1 sub vs 2

[gckless 5,000+ posts]

I have actually taken 2nd place with 2 in a sealed box in a SQ competition, and also hit 143.7 DB, I just prefer the flatter sound the sealed box gives instead of a huge jump in the bass around the port frequency followed by a dissapointing hole in the bass anywhere else. I know that ports are more efficient, but I just hate with the sound (and dont even get me started on Bandpass UGH...) I guess it will probably have to be a single sub, thanks for the input.

You haven't heard any good enclosures. If you have those connotations, you haven't.

 

[werewolftigermo]

??

You haven't heard any good enclosures. If you have those connotations, you haven't.

Meh... I liked the sound of my previous setup. bass guitars sounded good as well as low bass. heard plenty that sounded worse.

 

[Jeffdachef 5,000+ posts]

I have actually taken 2nd place with 2 in a sealed box in a SQ competition, and also hit 143.7 DB, I just prefer the flatter sound the sealed box gives instead of a huge jump in the bass around the port frequency followed by a dissapointing hole in the bass anywhere else. I know that ports are more efficient, but I just hate with the sound (and dont even get me started on Bandpass UGH...) I guess it will probably have to be a single sub, thanks for the input.

You have obviously never heard a proper ported design, you can have the same sq as a sealed but with the output and low end extension basically wider range of notes with a lot more impact. What you stated is true for pre made ported boxes which are basically garbage to begin with. Proper ported wins over sealed any day in sound quality and output.

 

[werewolftigermo]

You have obviously never heard a proper ported design, you can have the same sq as a sealed but with the output and low end extension basically wider range of notes with a lot more impact. What you stated is true for pre made ported boxes which are basically garbage to begin with. Proper ported wins over sealed any day in sound quality and output.

I was always under the impression that a sealed box allowed for tighter control of the cone (albeit at a cost of efficiency)due to the "air spring" resisting any change from a neutral cone position. How can a "proper" port accomplish this? I get the efficiency part but I am struggling with the SQ part. The systems I have heard over the years with ported / bandpass configurations always seemed to fall a bit flat in the higher end of the subs range. I am however open to suggestion as I have to build a box either way, Do you have any recommendations bearing in mind I have a tight space to work with?

 

[The Camry]

Everyone is always like more subs more subs. No **** that. Get one really nice sub for the power you have. ie: 1000rms sub for a 1000rms amp. You only really need one sub for balanced music and one can make a whole car shake. throw any 200$ sub from SSA website into a custom box and you will love life.

 

[treesive 10+ year member]

You have obviously never heard a proper ported design, you can have the same sq as a sealed but with the output and low end extension basically wider range of notes with a lot more impact. What you stated is true for pre made ported boxes which are basically garbage to begin with. Proper ported wins over sealed any day in sound quality and output.

With a majority of subs today that is probably true but there are subs that specifically will not work well ported just like some will not work well sealed. Take an eclipse sw8200 for example. It is a sealed or IB sub only. It does not spec well ported but has one of the best sealed graphs of any sub I have ever seen.

 

[hispls 5,000+ posts]

I was always under the impression that a sealed box allowed for tighter control of the cone (albeit at a cost of efficiency)due to the "air spring" resisting any change from a neutral cone position. How can a "proper" port accomplish this? I get the efficiency part but I am struggling with the SQ part. The systems I have heard over the years with ported / bandpass configurations always seemed to fall a bit flat in the higher end of the subs range. I am however open to suggestion as I have to build a box either way, Do you have any recommendations bearing in mind I have a tight space to work with?

You likely haven't heard a well designed speaker in the proper box then. The #1 culprit for poor sounding woofers is trying to cram too much cone area into too small of a box. If you insist on running what you have, go ahead and stuff it into whatever sealed box you like and pretend that that's good. No skin off my nose and sealed alignments are pretty forgiving for not using correct volume.

That being said, plenty of woofers just won't sound good period, but L7 shouldn't be terrible if you build a proper box. Virtually nobody has these in a big enough box for them to do well though.

 

[NASTY08IMPALA 5,000+ posts]

Sell both of the kicker l7s to nuthuggers out there ..there are plenty of them. then take ur pick of one of the decent 1000rms 15s on the market most are in the 200-300 dollar range , have someone design u a box then build it ./thread

 

[NASTY08IMPALA 5,000+ posts]

Most 15s will do well in 3-4 cubes...where as the l7 needs 5.5 or so and still sounds like a busted whoopie cushion

 

[adulbrich 5,000+ posts]

Most 15s will do well in 3-4 cubes...where as the l7 needs 5.5 or so and still sounds like a busted whoopie cushion

That's because it has more cone area than a round 15. Its closer to an 18 as far as cone area.

I wouldn't buy an L7 and I'm not defending it, but I can understand why it would need a bigger box than a round 15.

 

[NASTY08IMPALA 5,000+ posts]

That's because it has more cone area than a round 15. Its closer to an 18 as far as cone area.
I wouldn't buy an L7 and I'm not defending it, but I can understand why it would need a bigger box than a round 15.

Bc they hare poorly built,designed, heavy coned turds..i kno the cone area diff

 

[adulbrich 5,000+ posts]

Bc they hare poorly built,designed, heavy coned turds..i kno the cone area diff

Yea, soft parts are far from ideal

 

[treesive 10+ year member]

Yea, soft parts are far from ideal

Ideal for what? Soft parts vary depending on what you are wanting.

 

[NASTY08IMPALA 5,000+ posts]

Ideal for what? Soft parts vary depending on what you are wanting.

L7 soft parts arent ideal for anything...except making muddy noise

 

[Jeffdachef 5,000+ posts]

I was always under the impression that a sealed box allowed for tighter control of the cone (albeit at a cost of efficiency)due to the "air spring" resisting any change from a neutral cone position. How can a "proper" port accomplish this? I get the efficiency part but I am struggling with the SQ part. The systems I have heard over the years with ported / bandpass configurations always seemed to fall a bit flat in the higher end of the subs range. I am however open to suggestion as I have to build a box either way, Do you have any recommendations bearing in mind I have a tight space to work with?

Size and port area plays a big part, too much will play sloppy, not enough will cause turbulence and bad port velocity. Just the right amount, you can have 18s play double bass pedals clean in a ported box easily. Also you need to model your subs out on winisd or any other modeling software. It uses the ts parameters of the sub to model out its performance in transfer function, group delay and spl capabilities. Youll see if your specifiied tuning will give you a heavy low end, flat or peaky response.

You determine if your sub works well or poorly in sealed or ported via calculating the efficiency bandwidth product (EBP).

Also a bandpass box can also be tuned to have a flat response, it cannot match a sealed in precision but can come close. It depends on the sealed to ported ratio, tuning of the box, port area. All your assumptions are bassed on the garbage pre built bandpass boxes