Jump to content

Welcome to the SMD forum!

Sign in to follow this  
EyeMKermie

Input on new sq build

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, ToNasty said:

All my speakers are audible physics.  I've tried to go with other stuff and I always end right back to audible physics 

 

And 90% sq and 10% sql makes no sense.

I was referring to the amount of time I spend listening to each tune. One for sq and one more sql.  90% of the time I run a configuration with a targeted frequency response that is mostly flat. Sometimes that tune sounds best flat and sometimes I tune the response flat up to about 400hz and let it slope down on the top end.  The other tune, my spl tune, is the same as the other, except I raise my crossover points to protect the drivers usually letting the sub play up to 80hz or so.  

 

If that all makes sense.

 

Glad to hear you have experience with the brand.   According to the Audible Physics site, the RAM 6.2 set and RAM 3A  seem to be low on the sensitivity side and lack excursion compared to other drivers.  Have you experienced any issues with either the excursion limits or output?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ToNasty said:

All my speakers are audible physics.  I've tried to go with other stuff and I always end right back to audible physics 

 

And 90% sq and 10% sql makes no sense.

I've also looked at the Avatar 1.6 component set.  T/S parameters are on par with what I look for and the price right now isn't bad.  Sure would be easier to fit the 6" behind the factory door panel.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EyeMKermie said:

I was referring to the amount of time I spend listening to each tune. One for sq and one more sql.  90% of the time I run a configuration with a targeted frequency response that is mostly flat. Sometimes that tune sounds best flat and sometimes I tune the response flat up to about 400hz and let it slope down on the top end.  The other tune, my spl tune, is the same as the other, except I raise my crossover points to protect the drivers usually letting the sub play up to 80hz or so.  

 

If that all makes sense.

 

Glad to hear you have experience with the brand.   According to the Audible Physics site, the RAM 6.2 set and RAM 3A  seem to be low on the sensitivity side and lack excursion compared to other drivers.  Have you experienced any issues with either the excursion limits or output?

 

I dont see why you need a ton of excursion in a midrange that will be crossed around 400hz

 

And sql stands for sound quality level 

 

A great budget friendly setup is the ram 3 way set.  Its 560 bucks.   If you want 2 way.   Figuring out where you're placing the drivers would tell you if you could even run the ram 6.2 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ToNasty said:

I dont see why you need a ton of excursion in a midrange that will be crossed around 400hz

 

And sql stands for sound quality level 

 

A great budget friendly setup is the ram 3 way set.  Its 560 bucks.   If you want 2 way.   Figuring out where you're placing the drivers would tell you if you could even run the ram 6.2 

I don't need a ton of excursion, but it seems the norm for 3" to 4" midrange drivers is about 2mm one way excursion.  The RAM 3A is listed at .5mm.  When I ran my ne95's in WinISD and Bassbox pro, it was showing a little over 1.5mm one way excursion at 80 watts of input power when crossed 250hz up.  I haven't ran the RAM 3A in either of those programs to get an idea of how the driver would respond to a small enclosure.  Of course, simulations by those programs are just rough approximations as to how the drivers would act in a car. 

When I said SQL I meant it as sound quality loud, but I guess in MECA it's sound quality league.. EMMA it's ESQL.  I've always heard it referred to as sound quality loud, because you are playing the system above the normal 90db SQ judging levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3 and 4" are most likely wideband drivers.  A ton of excursion isnt needed for thise.  That actually reduces efficiency 

 

And you most likely wont be seeing 80 watts of power either in the midranges depending how you set overlap 

 

Hell my widebands I have right now are a mercury m40. (Made by audible physics. Basically a ram 2q)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a good point about widebands.  It is hard to tell sometimes.  Look at the Scanspeak discovery 10F.  It is listed as both a mid range and a full range driver, but with some nasty cone breakup at 8k I don't see why someone would run it full range. 

 

I usually set my overlap with -5 db test tracks and an o-scope.  I have a dd-1, but it has been lost for about a year and a half.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, EyeMKermie said:

That is a good point about widebands.  It is hard to tell sometimes.  Look at the Scanspeak discovery 10F.  It is listed as both a mid range and a full range driver, but with some nasty cone breakup at 8k I don't see why someone would run it full range. 

 

I usually set my overlap with -5 db test tracks and an o-scope.  I have a dd-1, but it has been lost for about a year and a half.  

I have the 10f here in my stash as well. That is a mid range 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ToNasty said:

I have the 10f here in my stash as well. That is a mid range 

I have yet to audition any scan drivers. Most of my collection of drivers are Dayton, Peerless, and SB.  I have a few really great Tang Bands, but they are all 8-ohm drivers for my home audio projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, EyeMKermie said:

I have yet to audition any scan drivers. Most of my collection of drivers are Dayton, Peerless, and SB.  I have a few really great Tang Bands, but they are all 8-ohm drivers for my home audio projects.

Ilike both scans and ap. But I always go back to ap. It just all depends on your budget.   A great 2 way setup is the sb17 and sb29.  There are 4 different cones in the sb to choose from though.  I like the paper or poly cone for those.  In the door. Since it gets moisture.  Poly cone would be better 

  • Like (+1 Rep) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ToNasty said:

Ilike both scans and ap. But I always go back to ap. It just all depends on your budget.   A great 2 way setup is the sb17 and sb29.  There are 4 different cones in the sb to choose from though.  I like the paper or poly cone for those.  In the door. Since it gets moisture.  Poly cone would be better 

I like the sb29, but in my last car I preferred the xt25. I may try the sb29 in this car. It may behave differently.

In a door I wasn't a fan of the sb17nrx version.  It ended up being fantastic in a pair of floor standers. 

 

I was actually looking at the SB10PGC21-4.  It is basically the same size as the 3" in the Audible Physics 3 way set, the Avatar 1.3.6.  Thinking now, running that sb10 and sb29 in the pillar might be pretty interesting.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...