Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Varsity
Sealed vs. Ported Subwoofer Enclosures in Pro Audio
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="David Morison" data-source="post: 132109" data-attributes="member: 2076"><p>Re: Sealed vs. Ported Subwoofer Enclosures in Pro Audio</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>Hi Fred, hope you don’t mind a comment from JV….</p><p> </p><p>I don’t quite see it the same way (unless I’m misreading you, in which case my apologies…). You seem to be presenting it as an “either/or” situation, whereas the reality in most cases is probably a bit of both.</p><p> </p><p>I can’t think of any responsible designer who <em>wouldn’t</em> check whether or not a modelled response becomes excursion limited before reaching full power and then adjusting accordingly, which seems to be what happened in the linked thread.</p><p> </p><p>Specifically in the case of more basic, affordable drivers as in that thread, it’s almost inevitable that the max flat/smooth response results in at least one of A: an unfeasibly big box and/or B: running out of excursion at relatively low power*. So, what would be the benefit of going ahead and building that box? None really, IMO.</p><p> </p><p>So, the next step is to either change the driver for a more capable unit (almost certainly requiring throwing more money at the project) or adjusting the box size, tuning & processing to get a more practical outcome, as in that thread.</p><p> </p><p>HTH,</p><p>David. </p><p> </p><p>*From the assumptions: Lower budget>smaller/weaker magnet>lower BL>higher Qes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="David Morison, post: 132109, member: 2076"] Re: Sealed vs. Ported Subwoofer Enclosures in Pro Audio Hi Fred, hope you don’t mind a comment from JV…. I don’t quite see it the same way (unless I’m misreading you, in which case my apologies…). You seem to be presenting it as an “either/or” situation, whereas the reality in most cases is probably a bit of both. I can’t think of any responsible designer who [I]wouldn’t[/I] check whether or not a modelled response becomes excursion limited before reaching full power and then adjusting accordingly, which seems to be what happened in the linked thread. Specifically in the case of more basic, affordable drivers as in that thread, it’s almost inevitable that the max flat/smooth response results in at least one of A: an unfeasibly big box and/or B: running out of excursion at relatively low power*. So, what would be the benefit of going ahead and building that box? None really, IMO. So, the next step is to either change the driver for a more capable unit (almost certainly requiring throwing more money at the project) or adjusting the box size, tuning & processing to get a more practical outcome, as in that thread. HTH, David. *From the assumptions: Lower budget>smaller/weaker magnet>lower BL>higher Qes. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Varsity
Sealed vs. Ported Subwoofer Enclosures in Pro Audio
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!