who thinks alpine type S is nicer then type r they got a higher sensitivity rating then the type r's do which mean they can go louder at lower volumes I think one 10" type S would be same or if not better then 10" type R its 87 db sensitivity for type s 10" and 85 db for the 10" type R just like the type x is only 81 db sensitivity and its not made for SPL cause low sensitivity so iam thinking the type S will rock!
well im sorry to say but subs do not perform by the way you "think" they will. a subs sensitivity does not show how loud the sub can or cannot be. and the type R is a better sub than the type S. sorry thats how it really is.
speakers DO NOT produce power. A speaker rated at 1000 watts is not necessarily going to be more efficient than a speaker rated at 50 watts. If they are manufactured by the same company (so that they are rated by the same standards), the speaker rated to handle higher power will be able to produce more sound pressure level because it can be driven with a more powerful amplifier without fear of damage. Many times, a manufacturers cheapest woofers will be more efficient and may be a better choice for a low powered system. You have to be careful when looking at reference efficiency (sensitivity). You can make a speaker really efficient by designing the voice coil to fit entirely in the magnetic gap. This would likely yield a sensitivity of 104 or so. This speaker may work very well if powered by a low powered amplifier because of the high efficiency but would not be able to produce high SPL at low frequencies because it would have a very small xmax. Actually, if the voice coil length was the same as the height of the magnetic gap, it would have no (zero) xmax. You can also design speakers for very high power handling and high SPL but those speakers would likely have a very low reference efficiency. Speakers designed for high SPL in cars generally have a larger xmax and therefore lower reference efficiency but would easily out perform the speaker (in the previous example) with the higher reference efficiency at low frequencies. Speakers that are designed to operate in very small enclosures are usually less efficient than speakers designed for larger enclosures. To make the speaker perform in a small enclosure, the suspension has to be stiff. This will raise the resonant frequency. To get a lower resonant frequency, they must add mass to the cone of the speaker. This added mass and the stiff suspension kill the efficiency. I think that says it nicely
haha so your basically saying the type X is better then the type R cause it has a higher X max and lower sensitivity lol naww i know its a sq sub the type R is prob the best then the alpine guy said so himself
no the R is not the best thing, in my opinion the R SUCKS hard nuts. i would take SONY over and R anyday. EVERY SINGLE R i've heard was total sh!t and was like nails on a chalk board. R's are good if you like that but other than that, they suck
andy stop acting like u know whats up lol. he didnt say the type X was better because of its lower efficiency and its higher xmax. he just said its a better sub, it is. the type R has capabilities of getting louder as shown by TCAB but that does not mean its the best subwoofer. you cannot judge a sub or any speaker by just looking at it on paper. its how it performs. so go read www.bcae1.com or www.the12volt.com
type rs aren't that bad nolimit. i used to own a couple of them and they sounded alright. not the best sounding subs but it didn't sound like the way you described them (never heard that kinda description before lol).
i have two type xs now and it gets much louder than the 2 rs i used to have