Jump to content
Sundown Audio

ZV4 12 in a 4th order. How many cubes sealed?


Recommended Posts

I'd personally go bigger than 1 cube sealed. I'd start out with 1.5 and then shrink it if you need. That sub is VERY well mechanically controlled by its suspension and the larger the sealed section, the lower your sealed resonance ie, the better the lows will sound. I'd also choose more port area than 60" personally. My Crossfire C7s don't have nearly the Xmax those Zv4s have and I'm at over 60"(66" to be exact) per sub.

Why are you doing a 4th order bandpass enclosure for this sub? The answer to this question is important

Im not the one you want to try to troll. Just a fyi for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 to what CleanSierra said about bandpass boxes.

However if you would like to try one anyway, here are some things to think about.

The reason people (like me) said to ignore bandpass box "ratios" is because they don't really tell you anything. Having a high aspect ratio does not guarantee you will end up with highly efficient box, and having a low aspect ratio doesn't guarantee you will have a wide bandwidth. These is because those attributes are not determined by the relationship between the two chamber sizes. Those attributes are both mostly a function of front chamber size. So if you have a box with a 3 cube front chamber and a 1 cube rear chamber, you have a 3:1 ratio. Now if you were the double the rear chamber to 2 cubes you now have a 1.5:1 ratio which by common (incorrect) wisdom would make the box have a lot wider bandwidth, but in practice its not going to make the box sound that much differently.

As far as sizing the rear chamber goes, I pretty much agree with CleanSierra. Larger is better. Making the rear chamber larger will improve you low end performance by reducing the sealed resonance frequency and the QTC. What limits how large you can make it is mechanical power handling. As you make the rear chamber larger your cone excursion below tuning also increases. You don't want to go too far. Modeling software can help give you an idea of whats going to happen.

Edited by Triticum Agricolam
  • Like (+1 Rep) 2

"Nothing prevents people from knowing the truth more than the belief they already know it."
"Making bass is easy, making music is the hard part."

Builds:

U7qkMTL.jpg  LgPgE9w.jpg  Od2G3u1.jpg  xMyLoO1.jpg  9pAlXUK.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 to what CleanSierra said about bandpass boxes.

As far as sizing the rear chamber goes, I pretty much agree with CleanSierra. Larger is better. Making the rear chamber larger will improve you low end performance by reducing the sealed resonance frequency and the QTC. What limits how large you can make it is mechanical power handling. As you make the rear chamber larger your cone excursion below tuning also increases. You don't want to go too far. Modeling software can help give you an idea of whats going to happen.

this is cool! i love reading Triticum Agricolam stuff... good stuff bro keep it up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 248 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...