its kinda scary, the recommended box is almost impossible to build becuase the sub is so bug & the box volume (gross cu ft) is only .9 cuft... the sub barely fits... LOL
Ive got one of those too (ID-Max)...was running IB in the Contour SVT....LOL.. now its sitting waiting for something else to go in... Along with a IDW-15, IDQ10, & 2 sets of ID Compv2 pro horns....IDX-24 & a pair of ID-31's. oh & then the mini cd-1/6,.5" component set in the tracer too.
I have one of the first 10 sets of the Pro Compv2's Eric every made & released. Been running Image for over 10 years.
And acutally the ID-Max 12" is "only" 8.25" deep & the SWX is 12.6" deep..
ID is actually an 11.75" woofer. 11.0" mounting hole... versus 12.3" & 11.9" hole for the alpine...
Same class of woofer with TOTALLY different parameters... the ID is an average size (.35 qts) enclosure woofer. where as the Alpine is a smaller enclosure woofer @ .63 qts... the ID would be better suited for IB installs, the Alpine would be great in smaller sealed & very small ported enclosures.
Originally posted by 2002GreyHD150 Ah... not quite my friend... close but not quite.
Ive got one of those too (ID-Max)...was running IB in the Contour SVT....LOL.. now its sitting waiting for something else to go in... Along with a IDW-15, IDQ10, & 2 sets of ID Compv2 pro horns....IDX-24 & a pair of ID-31's. oh & then the mini cd-1/6,.5" component set in the tracer too.
I have one of the first 10 sets of the Pro Compv2's Eric every made & released. Been running Image for over 10 years.
And acutally the ID-Max 12" is "only" 8.25" deep & the SWX is 12.6" deep..
ID is actually an 11.75" woofer. 11.0" mounting hole... versus 12.3" & 11.9" hole for the alpine...
Same class of woofer with TOTALLY different parameters... the ID is an average size (.35 qts) enclosure woofer. where as the Alpine is a smaller enclosure woofer @ .63 qts... the ID would be better suited for IB installs, the Alpine would be great in smaller sealed & very small ported enclosures.
I only wish the Alpine was available 2-2 ohm & 4-4ohm...
Rob W
What does the depth have to do with anything? If anything the ID woofer will have more room to perform due to the box being bigger because the box isn't taking up internal volume.. ?
I have seen those woofers, and as a whole.. about the only thing I would ever buy alpine is a deck.. after dealing with their amps.. I'm done. Their decks right now aren't too exciting either.. ? Glide touch? how about no.
Clarion came out with their 9255 again.. I want that thing BAD.
I've been very impressed with ID as a whole for many years.. and as we all know, speaker technology hasn't changed much in the last 5 years..
I forgot to say welcome to the audio Forum, forgive my manners.
I was making an off color joke about "size matters" with the title... everyone else got the joke.
you popped up with "ID Max > that" by which I gathered you were saying the ID Max was "greater than" that, and since the discussion was size, I simply restated the specs. As I usually do..
So if you meant "BETTER than"... then you really needed a different symbol. If I missunderstood your hierogliophics, then I do apologize.
I neither infered nor claimed a magic performance benefit to it being deep. Woofer displacment inside the enclosure has nothing to do with anything. It just is. You deal with woofer displacement like you deal with any other set of measurmeents... you make them fit.
"if anything the ID would have more room to perform...." I'm not sure where you were going with that... Its not like you are putting the ID in the same box as an Alpine, JL or any other competition level sub.The optimum sealed enclosure for the ID is almost .25 cu ft larger than the alpine. Like I said..you make the woofer fit in the enclosure it is made to go in. At these price points & performance levels, an installer is not looking to shove a round peg in a square hole. The electro/mechanical properties of the woofer dictate the enclosure. the ID likes more airspace. The basket is a net displacement that has to be dealt with. The Alpine (in this comparison) uses a slightly smaller enclosure. Its harder to cram the larger alpine into that small box. The JL w7 series is an even bigger challenge & they are smaller overall than the alpine, but need an even smaller enclosure.
Unfortunately Clarion can't take credit for the original 9255, great deck, but they had to pay Macintosh to develop the piece. I believe Macintosh still owns the rights to the chassis & CD-mechanism which is what makes that deck what it is. Also since it is the same chassis & mechanism in the 406 Mac HU (same one that is offered in the Ford GT). Interesting that they couldn't leave it alone & leave all the processing out. Hopefully the new version is more reliable than the originals. We sold a few back in the day, they seemed "fragile". I wonder if that Diecast fast plate is removeable? that would be interesting to lug around.. LOL
Can't really comment on your expereinces with Alpine (or any other brand)...I don't use Kenwood or Sony for my own vehicle, just my thing. But I am also the first to recommend a Kenwood HU for those that need what they offer. In my shop, Friends don't let friends buy anything from Sony any more. Since the C-90 & the entire Mobile ES line vaporized.. things in Sony land are scary... But baising brand preference over one product category is a little limiting. Clarion's ONLY piece I have ever considered buying is the 9255, honestly because Clarion DIDN"T make it.. again just my thing.
ID as a brand is an interesting little animal. Eric has kinda pigeon holed himself into a niche that is fizzling. the Horn Loaded driver rage is passing. Mainly because the rules for judging & the focus of the non-spl formats have become entirely glamour driven instead of sound quality driven. It makes me sick to think about The competitors who really shaped car audio as we know it today from a sound quality perspective, that are just lurking about in forums talking about the glory days of high end car audio, like some little hidden/cult club lower on the totem pole than techo-geeks from home audio who have $10,000 turn tables with no vinyl to play on them...
Speaker technology hasn't changed much in 50 years to be honest. All they do is keep reinventing baskets, magnet structures, & shapes.
The only new developments or improvements(specifically to car audio) I have witnessed of any consequence are neodynium(sp) magnets allowing for super shallow mounting & the application of Horn Loaded Compression drivers (HLCD's). & Horns are older in application than dynamic/cone drivers.. Again the technology hasnt really changed, as you said. Just a different application. A great example is Focal's Utopia Be's with the berylium tweeter cone materials & I believe neo magnet structures.
(ok I think I fixed all my typos now.. lol)
Rob W
Last edited by 2002GreyHD150; 11-01-2005 at 01:55 PM.
what needs 9"of depth @ a very small box?
now thats pimpin!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote