or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › late night thoughts about DIY vs Comercial
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

late night thoughts about DIY vs Comercial - Page 6

post #151 of 682
Quote:


Well bosso actually knows Seaton iirc, he isn't totally against ported, he just has a very different set of goals with his sub systems.

Quote:


correction: Bosso has never been against ported alignments...he actually thinks highly of them if executed well. His beef is with those who profess its' "superiority" at all costs.

Correct.

From 1978 through 1998, I only designed and built ported subs. With SL's now taken for granted L/T circuit and huge advances in signal, amplifier and driver tech, I saw the light. In this thread, I believe the point I'm trying to make is that DIY's biggest advantage is that of truer reproduction of sound through better transient response.

As Seaton points out, commercial subs must work within size, production and price parameters and include protection from potential owner-abuse as much as practical. Therefore, they employ limiters, filters and other protective measures that DIY can largely ignore.

Quote:


And psssst it is ported. Do not tell Bosso.

Don't tell Seaton, either. I believe he replaced Art's 4 ported subs with 4 Submersives. You might want to check out those threads.

I doubt Mark would argue the potential for more clean output and extension in his Submersive if price and protection parameters were changed.

Bosso
post #152 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossobass View Post

Correct.

From 1978 through 1998, I only designed and built ported subs. With SL's now taken for granted L/T circuit and huge advances in signal, amplifier and driver tech, I saw the light. In this thread, I believe the point I'm trying to make is that DIY's biggest advantage is that of truer reproduction of sound through better transient response.

As Seaton points out, commercial subs must work within size, production and price parameters and include protection from potential owner-abuse as much as practical. Therefore, they employ limiters, filters and other protective measures that DIY can largely ignore.



Don't tell Seaton, either. I believe he replaced Art's 4 ported subs with 4 Submersives. You might want to check out those threads.

I doubt Mark would argue the potential for more clean output and extension in his Submersive if price and protection parameters were changed.

Bosso

Bosso,

As you could very probably guess, I can tell you that sealed well done sounds great and performs great.

I have a few sealed subs and two DIY sealed with TC Sounds drivers. The dual sealed TC-1000 is my favorite sub when it comes to sound quality. Simply perfection to my ears. ...it is SEALED.

It was more for the sake of debate. Not attempting to prove sealed,ported or IB are the correct ways to reproduce bass.

And I know the SubMersive is a dual 15" sealed,opposed firing sub.

About the filters and limiters,agreed they compress the reproduced signal. For all my DIY subs I have yet to use a subsonic filter or limited to protect the amp/driver.
post #153 of 682
ssabripo,

Thanks for posting the pic.

The driver looks closer to a Dayton DVC 15" ,it has specs to match the Seaton design. Proof you do not need gorgeous and expensive brutes to do an admirable job in a sub.
post #154 of 682
Oh no, next there will be a thread about unlocking your subwoofer's true potential through porting.
post #155 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpmst3 View Post

Oh no, next there will be a thread about unlocking your subwoofer's true potential through porting.

LOL

Then how to lock in all the goodness and go sealed.
post #156 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpmst3 View Post

Oh no, next there will be a thread about unlocking your subwoofer's true potential through porting.

LOL! you beat me to it! that was fuken great!!


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...ential+porting

in all fairness, SteveC does make some good points on occasion...just the way he comes across is I think the issue with many. I'm used to his style..it's all good.
post #157 of 682
yeah you seem to be a bridge between Steve C and Bosso, both come across very strong and turn a lot of folks off, you just gotta get used to them and their styles, no way around it.
post #158 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by armystud0911 View Post

yeah you seem to be a bridge between Steve C and Bosso, both come across very strong and turn a lot of folks off, you just gotta get used to them and their styles, no way around it.

Don't we all?

I love this place
post #159 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by armystud0911 View Post

yeah you seem to be a bridge between Steve C and Bosso, both come across very strong and turn a lot of folks off, you just gotta get used to them and their styles, no way around it.

post #160 of 682
That's all part of the package that keeps things interesting! You never know where things will go and what road will be taken to get there. It can get a little dicey!
post #161 of 682
Thanks Sherv, I appreciate it.
Quote:


yeah you seem to be a bridge between Steve C and Bosso, both come across very strong and turn a lot of folks off, you just gotta get used to them and their styles, no way around it.

Thinking about it, we're all eccentric in our own way no?.. we have our own signature. I have had the pleasure of knowing Steve C for quite some time and can attest to him being a stand up guy in all aspects, he's always willing to help out. We differ in our need to play around with other designs, but that's easy enough to look past. From the little I know Bosso, I have no doubt the same holds true (imo). "you just gotta get used to them and their styles, no way around it." Yip! ditto..
post #162 of 682
The difference is that what I say has been supported with facts and measurements anyone can spend 5 minutes looking up and confirming for themself. What bosso says is more of the left field, grey area, "audiophile" talk that nobody can confirm and acoustic studies actually contradict. Significance of performance in the single digits is meaningless when performance above that, where our ears are more sensitive, is handily bested.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

The fact remains that you will always have a hard time comparing DIY designs to production units.

Quote:


This is rarely part of DIY discussions, as few take their subs outdoors and measure the end result, but is rather assumed to be equal

Enter Ilkka, the equalizer. One of the best commercial subs for the $ going right now, the SVS Ultra 13, is in the same performance range as the ported TC2k 15", dare I even say it's a little better. But it costs nearly twice as much as the DIY option. So for the money (actually you'd come in for a little less, as building a second sub is always cheaper than the first due to materials), one could build a second sub if they wanted to and easily outclass that commercial offering. Or they could just stay with the one and have roughly equal performance for less money.

You've spent a lot of time polishing your subwoofers Mark, I can't wait to see how they measure up, pun intended
post #163 of 682
I would say that if you were to have all front firing ports like the SVS, the scales might even be tipped differently, but who's to say. All this GP stuff where you have half your output going the other way makes things tough to analyze. Yes I know sub frequencies are non directional and they radiate in all directions, but you can't deny that there is benefit to having the cone and ports facing the mic in a gp measurement.
post #164 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by armystud0911 View Post

I would say that if you were to have all front firing ports like the SVS, the scales might even be tipped differently, but who's to say. All this GP stuff where you have half your output going the other way makes things tough to analyze. Yes I know sub frequencies are non directional and they radiate in all directions, but you can't deny that there is benefit to having the cone and ports facing the mic in a gp measurement.

Spot on, and in a GP measurment you do not have the wave (back ported) being "bounced" back like in a room. So the measurment is not fully representative.

I will do all my ported subs (as the first red monster) driver and port on the front. And this way,I can stack...pile them and get max output at sitting position. As the subs will be lined against the front wall,creating a false wall of ports and drivers.
post #165 of 682
This thread has had some great debate so far. Thank you to everyone that has contributed.

In reading through all of this I have been wondering how much of the DIY vs Commercial issue is affected by retail mark-up of components. Most audio components have a fairly large mark-up. For electronics dealers audio is often the highest profit margin in the store.

DIY'ers buy components at retail (usually) and in very small quantities. On top of this there are not many retailers that carry these components. DIY audio is a niche market and as such we pay for access to these components.

The guys building commercial subs are buying dozens, hundreds, and sometimes even thousands of the same component at wholesale. The economies of scale that commercial builders can take advantage of really work against the DIY guys. However, eventually the commercial sub must be sold at a profit for the commercial interest to stay in business.

So the basic questions of DIY vs Commercial comes down to this for me:
1. Can a DIY builder buy the same quality of components that the Commercial builder can buy?
2. Can the DIY builder buy these components for less than the Commercial builder sales his completed sub?

If the answer to both of these is yes then I think DIY wins.
post #166 of 682
It's predictable for someone like Steve to say that 3-15Hz is theoretical, meaningless, audiophile mumbo jumbo, or whatever Steve's latest explanation is...because he has no output in that region.

If by looking up facts Steve means visiting a forum that publishes the latest GP test results to 10Hz or 15Hz, then my case is already made for his biased opinions.

Let's see what real science reveals about my audiophile mumbo jumbo.

Quote:


The frequency spectrum has a periodic structure with zero force at n/T intervals where n is an integer and T is the duration of the transient signal. The frequency range where the transient signal can be analyzed accurately is from 0 Hz to a frequency f after which the signal magnitude decays by 10 to 20 dB.

Quote:


A most important feature of the magnitude graph (relative to our earlier periodic-function spectra) is that our transient signal has frequency content at every frequency, not just at discrete frequencies. Our example also shows that the frequency content gets smaller as we go higher in frequency. This trend will be observed in all spectra of transients; thus we can use such spectra for estimating the highest frequency for which a system model must be accurate, just as we did with Fourier series for periodic inputs. Note also that much of the frequency content is located below the frequency 1/T, so 1/T is useful in roughly gauging where the spectrum begins to drop off. Thus if T=1.0 second, we have strong content to 1Hz, whereas with T=0.001 second, we have equally strong content to 1,000 Hz. That is, the shorter the duration of a transient, the more its spectrum extends to higher frequencies. This feature is applicable to general transients, not just our simple example.

So, a transient, any transient, foot steps, a car door slamming, a kick drum, a snare drum, a cough, a mortar round, a gunshot, etc., etc., has content to zero.

It's interesting that there exists an industry that is paid to design the sound of a closing car door. "Improving the Sound Quality of the Closing Sound of a Car Door" is one of many studies, all of which analyze the component parts to the nth degree to result in a transient event that will be associated with quality.

Every one of those tests includes analysis to and emphasis on single digits.

I also take a 'snobbish' approach to those who say that single digits in movie soundtracks are BS, artifacts, useless, mistakes, etc. because the state of the art in soundtrack production involves extremely complex equipment that isolates and synthesizes real events, like a lightning strike, and combines parts of synthesized versions of real events to arrive at the best possible effects for a given scene.

These aren't some knob jockeys with a Casio keyboard. I have friends who do this for a living, and I wouldn't insult their intelligence with those comments. I certainly will never agree that Spielberg would preside over incompetent effects production that places single digits in a soundtrack by mistake or even though they thought it irrelevant.

Visit the master list sticky and see the number of movies with <10Hz content Here as well as a partial list of sub 10Hz soundtracks that include prime time network TV shows and Superbowl commercials here from the TRW (the 'fan sub' Ear refers to) site.

The scientific fact remains that all transients have content to zero. This can easily be verified by anyone who wants to do so. Is there a 125dB requirement to properly reproduce the sound of a car door closing? Of course not. Will it sound the same with a 15Hz high pass filter? Apparently not according to those whose job it is to analyze and utilize such an event, but that's up to the individual to decide (which is hard to do if you lack the capability to compare.

Here is a blurb from a company that's involved with car door closing sound. The graphic is poor but you can see the reference graph (in blue) has less higher frequency content and more lower frequency content. The interesting thing to note here is that even the cheapest car door closing spectrum is to single digits.

I'm certainly not saying that everyone should attempt to achieve single digit playback capability. I couldn't care less who has what or whether or not they're happy with it. I'm saying that it's the next frontier. I'm also just trying to state the obvious. Having a full spectrum playback is better than having a truncated one.

Again, short of the price and logistical hurdles the TRW presents, a sealed system is the only way to reproduce the source material. DIY's biggest advantage over commercial is, for me, in this area. Otherwise, I would bought a commercial sub. Of course, over the years, you'd have had to buy another, and another and another, etc., as the need to upgrade manifests itself in the commercial world.

Pointing to Ilkka's tests as the reference, or "the great equalizer", is like saying CD is the reference for all digital disc formats.

For example, the JL Gotham would top his lists, and the many excellent on board features would barely get a mention much less be tested, but the price would be talked about by guys like Steve as the reason it shouldn't be considered at the top of the list, which, BTW, only charts comparisons down to 12.5Hz, and only considers comparisons to 20Hz.

I first saw the g213 at CES in 2004. It compares to a subwoofer I built a year before that with similar signal shaping features, although my on board signal shaping is analog, similar power plant, although mine is outboard and similar enough driver compliment. Just take Ilkka's f113 numbers and add 7-8dB, more down low due to better extension capability.

Now, add 12dB to those numbers, add anechoic F3 capability to 9Hz and modify the HP in your signal chain and you have a similar system to mine. I hardly think 4 of Steve's subwoofer would be practical, and even if it were somehow possible to fit them into my HT and tolerate the loss of space, I'd still only have large passive ported subwoofers with cheap pro amps and no signal shaping capabilities with no output in the single digits and a steep roll off.

Can anyone tell me why on earth I would ever consider doing something like that? Ilkka's test results? Some hidden 'facts and measurements'? Cost savings? More output at 16Hz and less everywhere else? The need to lower my X-over point? The carpeted tubes would double as sound absorption? They would 'mimic' a sealed sub?

Bosso
post #167 of 682
Everything to justify the inaudible effects that are felt. That is fine with me.

I am very sorry to have offended the inaudible(you will hear...rumble) effect creators of this world and the fanatics who will go a mile out of the way to push the inaudible(rumble).

You are fully in your right to push the inaudible(rumble) and the need to reproduce rumble(what else?),because that is what single digit bass is(rumble). Rumble,no matter how you disguise single digit frequency bass.

And by the way when I wrote BS,I meant Bosso's Sounds. I no way I cultivate any hate towards bass near DC(that rumble again).

Reading your post I want to ask why dont you market your sub,from your claims it is one heck of a machine that would fit a niche market segment perfectly and sell. If the price was around the JL Gotham even I would be more than interested,after your favorite tester would run it and certify the claims(withing 10% of the claim would do just fine).

Now let me descend to my doom's day shelter where I hope not to hear the fallout(rumble)!
post #168 of 682
Yawn at that post


Quote:
Originally Posted by armystud View Post

Yes I know sub frequencies are non directional and they radiate in all directions, but you can't deny that there is benefit to having the cone and ports facing the mic in a gp measurement.

If there is any benefit in GP measurements for a front ported sub, I'd chalk it up to the port being closer to the ground, getting more boundary gain sooner, rather than the port facing the mic. The drawback to a front firing port - unless your baffle is enormous - is that it becomes extremely difficult to allow for ideal spacing around port openings. The internal port opening will be too close to enclosure walls and the external port opening will be too close to a boundary in the room. This will induce turbulent air flow sooner than it would if there were more clearance around the openings.
post #169 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssabripo View Post

LOL! you beat me to it! that was fuken great!!


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...ential+porting

Hehe...
post #170 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexE View Post

It's like buying computer parts (which perpetually get faster and cheaper) - you have to draw the line somewhere and just do it!

It's like that old saying, "Give 'em an inch, and they'll take a mile". That goes for yourself too! You think hey, if I go just a tad bigger, my graph will look like this, oh but just 15% more volume and I can use this driver, but then I'll need to go a little bit bigger...Next thing you know you just tripled the box size and doubled cost.

What I did was say, "I have 10ft net per box and I want two boxes, what can I do"? So I bought two SDX-15's. My GF didn't approve of my first design, so now my next one, which she DID approve of, is a little over 11ft net, so even better!
post #171 of 682
Thread Starter 
Quote:
So the basic questions of DIY vs Commercial comes down to this for me:
1. Can a DIY builder buy the same quality of components that the Commercial builder can buy?
2. Can the DIY builder buy these components for less than the Commercial builder sales his completed sub?

If the answer to both of these is yes then I think DIY wins.


Several posts about this so I will summarize.

incredible quality amps and drivers can be purchased for DIY, these amps and drivers are better then a lot of lower costs amps and drivers in comercial subs. Along with a pretty simple large ported design will give the DIY sub incredible SQ and SPL. Its already been posted many times about the comparisons between the MFW-15 ( Av123's great performing/value sub) and any DIY project around $600.

My examples, I have 4 18" Q18 drivers and they are beautiful monsters with HUGE displacement. I also have 2 TC2000 15" drivers ( the originals), IMO, these are the best looking 15" drivers you will ever see anywhere and they were only $275 way back when. SQ and output of the Q18s or the TC2K will beat what comercial subs have in them.


Now, Mark from av123 posted in this thread a little while ago and explained some key difference between DIY and comerical. He makes some valid points and that is what separates the comercial sub from the DIY sub.

The other thing IMO is the footprint/performance/finish/build quality still gives the comerical sub the upper hand. I ahve seen some incredible DIY builds and finishes but the majority can not compete with the look of a SVS PB13 or AV123s rosewood veneers.

A person deciding between DIY and comercial subs really has to create a checklist of wants. Deciding either way these days wont really hurt anyone either since I believe in the last two years comercial subs have come down in price and increased performance (PB13, MFW-15 and all the ED subs)
post #172 of 682
Build quality. Lets be more accurate ...finish quality, I cannot compete with the finishes on the commercial products,as they have dedicated people who only do finishes.

But built of cabinet itself,my cabinets are more stout,resonance free than JL's,Velo's ,Paradigm(Servo,Seismic). The only cabinet as well built is Aerial Acoustic's SW12,the box build and bracing more than matches its gorgeous finish.

Is this needed,no. But when you go DIY why not put the extra brace or two and double up on the wall thickness? After all this is not a business where you have optimise to get maximum performance out of a safe minimum of materials.
post #173 of 682
Thread Starter 
Quote:
But built of cabinet itself,my cabinets are more stout,resonance free than JL's,Velo's ,Paradigm(Servo,Seismic). The only cabinet as well built is Aerial Acoustic's SW12,the box build and bracing more than matches its gorgeous finish.

really, wow! Considering their price tag, I would have assumed those sealed subs had incredible cabinet builds to the point where they would be resonance free.

I have read that the AV123 MFW-15 subs is very,very heavy for its size.

Yes, internal bracing is more important that I thought before and Im adding more and more to my sub boxes....I just hate doing all those routed holes that I see in designs all the time and too move 150 lb boxes is a pain in the A$$!!!
post #174 of 682
penngray,

The JL Audio Fathom sub box is very stout,it is in no danger of deform in in any abnormal manner even under the driver's enormous peak near Xmech.

However I found teh Aerial Acoustics to have the highest quality box of all my commercial subs.The cheapest being Velodyne's HGS18/DD18...man is that box a plain jane affair or what...but it does the job and the sub sounds great. The resonant points do not compromise SQ here as the sub's operating frequency is well below...that resonant point(s).

When building DIY subs,I want to go beyond what is needed,well beyond. Impractical for a commercial. As it would add dead weight and not performance.

Even my dual TC1000 opposed sealed is build like a tank. You rap N tap in any spot ...dead ...you hear that Wilson WATT/PUPPY brick sound when tapping the top module, a real pleasure to hear.

Even the large sealed,opposed dual TC-3000...like a monolith machined out of a piece of MDF.
post #175 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by zordac View Post

So the basic questions of DIY vs Commercial comes down to this for me:
1. Can a DIY builder buy the same quality of components that the Commercial builder can buy?
2. Can the DIY builder buy these components for less than the Commercial builder sales his completed sub?

If the answer to both of these is yes then I think DIY wins.

1. Yes. Some commercial speaker companies may use their own drivers in some cases using exotic materials that will not be available to DIY. However, frequently these drivers are not better than or even as good as off the shelf drivers that are available to anyone.

2. Here the commercial product doesn't stand a chance against DIY. When it comes down to it, drivers, even very high quality ones are not very expensive. So even if they pay half the price buying in quantity, that's not as big a savings as you would expect. More of the cost in a commercial speaker product goes into other areas such as construction, packaging, distribution etc. They have to pay someone labor to build the things whereas the DIY'er doesn't have to pay himself to enjoy his hobby and DIY has no packaging or distribution cost. Additionally, typical wholesale on speaker products is 50% to 60% of retail. That means the manufacturer has to make money on it based on selling it for half retail. This alone more than out weighs any advantage they have in paying less for the drivers. Generally they can not spend more than about $100 on parts for a product they will sell to the retailer for about $500. Somewhere within that $400 difference is construction packaging and distribution cost plus their profit. The retailer then sells it for about $800 to $1000. So, even if you pay twice as much for parts as they do, you are still building the $800 ~ $1000 speaker for about $200.

Monte
post #176 of 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by zordac View Post

So the basic questions of DIY vs Commercial comes down to this for me:
1. Can a DIY builder buy the same quality of components that the Commercial builder can buy?
2. Can the DIY builder buy these components for less than the Commercial builder sales his completed sub?

If the answer to both of these is yes then I think DIY wins.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montekay View Post

1. Yes. Some commercial speaker companies may use their own drivers in some cases using exotic materials that will not be available to DIY. However, frequently these drivers are not better than or even as good as off the shelf drivers that are available to anyone.

To hopefully spare us some worthless debate, while there are many still using rather off-the-shelf drivers in expensive subwoofers, those held in higher regard on forums like AVS and others generally are not.

The biggest benefit I have in designing a product from scratch is the ability to have a driver made to fit my need or needs (sometimes multiple products). Sometimes we do have certain changes made that make for better results, but often that benefit is of most value in the specific application. Designing a subwoofer as a closed system with amplification, EQ, Limiting, box, etc, etc affords fewer "what-if?'s" to consider.

Please don't read me wrong here. Being a long time DIYer I am in no way suggesting a production product is beating out DIY in any clear way. I'm pointing out that what gets most commonly focused on in DIY projects aren't always the limiting factors, and many times you don't need more exotic, better parts or longer woofer travel. Sometimes you have to find better ways to put what you have to use, especially when production products face physical size limitations. The single biggest advantage DIY has over production subwoofers is the ability to build larger by customizing for the application. Of course using uber-drivers and big pro-amps also give the DIYer some huge assets to work with.

That is why I have set in motion my own efforts for some semi-custom, built-to-fit designs. I don't expect avid and enthused DIYers to purchase my designs over a DIY option if one exists to fit their need. Rather I hope to execute some designs that are flexible and useful enough that a DIYer would feel comfortable in recommending them to say a boss or acquaintance who found out they are an enthusiast, knowing they wouldn't end up with the anemic performance found in so many retail subwoofers we all poke fun at here.
post #177 of 682
I'd agree that the commercial designs have the benefit of more testing by qualified engineers in their design and testing.

I'd also agree with Mark that size & power are big factors. Using big-pro amps in designs that get too large to be attractive for commercial designs is the sweet-spot for DIY subs.

The <$600 price range is a competitive market for commercial subs and trying to out-DIY that category is pretty tough too. They have advantages of economy of scale, especially AV123 as they have a great manufacturing set-up for the most expensive part, the cabinet.
post #178 of 682
Thread Starter 
Quote:


That is why I have set in motion my own efforts for some semi-custom, built-to-fit designs. I don't expect avid and enthused DIYers to purchase my designs over a DIY option if one exists to fit their need. Rather I hope to execute some designs that are flexible and useful enough that a DIYer would feel comfortable in recommending them to say a boss or acquaintance who found out they are an enthusiast, knowing they wouldn't end up with the anemic performance found in so many retail subwoofers we all poke fun at here.

That will be pretty cool!
post #179 of 682
Actually, I went through the DIY gallery in this forum a while ago, and although the big subs with big amps get all the attention, the average DIY was 5 cubes and 60/40 sealed vs ported.

A 30 second sine sweep at 110dB, 2M, GP with its associated THD numbers is largely an irrelevant measurement, IMO, and refrigerator sized subs driven by mega watt pro amps are the very small minority for DIY or commercial.

5 sealed cubes loaded with 2-15" drivers is more than adequate for the average person. It's very versatile in adapting to various spaces and source material, it's much easier to transport and place, it can be used with many different power plants and offers the best in-room FR options.

It's much easier to add another 4-5 cubic foot sub than to try to place a 10 (or 12, or 20, or 30) cubic foot monster in the average HT.

At an average listening level of -10dB from reference, you can do the math for average peaks (none of which will ever last 30 seconds) and add a few dB for the fact that most people calibrate the sub hot, balanced against the average room gain below 30Hz.

Again, the advantage of DIY vs commercial is better transient response. SVS and HSU each offer a ported commercial sub tuned to 10Hz, which seems to be the latest magic number benchmark, but many compromises are made to achieve that goal in both designs. Brian Ding has been offering a superior in-room transient response for years, but I consider his to be a DIY package.

Mark said in another thread "As I hinted at in an earlier post, the very low frequency extension of the system extends to around 10Hz as measured at the listening position, and we should remember that as we get this low in frequency, even 5Hz makes for a significant fraction of an octave".

I couldn't agree more, and it's generally much easier to achieve a lower in-room response (as Mark did) using multiples of a small sealed system, no matter how you slice it.

Bosso
post #180 of 682
Hey... I don't care what your flavor is....sealed, ported or IB I love em all. Different strokes for different folks.

I'd say most of my customers build big but my drivers push in that direction. Five cubic feet would be a puny one based upon my average customer. My customer base is probably not 100% representative.

I doubt Hsu or SVS are tuning a sub anywhere near 10hz. It would require one hell of an undersized port and they would catch major grief for all the chuffing. Most of the commercial subs are probably tuned high and are using under-sized ports compared to most of the DIY builds I'm seeing. When your prototyping a product you have the advantage of testing the hell out of it to see when the port starts chuffing and how much masking you get from the program material. In a DIY project you just oversize it so you don't have any chance of hitting that threshold.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › late night thoughts about DIY vs Comercial