I cannot answer the above question as I am not a professional audio guy, but i wanted to say that I rode with JohnnyBoy yesterday as I do every week sand these ROKKERS really do rock! You can put your hand in front of them and feel the sound. They get extremely loud without distorting with the Harley amp that comes on his CVO. Ear splittingly loud and CLEAR. He did more tests as well and I am sure when he has time will post the results for comparison with the Harley Boom speakers.

Man, Rokkers kick some serious awzz.

Drew

 

Loud and clear but how's the BASS?

 

2009blackpearl, you need to match the output of the amp/head driver to the speakers you use. Yes lower resistance does increase power, but using speakers that are not in design specification of whats driving them i.e., head unit and/or amplifier will place strain on the said unit.

OK: We did the filming and evaluation of the Rokkers in the same test senarios as the Booms. I am going to post my findings tomorrow as there are a lot of details I am going to cover. There were a few surprises with the J&M Rokkers, albeit, most likely only the discerning audio enthusiast will appreciate the details, but I promise to give detailed attention to a wide scope of audience. Talk to you guys tomorrow.

BOWA18: I'll have some good feedback for you tomorrow.

 

Johnny, did Dr. Vtwin put the foam in your fairing when they installed the speakers? If so, since the foam wasn't present when testing the Boom speakers it's not an apples to apples comparison. I know when I installed the reg. 7.25 speakers in my Ultra I first installed the foam in the fairing, put it back on to see if it improved the sound of the stock speakers and it definitely helped. Just sayin'

 

If the MoCo wanted the foam to be part of the their upgraded speaker package they would have included it like J&M did.
I don't know why anyone would install the J&M speakers, but skip the foam. Therefore I think it should be part of the test.
Trying to quantify just how much of a difference the foam makes by itself would a totally separate different test.

 

I disagree. The foam definitely enhances the sound so to make the speaker comparison fair, foam should have been present in both tests to make things equal.

 

My response to this is when you buy the MoCo, do you get the foam, NO. When you buy J&M, do you get the foam, YES. This is just an off the shelf comparison. Who in their right mind would buy MoCo and then buy J&M for the foam.

 

Not sure I'm following you but what I'm saying is you can get the foam to enhance the sound for around $35. If the foam is making the difference in the test then to be comparing the "speakers" equally the foam should be there for both. I don't know how the Booms compare with JM nor do I care (I have JM 7.25 with no plans to change)... just thought to claim that they're better without having things equal isn't necessarily 100% accurate. It's like comparing .22 rifles at 100 yards, one with open sights and one with a nice scope on it....obviously the one with the scope will give you a better pattern but to claim that the "rifle" itself is more accurate vs. the other one isn't exactly the whole truth.

 

All I can say is,...my buddy put in a aftermarket stereo and these new Rokkers, Man!,... is that thing L-O-U-D! no amp and the unit that drives-m is the Sony 930. It does sound good!
But I like Hawg-Wired. I've got the new 6.5" speakers (a pair) cumn and they will b here on Thursday! I bought the same radio for my bike, but will b pushn sum watts (amp) after I get my bike back together.
This thread is a good one!
X-cellent (non-bias) John-Boy,
Good Night Granpa
Good Night mary-Ellen
Good Night Jason

LOL!

 

OK HERE WE GO: This is going to take an hour or so here, so for those who have questions please wait till I'm completely through then I would be more than happy to answer any question. Once again, I'm not out here to sell J&M Rokkers, I'm just here to report my findings as compaired to the factory CVO speakers.

A couple of questions and PM's were sent to me that I will respond to now. The one gentleman was asking about the provided J&M foam and using said foam on the Booms. My answer to you is no, I did not evaluate the foam on the Booms. I can tell you that I did evaluate both the Rokkers and the Booms with the Roadglide fairing off and there were measureable differences between the two sets of speakers. Does the foam backing give the Rokkers an unfair advantage? I don't think so. I think the Rokker design specification requires a more sonically "dead" airspace to perform in its design spec. Would the Booms perform better with a foam insert such as the J&M? Maybe, but if the form did tighten up the bottom end, I would wonder what subtle characteristics would be taken away from the other end of the frequency spectrum. As you can tell from my tests and reviews last week, I found the Booms to be a great speaker. I have no problems with them.

Next I have had several PM's about the test music supplied from J&M. For you conspiracy theorist out there, I love a good story too, but to put this one to bed, NO J&M did not create a special disk that was "Super Mastered" to work better on the J&M's vs another product. I loaded a few of the J&M cuts into Protools along with my own versions of the cuts and both the modulations and phasings are neck to neck. There was some amplitude correction on a few of the cuts to have the "Loudness" reflect the characteristics of the whole CD, but it was minimun and every CD burning computer system does it.

Lastly to the gentleman that said using the XM radio would be a better test, well I respectfully beg to differ with you sir. If I had you in my studio and I played you your absolute favorite recording 2 times, once on CD and once on vinyl record, you hands down would choose the vinyl as the best reproduction. If I then dialed up the same recording on a satillite radio station and played it for you, you would tell me that I was purposly screwing with you. I won't get into why Vinyl records are sonically better than CD's here (trust me they are and for very specific reasons) but let me tell you that satallite radio was never intended to be as high quality as CD's, it just won't happen. Satallite Radio is there for convenience not quality. Without getting too involved here, because of bandwidth restrictions SAT Radio has to incorporate heavy compression algorithms in order to deliver the product. Most popular music produced from the 1980's thru today is mixed and mastered with tight mirrored imaging in the stereo spectrum and can be compressed and delivered via SAT Radio with average results, but if you want to really hear the limitations of Sat Radio, listen to recordings from the 1960's and the 1970's, mixed for vinyl, there awful. If you listen to some of the early Beatles recordings on Sat Radio, you can sometimes hear complete channel loss!!! CD's, albeit sonically limited too, are truely the way to go for evaluating mobile audio.

Going to take a break here, back in 10 minutes.