]

Yes, but there is no point to give them that much. Turn the gain down.

[emh9009 199]

Just because it's rated at a given number doesn't mean that's what they're going to see. Just be careful with the gain and you should be fine. They have an RMS value for a reason.

[Quentin Jarrell 671]

I did two flatline 12's in an M5 on a IA 20.1 and the coils got pretty stinky with the gain wide open. I wouldn't do anymore than 750 rms.

[pmureika 31]

Let more of you newbies watch you tube.They dont tell you the subs burned up later that day.

[BigGuy 22]

There needs to be some more explanation on rms ratings somewhere. Obviously more power than rms is not recommended. However, having more power gives better headroom. Less power than recommended is good. Subs that can handle 2000 watts or more sound good on 2-500 watts. I myself still don't understand power and rms. If your subs handle 750 watts a piece I would get a 1500 watt amp. I do know their is a direct correlation between power handling and box size where as a smaller box lends to more power handling and bigger less power. Where are the techies???

Edited September 14, 2012 by BigGuy

[emh9009 199]

There needs to be some more explanation on rms ratings somewhere. Obviously more power than rms is not recommended. However, having more power gives better headroom. Less power than recommended is good. Subs that can handle 2000 watts or more sound good on 2-500 watts. I myself still don't understand power and rms. If a your subs handle 750 watts a piece I would get a 1500 watt amp. I do know their is a direct correlation between power handling and box size where as a smaller box lends to more power handling and bigger less power. Where are the techies???

What don't you get? Seems like you are pretty clear on what you're mentioned.

[sundownz 197]

The Flatlyne woofers are under-hung -- which means the coil is quite small compared to a "normal" woofer with comparable x-max capacity.

I would stick to what IA suggests for them for this reason. They can probably take a little extra but I wouldn't be one to push it with an under-hung driver.

Edited September 14, 2012 by sundownz

[SMpaintball78 58]

i had a flatlyne 15 in 3.5 cubes on a kicker zr240 (around 500watts) and it was perfect. i then later put it on a mtx 1501 (1500watts) and had the gain maybe half way up and the coils got STANKYY. i wouldnt give them anymore than 800 watts each..

[Blackula31 0]

Well I guess I have the option to move up to the Sundown 1500D @ 1ohm & get Dual 4 ohm subs... or just stick with my Sundown 1000D and give em 500 watts each...

[ricksi30 923]

Save the money and use your current amp. The gain you will see in moving up to the 1500 will not be audible.

[Impious 1,476]

Well I guess I have the option to move up to the Sundown 1500D @ 1ohm & get Dual 4 ohm subs... or just stick with my Sundown 1000D and give em 500 watts each...

Output wise you'd be looking at a maximum difference of 1.8db, that's before power compression so reasonably expect the difference to be somewhere less than 1db which is not going to be audible.

[BigGuy 22]

What formula are you guys using to say that there would be no audible difference? I'm not critizing at all. I'm just trying to have a better understanding of how power works.

[ricksi30 923]

What formula are you guys using to say that there would be no audible difference? I'm not critizing at all. I'm just trying to have a better understanding of how power works.

In a perfect world doubling power would result in an increase of 3db. Most people can't detect anything less than a 3db gain or loss.

[BigGuy 22]

So it makes more sense to add more amps and more subs rather than throwing more power at one sub - ricksi30?

[shizzzon 461]

If you really want to get technical experience, you can purchase an SPL-Lab's meter and sit there and watchmeter what you are doing in the vehicle.

This will better help you see what's happening than just reading about it because in the real world, there are many uncovered variables at play that's not talked about in this thread and probably will never be because it's too much to cover.

Many people that do not compete own pressure meters for this very reason. They eventually get their daily setups louder without buying extra equipment. Positioning, box tuning, vehicle environment mods, etc will all effect pressure and when it starts to become audible that what you are seeing is having a great effect on your ears, you will then gain a large understanding and like others out there, maybe even start competing.

[Impious 1,476]

What formula are you guys using to say that there would be no audible difference? I'm not critizing at all. I'm just trying to have a better understanding of how power works.

10*Log(Power1/Power2) = Power Difference (in db)

So in your case, the difference between 1500w & 1kw is

10*Log(1500/1000) = 1.76db

This is the maximum theoretical difference in output. It does not account for real world factors which will only decrease the difference to something less than that predicted by the formula. For example power compression (<--explained in the link), the ability of your electrical system to support the larger amplifier, etc etc. For power compression, when you're already at 500w on a driver rated for 750w or so, expecting atleast 1db of power compression is not unreasonable and is likely pretty conservative which would make the actual difference less than 1db.

Audibility wise less than 1db especially in the subbass is not going to be audible. Between 1db and 3db it's possible for the difference to be audible depending on circumstances surrounding the listening session but it's not going to be a dramatic difference, in most cases the difference is not worth the cost of the larger amplifier especially if further electrical upgrades are necessary. Beyond 3db (actual acoustic difference, not theoretical difference) it's going to be up to the individual user at what point the cost of the added equipment is worth the difference in acoustic output.

So it makes more sense to add more amps and more subs rather than throwing more power at one sub

It makes more sense to improve your enclosure and maximize your displacement potential long before you ever think about amplifiers. Increasing amplifier power is the least effective and least efficient method of increasing output with the lowest cost/benefit ratio, especially when you already in the 1kw range because to increase power enough to make an audible difference you would then also need to upgrade the electrical system to support the increased amplifier power which only costs more money and time.

But yes, it can be slightly more "effective" to upgrade power with multiple subs as opposed to a single driver because the power is distributed among multiple motors which could potentially mean that power compression is lower. However, increasing amplifier power to reach the goal of increasing audible output is and always should be the absolute last factor considered, and more times than not it isn't going to be a worthwhile "upgrade".

[ricksi30 923]

So it makes more sense to add more amps and more subs rather than throwing more power at one sub - ricksi30?

Cone area over power in my opinion. If you have the room cone area is the cheapest way to increase output. (Of course not counting a proper install which is THE most important thing)

[BigGuy 22]

I'm getting stronger I love yous guys!!! Preciate it!!!

[Sencheezy 689]

I share the same opinion, more cone and better enclosure is the most efficient way to go for sure.

[shizzzon 461]

Reality says otherwise.

It's a well known fact that in competition, if you are burping, you use the LEAST cone area and if you are doing demosor averaging musical runs, you use the MOST cone area.

Now why is that?

Well, for averaging, more cone area equals better heat dissipation which means louder longer on AVERAGE.

For burping, least cone area is required because the more cone you install, the more complex the output will be.

Cancellation will be a problem, time alignment will be a problem.

And the last thing, space. It's easier to fit less cone area than more. This allows for a more optimal or should i say EFFICIENT enclosure.

So, what's more efficient, the enclosure or the cone area?

[Impious 1,476]

Competitors operate under a unique set of circumstances. For the normal everyday user, such as the OP, what a burp competitor experiences and focuses on is completely and utterly useless. For a daily system, it will always be better to focus on maximizing displacement and proper enclosure design before even considering increasing power.

Scott Owens was the first to break 180db with thirteen 12's, so i would raise issue with the premise that least cone area is best for burping. I would gander a guess the issue you raise with cone area and SPL has significantly more to do with the last issue you mention than the 1st two, maximizing cone area while also maximizing enclosure efficiency is a balancing act......which is again only significant when we narrow our focus to that of a burp SPL competitor....which has absolutely no bearing on the daily user.

I'll add that it is possible for a daily user to have more cone area than their space allows, but that has more to do with appropriate enclosure design in general and not the efficiency aspect that SPL competitors focus on. When I mentioned "efficiency" earlier it was not in regards to subwoofer enclosure efficiency........adding a 2nd subwoofer (where airspace allows) even if we keep power the same is a 3db increase, you double amplifier power on the same sub setup and you'll gain somewhere less than 3db - after power compression - (that's after not only spending $$ to upgrading the amplifier but also more than likely the electrical system, wiring, etc), which is the more efficient upgrade for a daily listener from an acoustic and money/time spent perspective ?

[shizzzon 461]

Alan dante....

I'm mobile so can't elaborate on everything

We are getting to techy for this thread but comp, daily, etc has bearing on

A common comparison when looked at.... averaging.

Cone area and enclosure are both crucial.

However, sacrificing one will require more power to compensate.

The application is the factor in determining that.

[Impious 1,476]

And the important difference is that SPL competitors worry about what a meter says whereas the average daily user is concerned with the resultant sound.

The main issue is SPL competitors trying to convert all of their experiences from the lanes on a meter and applying it to every daily system when the overall goals are completely different. A 1db difference in the lanes is a big deal, in a daily system it's literally not going to matter one damn bit. As a result the things an SPL competitor did to gain that 1db may not be applicable or advisable to a daily user. Daily systems can do things like sacrifice some overall system efficiency to gain low end efficiency or an improved response curve or system damping whereas that might not be acceptable to an SPL competitor because "it hurt their score". When there's a meter involved, either burp or averaging, there are going to be compromises made in that system to improve the score on a meter which is not necessarily going to be relevant to a system focused on sound rather than score. Prime examples are the three issues you mentioned above...the first two have no reason to even enter the mind of a person designing a daily driver system as they won't matter in the slightest, and if someone with a daily system is designing their enclosure for efficiency rather than response then they are designing it wrong.

I'm not saying there is no overlap between the two, there's bound to be some as we're dealing with the same physics.....but there are different goals and focuses, and the means to those ends are not necessarily going to carry over from one area of focus to another. IMO SPL competitors tend to end up with tunnel vision and view everything in terms of how it scored on a meter when that's not the focus of 95% of the audio market.