PDA

View Full Version : I was told Ported is better SQ than sealed today!!??



snb778
07-16-2005, 05:02 PM
Ok guys, now im really confused...my whole life I have heard and been tought that a sealed box is better SQ than a ported box, BUT today at work I was told different by one of our new master installers....

We were looking at a sealed box with an alpine type R in it when one our new master installers says "i hate sealed boxes" I asked him why and he replied with "the SQ on the is horrible" I looked at him confused because my whole life all I have heard is that for SQ, you want sealed, SPL you want ported. His argument was that all the air inside a sealed box is uncontrolled, bouncing all over the place throwing the subwoofer out of control when it hits low notes.

He explained that on a ported box, the air is more controlled, hence being able to tune a ported box to a certine frequency, so you can control the sub more within that certine frequency range. He also went to Mobile Dyanmics, but it was the one in AZ. He said this is what the acoustics teacher there tought them. Is this true, because I am very confused right now??

Black_Jesus
07-16-2005, 08:47 PM
i second that laugh..

swaptrex
07-16-2005, 08:51 PM
do you by chance work at best buy?? :laugh:

BeanII
07-16-2005, 10:46 PM
Okay, point of debate for Jmac and a few others. Through literal definitions of SQ and SPL out. By literal, I mean competition rules and standards. Let's just say you want an audio system for you to listen to. Not to compete with (which is how I design an audio system). If that's the case, I have to agree with the dude that said ported sounds better. Obviously not for the reason he stated. What is controlled air anyway? hahaha

My experience has been that the bump in volume you get from a ported box tends to compensate for deficiencies (sp) in environment. Also, a properly tuned box, as you well know, is going to provied a certain amount of gain to the area of bass that the user wants. Right? Knowing this, isn't it safe to say that without an eq, you'll loose performance from a sealed enclosure when it's put into the car?

Now, I know I've opened a huge can of worms and I often don't communicate very well in posts so don't take any of this to literally. But, I just want your thoughts. Because I for one beleive that a ported enclosure can easily sound as good as sealed.

I don't want to turn this into a flame war, I really just want a discussion about it.

BeanII
07-16-2005, 10:52 PM
yeah it is funny. but what about this misconception that


sealed = SQ
Ported = SPL

that's just crap as far as I'm concerned.

Anybody else?

creater
07-16-2005, 11:06 PM
now thats funny^^^

jujumantb
07-16-2005, 11:12 PM
Don't you know that most high-end home theater speakers sound like **** because they're ported ?
Well wouldnt you say that they are ported to attain a flat frequency response? You cant really argue ported has worse transient response, it simply does. Obviously, a flat repsonse is more important for SQ than transient response, hence home audio woofers are ported. In car, a sealed box coupled with cabin gain can make a **** flat response WITH good transient response. I dont see how their can be a true SQ comparison IN-CAR between sealed and ported... sealed has every advantage.

60ndown
07-16-2005, 11:28 PM
i have built 8 different sub enclosures in the last year, the slot ported tuned to 32hz driver specific enclosure i tried today was the worst with regard to sq, it did a couple of things well, but i am very familiar with some tracks ive had for years, and even tuned to 32 hz it was missing alot of low end in my opinion (32-20?), was slow, and innaccurate. after less than an hour listening and tweaking i realized it was not what i wanted and decided to give it away or burn it!

Insomniac119
07-16-2005, 11:33 PM
It all depends on your own definition of SQ. For some people sound quality is how flat the frequency responce is, to others it's how tight and accurate the notes are being reproduced. My own definition follows more closely along the later. And using that definition, yes, ported enclosures can sound just as good as sealed and possibly even better. If having the first definition in mind, than, no, a ported box cannot sound as good as a sealed box.

jujumantb
07-16-2005, 11:40 PM
It all depends on your own definition of SQ. For some people sound quality is how flat the frequency responce is, to others it's how tight and accurate the notes are being reproduced. My own definition follows more closely along the later. And using that definition, yes, ported enclosures can sound just as good as sealed and possibly even better. If having the first definition in mind, than, no, a ported box cannot sound as good as a sealed box.
ehh, still not as accurate as sealed, again, transient reponse suffers in ported. if well designed, it may often be inaudible to most people. I'm not saying ported cant sound good, as Jmac pointed out, home audio uses ported extensively and they dont sound bad.
Real SQ *should* always be defined as the most accurate reproduction of the music as it was recorded IMO.

jujumantb
07-16-2005, 11:44 PM
Read the whole thread ...
ok, but lets keep this to a CAR audio discussion. I still dont see how you could say ported is more listenable in terms of true SQ (accurate reproduction).

jujumantb
07-16-2005, 11:46 PM
That is the only definition of sound quality; how accurate the reproduction of the source material is.

However, this debate isn't about what has better SQ, it's about what sounds better ...

This will, of course, depend on the equipment, the setup, and the listener ...
touche'

disregard my previous post btw

UndercoverPunk
07-16-2005, 11:50 PM
Well, I'm starting to understand some other people's opinion of this forum....

jujumantb
07-16-2005, 11:55 PM
I still don't see how people can say and teach that sealed is for SQ and ported is for SPL ... It's one of the most asinine statements one can make when referring to enclosure design ...

Again, we're not using the definition of SQ, we're debating what sounds better ... When people say, "ported for SPL," it implies ported sounds worse than sealed by nature, which is completely untrue ...
I would never make such a generalized statement as sealed is for SQ, ported is for SPL. If you feel we are debating simply what sounds better, than this debate is about as helpful as debating about which color is the prettiest.

UndercoverPunk
07-16-2005, 11:57 PM
Green is the best ever

[/thread]

Insomniac119
07-17-2005, 12:18 AM
Now just hold on. Just relax, I'm not done yet :D.

"Transient response - The time it takes for the output power levels to stabilize after a device connected to the power source stops drawing power."

Can someone put this in english in how it relates to car audio and ported vs. sealed? Or better yet, anyone have a linky?

jujumantb
07-17-2005, 12:27 AM
Now just hold on. Just relax, I'm not done yet :D.

"Transient response - The time it takes for the output power levels to stabilize after a device connected to the power source stops drawing power."

Can someone put this in english in how it relates to car audio and ported vs. sealed? Or better yet, anyone have a linky?
Transient response is more relatively defined as how well a sub reacts to transients, basically how accurately the woofers movements are controlled as the input to it changes. For the lamen, saying sealed makes for a better transient response is saying that sealed boxes control the woofer better than ported do.
Maybe thats not the best way to put it, somebody else wanna add onto or tweak this definition?

BeanII
07-17-2005, 12:50 AM
transient response, shransient response. I think you're holding on to that a little tight...... most of those reading this have no idea what you are talking about (comment not meant as a flame is it sounds as so)

also, a flat response sounds good to a mic. generally the human ear favors a little variety

Harrison486
07-17-2005, 12:52 AM
transient response, shransient response. I think you're holding on to that a little tight...... most of those reading this have no idea what you are talking about (comment not meant as a flame is it sounds as so)

also, a flat response sounds good to a mic. generally the human ear favors a little variety

I will admit that I don't understand all of what is being said here...

I do have to say though, as I am sure everyone realizes, there is a big difference between those who take terms like SQ and SPL seroius enough to compete and the everyday average joe schmo with subs...

BeanII
07-17-2005, 12:52 AM
couldn't one argue that the amplifiers damping could compensate for transient response? there are too many variables for you to hold on to that arguement so closely

stones
07-17-2005, 12:52 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


transient response, shransient response. I think you're holding on to that a little tight...... most of those reading this have no idea what you are talking about (comment not meant as a flame is it sounds as so)

also, a flat response sounds good to a mic. generally the human ear favors a little variety


^x2 :word:

BeanII
07-17-2005, 12:59 AM
these are my favorite threads. a little constructive and informative debate. thanks guys

snb778
07-17-2005, 12:53 PM
Ok ok, let me ask this question....Which type of enclosure has BETTER CONTROL over the subwoofer at peak excursion, or close to peak excursion and why? Because once again, everything I have read, heard, or been tought until 2 days ago says that sealed has better control over the subwoofer than ported...???

diminishedpower
07-17-2005, 01:08 PM
dont mind if i jump in? as in your question about control over excursion, sealed has the best control over the frequency band (20-70hz) on average, but ported will control exursion 10x better near tuning but farther you get away from it the less controll it has, make sense? or is someone going to tell me im wrong?

Edit: but control over excursion doesnt neccisarly have to do with sq,

snb778
07-17-2005, 01:34 PM
that is closer to what I was looking for, thank you. So in a sence, they are both better SQ in their own kinda way?

squeak9798
07-17-2005, 01:52 PM
couldn't one argue that the amplifiers damping could compensate for transient response?

No. DF can not and does not compensate for poor transient response. That's not what it is, and not what it does. DF is just a ratio of output impedance to input impedance. Anything above 50 (some say 20) is adequate to dampen voltage spikes. Going any higher does not yield "better" peformance. And it has nothing to do with "improving" transient response that is the result of the acoustic suspension affects of the enclosure. It's a measure of the amp's ability to resist a change in it's output voltage. Absolutely nothing to do with "increasing" transient response from poor enclosure design.

If you have an amp with a low enough DF that the differences are audible; then you need a new **** amp (unless you are a tube fairy like Jack).

UndercoverPunk
07-17-2005, 01:56 PM
LOL... tube fairy...

squeak9798
07-17-2005, 01:57 PM
transient response, shransient response. I think you're holding on to that a little tight......

Don't agree with that either. The differences in transient response can be noticeable. Enclosures with poor transient response can exhibit obvious "ringing" or "overhang", aswell as what sounds like a delayed response from the subwoofer.

Raven
07-17-2005, 02:04 PM
A delayed response from a woofer is something you'll find in about 90% of every install around. In fact, I wonder if it has less to do with the enclosure, and more to do with where you place the enclosure and what direction you point the loud end in relation to where you will be when listening to it.

Insomniac119
07-17-2005, 07:43 PM
I'm going to refraise my question. When designing an enclosure, what effects transient response?

MrWizzard
07-18-2005, 11:21 AM
There was another discussion here that seems to go into more details.... might help a little.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=529189

BeanII
07-18-2005, 11:42 AM
I like the AVS forum. I don't post anything, but lurk a lot. People over there are smrt. S-M-R-T. smrt.


going from this forum to that forum reminds me of the days when Jepaordy used to follow Wheel of fortune.:)

Raven
07-18-2005, 12:10 PM
http://www.geocities.com/kreskovs/Box-Q.html

Insomniac119
07-18-2005, 05:17 PM
http://www.geocities.com/kreskovs/Box-Q.html

I'll admit that was a hard read, so let me see if I got some things straight.

The higher the Q the louder the sub, but the poorer the transient response. Visa-vera for lower Q. Correct?

JimJ
07-18-2005, 05:27 PM
unless you are a tube fairy like Jack

Hay there, smoochums.

:)