PDA

View Full Version : Advantage to single vs dual chamber?



jcbabb
01-18-2007, 03:05 PM
For a ported box with 2 subs, are there any advantages to doing to separate chambers each ported versus one single chamber and one port?

phyphoestilic
01-18-2007, 03:07 PM
Structual Integrity, also if 1 sub goes out the other wont be getting way more space then it needs, less chances of it going over excursion and blowing. I had mine built with dual chambers, kinda like insurance if u have the extra space.

talon2nr7588
01-18-2007, 03:08 PM
if it is dual cnambered and one speaker blows you can still play the other one.

Death By Bass
01-18-2007, 03:46 PM
better yet, if you do two completely seperate boxes, that sit side by side, you can remove one for more trunk space, but still have some bass :)

billabongcr
01-18-2007, 03:48 PM
if it is dual cnambered and one speaker blows you can still play the other one.

i have both my ssds in a single chamber box with only one sub under power till my old amp gets back from repair. plays fine.

jcbabb
01-18-2007, 05:32 PM
My thoughts were to do two separate boxes. Id like to mount my amps to the boxes as well, is there such thing as an easy way to take them in and out(amps and all). Sort of like a quick disconnect setup, some sort of wiring harness than can clip in and out? There would be a power+, ground, rem, and RCA's. Any ideas on that? I guess I could just use a pdb mounted to the trunk for the 12+ and 12-, use a bullet connector for the rem...

PV Audio
01-18-2007, 06:49 PM
Since you're obviously brand new, I'll be easy on ya. :)

In between new posts and quick links in the black bar at the top of the forum is the search button. LEARN TO USE IT WELL! This topic has been covered numerous times, and the real answer is that there are no advantages. The speakers should sound the exactly same. The argument that you can keep playing one speaker if one blows is creative, but not true. There's two ways to destroy a speaker: exceed EITHER its mechanical (overexcursion) or thermal limits (both are usually caused by too much relative power (1500 watts in tiny box or 1000 watts in a huge box can have the same effect. A box helps the speaker work like an air spring, and if there's not enough cushion it will fail mechanically, and if you feed it too much power, it'll fail thermally)). In a single chamber, if you blow a sub you'll either kill it thermally (2x the power) or mechanically (overexcursion due to 2x more internal volume per sub). In a dual, you can only eliminate the volume issue, but it's still getting 2x the power. If any of that is incorrect, please someone correct me.

j3bus2k3
01-18-2007, 06:53 PM
Since you're obviously brand new, I'll be easy on ya. :)

In between new posts and quick links in the black bar at the top of the forum is the search button. LEARN TO USE IT WELL! This topic has been covered numerous times, and the real answer is that there are no advantages. The speakers should sound the exactly same. The argument that you can keep playing one speaker if one blows is creative, but not true. There's two ways to destroy a speaker: exceed EITHER its mechanical (overexcursion) or thermal limits (both are usually caused by too much relative power (1500 watts in tiny box or 1000 watts in a huge box can have the same effect. A box helps the speaker work like an air spring, and if there's not enough cushion it will fail mechanically, and if you feed it too much power, it'll fail thermally)). In a single chamber, if you blow a sub you'll either kill it thermally (2x the power) or mechanically (overexcursion due to 2x more internal volume per sub). In a dual, you can only eliminate the volume issue, but it's still getting 2x the power. If any of that is incorrect, please someone correct me.


:word:

The only reason I do seperate chambers for bigger boxes is for added bracing in the middle and possibly parallel to the back wall, if'n theres a second port wall...