Which setup would be better in SQ, SPL, and just all around better?
Eclipse SW7124SVC-T2 (aluminum)-450RMS with Kicker KX450.2 amp -450RMS or Rensonant Engineering SE -600RMS with Kicker KX600.1 amp -600RMS
Does anyone know what the Xmax of the SE is? The Eclipse is about 35mm. Also does anyone know if the Kicker 450.2 amp is underrated? I know the KX600.1 is underrated just wondering if all their amps are.
the xmax of the eclipse is NOT 35 mm.. im curious about the xmax of the SE as well ... and i feel that the SE with the kx600 would give you a better result all around, infact much better.
I have an Eclipse Titanium on its way, so I might be a little biased in saying go with the Eclipse.
The Aluminums have excellent sound quality and get pretty loud.
Plus, the Eclipe AL's will work well on 450 watts. That's a pretty nice setup, as well as easy on the alternator.
I would pretty much bet that the RE SE's get no where near that XMAX number, being as their old XXX woofer had an XMAX of 32 mm. But since the Xmax number isn't the sole basis for how loud a subwoofer gets, I don't think you can base a decision off of that.
I think the Eclipse would be a better pick, but the RE SE's would be fantastic as well.
Are we all forgetting that XMAX has nothing to do with power output? Audiobahn makes high excursion woofers, and they only hit 800W max! So, excursion is pretty much just about looks...
It is a hard decision. I don't care much about Xmax I was just wondering what the SE's are because it doesn't say on their site. Right now I am leaning towards the SE because it has more wattage AND it has excellent SQ... That is why I made this forum because it was a hard choice. Does anyone else have opinions on which setup I should choose... maybe from experience.
Yea, right...How can it move more air when a higher XMAX woofer has more rubber/foam/poly surround? It has a SMALLER OVERALL CONE SPACE. Are you telling me that the dampening foam is what's moving the air? I don't think so, that's why it's for DAMPENING! Just because it comes out an inch doesn't mean it pushes more air. It might say it's a 12" sub, BUT, how much of that 12" is foam/rubber/poly? Greater CONE area = greater air movement. Haha, and if you swing that bat too far, you'll miss the ball completely. MAX power ratings aren't important anyways, so don't mention them, it's the RMS that means something, you aren't going to be turning your subs up to max levels and then down in a seconds notice just for the hell of it are you? I don't think so.
And, clearly you have little to no idea what you are talking about. XMAX is the distance the cone travels on a linear plane. What does the surrond have to do with XMAX? Nothing at all.
In fact, link me to proof that all higher XMAX woofers have more surround and less cone area. I don't even know where you got that from.
But, you know what, you are right. Clearly all of the top SQL subs like JL W7, Eclipse TI (PRO), RE XXX just boast huge XMAX's to prove how little surface area their cones have.
And your analogy of overswinging the bat doesn't even make sense. Maybe if you were speaking about clipping the signal it would have relevance, but here it does not.
The fact of the matter is, when talking about SPL one of the things mentioned is excursion. Xmax is one of these measurements.
is thread suppose to be newbies teaching newbies????
I wont even waste my time on this lame thread!!!
Nevermind, maybe i should mention a few things. Tyler, you are completely clueless. RMS doesnt determine how loud a sub is going to get all the time as well. Max ratings in SPL cases are important. If you are planning on burping a sub for competetion you are going to wanna know how far you can push the sub. As far as that foam surround krap you were talking about, you really need to get a clue and not talk nonsense. Greater cone area doesnt mean greater movement. Think of a 15" sub with an xmax of 10 and a 15" with an xmax of 33, are you saying that they will move the same amount of air, hell no. Just like if you had a 12" sub with an xmax of 33 and a 15" with an xmax of 12, the 12" sub would displace more air. XMAX is a very important thing when talking about subwoofers and displacement. That bat analogy is really retarded, just cuz you swing a bat far doesn mean you will miss the ball, so that makes no sense at all.
Once you swing the bat so far, you have little control over it, you have more power coming from a rest than you do with the bat at your arm's full extension. That's also how subwoofers work when excursion comes to play, and having a high linear excursion with strong BL at that point is key in an SPL or a SQ subwoofer. Excursion matters immensely in SPL. Want proof? Turn the system off. Now turn it back on. The reason you're hearing sound is because the cone is moving. If it isn't, no sound will come from it. It takes double the excursion and 4x the power to produce a 6db increase in SPL, that applies to any driver, from 3" to 30". It makes the surround tradeoff worthwhile. Now, if you have a high surface area driver, with a very strong motor, versus a high x-max driver with a weaker motor (less BL at that point, because the motor is designed to provide more overall BL instead of a just high flux at the gap), the higher surface area driver will win out, but ONLY because its high motor strength allowed it to reach a higher excursion relative to the power level. That being said, not all high excursion designs lack cone area. There is a reason that JL uses an overroll surround, ID uses a tall, narrow surround profile, both provide a surface area larger than even conventional drivers with a lower excursion level. The Eclipse Tis do lack some surface area, but they do make up for it in excursion, and have the motor strength needed to perform well in a ported box. They're not the loudest out there, but they aren't a slouch in SPL either.
That being said, the Eclipse subs use a very long voice coil and a short gap, and use the overhang method to determine x-max. Whether you reach that or not will depend on the level of power you're applying to it, Eclipse subs are pretty well underrated. Real world, though, if these subs did something like a Dumax, they'd likely Dumax in the 20s, probably low 20mm range. The Tis and Ti Pros are around 30, the Pro being above 30.
I personally am a huge fan of RE, seeing as i have 4 RE12's in my car. The SE is suppose to have some of the best SQ you can get in a sub. The alum is suppose to have great SQ as well. I think you would be happy with either one, but like i said, i prefer RE. As far as spl goes i think that they might be comparable, but without having heard either one i cant say for sure.
Or ya know, we could ALL just go back to home audio...Where true SQ is...Just a thought maybe...I've always had this question about car audio. Why is it that I can take a pair of decent-high end home audio speakers, play a song, and get the bass actually added in the song. I take that same CD to the car, and the subs put out a crap load more bass, even though my home stereo has woofers of a better calibur and same size? Doesn't that tell you something? I think there's something wrong with car audio, it adds a lot of bass that isn't there when played on home audio equipment!