Subwoofer

[TheEAR]

JW,

Agreed,100% with what you said.

JL is using a platform they know,and with great results. Even if JL's woofer has only a 3" travel both ways,it is still a very high excursion unit.And the level of sub bass quality and quantity cannot be denied.Among the best

[brennyE]

I watched some excursion vids for the JL w7........INSANE!

that things looks like it could cause body limbs tear off without

warning at full tilt [:|]

[Jay481985]

I think you guys need to put the crack pipes down, take a depth breath and save what few brain cells you have left.

Ear-I agree that the woofer is a "variant" of the 13w7. I think it uses the same motor with some changes to the suspension and cone. JL makes the cone and suspension parts in-house, the rest is sourced. Don't get me wrong, I like this sub but it is a 13" and say what you will, a 13" has only ~1/2 the radiation area as an 18".

I looked at the TC Sounds 18". I would have bought it if I thought it made sense. For me it didn't. Fs is almost too low (14Hz). The result is a very, very inefficient driver. The inefficiency, coupled with the near stupid use of ferrite in the motor results in a 75lb driver. I chose the McCauley because it has a low Fs (19Hz) but uses Neo magnet material for a more managable 40lb driver. The higher Fs also means much better efficiency. In a large vented enclosure I can tune the vent to 20Hz. Thus maximum system efficiency and minimum cone excursion is acheived at 20Hz! So 3-4" cone excursions are not required to get the output. The downside is that the enclosure is the size of a refrigerator, not a big selling point.

TCSounds has the 4100 neo magnet and who says that a neodymnium flagship is not in the works?

[John Warren]

Good for them and while they play catch-up, I've purchased three 6174s.

[OneTwoMany]

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.

[John Warren]

c

[TheEAR]

Let there be peace . No wars because of woofers. []