Originally Posted by armystud0911
Bosso = SMALL SEALED!
Steve = LARGE PORTED!
New folks, that pretty much sums up the past several pages.
The truth be told, I couldn't care less what method is employed to achieve the flattest in room response across the widest possible spectrum, as long as it's achieved.
Steve is absolutely correct in his basic premise, but he's not content with that so he crosses the line with a lot of ridiculous claims that simply aren't true. You cannot...cannot...build a ported sub that covers the Dolby spec. If you attempt to do it, theoretically, you'd end up with an IB that has a hump at 3Hz and a pipe that wouldn't fit in your house.
Steve's theory is that a huge subwoofer that rolls off sharply at 10Hz, in-room, is the best system one can hope for. He's wrong.
I've survived the evolution of this discussion over the last 7 or so years that began with TV's condescension (and there has never been a more condescending blowhard on the boards, IMHO) regarding "tweako-fast bass", decay time, anechoic flat response to tune is best, etc. (or, as TV says, "ect."). During this time, Wiggins and Hyre continually raised the bar of understanding of things like flux modulation, motor topology, transient response, anechoic vs in-room response, and much more. It progressed through the "house curve, F/M era that held fast to the idea of a gradual boosting of the response from 80-20Hz by a huge amount to accommodate the non linear human hearing curve. We have battled through the measurements discussions with Sir Edward, Ilkka, TV, Yates, Nousaine, Chase and CEA. We advanced our way through the IB craze (where ThomasW has presided, and done a great service to everyone, IMO), which served to validate a lot of the points made before then regarding a second order sealed system. Of late, Steve has been crowing about the EBS 4th order reflex alignment. Not an original idea, Steve has tweaked its fine points to everyone's benefit.
You also have to mention TV, Brian Ding, Tom Holman, Klippel, Danley, Seaton, Thilo, Dr. Phil and the king of practical audio engineers, Siegfried Linkwitz, who has been amazingly accessible and willing to help in all of the areas discussed in my own case.
Along the way, groups of people latched on to many of the points discussed and have settled there, which is cool. Happy listeners is what this is all about.
I've pushed the envelope for most of my years in this hobby. It's a lot of fun and results in amazing listening experiences. Advances in driver technology, clean amplifier power in $ per watt and low frequencies in general have made it possible to keep raising the bar. Signal shaping, measurement capability, motor cooling, self noise, digital audio resolution, stored energy, transients and transient response, group delay, are all things that I've studied and experimented with.
It's all just for the sake of discussion. No need to focus on styles of debate. We're all individuals with our own perspectives and quirks. Sure, there's a bit of pushing and shoving, but that makes it even more fun. No one searches harder for the truth than he who has been pushed to his limit, IMO.
I doubt that anyone would argue that the state of the art has been born of these discussions far more so than it would have been if left to the consumer electronics industry.