last sub question ever?

[60ndown 10+ year member]

if you had the choice between 150 db with the accuracy and lows of a sealed box and a big amp, or, 150 db with issues like unloading woofer below tuneing and port phase alighnment, which would you choose? i think we would all go the accurate sealed route right? end of story? sealed box and big amp > all other?

Click to read more...

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

150dB is noise, period. Whether it's tones or "music", with that much subbass it's lost any resemblance of being "musical".

 

[phyphoestilic 5,000+ posts]

150dB is noise, period. Whether it's tones or "music", with that much subbass it's lost any resemblance of being "musical".

Word. lol

 

[wilzyx 5,000+ posts]

pwnt by jimj

 

[60ndown 10+ year member]

so no serious challenges to my point other than a personal opinion? guess im right then //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif........again.

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

I didn't answer your actual question, but if you want me to...

The reason you don't see SPL competitors (generally) with sealed enclosures is that to create the highest in-cabin SPL possible, you need to find the enclosure that is the most efficient in that install. A sealed setup of reasonable Qtc is not going to be very high in efficiency...so good luck getting comparable SPL's. The money and time required for each are going to be very different.

Your question has no value in the real world, because the amount of effort getting a 150dB with a sealed enclosure is vastly different than the effort to get that number with a ported enclosure. And even once you've gotten that number, go back to the fact, not the opinion, that 150dB of subbass is simply noise.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

haha

 

[60ndown 10+ year member]

I didn't answer your actual question, but if you want me to...
The reason you don't see SPL competitors (generally) with sealed enclosures is that to create the highest in-cabin SPL possible, you need to find the enclosure that is the most efficient in that install. A sealed setup of reasonable Qtc is not going to be very high in efficiency...so good luck getting comparable SPL's. The money and time required for each are going to be very different.

Your question has no value in the real world, because the amount of effort getting a 150dB with a sealed enclosure is vastly different than the effort to get that number with a ported enclosure. And even once you've gotten that number, go back to the fact, not the opinion, that 150dB of subbass is simply noise.

if you are going to answer a question correctly you need to understand 'the question'. its pointless explaining why something wont work, or why spl copetitors dont do it, if your answer has nothing to do with 'the question'.

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

Explain the "question" to me, then...so I can understand.

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

so no serious challenges to my point other than a personal opinion? guess im right then //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif........again.

Controlled Tuning (what YOU like to hear) > not controlled tuning FTW anyday

 

[60ndown 10+ year member]

Explain the "question" to me, then...so I can understand.

given that sealed boxes are more accurate (reproduce music, bass, sub-bass etc in a way that is enjoyable and non fatigueing- loud as you like with no headache! ) IF you could achieve the same volume with a sealed box as a ported one (phase issues, unloads below tuneing and risks damage to the sub, which means if the imformation on the recording is below tuneing of the box you dont get to enjoy it) would you choose a ported box? no? neither would anyone who understood the question, so ported boxes are always a compramise (more output at the cost of sq) and should never be used unless you dont have a big enough amp to satisfy your bump desires!

 

[johnson 10+ year member]

150db is not enjoyable, unless you want to be deaf.

Sealed boxes are more accurate? Is that a fact?

Your question is like this, "Would you rather eat a steak or pile of shit?"

 

[snb778 5,000+ posts]

no...they are more versitile and have a wider range they can hit. If you have a ported box tuned to 33 Hz...and you are playing 33Hz tone...its gonna be.................................yaa....not 100% on this...but WILL IT be more accurate?? or just as?

But given that you could hit 150 with just as much effort with sealed... THEN I would take the sealed.

 

[ngsm13 5,000+ posts]

Many people don't like the sound of Sealed setups. I personally LOVE the sound of a low-tuned ported setup with ample volume and port area.

What you are trying to do hear, is address the way people hear sound... and what they like (which is an OPINION //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif) as a true/false statement. This is ludicrous, and trivial at best.

SO, in conclusion... get over your own opinion. If you like it better, then good for you.

nG

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

given that sealed boxes are more accurate (reproduce music, bass, sub-bass etc in a way that is enjoyable and non fatigueing- loud as you like with no headache! ) IF you could achieve the same volume with a sealed box as a ported one (phase issues, unloads below tuneing and risks damage to the sub, which means if the imformation on the recording is below tuneing of the box you dont get to enjoy it) would you choose a ported box? no? neither would anyone who understood the question, so ported boxes are always a compramise (more output at the cost of sq) and should never be used unless you dont have a big enough amp to satisfy your bump desires!

Your question is invalid because it's based on many, many flawed points.

Believe what you want...personally, I think you've been reading too many posts by Remotia and Mark Potts...