12" subs,idmax,flatline,alumapro,rsd,w6v2

[bdubs767]

All these results are my opinion. I had some others around me that have been in the car audio business for ~15 years and there thoughts were for the most part in synic with my own. Take that for what is worth. All boxes were built to manufactory specs and built with the same style of bracing. The amp used for the test was one half of the Phoenix Gold MS1000ta, its specs are...
250x2 @ 4ohms
500x2 @ 2ohms
1050x1 @ 4ohms
Car tested in Dodge Intrepid 2002. All subs were crossed at 80hz with a 30db slope off my alpine pxa h701. Speakers were dyn mw 160 and dyn md 100.





SUBWOOFERS REVEIWED
IDMAX 12d4 v.3
1.5 cu. ft sealed
Retail: $450
run @ 8ohms

What can I say, I have read all this hype about the sub through the forums over and over. looking at the sub lived up to it, it's build quality on this sub is amazing, and its looks o so sexy. Once I got it powered up it met all of that hype. The subwoofer was the smoothest sounding next to my old IDQ 15", but had a little more upmh to it. The bass dropped amazingly low, but yet recreated the high range 60hz-80hz incredibly well, and got incredibly loud off of only 500 watts. It is the type of woofer when you want can play seamlessly with your midbass and then when you get in those moods make your chest thump. Build quality on this sub is amazing, and its looks o so sexy.

JL W6v2 12"
1.4 cu ft. sealed
Retail: $400
run @ 8ohms

W6v2, another well hyped sub that I had heard in a few "not so great" install before, but I have to say when installed properly this sub impressed me. It played tight and blended with my mids great, the bass sounded as if it was upfront. It also dropped pretty low, but not with the authority of the IDMAX, FLATLINE, or RSd. Also didn’t quite have the output of the three other woofers I mentioned. But as a pure SQ woofer this would be at the top of my list.

Arc Audio Flatline 12D2
1.25 cu ft sealed
Retail: $500
run @ 4ohms

This sub to be honest disappointed me. It was the loudest sub out of the bunch most likely because it was run at 4 ohms obviously, but I felt it was lacking quite a bit. I feel that it wasn’t happy off the 1000 watts and that it wanted more, and the 50hz-80hz on this woofer was terrible, it was sounded like a sub and did not blend well with the mids. It was boomy and missed many notes that the other woofers were hitting. Under 50hz its response was about the same as the IDMAX, but the IDMAX at half the power sounded a little better and almost got as loud. My impression of this sub is an inefficient version of the IDMAX.

Alumapro Alcemey RX sq version 12D4 (newest version)
1.4 cu ft sealed
Retail:$375
run @ 8ohms

This sub was by far the best in the 60hz-80hz range. Sub was awesome up there, I previously said the other woofer blended seamlessly with the mids, well after this sub the others didnt compare. But 45hz on down I was disappointed with this sub, the output was very weak compared to the other woofers. IMO this sub reminded me a lot of Boston speakers or seas speakers, very neutral, and I think could make some on into that "neutral" sound would be extremely happy with this sub.

Phoenix Gold RSd12d
1.8 cu ft sealed
Retail:$170
run @ 8ohms

This sub, I had hanging around, from PG and figured why not add it in. It was the prototype model that went into production, thus no magnet boot and dust cap not labeled. Well when you look at this sub verus the other you almost laugh I put it into the test, and I was thinking the same thing. Any how I powered it up, and I WAS SHOCKED, to simply put it. This woofer was amazing, it output was neck and neck with the IDMAX, it was very tight in the 50hz-80hz range, and hit low with authority. The sub is in the same league as the other and was better then most all-round actually.


Since the subs were listened to all in one day and changed constantly throughout two weeks I think I can do a fair number rating. I will also add RF p1 12"(worst woofer I ever had), and jl w3v2 12" for people to have an idea where these subs lay.

On scales 1-10(1 as the lowest, 10 the highest)
50hz-80hz
Alumapro RX=10 (tight, extremely tight, and played every note)
IDMAX=8 (hit every note with uphm but not as tight pro and rsd)
RSd=8.5 (hit the notes very tight not as tight as the pro, but had a ti bit more uphm with the notes)
Flatline=4(Was not great, just your avg woofer)
w6v2=8(very similar response to IDMAX)
w3v2=4 (your avg woofer and to me little boomy)
p1=1.5 (p1 enough said)

20hz-50hz
Alumapro RX=5.5 (hit the notes just didnt have the outpute of the other woofer here)
IDMAX=9.5 (great down here hit all the notes, accurate, and hit em hard)
RSd=9.25 (right there with the MAX but was just barley a little behind)
Flatline=9(great down here but not quite as accurate as the max and rsd)
w6v2=7.5(accurate, but didnt have the output of the rsd max and flatline)
w3v2=5(decent down here but not in the league of the other woofers)
p1=1 (look above)

The winner of the bunch with no price involved would be the IDMAX and the RSd. When you look at price the RSd is hands down the winner. The max wins in build quality. The only difference in the woofers sonically is the RSd hits a little tighter and more neutral where as the IDMAX has a more of a robust sound. Which one would I choose many will ask well, the RSd it is less the 1/2 the cost of the MAX, and performs just as well so id go that route, but if prestige is your thing then go with the max.

fyi I ordered 2 RSd at the end of this test.

[3.5max6spd]

Nice review. What are the conditions in the trunk as far as dampening? Rear deck? Trunk lid? Music listened to?

[bdubs767]

two layers of none other then Raammat. Music listend to was mostly rock ranging from jimmy hendrix to green day to system of a down with mix of techno, hip-hop, and bass tester songs.

[ocuriel]

Great review. It's not everyday you get to read a comparison review on 4 incredible subs.

I'm surprised to hear bad things about the flat line. Never heard one myself, but everyone else swears by them. They do look sexy though.

[bdubs767]

Originally Posted by ocuriel

Great review. It's not everyday you get to read a comparison review on 4 incredible subs.

I'm surprised to hear bad things about the flat line. Never heard one myself, but everyone else swears by them. They do look sexy though.

Dont get me wrong, I think its a great sub, but the other subs that were tested, required less watts and sounded a little better. My feeling on the flatline is that it wanted more then the 1000watts I threw at it. If your looking at one Id say go with the max, takes less watts to get it going, and was much mroe accurate in the higher frequencys.

[legend94]

You have me wanting to try the new Alumapro
So are you saying the rsd is the new poor mans IDMax?
Here is a link to get them cheap
http://www.etronics.com/product.asp?...bname=403&CA=Y

[npdang]

Awesome review, I only wish we had more like this!

[xencloud]

Interesting about the RSD, it seems to be a little more sensitive, but only has 13.5m xmax and keeps up with the rest.....hmmmm

[bdubs767]

Originally Posted by xencloud

Interesting about the RSD, it seems to be a little more sensitive, but only has 13.5m xmax and keeps up with the rest.....hmmmm

RSd is the not the poor mans IDMAX, it performs right with it. It sensitivity is 90db better then the maxs 88db. I dropped the RSd down to 2 ohms with, about 1500 watts going to it on sine wave 20-45, and once the gains were agusted for no clipping it took them for 25 minutes straight, i gave up tryign to kill it. And the xmax is far more then 13.5mm the thing was ready to jump out of the box with 1500 watts. Pg's tech Errin keeling in tests before the line was realsed had one 12 off of 2000 watts and could not damage the sub. He was told by PG to kill the sub, and he couldnt do it off of 2000watts, the prior sub PG had the xenon he killed in 20 mintues. I can take a video of it if people would like of the excrusion fo the sub.

[bdubs767]

[quote=legend94]You have me wanting to try the new Alumapro
QUOTE]


the alumapro I fell in love with when blending with the mids, it was truly seemless. I honestly could not tell that I had a sub in the trunk, sounded as if it was all up front. Just wish it had more in the low end.

[dBassHz]

Originally Posted by bdubs767

the alumapro I fell in love with when blending with the mids, it was truly seemless. I honestly could not tell that I had a sub in the trunk, sounded as if it was all up front. Just wish it had more in the low end.

I too would like to try the alumapro subs... I also need one that can play low. -45-50Hz.

[legend94]

[quote=bdubs767]

Originally Posted by legend94

You have me wanting to try the new Alumapro
QUOTE]


the alumapro I fell in love with when blending with the mids, it was truly seemless. I honestly could not tell that I had a sub in the trunk, sounded as if it was all up front. Just wish it had more in the low end.

On a scale of 1-10, could you rate both the rsd and the alumapro on blending? What causes one sub to blend better than another?

[Rbsarve]

Have to second your findings on the RSd, they are really, really nice subs for the money.

[bdubs767]

[quote=legend94]

Originally Posted by bdubs767

On a scale of 1-10, could you rate both the rsd and the alumapro on blending? What causes one sub to blend better than another?

10 on th epro and 8.5 on rsd. The alumapro was more natural, punchier, and quicker. The RSd played the notes but with more umph which made you know you had a sub in the runk where as the pro just blended seemlessly, and I forogot I had a sub in the rear of the car, sounded as if it was upfront. Hope that helps.

[jearhart]

so is the production rsd the same as your proto or were there modifications when it went into production?

[xencloud]

awesome, I can't wait to see dang's data on the Rsd, seems like a great bargain sub so far

[bdubs767]

Originally Posted by jearhart

so is the production rsd the same as your proto or were there modifications when it went into production?

same as production models, just mine has no logo on the dust cap, magent boot, and I think it was made in Portland instead of mass produced in china.

[SQ_Bronco]

On the subs that blended well but lacked low end punch, like the alumapro, did you try boosting the low frequencies? Were they bottoming out, or just not playing as loudly down low as you would have liked? From your description it seems to fit into the category of midbass-heavy subs like the Illusion nd-12, idmax, ed 13ov2's, etc. A little bit of low-end eq does wonders for those subs imho. They roll off naturally fairly high but (with the exception of the nd12) they have plenty of xmax; you just have to tweak a bit to get them to give it to you

Also - and I'm not trying to be critical here, I'm just pointing out something I noticed- I think part of the problem with the flatline may have been that the box was way too big, especially with that much power. Your box was almost twice the size of the optimum box for that woofer-winisd says that .71 qtc is .7cf, and 1.25cf is .58 qtc. If you get a chance, you might want to try it again with a box in the .6-.9cf range to see if it improves the dynamics at all. I've never used one, so I can't say I have any reason to disagree with your findings, but they were interesting considering the other reviews it has gotten.

[bdubs767]

Originally Posted by SQ_Bronco

On the subs that blended well but lacked low end punch, like the alumapro, did you try boosting the low frequencies? Were they bottoming out, or just not playing as loudly down low as you would have liked? From your description it seems to fit into the category of midbass-heavy subs like the Illusion nd-12, idmax, ed 13ov2's, etc. A little bit of low-end eq does wonders for those subs imho. They roll off naturally fairly high but (with the exception of the nd12) they have plenty of xmax; you just have to tweak a bit to get them to give it to you

Also - and I'm not trying to be critical here, I'm just pointing out something I noticed- I think part of the problem with the flatline may have been that the box was way too big, especially with that much power. Your box was almost twice the size of the optimum box for that woofer-winisd says that .71 qtc is .7cf, and 1.25cf is .58 qtc. If you get a chance, you might want to try it again with a box in the .6-.9cf range to see if it improves the dynamics at all. I've never used one, so I can't say I have any reason to disagree with your findings, but they were interesting considering the other reviews it has gotten.

coudl be very right bout the flatline, I just went of off what each tech told me to do for the box size. And eqing I used zero of, I wanted to compare the sub naturaly, and yes eqing could bring up the low end on some of the subs.

[WLDock]

I would try out one of the RSd subs myself if the box requirements were not so large. The magazine review showed that they did not like that sub until it was put in the 1.8 cu ft box. Still, sounds like a nice budget sub for someone that has space to work with.

[Rbsarve]

Which magazine? CAE? Didn´t they just build the box according to the reccomendations from PG?
I agree that 1.8 is a lot these days, but i kinda like it, as it reminds my of my boxes of old...

[legend94]

anyone ordered a rsd yet?

[WLDock]

Originally Posted by Rbsarve

Which magazine? CAE? Didn´t they just build the box according to the reccomendations from PG?
I agree that 1.8 is a lot these days, but i kinda like it, as it reminds my of my boxes of old...

Yes! the CAE reveiw. Eric Holdaway tried a 1.2 cu ft but liked 1.8 much better. I think I remember reading on the forums somewhere that he thought the 1.8 sounded much better?

http://www.caraudiomag.com/testrepor...ort/index.html

Excerpts from the review:

"Switching to the pop/R&B artist Usher, I played the song "Simple Things." Listening to this track, I found a renewed appreciation for how much I like larger subwoofers. Bigger is almost always better. Bigger subs reproduce the deep stuff with more authority than smaller subs. With the RSd12, I heard notes and details that I haven't heard since I tested the JL Audio 12W6 and the Stroker Pro 15". At low, medium and at high volumes, the RSd12 was unstressed and sounded wonderful."
Score: 8/10

"Next, I played "Boxenkiller" from the Focal Demonstration Disc 4. The bass drum and bass guitar were reproduced tightly and with force. The RSd12 was very impressive sounding and I frequently reminded myself that it costs only $169.99. The RSd12 has some real gusto. I really like how smooth the frequency response sounded and that there was nothing pulling the imaging to the rear of the vehicle where I had the enclosure installed."
Score: 9/10

[Boring]

I'm very tempted to get the 10" RSD. I wonder if it'll be good in 10". Anyone has any experience with a 10" RSD?

[bdubs767]

Originally Posted by Boring

I'm very tempted to get the 10" RSD. I wonder if it'll be good in 10". Anyone has any experience with a 10" RSD?

I have two RSd10d and a RSd comp set sitting next to me right now just got em from PG this week...I dont think Ill ever get around to playing with them though, PM if your intersted in one I can let em go for dirt cheap