Quote:
Originally Posted by RL18
If you’ve been following along in this thread, which I guess you aren’t, the B&W underseats are 8ohm woofers. That’s nominal. So you’re sending them 40w each. You must know though that a speakers impedance changes constantly, some factors could be an open window, enclosure type and size, and it’ll change depending on the frequency it’s playing. Ive gone over all these things already in this thread. And great you have a vented enclosure you are already getting more out of them then we are since our enclosures are sealed. And Idk where you got the xmax numbers but I DOUBT its 10mm. A morel elate carbon mw9 doesn’t even have 10mm of xmax and it a MUCH better speaker for the job. And their Fs is exactly 46hz. Idk where you’re getting all this info but we already know just about everything there is to know about the b&w speakers. I’m still doing some testing with porting the underseats, and creating custom crossovers for the b&w midranges and morel m120n tweeters, but other than that we know just about everything we need to know.
|
Little bit more to this thread now with winisd speaker modeling. Here is earthquake sws8, b&w sub and morel elate carbon mw9. Morel has the worst response. Best is sws8, in same 10 liter enclosure.
But this is just one part of it, if I look at cone excursion the morel mw9 runs out of its xmax already at 60 watts. How about b&w sub? With a light guess of 7mm xmax, it runs out at 90 watts. Also aftermarket bmw product like audison apbmws8 has better response than mw9 and can handle 100 watts. And the sws 8x has enough xmax for 900 watts but other things won't handle that before the xmax is the limiting factor. Do you still think the morel mw9 will outperform b&w sub? I mean the difference is not huge, but it is clearly worse.