DD haters

[UsAmpsFreak]

Staff turnover for assembly line work is always high regardless of what it is you are into. The work is tedious and gets real boring real quick, so this doesn't surprise me much at all. It is difficult to keep staff amused and in tune with what they are doing. If they are bored with doing what they do, that's when mistakes begin to happen. So even if a person has x hours of experience in assembly, defects still arise, and the best QC processes cannot catch every one.

You seem like you're knowledgable, any response to my post above? Thanks guys. I'm new here but a few years back was a very knowledgeable installer and enthusiast.

 

[mrogowski 5,000+ posts]

You seem like you're knowledgable, any response to my post above? Thanks guys. I'm new here but a few years back was a very knowledgeable installer and enthusiast.

I'm a bit dated with the latest and greatest so I'll let others chime in and help you out.

 

[n8skow 10+ year member]

I'm not sure the "6-months" number was an indicator of constant turnover - just at some point during my friends employment - they had a whole new group of people assembling their woofers.

The sloppy glue job isn't as worrisome to me as an apparent lack of caring by the QC person(s)... If I was looking at a woofer on a store shelf and it looked like it had been slapped together by a 5 year old - I'd definitely be reaching for a different product. This seems to be a recurring issue - not just on the woofer in the video - but heck - I remember a teammate of mine ordering a pair of the 9917's back in '03ish - and man those things looked raw and unpolished - I actually got metal splinters in my hand from the basket when we mounted them - ouch!... (thankfully they performed like we hoped - but they were far from from what I'd call 'beautiful' or refined.)

Requiring the addition of a CF dustcap sounds like a terrible bandaid - but an excellent 'upsale' opportunity for DD (it adds what, like another $40 to an already overpriced woofer?) Well played DD, well played... =)

Concerning the neo-upgrade - slapping a neo ring on the outer edge of an existing magnetic field seems like it would only increase the magnetic field on the positive stroke, but then what happens on the negative stroke? I'd love to see how one of these SC woofers perform on a Klippel analyzer - I'm suspecting a very lop-sided and non-linear moving mass from having an asymmetrical BL curve. I did read an article about an SPL competitor gaining 1.5-2 db going with the SC upgrade (and Jacob at Sundown seemed to concur it was likely to gain in SPL), which was interesting... but then I guess SPL isn't about being sounding good (though obviously a subjective experience).

Also on the SC topic (as it's applied on these 'upgrades' - not as a all-neo motor) also causes a higher impedance rise, meaning it's going to be more difficult to get power into the woofer - as well as a definable saddle-shaped response curve in terms of frequency reproduction.

I acknowledge the W7's are crazypriced as well - but at least they deliver on the quality end, both in build and musicality.

Would I pay what they want for them - no, but it's nice to know some companies out there still flaunt good craftsmanship. =)

Well it's certainly a testament to the douchebaggery of the company if they can't keep an employee more than 6 months. That being said, I'm quite confident that after about two 40 hour weeks just about anybody could assemble a woofer that won't fail. So long as they don't break I don't care how glue looks on the triple joint. I've seen uglier from most companies that build by hand.
I'd say that for a 600-700W woofer it's built up to the task. If you want a more rigid cone you can opt for CF (though I doubt it much matters in this application), and if you need more excursion this isn't the right platform plain and simple. The guy in the video said he reached x-max at 750W so that's about right.

I also question the effectiveness of the "supercharge" option until someone proves otherwise.

Worth 350$..... about as much as a W7 is worth 850$ but you're paying for the privilege of being able to act like an elitist snob to other people on internet forums. MSRP on DD stuff is typically a little over double what comparable product would cost from any other company.

 

[Slo_Ride 5,000+ posts]

I love Double D's! Never had a prob with Digital Designs either, just the rest of the market caught up and offer it for a better price.

 

[UsAmpsFreak]

I love Double D's! Never had a prob with Digital Designs either, just the rest of the market caught up and offer it for a better price.

That's cool man, fill me in on what other product is just as good for half the price and what you would go with if you had money to spend as your ultimate system within reason.

 

[hispls 5,000+ posts]

I don't have experience with DD so i can't speak to their service. I'm just now getting back into the swing of car audio as i've been out of it for about 5 years. I was a hardcore US Amps supporter back when they still built everything in Florida, the last system i had was Re Audio 15's with the md amps strapped on all 4 which is the system that my avatar is of. Before that i ran my favorite amp of all time the Usa 400X from them on some Kove Armageddons. I have a personal friend of mine now that i just found out works at DD now so i will definitely be studying their stuff to see what it's all about but i can say for sure that i'm liking what i see on their amps. Any direction from some long time car audio old school guys that actually know what they're talking about is very welcomed. Just trying to re-educate myself on what is the truly elite equipment today instead of what the word on the street is that is usually fairly misguided in my experience. I always chuckled when a guy would try to compare my 400X to amps that cost 300 dollars and had a sticker saying their claimed to be 2000 watts. That was in my circle of friends known as the WLS rating. "When lightening strikes" the power input it would do 2000 watts for 1/2 a second.....

RE still makes a good product. AFAIK all their amps are rated at double actual power, but they seem reliable anyway. Mmats still builds amps in Florida if you're looking to get performance built close to home.

I'm not sure the "6-months" number was an indicator of constant turnover - just at some point during my friends employment - they had a whole new group of people assembling their woofers.
The sloppy glue job isn't as worrisome to me as an apparent lack of caring by the QC person(s)... If I was looking at a woofer on a store shelf and it looked like it had been slapped together by a 5 year old - I'd definitely be reaching for a different product. This seems to be a recurring issue - not just on the woofer in the video - but heck - I remember a teammate of mine ordering a pair of the 9917's back in '03ish - and man those things looked raw and unpolished - I actually got metal splinters in my hand from the basket when we mounted them - ouch!... (thankfully they performed like we hoped - but they were far from from what I'd call 'beautiful' or refined.)

Requiring the addition of a CF dustcap sounds like a terrible bandaid - but an excellent 'upsale' opportunity for DD (it adds what, like another $40 to an already overpriced woofer?) Well played DD, well played... =)

Concerning the neo-upgrade - slapping a neo ring on the outer edge of an existing ferrite motor seems like it would only increase the magnetic field on the positive stroke, but then what happens on the negative stroke? I'd love to see how one of these SC woofers perform on a Klippel analyzer - I'm suspecting a very lop-sided and non-linear moving mass from having an asymmetrical BL curve. I did read an article about an SPL competitor gaining 1.5-2 db going with the SC upgrade (and Jacob at Sundown seemed to concur it was likely to gain in SPL), which was interesting... but then I guess SPL isn't about being sounding good (though obviously a subjective experience).

Also on the SC topic (as it's applied on these 'upgrades' - not as a all-neo motor) also causes a higher impedance rise, meaning it's going to be more difficult to get power into the woofer - as well as a definable saddle-shaped response curve in terms of frequency reproduction.

I acknowledge the W7's are crazypriced as well - but at least they deliver on the quality end, both in build and musicality.

Would I pay what they want for them - no, but it's nice to know some companies out there still flaunt good craftsmanship. =)

How rigid is the cone on that W7? Find me a SQ woofer with super rigid (heavy) cone (Tc Sounds aside). Of all the reasons you wouldn't use that DD woofer for SQ the cone materials would be way way down on the list. I've used some soft dustcaps and noticed no difference whatsoever. About the only time it really matters is if you're running upwards of 8K per sub or are into the 170 dB range and need the extra strength to keep from shredding cones.

Most of the hand built SPL marketed woofers have seen have ugly glue jobs.

 

[UsAmpsFreak]

RE still makes a good product. AFAIK all their amps are rated at double actual power, but they seem reliable anyway. Mmats still builds amps in Florida if you're looking to get performance built close to home.


How rigid is the cone on that W7? Find me a SQ woofer with super rigid (heavy) cone (Tc Sounds aside). Of all the reasons you wouldn't use that DD woofer for SQ the cone materials would be way way down on the list. I've used some soft dustcaps and noticed no difference whatsoever. About the only time it really matters is if you're running upwards of 8K per sub or are into the 170 dB range and need the extra strength to keep from shredding cones.

Most of the hand built SPL marketed woofers have seen have ugly glue jobs.

Nah, i'm well aware of MMAts and i never bought UsAmps because they were built close to home, they were just far superior to most brands which is why i loved them. So i'm just trying to find out what would be comparable to them in this day in age. Most people that hated on my amps back in those days were usually either jealous or couldn't afford them.

 

[n8skow 10+ year member]

Heavy materials are not the only way to make a rigid cone. The W7 gets it's cone strength from the shape (a deep 'W' shaped form) - not so much the material it made out of. The smooth parabolic dish you see on the face is actually a secondary cone for cosmetic appeal.

SQ oriented woofers with super rigid cones? Here's a few I could think of off the top of my head:

Polk Audio db series? (from the late 90's?) - the ones with the graphite composite cones...

Eclipse TI series (either aluminum or an aluminum composite, not sure)

SEAS and Elemental Designs also did some sort of composite metal cones at one time (may still?)

PPI Pro series (the original flat piston woofers, not the post-DEI junk)

Paper, as a cone material, is not the issue per se (it's a popular, inexpensive, and lightweight material) - it's the application of that material - and a floppy, deforming cone IS going to affect the quality of sound produced.

A paper cone 'can' also be a structural issue at far below than the power range or SPL levels you suggest. Case in point, the old 18" Strokers were known for creasing the cones on less that 3K - but admittedly, I would cite the shallowness of the cone as being the issue - not the material used.

Now I'm not suggesting people are tearing up cones on these little DD woofers - again - my point was for the same money, there's far better built woofers to be had.

How rigid is the cone on that W7? Find me a SQ woofer with super rigid (heavy) cone (Tc Sounds aside). Of all the reasons you wouldn't use that DD woofer for SQ the cone materials would be way way down on the list. I've used some soft dustcaps and noticed no difference whatsoever. About the only time it really matters is if you're running upwards of 8K per sub or are into the 170 dB range and need the extra strength to keep from shredding cones.Most of the hand built SPL marketed woofers have seen have ugly glue jobs.

 

[Timmy13091 10+ year member]

I'm not sure the "6-months" number was an indicator of constant turnover - just at some point during my friends employment - they had a whole new group of people assembling their woofers.
The sloppy glue job isn't as worrisome to me as an apparent lack of caring by the QC person(s)... If I was looking at a woofer on a store shelf and it looked like it had been slapped together by a 5 year old - I'd definitely be reaching for a different product. This seems to be a recurring issue - not just on the woofer in the video - but heck - I remember a teammate of mine ordering a pair of the 9917's back in '03ish - and man those things looked raw and unpolished - I actually got metal splinters in my hand from the basket when we mounted them - ouch!... (thankfully they performed like we hoped - but they were far from from what I'd call 'beautiful' or refined.)

Requiring the addition of a CF dustcap sounds like a terrible bandaid - but an excellent 'upsale' opportunity for DD (it adds what, like another $40 to an already overpriced woofer?) Well played DD, well played... =)

Concerning the neo-upgrade - slapping a neo ring on the outer edge of an existing ferrite motor seems like it would only increase the magnetic field on the positive stroke, but then what happens on the negative stroke? I'd love to see how one of these SC woofers perform on a Klippel analyzer - I'm suspecting a very lop-sided and non-linear moving mass from having an asymmetrical BL curve. I did read an article about an SPL competitor gaining 1.5-2 db going with the SC upgrade (and Jacob at Sundown seemed to concur it was likely to gain in SPL), which was interesting... but then I guess SPL isn't about being sounding good (though obviously a subjective experience).

Also on the SC topic (as it's applied on these 'upgrades' - not as a all-neo motor) also causes a higher impedance rise, meaning it's going to be more difficult to get power into the woofer - as well as a definable saddle-shaped response curve in terms of frequency reproduction.

I acknowledge the W7's are crazypriced as well - but at least they deliver on the quality end, both in build and musicality.

Would I pay what they want for them - no, but it's nice to know some companies out there still flaunt good craftsmanship. =)

Interesting .. From what I've read the neo cs option adds cone control and actually improves sq not the opposite ...

Not saying your wrong .. Just throwing that out there

 

[hispls 5,000+ posts]

Heavy materials are not the only way to make a rigid cone. The W7 gets it's cone strength from the shape (a deep 'W' shaped form) - not so much the material it made out of. The smooth parabolic dish you see on the face is actually a secondary cone for cosmetic appeal.
SQ oriented woofers with super rigid cones? Here's a few I could think of off the top of my head:

Polk Audio db series? (from the late 90's?) - the ones with the graphite composite cones...

Eclipse TI series (either aluminum or an aluminum composite, not sure)

SEAS and Elemental Designs also did some sort of composite metal cones at one time (may still?)

PPI Pro series (the original flat piston woofers, not the post-DEI junk)

Paper, as a cone material, is not the issue per se (it's a popular, inexpensive, and lightweight material) - it's the application of that material - and a floppy, deforming cone IS going to affect the quality of sound produced.

A paper cone 'can' also be a structural issue at far below than the power range or SPL levels you suggest. Case in point, the old 18" Strokers were known for creasing the cones on less that 3K - but admittedly, I would cite the shallowness of the cone as being the issue - not the material used.

Now I'm not suggesting people are tearing up cones on these little DD woofers - again - my point was for the same money, there's far better built woofers to be had.

Those 90's polks were crazy. I worked at a shop that sold Polk when they came out and we used to stand on them and kick them to show people how tough they were. I always thought those flat PPI's sounded like wet a$$ though.

Would totally agree there's better to be had for the money for any application (except feeling elite).

 

[LosIsATool 5,000+ posts]

I'm not sure the "6-months" number was an indicator of constant turnover - just at some point during my friends employment - they had a whole new group of people assembling their woofers.
The sloppy glue job isn't as worrisome to me as an apparent lack of caring by the QC person(s)... If I was looking at a woofer on a store shelf and it looked like it had been slapped together by a 5 year old - I'd definitely be reaching for a different product. This seems to be a recurring issue - not just on the woofer in the video - but heck - I remember a teammate of mine ordering a pair of the 9917's back in '03ish - and man those things looked raw and unpolished - I actually got metal splinters in my hand from the basket when we mounted them - ouch!... (thankfully they performed like we hoped - but they were far from from what I'd call 'beautiful' or refined.)

Requiring the addition of a CF dustcap sounds like a terrible bandaid - but an excellent 'upsale' opportunity for DD (it adds what, like another $40 to an already overpriced woofer?) Well played DD, well played... =)

Concerning the neo-upgrade - slapping a neo ring on the outer edge of an existing ferrite motor seems like it would only increase the magnetic field on the positive stroke, but then what happens on the negative stroke? I'd love to see how one of these SC woofers perform on a Klippel analyzer - I'm suspecting a very lop-sided and non-linear moving mass from having an asymmetrical BL curve. I did read an article about an SPL competitor gaining 1.5-2 db going with the SC upgrade (and Jacob at Sundown seemed to concur it was likely to gain in SPL), which was interesting... but then I guess SPL isn't about being sounding good (though obviously a subjective experience).Also on the SC topic (as it's applied on these 'upgrades' - not as a all-neo motor) also causes a higher impedance rise, meaning it's going to be more difficult to get power into the woofer - as well as a definable saddle-shaped response curve in terms of frequency reproduction.

I acknowledge the W7's are crazypriced as well - but at least they deliver on the quality end, both in build and musicality.

Would I pay what they want for them - no, but it's nice to know some companies out there still flaunt good craftsmanship. =)

The SC upgrade is a neo pole piece. It does not wrap around the magnet lol, it holds rise down bud

 

[n8skow 10+ year member]

I should of said 'on the outer edge of the existing magnetic field' instead (though technically the pole piece acts as part of the magnet, in the Y-axis)...

Thank you for the correction (late nite typing, lol)

Two different people I know locally running them have shown me they have a bigger impedance spike going from stock to SC woofers. Are you able to share a case where the there was a drop instead?

The SC upgrade is a neo pole piece. It does not wrap around the magnet lol, it holds rise down bud

 

[imghetto]

Who cares what they look like its about performance not cosmetics if you want pretty customise them or get something that looks "Pretty" generally u don't get performance from pretty...just sayin

 

[hispls 5,000+ posts]

The SC upgrade is a neo pole piece. It does not wrap around the magnet lol, it holds rise down bud

If the whole pole piece is neodymium I'll eat my hat. Also lower z-max with a stronger motor seems unusual. Any evidence?

 

[LosIsATool 5,000+ posts]

If the whole pole piece is neodymium I'll eat my hat. Also lower z-max with a stronger motor seems unusual. Any evidence?

Its the same thing Sundown does but instead of aluminum its neo. There was a drop in test done, Distortion was decereased at full excursion, and the amp clamped a lower imp. Thats how people are gaining close to 2db with it. I'm looking at super charging my set before I swap amps and I'll do a before and after.