New guy here subwoofer question

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

EMF Audio

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Posts
129
Reaction score
2
Location
Spartanburg, SC
You're tuning two totally different things. If you have a smart phone and $35 you can read all OBD2 data, and that data doesn't change. Vehicle dynamics change depending on pressure and temperature, and furthermore, you have to do a lot more to get a reading on top of having an RTA to compare and transfer that data. I have an RTA, I'm willing to bet nobody else here does. Do I use an RTA to plug data into software to try to make something sound a certain way? Nope, I build out of my head. You don't get to doing 160+ dB with software simulations, even as an attempt at a starting point.
 

Deephaven

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2013
Posts
263
Reaction score
4
You're tuning two totally different things. If you have a smart phone and $35 you can read all OBD2 data, and that data doesn't change. Vehicle dynamics change depending on pressure and temperature, and furthermore, you have to do a lot more to get a reading on top of having an RTA to compare and transfer that data. I have an RTA, I'm willing to bet nobody else here does. Do I use an RTA to plug data into software to try to make something sound a certain way? Nope, I build out of my head. You don't get to doing 160+ dB with software simulations, even as an attempt at a starting point.
Yikes, seriously?

I use the same MAF in both my intakes and my airflow measures COMPLETELY differently and my truck wouldn't run for crap if I didn't remap/calibrate the airflow to the output of the sensor. As for the RTA, not sure who you are trying to impress but you aren't the only one on here with one, I'd bet not even close.
 

EMF Audio

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Posts
129
Reaction score
2
Location
Spartanburg, SC
Yikes, seriously?

I use the same MAF in both my intakes and my airflow measures COMPLETELY differently and my truck wouldn't run for crap if I didn't remap/calibrate the airflow to the output of the sensor. As for the RTA, not sure who you are trying to impress but you aren't the only one on here with one, I'd bet not even close.

Do you own an RTA? Why do I get the feeling you've paid somebody for graphs in the past.
 

Deephaven

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2013
Posts
263
Reaction score
4
Do you own an RTA? Why do I get the feeling you've paid somebody for graphs in the past.
Yes, I do. At the same time, I am not sure what that has to do with this thread, if you want to make a point or discussion go for it. Puffing your chest however you can stop.
 

Ponchonutty

Full Access Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Posts
560
Reaction score
68
Location
New Washington, Ohio
On a different note I fiberglassed a 10" fosgate shallow sub inside the rear drivers side panel. Still have room to use all 3 rows and a place to store my jack. I made a sealed enclosure and on the smaller side of what was recommended since there's so much airspace in the cabin. Turned out very well considering what challenges were to deal with!
 

EMF Audio

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Posts
129
Reaction score
2
Location
Spartanburg, SC
Yes, I do. At the same time, I am not sure what that has to do with this thread, if you want to make a point or discussion go for it. Puffing your chest however you can stop.

Well the thread as a whole derailed a long time ago. But in reference to where I was headed with that, since you do have an RTA you can show everybody how you designed a box using simulation software, then took that to your RTA and it shows EXACTLY what the graph does. That's what you've been trying to prove, right? Simulation software is accurate?

Trying to be Alpha male can stop, it's possible that manufacturers know more than enthusiasts. This isn't CACO.

On a different note I fiberglassed a 10" fosgate shallow sub inside the rear drivers side panel. Still have room to use all 3 rows and a place to store my jack. I made a sealed enclosure and on the smaller side of what was recommended since there's so much airspace in the cabin. Turned out very well considering what challenges were to deal with!

I used to do that (area, not exact scenario) a lot in 4Runner's back in early 2000's, people loved it.
 

Deephaven

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2013
Posts
263
Reaction score
4
Well the thread as a whole derailed a long time ago. But in reference to where I was headed with that, since you do have an RTA you can show everybody how you designed a box using simulation software, then took that to your RTA and it shows EXACTLY what the graph does. That's what you've been trying to prove, right? Simulation software is accurate?
If by manufacturing you are referring to grabbing some off the shelf parts somewhere in Asia based on what is available and assembling them, then that is a really weird definition. All the real manufacturers of course use T/S and modelling everyday. Exactly how criteria for product development occurs. If you want to go to Harman, Seas, Scan Speak and so on and tell them they are idiots and you know more by seeing a woofer, go ahead. They'll laugh their ass off at you.

Since you have the great idea of showing how modelling doesn't work and own an RTA and a company that sells things perhaps it should be you to prove the rest of the audio world is wrong. This is how the thread derailed as you call it. You told someone to do exactly the opposite of what the educated audio world does. I'd like to see how this arbitrary process of yours works.
 

EMF Audio

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Posts
129
Reaction score
2
Location
Spartanburg, SC
If by manufacturing you are referring to grabbing some off the shelf parts somewhere in Asia based on what is available and assembling them, then that is a really weird definition. All the real manufacturers of course use T/S and modelling everyday. Exactly how criteria for product development occurs. If you want to go to Harman, Seas, Scan Speak and so on and tell them they are idiots and you know more by seeing a woofer, go ahead. They'll laugh their ass off at you.

Since you have the great idea of showing how modelling doesn't work and own an RTA and a company that sells things perhaps it should be you to prove the rest of the audio world is wrong. This is how the thread derailed as you call it. You told someone to do exactly the opposite of what the educated audio world does. I'd like to see how this arbitrary process of yours works.

You seem to know an aweful lot about my company for knowing nothing about me, or my company. I wasn't aware tooling my own parts was "off the shelf". Well, I guess they were on a shelf at some point. What if I told you I used the same parts as Scan Speak? Would their parts sound better? Who said anything about T/S parameters? You're right, they do use those, so do I. Know what I use them for? Understanding the speaker, not the BS modeling puts out. You're also talking about mids, NOT subs. Mids are a very different ballgame, and holy shit I designed a set of those too. You aren't dealing with cabin changes with mids. Your environment doesn't change with output like with subs. I guess if you never get over 120 dB you might get a vague idea of what's going on.

So you're saying you can't prove me wrong? What the rest of the educated audio world does is do what the manufacturer says, because they know their product best (or should). The rest of the world doesn't build sealed boxes with an alleged 0.707 Qtc, check vehicle response out of the vehicle then in the vehicle at various SPL levels, then graph that data for trends to in turn plug that data into a software simulation to change the box to plot a graph that will make them visually pleased.

I've NEVER had a customer take my box recommendation then come back and go "ya know, it sounds like there is a 1 dB saddle around 47 hz". I'm not sure if you've got rose colored glasses or beer goggles, but you have a very skewed idea of what manufacturers really do behind closed doors. You're making everything out to be way more than it is, which based on how you're acting also tells me there is a very good possibility you either have or do compete in SQ.
 

Deephaven

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2013
Posts
263
Reaction score
4
You seem to know an aweful lot about my company for knowing nothing about me, or my company.
Funny, there is this thing called the internet. Glad you approve of what I know.


I wasn't aware tooling my own parts was "off the shelf". Well, I guess they were on a shelf at some point.
You can surely correct me and tell us how you designed them, but obviously we both know the outcome of that.

What if I told you I used the same parts as Scan Speak? Would their parts sound better?
If you need someone to tell you it is the sum of the parts and not the parts you have more to learn than I thought.

Who said anything about T/S parameters? You're right, they do use those, so do I. Know what I use them for? Understanding the speaker
Like?

not the BS modeling puts out.
Okay, confirmed a ton to learn. Why don't you tell us how things are designed if they aren't modelled first?

You're also talking about mids, NOT subs. Mids are a very different ballgame, and holy shit I designed a set of those too. You aren't dealing with cabin changes with mids. Your environment doesn't change with output like with subs.
I wasn't talking about mids. Your statements about them are way off. Google standing waves.

So you're saying you can't prove me wrong? What the rest of the educated audio world does is do what the manufacturer says, because they know their product best (or should). The rest of the world doesn't build sealed boxes with an alleged 0.707 Qtc, check vehicle response out of the vehicle then in the vehicle at various SPL levels, then graph that data for trends to in turn plug that data into a software simulation to change the box to plot a graph that will make them visually pleased.
Sounds like you just did with your own statement. Do you think before you type? Obviously nothing wrong with the modelling software.

I've NEVER had a customer take my box recommendation then come back and go "ya know, it sounds like there is a 1 dB saddle around 47 hz". I'm not sure if you've got rose colored glasses or beer goggles, but you have a very skewed idea of what manufacturers really do behind closed doors. You're making everything out to be way more than it is, which based on how you're acting also tells me there is a very good possibility you either have or do compete in SQ.
Your customers aren't discerning, we get it, but then if they were we both know they wouldn't have bought woofers designed as you are implying you do. As for knowing what manufacturers do, I guarantee I've been in more speaker R&D centers than you have. Probably more this year than you ever have...but my idea is skewed perhaps instead of just going to build houses you should interact with some engineers, it would be enlightening for you.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
129,114
Posts
1,810,662
Members
92,202
Latest member
Phoenix2k9
Top