Quote:
|
I ignored the SDX15" results the first time looking over this data, looking only at the LMS, but now that I do, things get even more interesting. The 15" SDX, with its smaller voice coil and all, can outdo the TC2k from 25hz on up, and two can outdo the 18" LMS in the same frequency range for less money. That's pretty significant me thinks....I wonder why it doesn't suffer from nearly as much compression? It looks like it would be an excellent fit for a LLT, as it could really benefit from the additional clean headroom down low - that would make for a great sub. It would look to be a notch above a TC2k LLT performance wise.
|
Its the <25Hz performance that concerns me with the SDX. And since when have you or anyone else cared so much about >25Hz performance from a sub? Getting that has never been the hard part. Sure the pair of SDXs in 140liters edges out the single 5400 in 100liters from 31.5Hz to 80Hz, but wow, look at the 20Hz and below performance. The 5400 crushes it, with an average of 5.7dB more output; and that is with one CE-4000 vs the pair of amps for the twin SDX sub. So in reality, the pair doesn't outperform the LMS-5400 for less.
And you've seen the power compression magnitude measurements already? I didn't know Ilkka released them yet.
And there are a few differences between the tests in the fall and the ones in the spring. Fall, Ilkka used the CE4000 all around. Superior amp, as you know, the 2000 could've definitely used a more powerful amp in the spring. There is at least a 1000W difference between the CE4000 and the t.amp TA2400 MK-X used with the TC-2k. Something tells me that extra 1000W would bump up the TC-2000s CEA-2010 clean output results from the spring just a tad.
I'll still wait and see the full set of results. The CEA-2010 table isn't enough by itself for me to completely judge a sub. Its neat, but the individual threads tell the real and true story.