PDA

View Full Version : * JL W7 Box Specs!?



Go2Sleep
10-06-2011, 11:31 PM
Looking for suggestions from those who have Experience with JL W7 products.

I'm going to be building a ported enclosure for (1) JL 13.5 W7

* Should I Use the Recommended JL W7 Enclosure Specs?
2.375 cu. ft.
@34 hz

* If not then what do you suggest for airspace and tuning that you know will work better?

kramer_212
10-06-2011, 11:32 PM
find dccreations, they will make you one up, or drawl you some plans.

be sure you state what you want out of your sub strait spl strait sq, both etc.

Go2Sleep
10-06-2011, 11:35 PM
Last resort i'll have someone draw something up... I would like some input from those who have used the recommended specs first.

Thanks

Bettr n' Revrse
10-06-2011, 11:37 PM
Sell it to me cuz I have a guy that wants it...

kramer_212
10-06-2011, 11:38 PM
well on my 13 w6s i used the rec specs for my first box, and overall not a bad box, but when i changed it to single chamber, and added .5 (.25 per woofer)sq ft, and tuned it to 32 its louder, and sounds better

Go2Sleep
10-06-2011, 11:41 PM
well on my 13 w6s i used the rec specs for my first box, and overall not a bad box, but when i changed it to single chamber, and added .5 (.25 per woofer)sq ft, and tuned it to 32 its louder, and sounds better
This is the input i was looking for... I'll keep that in mind
thanks

Anyone else?



Sell it to me cuz I have a guy that wants it...
It's a build for a local guy.. not for sale sorry

Bettr n' Revrse
10-06-2011, 11:44 PM
Awww d@mn

Go2Sleep
10-07-2011, 12:31 AM
any box builders out ther with input?

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 12:35 AM
Try 1.5cubic ft, 14x6port and around 40.5in length. See what you come up with.

Go2Sleep
10-07-2011, 12:40 AM
Try 1.5cubic ft, 14x6port and around 40.5in length. See what you come up with.

Have you tested this and got better results than 2.3?

The guy above said to go larger but that was for a W6

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 01:21 AM
Well, I've not heard one in a 2.3 so I cannot accurately compare. But recommendations are only a basis. Without knowing anything else but the driver capabilities and limitations, you may get different recommendations from different people. As far as larger, it depends on what you are looking for as a response as anything larger will need to be accounted for with port area and length with less accurate loading capabilities and control. My recommendations are for SQ based and without calculating for any other factor but driver specs, any other recommendations to me are null. I have had great results with my specifications,yes. Are they what you are looking for? If you are looking for optimal box specs, then yes.but again, this is a basis and without accounting for anything else, so these numbers will always be tweeked for accuracy. As a starting point, you can't get any more accurate. I use quite a bit to get those numbers and all of it is relevant to performance. If you want, I can model its response when I get home to show you what I mean.

benchambers80
10-07-2011, 01:51 AM
What about a 12W7 3ohm SVC, can you crunch those for a homie

RAM_Designs
10-07-2011, 01:59 AM
Try 1.5cubic ft, 14x6port and around 40.5in length. See what you come up with.

1.5ft^3 tuned to 56hz?

Fiercetimbo17
10-07-2011, 02:04 AM
Ive had a couple 13w7s and tons of boxes. Honestly their recommended was probably my favorite, it was a good mixture of sound quality and loud. I use to build a ton of boxes and tried just about everything and for my tastes it worked best, could get loud as I would ever want but would sound great everyday on any music I would listen to.

Go2Sleep
10-07-2011, 02:15 AM
Ive had a couple 13w7s and tons of boxes. Honestly their recommended was probably my favorite, it was a good mixture of sound quality and loud. I use to build a ton of boxes and tried just about everything and for my tastes it worked best, could get loud as I would ever want but would sound great everyday on any music I would listen to.

Thanks great input.
I think i'll go with the recommended airspace of 2.3 but change the tuning from 34 to 32-33hz



1.5ft^3 tuned to 56hz?

lol

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 02:33 AM
1.5ft^3 tuned to 56hz?
Actually, closer to 54Hz, but yes. You have to remember, that the tuning frequency is not in direct control of the response curve. Its very subjective towards cabin gain as well. The recommended was based on a smooth response only, also that it can be minorly tweeked using more information about what mat be requested. Remember, this is optimal recommendations, not "tuned" to a specific goal yet. Just a starting point and will only be that until more information is needed, which can change the entire outlook and numbers.

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 02:39 AM
What about a 12W7 3ohm SVC, can you crunch those for a homie

8 have 1.34 cubic ft, 12.5x4.75,66.75"port.
You guys have to remember, that again, these are sq recommendations, not spl, or sql. Just what the drivers like, not what we like. A common ground can be met for more personal oriented response. Most will find these numbers not to their liking....mainly because they are not used to it.
This one should be around 40Hz or so, haven't figured for tuning yet.

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 02:52 AM
As far as the first one for the 13.5, it should be 81". It didn't hit the 2 on my calculator. Lol. But still, 54Hz is good for SQ, Ill stand by that,lol. Not sure what 81" Gives you though. It should be around 38Hz or so, not sure...if someone wants to use one of those simple calcs for it.

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 02:54 AM
I haven't put tuning in my calculations yet because it really is a secondary source ofmeaning when it comes to response accuracy.

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 03:05 AM
Another note....my box volumes are smaller than manufacturer recs because of compression factors that they do not consider. Do not let the box volume control the output or loading, let the port do the work it is intended for. The compression is mainly for coupling and driver control, then the phase and main output of vlf response is done by the port. Making a box too large with a small port will have less driver control and less tonality than a smaller enclosure with a proper port. Don't control tuning based on mainly box size. Just a thought. Of course, everything works hand in hand, but the physics are constant. This was the whole reason I believe bose took that info from jensen, for the wave radio. And tline became a thing again, because of proper loading of a resonance tube.
Sorry, just needed to say that.

$LICK CALIFA$
10-07-2011, 07:03 AM
I've had 2 in 2 different ported boxes. One was in a smaller ported box, not quite sure what the tune was but the sound didn't compare to the other 13w7 in the larger ported box. The other one was in a 3.5 ft^3 @ 35 and sounded pretty good but imo if it was tuned a little lower to maybe 32 or 33, it would've definitely sounded better.

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 09:16 AM
The OP asked me to do a comparison of my specs and the 2.5 box. I used 33hz for the 2.5, and mine is not figured using a tuning factor, just proper alignment. This is how close the two are in response:

Here is the anechoic responses
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/5822/responsecompareanechoic.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/502/responsecompareanechoic.png/)



Here is the response with an example vehicle gain
http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/5822/responsecompareanechoic.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/641/responsecompareanechoic.png/)

This shows that both of them are pretty identical, with mine not focusing on tuning, but proper loading and coupling. The difference is, my enclosure exhibits a shallower delay from 30-60Hz, resulting in a quicker response time for multiple tones within a certain period. This means, the tones are separated by the ear better and not blended from delay time. Also, it is more in phase from 31-90hz, vs the 2.5 which has a 90degree in phase response from 35-95Hz. What does this tell you? That from 35hz and below, my specifications will also result in more direct output for the previously mentioned less delay time. Hence, more accurate output.
One more thing is that the optimal loading frequency, though it will not show up in the response, for my design is at 37Hz, and for the 2.5 design is higher at 42Hz. This is the result in higher +3dB output shown in the graphs from 32Hz and below, though at those frequencies, that is nothing audible, but mentioned because it is related to the loading of the design, showing that mine has a lower frequency loading capability for higher efficiency. Not by much at all, very close, but the point is, my design was not based on tuning, but loading. And it compared quite well with minor/better results in quality.
I had to show this because the OP requested this in a PM and I wanted to post it here so people will see that a bigger box is not always better. In fact, in this case, it is very close to what my recommendations are, so I give much credit to JL for having those specs...which proves again why some of you say they are very well specifications. :)

It also must be noted that my recommended port area was used for both designs. And any smaller port area would result in the JL 2.5cft box to have a drop in response quite a bit for nearly the entire usable range, but will give better quality and a smoother phase than before. So, it is a compromise as always. Hope this helps for those who questioned my recommendations.

benchambers80
10-07-2011, 11:09 AM
Thanks, and sorry for thread jack but my goals are not spl, I just want to hit the lows and not be peaky. more a deep bass sq

Moble Enclosurs
10-07-2011, 11:39 AM
Thanks, and sorry for thread jack but my goals are not spl, I just want to hit the lows and not be peaky. more a deep bass sq

YW. PM me then. I can get you a more deep bass output if you like. No problem. Keep in mind, I am not finishing the design for you. I only did this for free to help you all out, and gain some recording information in the process for later calculations to make them more accurate if possible. SO, pm me and I can help you out more with a design idea more towards your request.

Go2Sleep
10-07-2011, 02:16 PM
Much thanks to everyone for their input and Mobile Enclosures for the extensive explanation & graphs!