box rise question

[LBC]

U mad, bro?













he mad.

don't bro me... if you don't know me

[bangintahoe]

I never really understood box rise

[skylineTT]

I never really understood box rise

Hardly anybody does.

[clickclickw00t]

Hardly anybody does.

I thought box rise was how high you raise the box off the floor of your car. needless to say after my local audio shop had a good laugh at my expense, I learned what it really was.

[Dirtrider4eva]

Impedence rise varies with frequency. At some freqs it actually drops. The reason we call it "impedence rise" is because we only measure it for SPL burps and only at our burp frequency. It means absolutely nothing for most of you on this site who play music through your stereo. It will cause you to damage your equipment.
Impedence rise does not have a predictable pattern or formula to calculate it because as stated, there are quite a few things that can manipulate it.

your impedence will never Drop below the subs wiring however.

[LBC]

your impedence will never Drop below the subs wiring however.

Please don't say things as truth if you don't know for sure. I know you thought you knew better but you didn't.
"This proves to be very important, since a loudspeaker with a nominal impedance of 4 ohms will sometimes have an actual impedance of 1 ohm or less." -Jacob Fuller of Sundown Audio

Why "daily" systems should not count on impedance rise - SSA Car Audio Forum

[keep_hope_alive]

Thanks for your opinion. The fact still remains that there is nothing available that can accurately predict impedence rise. The example provided was wrong. If you relied on it and went full tilt for spl you would blow your amplifier. Testing and "getting lucky" would be COMPLETELY required given his examples. So you defeated yourself with your argument and your "vs" statement and conclusion was biased and your assessment of maturity shows your lack thereof since I have done nothing immature. You provided no evidence or factual information which by your definition means you're wrong and should butt out. What you just said was that even though his data proved him wrong, and I showed that, that since I didn't provide any evidence (i didn't need to because his supported my argument) that I'm still wrong and he's right.

i just came back to this thread. you think people should just believe what you say regardless of proof. i don't do that for anyone. neither does the scientific community.

you make statements as fact without supporting information. you may know and are just too lazy to back it up, or you may just be regurgitating information you don't understand. regardless, i have decided to ignore all of your statements until i see a reason to do otherwise.

can box rise be calculated? of course it can. it's just physics. i could write a program to do that if i wanted to spend the time, which i don't, and neither does anyone else.

[thevic24]

your impedence will never Drop below the subs wiring however.

Umm...

My Infinity Kappa 9 home speakers are wired/rest at 4 ohms.....
they are called amp killers because they are known to dip well below 2 ohms...especially if put into extended mode....

[LBC]

i just came back to this thread. you think people should just believe what you say regardless of proof. i don't do that for anyone. neither does the scientific community.

you make statements as fact without supporting information. you may know and are just too lazy to back it up, or you may just be regurgitating information you don't understand. regardless, i have decided to ignore all of your statements until i see a reason to do otherwise.

can box rise be calculated? of course it can. it's just physics. i could write a program to do that if i wanted to spend the time, which i don't, and neither does anyone else.

Your idiotic ad hominem attacks do not phase me. Don't think because you're a mod on a dead forum that you deserve any sort of respect. I supported what I said. I simply used someone else's "Facts" to do it. You are criticizing me because you either do not understand what was said, or you have chosen to ignore it. Either way that is your fault and not mine. you called me lazy and wrong and said it's possible, but that you're too lazy to do it. You're nothing more than an arrogant hypocrite. I'm glad you'll be ignoring me.... so you don't continue to make yourself look foolish. Way to dig up and old thread hoping I wouldn't see your ignorance and continue to show you for what you are.

To sum up what he said, "you said there are no programs that accurately calculate rise in a real world install.... that's true but there could be, and I could even write it... but I won't and neither will anyone else". Thus confirming that what I said is true. LMAO.

[murph]

One time my box rose a WHOLE INCH! The best way to stop it is with L brackets.

[keep_hope_alive]

I simply used someone else's "Facts" to do it.

you may just be regurgitating information you don't understand.

thank you for admitting it.

if i didn't want you to see my response, i wouldn't have quoted you to get your attention.

[keep_hope_alive]

Impedence rise does not have a predictable pattern or formula to calculate it because as stated, there are quite a few things that can manipulate it.

this is the main argument you have maintained - that it cannot be calculated.

you feel this way because you don't understand it. you can't calculate something you don't understand.

physics is predictable and can be represented with mathematics.

solving wave equations (differential equations) is time consuming.

no one cares that much about car audio to predict something that can be measured easily.

just because no one bothers to calculate something doesn't mean it cannot be modeled accurately.

my summary is that box rise is better measured than calculated - though you can predict it with enough effort.

[LBC]

thank you for admitting it.

if i didn't want you to see my response, i wouldn't have quoted you to get your attention.

Your quoted statements didn't prove what you wanted them to prove. You claimed I provided no facts. I made it clear that since he provided "facts" that proved him wrong, there was no need for me to do so. Please try to pay attention from now on.
You waited a month or so to do it, after I showed no activity. It's safe to say you didn't want to get my attention.

[LBC]

this is the main argument you have maintained - that it cannot be calculated.

you feel this way because you don't understand it. you can't calculate something you don't understand.

physics is predictable and can be represented with mathematics.

solving wave equations (differential equations) is time consuming.

no one cares that much about car audio to predict something that can be measured easily.

just because no one bothers to calculate something doesn't mean it cannot be modeled accurately.

my summary is that box rise is better measured than calculated - though you can predict it with enough effort.

I feel this way not because I don't understand it, but because what I said is true. There are too many variables to take into account. By your own admission no software exists to do it and nobody is going to write it. Even if they did, nobody would fill in enough of the variables to make it accurate. you are arguing it because you don't understand it. If you did, you wouldn't be in here posting. Everything I have said has been 100% accurate and you have failed to demonstrate otherwise. you're just filled with hatred and butthurt and 0 facts. You have tried, you have failed. Move along.

[Buck]

People really shouldn't worry about rise IMO.