TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:25 am

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: 6x9s
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 9:39 pm
Posts: 68
Location: Red Deer, Canada
Hey Guys I was wondering if you guys could help me out; I'm looking for a good pair of 6x9s for my 87 fly, I was hoping to spend roughly 100$ cdn on them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 6:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:38 pm
Posts: 762
Location: pines
i have couple panasonic, sony pioneer 6x9's


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 6x9s
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 10:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 4:42 pm
Posts: 1464
Location: Guelph, Ontario
garrick7 wrote:
Hey Guys I was wondering if you guys could help me out; I'm looking for a good pair of 6x9s for my 87 fly, I was hoping to spend roughly 100$ cdn on them.


If you have a Best Buy near by, you might want to drop by there. Last time i was there, they had a pair of kenwood 6X9s for 69.99 canadian. I still actually might grab them. the price is right, IMO.

_________________
when the clutch drops, the BS stops

"Life's a rally, cut corners"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:34 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2003 4:16 am
Posts: 8042
Location: Ontario, Canada
EBAY.
If there are still some available, you can get infinity reference 6X9's for $25/pr.
Thats what I payed for the half dozen pr. I bought. They are $249 in stores, and sound good.

_________________
Contact 3tech: g10pro@rocketmail.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 12:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:49 pm
Posts: 60
Location: salmon arm
I have a pair of JVC 240w 3way and i got them at future shop for 79.99 sound really good for 6x9s


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 10:48 am
Posts: 1250
Location: Los Angeles, Ca.
I am a fan of the Pioneer 6x9's for $99 at Best Buy. Mike has a point thoug Evil-Bay may be the best place to start.

_________________
Not very fast, but fun.

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2105148


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: 6x9's
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 9:39 pm
Posts: 68
Location: Red Deer, Canada
Hey guys I went and bought a pair of Jensen 6x9's from the source (29.99 cdn) I'm pretty happy with them. they'll put out 150w peak, 75 rms, since I'm just running them off the hu I'm not worried about power problems. thanks alot for your suggestions
Garrick


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 5:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
Just my two cents.

I wouldn't go with six by nines. Generally they're crap. They can't match a pair of 5.5 or 6's tonally, and BOTH will put out more bass than a 6 x 9.

If your on a budget, think of an eight in a pre-made small box. Put good speakers in the stock location, and you're good to-go.

In all my SPL competition days, I never found anyone who used 6 x 9's.

Just my thoughts, don't want to pee on your plans or anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
sorry, i guess i missed the last post somehow. just ignore everything i said. :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 11:26 pm 
Offline
King of Pompous
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 4:22 pm
Posts: 5596
Location: Ottawa ONT.
scotch wrote:
and BOTH will put out more bass than a 6 x 9.


that may be true for cheap 6x9's but as far as output they have the cone are of around a 7" driver and better 6x9's will stomp on a pair of average 6.5's.

_________________
LNLC Founding Member

FAKE FRIENDS: Never ask for food.
REAL FRIENDS: Is the reason you have no food.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
I don't want to get in an argument or anything, but the 6x9 is one of my pet peeves. I don't know how many people come into the shop and want 6 x 9's because they thing that they're getting more speaker.

As I'm sure a lot of people know, speakers don't make sound, they move air. the movement creates pressure in the surrounding air resulting in the waves our ears interpret into sound. so the more air you can move, the more sound you can make.

This is probably making me sound like a know it all, but 6 x 9's just kill me.

So the problem with 6 x 9's is the whole design. In order to make more sound you have to move the speaker more, and the inherent design of these speakers make them very prone to flex. Linear excursion is the most important aspect of a speaker. and 6x9's start to flex almost immediately. As a speaker starts to flex out of shape, you loose tonal clarity, and soon you get distortion. Also, you can't make as much noise, because the speaker won't extend as much. The coil starts to move out of the sweet spot in the Magnetic suspension, and you get distortion and less volume.

If you ever look at those crazy spl woofers, you'll notice that they are made for extreme excursion. some can extend six or eight inches out from center. The way they do that is give them thicker surrounds, and they spend a lot of money designing machines that make them perfectly round. The only good speaker out there that isn't round is the kicker, and that happens to be a special speaker. It has massive re-enforcements, the spider is huge and there's two of them.

Anyway, I'm getting carried away again. Sorry. It's just that a car manufacturer made a quick fix to a problem (not enough room for a larger speaker on the package tray) and convinced everyone that it's a good speaker. It kills me.

One final point. If you are cruising with the windows down, and a custom exhaust, engine, etc.. It doesnt make any difference. disregard everything I just wrote.

Sorry to rant. Guess I have to much time on my hands.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:41 pm 
Offline
King of Pompous
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 4:22 pm
Posts: 5596
Location: Ottawa ONT.
My pet peeve is when somebody says something that is so fucked I think it’s a joke. Before you post such total bullshit please read up on what your saying. You are making claims that are completely false.


scotch wrote:
This is probably making me sound like a know it all


Sadly your showing everybody how little you do know.

scotch wrote:
the inherent design of these speakers make them very prone to flex.


The design has been optimized to reduce the amount of flex the shape has. Many higher end 6x9’s have about as much flex as a traditional round cone. While it is true that most people will be going for low end to midrange components these speakers aren’t designed for the kind of power that’s going to flex their cones anyways. Sure if you want to throw a true 100W to them you gonna have issues if you don’t set the crossover correctly…but that’s an install issue more than faulty product.

scotch wrote:
Linear excursion is the most important aspect of a speaker.


This isn’t true at all. There are many more factors that are more important than X-max. X-max is actualy one of the lesser in importance.

scotch wrote:
and 6x9's start to flex almost immediately.


And you, of course, have solid written proof of this from a reputable source such as a dumax machine? Or is this from a speaker ad? Using rigid materials lessens the cone’s tendency to break up and is plentiful in most speaker systems. Yes, again, if your buying $30 speakers your gonna get $30 sound…but that goes with round speakers too. Will they break up before a round will? Probably…almost immediately? Only the cheapest of the cheap.

scotch wrote:
As a speaker starts to flex out of shape, you loose tonal clarity, and soon you get distortion. Also, you can't make as much noise, because the speaker won't extend as much. The coil starts to move out of the sweet spot in the Magnetic suspension, and you get distortion and less volume.


Cone breakup sounds like shit. But it has nothing to do with the amount of excursion a speaker has or where the coil is sitting in the flux. All speakers will have the coil move out of the magnetic gap. No way around it. You can use different coil technologies to help compensate (xBl^2, LMT, split coil etc…) for it but it will happen. This is not a “flaw’ of the 6x9 design. It’s inherent in all speaker designs (planar are another story…)

scotch wrote:
If you ever look at those crazy spl woofers, you'll notice that they are made for extreme excursion.


Looking at a Cerwin Vega Stroker 15. One of the best SPL subs made (and still competitive) and I believe it’s x-max is less than ¾ of an inch. X-max isn't the end all parameter. Yes most subs (not just SPL) are getting pretty radical excursion. It's not the only thing making them loud.

scotch wrote:
some can extend six or eight inches out from center.


Of course you also have a link to this wonder sub that touts 4” to 6” more than the best subwoofers out there right? Verified again and not some advertising campaign for Audiobahn right? Parthenon architecture is one of the only designs that I know that can accomplish this…and they aren’t making SPL subs from them….


scotch wrote:
The only good speaker out there that isn't round is the kicker


Which is also touted as one of the worst sounding speakers on the planet. It’s higher SPL comes from an increase in Vd and not from excursion BTW…the Solo X doesn’t even have that much compared to many high end subwoofers out there…certainly not even close to the 6”-8” xmax you say is common among SPL subs. They also require a ton of power. Flat frequency response from squares requires huge enclosures. Tonality is beyond help.

scotch wrote:
It has massive re-enforcements, the spider is huge and there's two of them.


They had to add more reinforcement to it to stop the cones from breaking up (tonally) more than they already do. This of course adds cone mass (Mms) and hinders it’s overall SPL potential…unless you make it so that it can take boatloads of power by using a larger coil…increasing Mms again. Dual spiders are nothing special either… pretty common and many subs have more. Kicker uses much more overbuilding to keep it’s inherently bad design together. (by using a square cone with inherent stress risers rather than a conventional round) They have more cone breakup than rounds and even more than an oval…such as a 6x9.

scotch wrote:
Guess I have to much time on my hands.


Take that time…read about how speakers and their parameters work. Don’t post such nonsense again.


PS...i don't like 6x9's

_________________
LNLC Founding Member

FAKE FRIENDS: Never ask for food.
REAL FRIENDS: Is the reason you have no food.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 7:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
First of all WOW! Foul language, insults, and blatant attacks on my knowledge base. Going a little far for a moderator don't you think?

Second, if you really want to know, I will PM you with my work website and email. It has a lot of info on me, and what I do for a living. I am an acoustical engineer, that has done everything from designing buildings at airports (to tolerate the sound of planes all day), to even (yes) designing speakers for audio companies. It infuriates me that I have to prove all the pertinent info about myself, regarding a simple post on speakers. If you were anyone other than the moderator of this page, i would tell you to go to hell.

Third, linear excursion is the only important thing in a speaker design. Period. Any first year engineering student will tell you that if a speaker coil can not move straight inside the magnet gap, you get distortion. The leading cause of this is flex in the cone, and or surround. The second those tolerances change the voice coil will not react correctly to the magnetic field that it is suspended in. The result is less, and/or uneven movement. Nothing, absolutely nothing, contributes more to distortion than this.

Fourth, the recent square speakers from Kicker, while not the best sounding speakers in the world, where used as an example of what extents you have to go to, to make a square speaker work. You proved my point. The surround is designed to flex in a way that TRIES to keep the cone from flexing.

Fifth, in the real world, watts have nothing to do with how these speakers and amps sound, and/or work. I run a "small" A/D/S 60 watts per channel; six channel amp. But guess what, It pulls a full 240 amps at full load. Do the math. Speakers and amps are either under rated (expensive/competition) or over rated (Most everything else). A speaker that advertises 100watts, usually can't handle that. Maybe at peak loads for tenths of a second, but usually not even then.

Sixth, the design of a 6x9 causes very uneven stress on the cone. We already know what happens then.

Seventh, Go to Audio Video Interiors; Car Audio Design; Hell even Lowrider Magazine has a tech article on "xmax". Now, my CV facts are a little fuzzy, but I think caraudio moved the front spider clamp on that speaker forward 3/4" and managed a full six inches of xmax.

Finally, I wasn't trying to get into some strange argument regarding speaker design. You posted no facts, no tech info, nothing. You can't argue with someone by going, "nanana you don't know what your talking about"

Now I'm going back and I'm going to see what i can learn about beefing this car up. The whole reason I'm here. Don't know that much about what's possible with this little car.

Starting to feel a little unsure about this site now though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 7:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
One more thing, xmax isn't the same thing as linear excursion. Read up on it.

Also, a kicker isn't a true solo-baric. That actually means something. Just like iso-baric, para; etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 7:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
Oh and for home speakers, check out Sun, and Madrigal. Very good, I've worked for both, and I think that I'm on both websites. Sun is a small home sub that has eight (8) inches of cone excursion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 10:24 am 
Offline
King of Pompous
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 4:22 pm
Posts: 5596
Location: Ottawa ONT.
scotch wrote:
First of all WOW! Foul language


Yeah…I was kinda surprised at that too…the filter should have caught those words words and make them a little more harmless…..my bad.

scotch wrote:
and blatant attacks on my knowledge base


If your gonna post crap like that on a public forum for everybody to see…expect people to call you out on it. I (and many others on another forum having fun with this thread) stand by what I said. Your knowledge base is awful. Read some more…your not getting it.

scotch wrote:
It infuriates me that I have to prove all the pertinent info about myself, regarding a simple post on speakers.


I didn’t ask you to prove any information about yourself. The lack of knowledge in your post was all the proof anybody needed. Yes…it was a simple post about speakers…you choose to answer with faulty logic/information and I choose to reply to it. That’s how a forum works…get used to it.

scotch wrote:
If you were anyone other than the moderator of this page, i would tell you to go to hell.


Go ahead. Not I or anybody else is gonna ban you for telling me off. I can take it…but you have to have solid information to back your claims..you have none….

scotch wrote:
Third, linear excursion is the only important thing in a speaker design. Period. Any first year engineering student will tell you that if a speaker coil can not move straight inside the magnet gap, you get distortion.



Xmax

Max linear excursion, usually calculated as abs(Hc-Hg)/2, and sometimes multiplied by a factor (1.15 or 0.87, depending on how much distortion is accepted). What you are talking about is Xlim…either way…it still isn’t the most important parameter.

Xlim

This is the limit of excursion that will cause damage to the driver.

Apparently a first year engineering student understands the parameters a we bit better than yourself as well. There is so much more to it....

scotch wrote:
Fourth, the recent square speakers from Kicker, while not the best sounding speakers in the world,


scotch wrote:
The only good speaker out there that isn't round is the kicker,


Make up your mind then. Is it good or isn’t it….

scotch wrote:
where used as an example of what extents you have to go to, to make a square speaker work. You proved my point. The surround is designed to flex in a way that TRIES to keep the cone from flexing.


Which is because of an inherently poor design. I didn’t prove your point. I disproved your point…it isn’t a good speaker. You say it is…

scotch wrote:
Fifth, in the real world, watts have nothing to do with how these speakers and amps sound, and/or work.


Never said they did. Read what I said…they need more power to get them to the high SPL that they can do…because of Mms (among other things) being so great…I won’t give the definition…you’re an engineer..you already know what it means :jerkit:.

scotch wrote:
I run a "small" A/D/S 60 watts per channel; six channel amp. But guess what, It pulls a full 240 amps at full load. Do the math.


Hmmmm..your amp is about 10% efficient? What ADS is this…I’m curious…I’ve owned a few…never realized it had enough draw to shut down just about every OEM electrical system out there….I guess that’s how they marketed them back then…


scotch wrote:
Sixth, the design of a 6x9 causes very uneven stress on the cone. We already know what happens then.


This is for one of the guys on the other forum. He’d like you to expand on this phenomenom. Please make it as funny as your other comments.

scotch wrote:
Seventh, Go to Audio Video Interiors; Car Audio Design; Hell even Lowrider Magazine has a tech article on "xmax". Now, my CV facts are a little fuzzy, but I think caraudio moved the front spider clamp on that speaker forward 3/4" and managed a full six inches of xmax.


Not even close. The spider would rip out long before the halfway mark to that number. I already told you this. Even the new Stroker doesn’t come close to your number…here’s from the CV site

The new Stroker epitomizes high-output, high-performance subwoofers and has a linear operating range to an incredible 29mm in each direction.

Do the math with me now….that equals 1.141732283 inches. Hope I gave you enough significant digits…being an engineer and all…..it’s Xlim BTW is a little over 2” peak to peak….nowhere near 6"…nowhere near 3"….

scotch wrote:
Finally, I wasn't trying to get into some strange argument regarding speaker design. You posted no facts, no tech info, nothing. You can't argue with someone by going, "nanana you don't know what your talking about"


Ahem…I asked for facts from you…you haven’t gotten one thing right yet….I provided you with plenty of facts about CV’s excursion…Kicker’s inherently poor design….how cone breakup and excursion limiting aren’t related in the way you think it is….SPL subs aren’t solely high excursion beasts (hence the stroker)….I could add more…but you don’t get the simplest of concepts…WTF would I go indepth with you about it?

scotch wrote:
Starting to feel a little unsure about this site now though.


Why? Because somebody called you out on a statement and showed you how flawed your logic is? You’ll need a thicker skin than that. If you show me how wrong I am I'm not gonna get all pissy and tell you I'm an engineer and that's how I know all this yadda yadda either.....

scotch wrote:
One more thing, xmax isn't the same thing as linear excursion. Read up on it.


I’ll quote it again for you so that you don’t fail your freshman exam…this is from a couple of guys called A. N. Thiele and Richard Small. Ever hear of them?


Thiele/Small wrote:
Xmax- Short for Maximum Linear Excursion.


Did you see the linear part in that statement?

Thiele/Small wrote:
Xmax- Short for Maximum Linear Excursion.


Did you see it that time?

scotch wrote:
Also, a kicker isn't a true solo-baric. That actually means something. Just like iso-baric, para; etc.


Never said it was…just calling the subwoofer by it’s given name…Solobaric…SoloX.

scotch wrote:
Oh and for home speakers, check out Sun, and Madrigal. Very good, I've worked for both, and I think that I'm on both websites. Sun is a small home sub that has eight ( inches of cone excursion.


Well I’m familiar with Sun Audio from Japan…but they make tube amps. Madrigal/Levinson makes some fine products…you sure you weren’t in shipping and receiving though? Your knowledge of audio electronics/engineering hasn’t convinced me or a few others yet. Perhaps you meant to say that you worked at Sunfire Audio? They make a high excursion 8” and 10” subwoofer that runs off a 2700W amp…nope…couldn’t be there either…they only have 2.35” Peak to Peak. The only guy on that site was Bob Carver IIRC.


Anyways..this has been fun but I think I’m done with it. Nice having a little chit chat with you though…..are you from Jamaica by any chance?

_________________
LNLC Founding Member

FAKE FRIENDS: Never ask for food.
REAL FRIENDS: Is the reason you have no food.


Last edited by m on Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:04 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:31 am 
Offline
King of Pompous
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 4:22 pm
Posts: 5596
Location: Ottawa ONT.
Quick question for one of the guys...

KU40 wrote:
ask him just what about the square kicker's surround makes it able to keep the cone from flexing.



Thanks

_________________
LNLC Founding Member

FAKE FRIENDS: Never ask for food.
REAL FRIENDS: Is the reason you have no food.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:35 pm 
Offline
Suzuki Elder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 12:47 pm
Posts: 11672
Location: columbus, ohio
don't make me open this can of whoopass on ya'! :lol:

_________________
1991 Blue Geo Metro Convertible highly modified 1.0L Turbo3 5 spd. - 1991 Red Geo Metro Convertible customized with a Twincam 5 spd.

My Turbo3 Project
My Cardomain Page -Ol' Blue
My YouTube Channel
My Photo Gallery
SAAB Sonett II


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 1:02 pm 
Offline
King of Pompous
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 4:22 pm
Posts: 5596
Location: Ottawa ONT.
t3 ragtop wrote:
don't make me open this can of whoopass on ya'! :lol:


On me?


What could you possibly mean...yes...I used some generalization...but you know I can be specific if I want to be :P.

_________________
LNLC Founding Member

FAKE FRIENDS: Never ask for food.
REAL FRIENDS: Is the reason you have no food.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 5:29 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2003 4:16 am
Posts: 8042
Location: Ontario, Canada
This is awesome. m, thanks for doing all the hard work, and saving me from having to do it.
The best thing about the 6X9 is the shape, and its effect on the strength, and sound output. Round is OK, but hardly ideal.
Don't get me started... :D

_________________
Contact 3tech: g10pro@rocketmail.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:39 pm 
Offline
Suzuki Elder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 12:47 pm
Posts: 11672
Location: columbus, ohio
t3 ragtop wrote:
don't make me open this can of whoopass on ya'! :lol:


m,

your the one kicking butt and taking names in this thread! :lol:

i guess that i'll just pack up the nakamichi 6 x 9s and put them in the trash now that i know they flex and sound like a$$. :roll: the silk dome tweeters that came with them are probably junk, too, since they have no xmax to speak of.

_________________
1991 Blue Geo Metro Convertible highly modified 1.0L Turbo3 5 spd. - 1991 Red Geo Metro Convertible customized with a Twincam 5 spd.

My Turbo3 Project
My Cardomain Page -Ol' Blue
My YouTube Channel
My Photo Gallery
SAAB Sonett II


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
Ok. So I just read your answers, and I have to say, this is better than the Seinfeld rerun that's on right now.

Where to start? Well, evidently I'm a complete idiot. Right?

Linear excursion isn't Xmax. Xmax by definition is the amount of movement a speaker can handle before damage under a set limit of distortion. Linear excursion is the amount a speaker can move before ANY distortion. Speaker companies don't like to talk about that one. SO, I stand by my comment, for sound quality linear excursion is the most important thing in a speakers design. Not to be confused with linear response, which is a whole different thing again.

Oh and the definition of xmax, the width of the voice coil that extends beyond the front plate plus 15% or the impedance of the loudspeaker at Fs, used when measuring Qes and Qms. Not the same thing as linear excursion either. Also, it's very misleading. Xmax in the real world is usually less than a third of the numbers claimed by the speaker company. Usually sounds like crap when you get any closer. However under these "DB Drag" conditions that everyone seems so obsessed with, that doesn't matter. Get up to 140Db or higher, and there's no real "listening" to it. Xmech is expressed by us at Stork SWL as the lowest of four potential failure condition measurements times 2: Spider crashing on top plate; Voice coil bottoming on back plate; Voice coil coming out of gap above core; Physical limitation of cone. Take the lowest of these measurements then multiply it by two. This gives a distance that describes the maximum mechanical movement of the cone. For the Stroker. The rear spider is attached 6.25" from the front of the top plate. The voice coil is seven inches long. It is sitting in a gap that is 13" from top plate to bottom. Under the "xmax", we actually only got 17MM*2. Our Xmech? Well, we never officially got one. We sent the Stroker pink noise, band limited from 20 Hz to 20 kHz and crest factor limited to six decibels (four to one peak to average power ratio) in free air, without an enclosure, for a period of eight hours, and the damn thing never fell apart. The stitching and glue is very strong in this speaker.

In response to Mms; the weight of the cone assembly plus the driver radiation mass load(the amount calculated in Vd) that the cone will have to move? in other words the total moving mass of a driver, including the small amount of air before and behind the cone. This is in response to how speakers can't handle the power ratings they advertise? Or was it in response to why "spl" speakers need so much power? Either way, it really doesn't have much real world affect on either. Sure a greater Mms will result in needing more power to move them, but in real world application, we're talking 1 or 2 watts. More under extreme situations, and it rises in direct proportion to the size of the speaker, but it doesn't have the affect you are implying. If you had quoted the BL (expressed in Tesla Meters, for those of you that are still convinced that I don't know what I'm talking about); or how the EIA's equation "S-426A" isn't even close to real world music reproduction, I would agree with you. But Mms? Come on man, step up to the plate.

The Kicker Square speaker. Um... I didn't say they were the best out there, you did implied I did. They're not bad, I've heard plenty that sounded just fine. They don't have a very linear response, and they break up rather easily, but I never said they were the end all be all of speakers. You tried to imply that I said that. In fact. I have two that I bought back in '95. I liked the fact that you could get decent sound out of a very small in-closer, well it was very small for the time, and they're still doing fine. I've had to replace the surround, the sun and usage made them fall apart, but they are far from the pieces of crap that you ar claiming.

"You're amp is about 10% efficient?" Come on man! Ohm's Law, I=E/R. The only thing I'm going to say, is that all the other guys claiming 20,000 WATTS couldn't have replaced their alternator either huh? They're all running with a small 60AMP Geo alt. Well.... They probably are. I think that about 90% of those guys are idiots.

OK. So on to the first thing I said. 6x9's are an inherently bad design. How about a few definitions for you.

Q Parameters Qms, Qes, and Qts are measurements related to the control of a transducer's suspension when it reaches the resonant frequency (Fs). The suspension must prevent any lateral motion that might allow the voice coil and pole to touch (this would destroy the loudspeaker). The suspension must also act like a shock absorber. Qms is a measurement of the control coming from the speaker's mechanical suspension system (the surround and spider). View these components like springs. Qes is a measurement of the control coming from the speaker's electrical suspension system (the voice coil and magnet). Opposing forces from the mechanical and electrical suspensions act to absorb shock. Qts is called the 'Total Q' of the driver and is derived from an equation where Qes is multiplied by Qms and the result is divided by the sum of the same.

Get all that people. What that means is that for a 6x9 the Q parameters are crap. Here's a little test. Go outside and look at your 6x9. Now, take your fingers and push the speaker in (or down). See how the Surround creases, and how with just a little pressure the cone flexes. That's because a 6x9's suspension is flawed. you can't get material to react the same way to pressure regardless of dimension. This means that the longer sides of a 6x9 starts to flex earlier than the short sides. Now I know what your going to post. That you can't make a material that reacts perfectly to pressure. Even in a round speaker. You're right, but the problem is exacerbated by the suspension design of a 6x9. The long sides start to flex very early in movement, they in turn transmit this flex to the shorter sides trying to compensate. This causes a breakdown of the most basic system in the speaker. The voice coil moves around in the gap in an unwanted way. The cone flex causes improper wave production, etc.. All parameters (Qms;Qes;Qts) are affected. Satisfied?

And to all you treble rebels out there running six packs on your back deck. Get a sub!

And Superfly; If 6x9's were optimized for performance, we would have them in everything. Home theaters; stereos; movie theaters. No body makes them except to put in cars. I'm not trying to be a dick, but They're just not a very good design. It's another example of how a marketing department has convinced a lot of people that there product is the thing to have.

Now M; If you want to be the only one posting here that knows anything about stereos, fine. I'll go. If you want to have real conversations about stereos with someone that knows a thing or two, cool. I can do that too. But this? Your saying that your dick is bigger, but you don't want to drop your pants.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
And T3, Come on. Don't jump on the piss on scotch bandwagon. That's a whole nother thing. As I'm sure you're aware.

And I wasn't the one to bring up Xmax and SPl. M was!

Jesus, I've waisted 30 minutes writing this stuff. I feel like I'm back in school again. :roll:

I'm going to bed. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 3:34 am 
Offline
Suzuki Elder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 12:47 pm
Posts: 11672
Location: columbus, ohio
scotch wrote:
And T3, Come on. Don't jump on the piss on scotch bandwagon. That's a whole nother thing. As I'm sure you're aware.


nah, i'll just ebay the nakamichi 6x9 component set, it ought to bring $75 or so from someone who doesn't know they're a flawed mechanical design. i'm not pissing on anybody. i'm just reading all this discussion with delight because almost nobody ever discusses the engineering aspects of speakers.

i understand what you're saying about the cone geometry interacting with the surround but from a subjective point of view, that might be the very thing that makes the 6x9 a good wide frequency driver. if you do a laser interferometry scan of the cone you can clearly see that the 6x9 has mechanical nodes in the cone that aren't present in round geometry drivers.

that whole drive towards pistonic motion in a speaker cone died in the industry a long time ago along with the flash in a pan honeycomb cones that sony and panasonic touted. it's more realistic to treat the cone as a quasi- planar mechanical assembly and design for that.

as far as your argument that the 6x9 was foisted off on mobile audio i have a shining example of home audio use - KEF. they made a great high end speaker based on 6x9 drivers and they were rated by stereo review as one of the smoothest 2 way speakers ever made.

i've owned lots of audiophile grade speakers, some of which employed driver technologies that were so off the wall they bordered on bizarre. i used a set of arc plasma tweeters that didn't even have cones. i still use a pair of speakers in my bedroom that have 2 round ribbons that form a center aperature for a truly odd tweeter. those have a high end so smooth i'll hate to lose the speakers to age.

still, i am enjoying the lively debate in this thread. i've actually read everything over several times while absorbing the technical jargon being tossed about.

_________________
1991 Blue Geo Metro Convertible highly modified 1.0L Turbo3 5 spd. - 1991 Red Geo Metro Convertible customized with a Twincam 5 spd.

My Turbo3 Project
My Cardomain Page -Ol' Blue
My YouTube Channel
My Photo Gallery
SAAB Sonett II


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 5:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:48 pm
Posts: 19
Location: houston
OK. Um... I can only hope that you where trying to be funny. But you snuck some things in there that actually make sense. So here goes.

Using a laser interferometry scan or a Scanning Fabry-Perot Interferometer (SFPI) on a speaker? Why? What could you possibly learn that would make any difference? I'm assuming that you aren't looking at this from a fracture mechanics point of view.

Mechanical nodes? OK!?

Sure the design of the 6x9 does allow it to have a wider frequency range than say a round 6. Not by much though. And not more than a 9 round.

No more research into pistonic motion drivers? Not that's just plan wrong.

Now KEF made some wonderful speakers. I have their 105.3's in my house. Their whole uni-q thing was great. However, just because they made a 6x9 doesn't mean anything. They were just trying to make money.

William Duddell did some wonderful designing. Some of those ribbon speakers sound great. I believe that a friend just got a set of marten logens off of ebay. Haven't heard those in years though.

Man here I am sitting at work all night, waiting for the ovens to switch over like some intern, and all I can think of doing is talking about this kind of stuff. :-P


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group