Like

Got a 12w6v2, what to do for a box??

 

Silver Member
Username: Blindc1rca

Post Number: 199
Registered: Aug-04
Ok, I got my 12w6v2. I want SQ more than SPL, I listen to rock and reggae, should I go sealed? If so, how many cu. ft?
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2253
Registered: May-04
Both their sealed and ported recommendations sound great for SQ, it will degrade slightly with ported, but not by much IMO. Download the PDFs on that sub and JL will give specific dimensions for the box you choose. Either will work well.
 

Silver Member
Username: Fishy

Tamarac, FL USA

Post Number: 521
Registered: Sep-04
I dunno, their ported recommendation looks kinda "peaky" compared to other subs I've modeled in winISD like my 10w3d2 "purist" alignment.

http://home.comcast.net/~guppyrig/wsb/media/322068/site1053.JPG

(white=12w6v2, light blue=10w3d2, purple=-3dB)

but I guess JL has a purist alignment for the 12w6v2 as well.

Whataya think of those two Gain curves Jonathan? I know they don't take cabin gain into account.

-Fishy
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2257
Registered: May-04
It's a little peaky, but that's what most people like. It's well rounded in a vehicle, actually, saying most vehicles tend to have max gain in the 50s and slope off above and below that, it rounds out. WinISD can be inaccurate at times, too. For a more purist alignment, you'd probably do a little better with something like 2 cu ft net tuned to 26-28. I've heard them with that box, though, and they're really well rounded. The peaky response is mainly to blame on the sub, it's designed mainly for small sealed, EBP is kinda low. JLs in general tend to be that way, but it's not a horrible thing, they still work well in ported applications.
 

Silver Member
Username: Fishy

Tamarac, FL USA

Post Number: 522
Registered: Sep-04
Here's what their recommended sealed enclosure looks like for the 12w6v2(yellow, 1.25ft^3. Qtc=.81).

http://home.comcast.net/~guppyrig/wsb/media/322068/site1054.JPG

Are those accurate representations on how they'll play w/o cabin gain?

Does cabin gain really make up that much difference sealed?

I think I'm about to throw winISD out the window.

:-)

-Fishy
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2258
Registered: May-04
WinISD can be pretty inaccurate at times, especially with certain subs, and it's very hard to predict cabin gain well. Depends on too many things to accurately portray in vehicle response as simply different sub locations, boxes, sound deadening, etc. will all have an effect on cabin gain. If I use WinISD, I do so while still considering what I know usually works well.
 

Silver Member
Username: Fishy

Tamarac, FL USA

Post Number: 524
Registered: Sep-04
But doesn't the sealed response look weak as hell compared to ported?

Guess i'm gonna haveta build me a sealed enclosure for my 10w3's and have a listen.

Should I go with JL's .625 ft^3 recommendation(Qtc=.91) or go with somethin from winISD with a Qtc of the "ideal" .707 which gives me 1.35 ft^3.

http://home.comcast.net/~guppyrig/wsb/media/322068/site1055.JPG

(green = .625 ft^3, yellow = 1.35 ft^3)

I was worried about possible overexcursion with winISD's suggestion, but sure looks like it would play lower. Probably not louder, but lower anyways.

thanks

-Fishy
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2265
Registered: May-04
I'd stick with JL on that one. 1.35 is a big sealed box for a 10. Like I said, it can be inaccurate :-)
 

Silver Member
Username: Fishy

Tamarac, FL USA

Post Number: 526
Registered: Sep-04
lol, you should see what they look like in a 2.86 ft^3 box tuned to 24.5 Hz(winISD's recommendation). A beatififul curve flat all the way to 20 Hz(I'm done uploadin em tho, what a pain, hehe).

I foolishly built that one. Sounds fantastic at low volume(blows your hair real good), but you can't turn it up much and it doesn't handle transients very well. At least it would be a near perfect fit for a pair of Shivas.

How would a pair of those guys sound @ 250 watts ea? nah, nevermind that box kills my cargo space almost completely.

hmm.. Shivas in 1.75 ft^3 sealed would only be a bit bigger than my 10w3 box. I could afford a pair of those and that would be a significant SQ improvement over the 10w3's wouldn't it?

-Fishy
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2268
Registered: May-04
SQ is much better IMO, yes, just remember that the Shivas are 12s. Low end extension is fantastic, great SQ and low end in a sealed box (even below 20 hz). They'd work well with 250W RMS.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2269
Registered: May-04
BTW, on the "this forum has gone downhill thread" I gave you an answer, but it's kind of vague :-)
 

Silver Member
Username: Fishy

Tamarac, FL USA

Post Number: 529
Registered: Sep-04
lol, thanks, I'll check it out.

I dunno I guess I feel like I'm wasting 500 watts by not driving a 1 ohm load with my Xtant 1001dx but if my front components are getting overpowered as it is I guess I really don't need the full 1000 watts.

Hmmm... wonder what 4 isobaric Shivas would sound like in .9 ft^3 sealed per side. I could use 1000 watts then! lol, but thats $500.

:-)

-Fishy
 

Silver Member
Username: Fishy

Tamarac, FL USA

Post Number: 530
Registered: Sep-04
Oh, I installed my little PQM1 one band parametric EQ module in that amp. Can you make up some of the low end(not ultra low) response deficiencies of sealed enclosures with one of them things?

I tried messin with it with my 10w3's ported @ 28.8 Hz. I set the center frequency at 20 Hz(lowest) and the Q at the lowest(1.0). Just a lil bit of boost added a whole poopload of bass, but I was worried about overpowering my subsonic filter(set at 20 Hz) so I have the boost up just a tad.

I was wondering if boosting frequencies a sealed enclosure normally wouldn't really like to play requires a whole lot of extra power or not.

-Fishy
 

Silver Member
Username: Blindc1rca

Post Number: 200
Registered: Aug-04
I looked at that diagram fishy and the response seems to drop off tremendously at lower frequencies. Was that a model for 10w3's or my 12w6v2's? I got confused reading your guys' responses cause I wasnt sure who's sub you were referring to. Im feeling a smaller enclosure might work better for my needs. 1 cuft is within range for the 12w6v2, how would that work out for me?
 

Silver Member
Username: Fishy

Tamarac, FL USA

Post Number: 534
Registered: Sep-04
My 10w3's are actually playing "lower" on those plots but their in JL's SQ or what they call their "purist" enclosure. Those plots are a lil decepetive tho. They're representative(I believe) of how they would sound in an anechoic chamber(no reflections) and don't include cabin gain. WinIsd is used primarily to model home applictaions where "room" gain starts out at much lower frequencies. Those subs will play a lot lower in an actual vehicle.

It bothers me too. Sealed booxes generally look like they'd have incredibly weak low end response on these plots but apparently in a vehicle they don't.

I've lost all confidence in my ability to design a suitable enclosure using this stuff so I'd either E-mail JL Audio for alternate enclosure suggestions(ask for normal, purist, and dB monster, hehe, thats how they used to rate em anyways) or just use what they recommend here.

http://www.jlaudio.com/subwoofers/pdfs/W6v2_MAN.pdf

1.25 ft^3 sealed, 1.5 ported

I'm in the market for some more substantial enclosure design software.

:-)

-Fishy
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2272
Registered: May-04
Personally, David, I'd do around 1.25 like specs recommend, maybe a even larger. The problem w/ smaller boxes is degraded transient response and decreased bandwidth, plus more power needed to get the sub to full excursion. I'd go between 1.25-1.75 net, personally, or 1.25 and stuff with polyfill.
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Facebook

Shop Related Deals

Directory

Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us