I'm inFInitely Baffled.

[aworldcollision 10+ year member]

Didn't cut any holes in it. I literaly mean opening the trunk lid lol. Can't get judged like that though. But there are cabin pressure relief vents in mosts trunks. We have found it's best not to seal them up. Might have to do something about the rubber flappers farting in the wind. Point I was trying to make is cancelling sound waves in the trunk is going to be harder than just making the airspace bigger. Filling the trunk with polyfill would be an interesting test, but a messy one //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

We are still talking about apples and oranges but alas, I concede. You stated higher gains with a vented trunk whereas gain is my second prioriy after a nice smooth response curve which is what I was curious about. If you were to vent the trunk I'd say AP vent somehow would be best.

 

[ramos 5,000+ posts]

In our testing , we tried what you were suggesting with the foam. It actually made the response peaky at certain frequencies, and muddy on the low end. Take the foam out and the response was more linear, and more focused. Attack was tighter as well. We tried a couple different foams. And after testing decided no foam sounded more like what we were after. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[aworldcollision 10+ year member]

In our testing , we tried what you were suggesting with the foam. It actually made the response peaky at certain frequencies, and muddy on the low end. Take the foam out and the response was more linear, and more focused. Attack was tighter as well. We tried a couple different foams. And after testing decided no foam sounded more like what we were after. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

see? I told you so://content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[ramos 5,000+ posts]

I have a hard time putting my thoughts into words lol. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[aworldcollision 10+ year member]

I have a hard time putting my thoughts into words lol. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

so...you're baffled?

 

[James Bang 5,000+ posts]

infinitely.

 

[DEdwards 10+ year member]

all this talk about something that plays such a small band of frequencies....

 

[Plutoman 10+ year member]

all this talk about something that plays such a small band of frequencies....

but oh such an important range..

I can't stand listening to music without a strong subbass anymore -.- Not like rap strong, but just a focused sound, strong but transparent.

 

[James Bang 5,000+ posts]

all this talk about something that plays such a small band of frequencies....

oh no you did 'ent.

it's true that it plays a small band of frequencies when you put it in terms of frequencies, but what about the amount of octaves? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif

 

[James Bang 5,000+ posts]

but oh such an important range..
I can't stand listening to music without a strong subbass anymore -.- Not like rap strong, but just a focused sound, strong but transparent.

you like strong subbass???

I like a strong 20hz-20khz.

 

[Plutoman 10+ year member]

you like strong subbass???
I like a strong 20hz-20khz.

True, 'dat, but it's fairly easy to gain a strong range up top that's crisp and clear. Not with good imaging, of course, but it'll be a decent sound.

It's more difficult to find a sub setup that is crisp and clear, strong, but that blends well with the upper ranges of frequencies. I can't live without that anymore

I love feeling the pound of the sub when it hits a drum bass kick, while not being able to tell the sub is playing if I'm not looking.

But then we go into the whole subjective part of SQ. I drop back the treble on the EQ a bit, balancing things towards the lower octaves, because I like the resonance of it. The sub blends well enough that I can get away with it, because it blends with, rather than overpowers, the speakers, even when the balance is towards it.

 

[James Bang 5,000+ posts]

True, 'dat, but it's fairly easy to gain a strong range up top that's crisp and clear. Not with good imaging, of course, but it'll be a decent sound.

no it's not.

It's more difficult to find a sub setup that is crisp and clear, strong, but that blends well with the upper ranges of frequencies. I can't live without that anymore

you got it backwards.

I love feeling the pound of the sub when it hits a drum bass kick, while not being able to tell the sub is playing if I'm not looking.

sure..

But then we go into the whole subjective part of SQ. I drop back the treble on the EQ a bit, balancing things towards the lower octaves, because I like the resonance of it. The sub blends well enough that I can get away with it, because it blends with, rather than overpowers, the speakers, even when the balance is towards it.

Not subjective imo. Michael Jackson on stage should sound like Micheal Jackon on stage... and because YOU like the "resonance of it" (whatever that means) doesn't mean it's SQ.

 

[Plutoman 10+ year member]

Alright lol. Open it up for debate, will ya?

I think it sounds better with a more open ended lower octave, and the upper octaves faded back a bit. Not a lot, but a gentle blending. It comes from my orchestral playing... my directors frequently try to bring out the lower reeds, cello's, bass's, and tuba's, and it sounds better that way. I try to imitate that with my own system. Then again, now that I think on it, it could just be the whole problem that my car is too top heavy (sound wise) in the first place, and I'm just balancing it out.

And don't deny that it's difficult to find people with a sub setup that blends >.> Oh, my god, most of the people in my school run duals and crap, and that is so horrible to the ear.

Alright, maybe it's not easy to get a good clean treble (above 60-80hz or so), but it's easier to get a decent sound out of a new set of components than to try to blend two new 15" subwoofers into a stock system.

 

[James Bang 5,000+ posts]

Alright lol. Open it up for debate, will ya?
I think it sounds better with a more open ended lower octave, and the upper octaves faded back a bit. Not a lot, but a gentle blending. It comes from my orchestral playing... my directors frequently try to bring out the lower reeds, cello's, bass's, and tuba's, and it sounds better that way. I try to imitate that with my own system. Then again, now that I think on it, it could just be the whole problem that my car is too top heavy (sound wise) in the first place, and I'm just balancing it out.

And don't deny that it's difficult to find people with a sub setup that blends >.> Oh, my god, most of the people in my school run duals and crap, and that is so horrible to the ear.

Alright, maybe it's not easy to get a good clean treble (above 60-80hz or so), but it's easier to get a decent sound out of a new set of components than to try to blend two new 15" subwoofers into a stock system.

That could be it.

lol above 80hz... is EVERYTHING ELSE..

No shizZO. 'decent' would be subjective

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif

 

[req 5,000+ posts]

i