OneTwoMany

1. 10" TC Sounds LMS-4000<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Bad choice for a car unless you want a big box. This sub doest work well ported and really requires a large sealed box. If you want a sealed sub this is great, but expect to use at least 3 cubic feet for this guy 2. JL 8w7 or 10w7 Dont even consider the 8, total waste of money. But the 10" is a great driver. Its got adequate cone area for a 10 and a pretty beefy voice coil. Not quite as wide or as long as the LMS-4000 and its less layers so it wont handle as much power, but its more sensitive and can work in a smaller box because it got more BL product. 3. 10" Adire Audio Brahma Another good choice, but anticipate a large box, I believe the Brahma is linear under hung driver so it should have great SQ but not nearly as much throw as the LMS-4000 or JL 10W7. 4. 8" or 10" Ascendant Audio Assassin Certainly a step down in motor and voice coil. These will not have the output or displacement of the others, but probably sound great. Looks like Ascendant uses copper under the gap which is a great SQ feature on a sub-100 dollar driver. 5. Madison Dragon 18 or Executioner X 21 Dont know much about this hope that helped.

TC has been doing neodymium drivers for years man! Do a search for a TL1801SS for your ultimate neo pro driver. And here is a tip next time you build a subwoofer system: The efficiency of the system is going to be based on the BL product and box volume, not necessarily the SPL of the driver. High BL motors don't care about SPL because once you load it into a box, the box pressure domains by factors of dozen and dozens of times the moving mass. Your low BL drivers need a large box because its not an efficient motor. The tc motor is large so it "is" efficient. So just lookin at the numbers do do dee dum... The 6174 has a motor efficiency of 1.45 pounds of force per watt.The LMS-5400 has a motor efficiency of 2.9 pounds of force per watt, and thats linear The non-linear version of that driver is probably double that which would be more in line with the your non-linear 6174s Now, if you're going to do an IB or a very large box, then who cares about BL, just look at SPL, because there is no need to move anything other than that little cone, but if you want to make a "real" subwoofer, then you need motor, no way around it! JL Audio revamped these W7's because they needed more motor to make those boxes as small as they are. The old W7's were about 2.4 pounds per watt, the new ones probably closer to 3 or 3.5. BTW you can pull these numbers from T/S if you care to look up other drivers. Also dont get hung up on FS too much, thats a simple EQ thing Best of luck with your system! 3 18's regardless of brand, is nothing to shy from, that is some serious SPL John, and I hope none of this came out negative in anyway, I just wanted to make some points for you.

That is not a frequency response, that is a 10% THD measurement at discrete frequencies, and I'm not experienced enough to comment on it.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

What did i say it was?

I will not get into the whoile indutance BL issue, but here is a few simple facts the VC on the F112 is 2.8" long you can't get more than 2.8" p2p without a SHIT load of distortion, in fact you'll get more like 2.5 MAX usable, and the rest will sound like crap. That is just a simple fact! The VC on the RT12 is probably about that long too and it also uses a wide suspetion system like the JL driver. and it has more BL^2/Re the biggest factor as i said is one is sealed and one is vented. BIG advantage to the RT12 for sensitivty and low distortion because of this. The RT12 does not have to move as far to reach teh same level of bass down low. theear, stop comparing smaller subs to larger ones.. you know better. The RT10 is not the same motor as the RT12, why in the world did you buyt he 10? Compare the F110 to the RT10.. now we're talking!

This thread is really running over the Klipschs latest sub designs, I wouldnt count out the RT12-d against the 112 or even 13 for that matter. Sure it doest have as much system power at least from the basic numbers provided, but the RT-12D driver out matches both the 13 and 12W7 for BL product which means it has more motor! And unless its also a thin 2-layer vc like the W7s, it should be able to outclass both drivers for power handling even with a smaller vc diameter. Unless the HTW7 uses a copper coil too, and more layers, the RT12 should run with it for power handling if not beat it.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> However, I do suspect JL may have snuck in a copper coil for their HTW7 to make it perform better in that small box that is just my speculation. Now the notable thing about the RT12 is that its flat out going to kill at least the F113 around 20Hz, There is no way a sealed box can keep up with a ported box at Fb at least one like the RT12, and the RT 12 has some big passives which act as a huge port not some wimpy stuff lingering around these days. The RT12 sub is also a 13 driver so it technically has more surface area than the JL 12W7, more BL product and higher power handling if Im not mistaken, these things DO matter and when you add the fact that a vented box is going to kill a sealed box for output, then the only thing that the F112 has for it is a little more power.. big deal. I wouldnt count out the RT12 just yet, not until a formal and un subjective review can give us the facts. If I had to buy 2000 dollar DSP subwoofer, I wouldnt spend the extra money on the 12 Fathom just yet, I would stick with the Klipsch based on the numbers I have seen and my limited experience. Thats just my options. I wish an engineer would post in this thread and back up the RT12, I hope what I said was at least mostly accurate. Good job Klipsch, I hope all the new subs are as good as the RTs look to be! I will probably own one soon! For the price of that Gothom, I could own four!

I can't believe this thread went 2 pages without even seeing one recommendation for the Sub-10 or 12.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> if there is anything new or used that can beat the Sub-12 for 500 dollars, let me see it... The sub-12 destroys the RSW-10 RW-12 and RW-12d. More motor, more port area more volume, end of story.

The Bl for the W7 is around 17 Tm over the ~3 ohm impedance. the HTW7 may be a differenct coil but the motor is probably the same. There is a good chance the HTW7 is a copper coil which would give it a little more BL over the 12/13W7<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> The sensitivity does not matter so much in a box, because many other factors dominate the output, but you certainly want to maximize cone area and minimize mass. The W7 does use an overroll surround so they get back some of the cone area from the fat one they have because it covers the edge of the basket. Both the W7 and LMS-5400 are awesome drivers, and they among the few that actually use a larger 10" suspension system and custom frames. Many subwoofers these days simply use older stock parts and claim high excursion but really can't overcome many compliance linearity issues. The inductance value for the W7 is actually very low, it uses half as much coil as a standard coil and the poll piece is drilled out. They claim is some sort of cooling deal but this also will lower inductance because there is less steel for the coil to see. This is partly why its such a great design. The LMS-5400 also shows characteristics of low inductance with its extra wide gap from the linear coil, the T/S seem to back that up. As regards to the new XXX, it looks impressive and they do use a wide suspension, I think its 10", but you can't get a linear 54 mm out of that unless its some new crazy design I have not seen. The new XXX will also not top the LMS-5400 or 13W7 cone area being equal. The BL product is less than both and less than twice that of the LMS driver, the sensitivity is also much lower. Formal tests should be done, I may be wrong. Who knows....

Well, the W7's are well engineered, but are approaching and end of a lifecycle. The LMS-5400 has a longer and wider voice coil than the 13W7 and it has a more windings for higher power handling and the driver itself has about 75% more BL product too. Not to mention its a total linear driver on top of that for even lower distortion. The LMS-5400 comes in a 12" and should outclass the 13W7 with even less cone area.

That is simply a matter of gain, The RT-12 would slaughter the RF-83's down low when cranked up.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Furthermore tests are all relative, so SPL numbers are more or less meaningless unless the same person tested them in the same exact way, and the test was not biased. Such things are rarely done because they are not easy to do. I trust Tom, he has been doing it longer than most anyone. The RT12 is a pretty good step up from the old RSW designs which had a lot of complications with deep bass due to an amplification issue. The RT12 can best an RSW-15 at 20hz by some asinine figure like 10dB or so. I think its also important to point out that the RT12 is not a 12" driver, Its a 13 and I'm not surprised it can take the sealed F12 in a pissing contest. I guess that begs the question, is the RT10 really an 11? Yes it is.

You can't because many of these problems pertained to the actual driver, amp and passives radiators, not just the box. Production was ceased for a good reason.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Use those.. same motor, similar cone, same surround, same coil (or very similar coil), however the TC-1000 only uses one spider so its more compliant, more efficient and have slightly lower Q. http://www.tcsounds.com/tc1000.htm<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I think the biggest difference in the 12.3's is the lower DCR from the new coil to get more power form the amp. Certainly a great upgrade for the system, but the driver is really not much different as far as performance, especially when you consider that youll have a different amp anyway if this is a DIY project after all. Is it worth 99 bucks, thats up to you. I would say for peace of mind of having the latest gear, yes upgrade for sure, but for actual performance differences, borderline placebo unless you could measure it very carefully. Better midbass? Thats a matter of EQ, not really anything to do with the driver, unless the inductance is super high, which it was not.

That thing has nothing to do with TC Sounds. Re was bought out my US Amps not too long ago and all their prices sky rocketed. The 18" version of that driver is something like $2300 and the 12" is ~$1300.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Personally, I think those prices are unreasonable. And when you consider the fact the XXX is merely a 3" diameter voice coil / motor size, it seems a bit of a reach to ask that much for em. It is true that the vc happens to be extremely long which can lend to higher excursion, but greatly reduces efficiency as much of the electromagnetic field generated by the coil is outside the gap during excursion. They cheat this slightly by raising the gap height using a bevel that makes the gap very tall to cover the long coil, but the side effect is a Bl curve that is less linear than before, and if RE is telling its customers they can do 54mm one way, well, I certainly doubt the quality of those 54mms, at least the ones beyond about ~25. Secondly the extra coil adds a great deal of mass to already extremely heavy cone assembly, this is the biggest flaw imo. This is why you need a 4000 watt amp to driver the speaker with any kind of respectable results. Supposedly it can reach over 50mm excursion one way, I don't doubt it can, but at what kind of distortion and linearly is unknown. RE has yet to even release T/S measurements for this driver much less anything respectable like a Klippel report. I have seen what RE has done in the past and Im not impressed at all. They use very old parts desgined a long time ago on drivers they still sell today and for some reason they are against porting the T-yoke. A design to increase the Bl by a very small amount at the cost of even more efficiency (so says my mentor). Granted the XXX looks like a big improvement, but I cant afford to test one myself at their new prices, lol.

Can someone ask a Klipsch engineer who is familiar with the model numbers. I think I got some prototypes today by mistake. I dont reconize these speakers anywhere from the Klispch site<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> They use dual reference 3" or 3.5" midrange and some kinda small horn tweeter. They come in a very tall large sealed enclosure that looks a lot like the RVX or SLX speakers. thanks Klipsch.

you said so...