sure the w7 costs more but its well worth it in the eyes of an audiophile...not a very good comparison one on one even if it has the added little bit of surface area
Bacon, you do the math, go to the "SQ and SPL difference in a 12L7 and 12L5????" thread so you can finally learn something...there alot of peeps that are trying to teach you over there(not including myself).
ok i thought you were stating otherwise....anywez, if you're going to get just one, the 12w7 would be the choice, but onyl if you're willing to spend some money
Tim L.
Unregistered guest
Posted on
THE MATH
GEOMETRY and LINEAR EQUATIONS
when talking about surface area comparisons, for those who don't know, i'd like to contribute that MOST 12" high excursion drivers only have 10" of cone area due to their wide surrounds..
the exception bein the W7 with it's overroll surround design.. allowing a wide roll surround with more excursion and the piston area of a smaller roll sub..
but not by MUCH
W7 = 84 in.^2 L7 = 144 in.^2
with 71% MORE cone surface area, "To overcome this loss, the fat-surround woofer has to produce more excursion to displace the same air as the 12W3v2 (and will require more power to do so). " - JL AUDIO
one needs MORE energy to move that BIG, HEAVY magnet to get that NECESSARY HIGH EXCURSION to make sound.. makes sense, right? in simple analogy english, it's like a bigger brother vs. a smaller brother in a fight.. the younger smaller brother has to hit as hard as he can to do anything and his older bro barely has to swing to kick his as.. =P
so, bacon, your EQUATION ABOVE IS BACKWARDS..
also, a 12w7 is 750 wrms, like the S12L7, NOT 500, and those are thermal ratings, not necessary requirements for this or that..
"one needs MORE energy to move that BIG, HEAVY magnet to get that NECESSARY HIGH EXCURSION to make sound."
the magnet is stationary. the coil and cone are what actually move. The power required is to charge the magnetic field, and move the mass of the cone itself.
peak power isn't always required for a sub to reach it's mechanical Xmax. The fact still remains however, that the 12W7 is still a better sub than the S12L7. Better design, better made, better sounding. You're not going to encounter things like cone distortion as readily with a round sub, regardless of displacement by surface area and excursion.
having literally twice the excursion, would require quite a substantial difference in surface area to compensate for the difference, and you can't simply subtract the entire surround as negated space when figuring out how much air is really moved. the surround moves as much as he cone itself, still moving air, so there's a fudge factor in there you need to consider.
Tim L.
Unregistered guest
Posted on
sorry, wasn't thinkin straight.. had to go..
don't you typically account for half the surround as the cone surface?