6th order designs

[LMJexploder]

im looking to build a 6th order for 2 zv5 12". If anyone has some design plans that they wouldnt mind sharing or giving me some ideas, or if anyone can recommend someone to design me one i would pay if i had to. have no problem building whatever just still not 100% confident on the program numbers that i come up with yet. max dimensions are 41" wide 50" deep 20 " high

Click to read more...

 

[LMJexploder]

ok ill get that rear down to 5 and fix the bracing, jutting brace? not sure what that is. thanks again for all your suggestions and knowledge and not just saying oh yeah looks great when it needed some changes and letting me build some shitty box that sounds like garbage like some people might do. i appreciate it

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

ok ill get that rear down to 5 and fix the bracing, jutting brace? not sure what that is. thanks again for all your suggestions and knowledge and not just saying oh yeah looks great when it needed some changes and letting me build some shitty box that sounds like garbage like some people might do. i appreciate it

I forgot what a jut even was, I worried I just made that up like an idiot lol but I didn't:

Definition of JUT

to extend out, up, or forward : project; to cause to project… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

So it's a 90 degree jut from said wall needing bracing, where 3 walls are tied together with the jut for much better strength than a dowel. Gotta be careful with internal airflow but in between subs like yours, you could make a jut go back really far before it caused an issue. You have to look at cross sectional area of the entire box from sub rear wave as it goes to the port from every angle, as far as avoiding unwanted internal air-restrictions go. You really wanna shape the wavefront into the port as much as possible IMO, but that's technical.

And I am not back designing for anyone, just fyi, just helping here, had several ask me

 

[Old_Slapper]

It has been a while since I have built one of those, but Term-Pro was a great tool for designing them. It was the best enclosure building program I had ever used, and I used just about all of them.

I would recommend getting the program to help with the build. The porting on those are very sensitive.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

It has been a while since I have built one of those, but Term-Pro was a great tool for designing them. It was the best enclosure building program I had ever used, and I used just about all of them.

I would recommend getting the program to help with the build. The porting on those are very sensitive.

They are hard to learn. I've modeled them before, to see about port tuning. I don't even remember what it was on, it was a long time ago. I also reverse engineered built ones I saw online to get tuning data based on what they said tuning was, especially walls because they're so easy to see and see what's going on. I'm not saying I'm right on this, but I think people overthink series 6th orders. Maybe I've been into sound too long, and I'm definitely not a trained pro at sound, but it's just a ported inside of a ported box. The front port length just adds to the rear, but there has to be a dynamic of tuning where the rear port wave meets the front sub wave and is out of phase somewhat vs what the rear port is "tuned" to overall.

Even with that, when I modeled and studied them, and even with front and rear port radiating area differences, it largely seems the front port length mostly just adds to the rear somewhat consistently. The front/rear dynamic changes a lot with net box size and port area differences between the front and rear. You could stick a ported box in a tunnel, like if he just removed the entire front, and that's a series 6th without a loading wall, just a ported box in a line. You start adding a loading wall and closing it in or lengthening port length, it lowers tuning. Matching the nature of the chambers together can be difficult, but you can have such a high tuned front chamber that it effectively doesn't resonate what bandwidth you're playing, such as if you need to do a bandpass to port through a hole into a cabin. Regardless, I do think it can be complicated, but in a way it's really not vs ported box design.

 

[Old_Slapper]

They are hard to learn. I've modeled them before, to see about port tuning. I don't even remember what it was on, it was a long time ago. I also reverse engineered built ones I saw online to get tuning data based on what they said tuning was, especially walls because they're so easy to see and see what's going on. I'm not saying I'm right on this, but I think people overthink series 6th orders. Maybe I've been into sound too long, and I'm definitely not a trained pro at sound, but it's just a ported inside of a ported box. The front port length just adds to the rear, but there has to be a dynamic of tuning where the rear port wave meets the front sub wave and is out of phase somewhat vs what the rear port is "tuned" to overall.

Even with that, when I modeled and studied them, and even with front and rear port radiating area differences, it largely seems the front port length mostly just adds to the rear somewhat consistently. The front/rear dynamic changes a lot with net box size and port area differences between the front and rear. You could stick a ported box in a tunnel, like if he just removed the entire front, and that's a series 6th without a loading wall, just a ported box in a line. You start adding a loading wall and closing it in or lengthening port length, it lowers tuning. Matching the nature of the chambers together can be difficult, but you can have such a high tuned front chamber that it effectively doesn't resonate what bandwidth you're playing, such as if you need to do a bandpass to port through a hole into a cabin. Regardless, I do think it can be complicated, but in a way it's really not vs ported box design.

The complicated part is determining the port size and length, in my opinion. Other than that, it's not difficult to understand, right? Like you said, it's a ported box inside a ported box. So, basically, it's a little more of a complicated bandpass enclosure. However, what port size do you need on the inner box to get the desired hz. then, what the port size on the outbox to make sure your get the desired hz through that port?

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

The complicated part is determining the port size and length, in my opinion. Other than that, it's not difficult to understand, right? Like you said, it's a ported box inside a ported box. So, basically, it's a little more of a complicated bandpass enclosure. However, what port size do you need on the inner box to get the desired hz. then, what the port size on the outbox to make sure your get the desired hz through that port?

From my experience, it's a ported box in a ported box, I go from the rear wave forwards. The tuning is still like ported, where your front port and front works as a box and the rear does too, except the front port adds to the rear port length. I mean if you want more at or around tuning boost, then do bigger chambers, you want more bandwidth, do smaller chambers. Use port area to fine control some bandwidth and cone movement. It can be made more complicated than that, but there's really not a need to for most people, just like you can model ported with winisd vs a 3d sound design software that shows everything sound related. Studying horns helps understand series 6th orders, too. Idk I think realistically there's an art to higher order bandpasses. Sound itself is an educated guess when it comes to tuning, and it become less of guess when it comes to modeling, but there's usually variables that modeling can't account for, especially without serious programs or serious self-math skills and a ton of time.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

If you wanna test tunings you can do a front and rear port area the exact same or very close for both front and rear chambers, and see how the tuning works, front adding to rear. Here's a box I did like a series 6th, except the sub just isn't in the box (front wave exits into cabin instead of "front" chamber):



That's 2 chambers with 2 tunings in series, where the "front" port adds to the rear port length basically and the "front" chamber is just a chamber to add boost at higher frequencies, something like 28/56 tuning. This box was built and used by the owner, and it performed well. Can't tell you much outside of that. 3500w sub lol iirc.

 

[Old_Slapper]

From my experience, it's a ported box in a ported box, I go from the rear wave forwards. The tuning is still like ported, where your front port and front works as a box and the rear does too, except the front port adds to the rear port length. I mean if you want more at or around tuning boost, then do bigger chambers, you want more bandwidth, do smaller chambers. Use port area to fine control some bandwidth and cone movement. It can be made more complicated than that, but there's really not a need to for most people, just like you can model ported with winisd vs a 3d sound design software that shows everything sound related. Studying horns helps understand series 6th orders, too. Idk I think realistically there's an art to higher order bandpasses. Sound itself is an educated guess when it comes to tuning, and it become less of guess when it comes to modeling, but there's usually variables that modeling can't account for, especially without serious programs or serious self-math skills and a ton of time.

Sure, it can be simpler if it's guys like you and I who worked with a lot of ported boxes. I'm going off of the OP not really having a lot of experience with ports. He will have to know port length for hz requirement, port opening size to prevent port noise, and so on...

I guess my biggest question is, what is the OP's reason for going with this type of box?

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

I mean he's posted up port area and cubic footage size, all of that seems to be within a range I would do and that I've seen done, changes within that range would just be more personalized depending on exact goals IMO. You or I would just have to straight design it to do that further basically. Regardless, gotta build it and study response to learn. He could do more modeling if he wanted, but that's on OP. Just from what I see I think it'll get pretty close to doing what he wants to do, as long as those ports as decently accurate, which they visually don't seem to be wrong or anything based on what he's told me, but it's hard to say for sure.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

ok i made some changes now the rear port area in 72sq" port dimmensions are 4"x9"x 33"L . just over 5.5 cubes for the rear chamber now the rest is the same and i added bracing

What tuning were you aiming for here? How about this: if you post up both front and rear airspaces, port area and port lengths I will look at them, like make sure they aren't super off from what I've done. It's still build at your risk, like I can't absolutely guarantee any result.

 

[LMJexploder]

its not that i dont have experience with ports, well i dont have the experience the 2 of you have . i have done a few ported boxes that i was happy with and one 4th order for some type r 12s that sounded good. my problem is i question my self to much and end up overthinking it i guess would be a way of putting, but once i either just do it or get some tips or pointers like buck has done for me and i just build it, it all clicks. So to anwser your question why im going with this type of box, something i havent done, and iv heard that the zv5s sound and perform good in 6th orders, Might not be the best reason for doing all this but but then again alot of **** we do probably isnt for a good reason but we do it anyway lol. thanks for all the feedback from everyone ill take all the knowledge i can get and i can take the good and the bad critizisim i got pretty thick skin.

 

[LMJexploder]

i was going off your recommendations for tuning at 30Hz rear ,60Hz front, so the numbers i have came up with are
front airspace = net 8.18cubes
port= 22" x 8" x 5" port area= 176 Sq In
(W)x(H)x (L)

Rear airspace = net 4.96 cubes port area 36 sq in (each) 2 ports 1 on each side of subs
port = 4" x 9" x 33" 8 1/2" of each port going along sidewall into front chamber
(W)x(H)x(L)

hope that makes sense i can shoot you a drawing if that helps

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

i was going off your recommendations for tuning at 30Hz rear ,60Hz front, so the numbers i have came up with are
front airspace = net 8.18cubes
port= 22" x 8" x 5" port area= 176 Sq In
(W)x(H)x (L)

Rear airspace = net 4.96 cubes port area 36 sq in (each) 2 ports 1 on each side of subs
port = 4" x 9" x 33" 8 1/2" of each port going along sidewall into front chamber
(W)x(H)x(L)

hope that makes sense i can shoot you a drawing if that helps

That seems very close to me man, based on how I do it. Front chamber being large might peak a little harder, roll off a little harder some, but those subs move a lot of air, quite a bit, so that should be fine. I def think you show some experience. Based on the ones I've done in similar fashion to yours and what people have told me, should be loud, if all else about the system is proper, electrical, etc. You can make the tunings whatever you want, but 30/60 will pound decently hard low, but not too low, should be a lot of sound, IMO.

 

[LMJexploder]

right on thanks , itll be a couple weeks before i get started with the build but ill let you know how it turns out

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

right on thanks , itll be a couple weeks before i get started with the build but ill let you know how it turns out

The only thing I can't check is the port speeds, but front seems enough and rear doesn't seem like too much, so idk if I could help anymore. Best of luck with it