csshakka Posted July 8, 2014 Report Share Posted July 8, 2014 Searching threads mostly brought up people looking to build boxes for this sub, but didn't see too much about how it ended up sounding. What size box, tuning frequency, and port area tend to be good for a single soundqubed hds312? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cj Kumz Posted July 8, 2014 Report Share Posted July 8, 2014 Depends on how much power you running really, but 2-2.5 cubes with 32-40 sq inches and tune to a frequency that suites you though 35-37hz works well. Vw Polo Pioneer Deh-6050UB Sundown Saz-3500d DD Audio 9500 15'' 5.5 cubic feet box with 10 inch port @ 38hz I live to hear the Bass drop!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe X Posted July 8, 2014 Report Share Posted July 8, 2014 Searching threads mostly brought up people looking to build boxes for this sub, but didn't see too much about how it ended up sounding. What size box, tuning frequency, and port area tend to be good for a single soundqubed hds312? Thought I read somewhere you didn't like peaky, soundqubed maybe is not your best bet for flat performance, take your time to explain what you want and what vehicle you have, etc, probably sealed is one way to go or a lower chamber ratio 4th BP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csshakka Posted July 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Depends on how much power you running really, but 2-2.5 cubes with 32-40 sq inches and tune to a frequency that suites you though 35-37hz works well. Going to be running off of a sundown saz-1200d. And thanks I'll keep that in mind. Searching threads mostly brought up people looking to build boxes for this sub, but didn't see too much about how it ended up sounding. What size box, tuning frequency, and port area tend to be good for a single soundqubed hds312? Thought I read somewhere you didn't like peaky, soundqubed maybe is not your best bet for flat performance, take your time to explain what you want and what vehicle you have, etc, probably sealed is one way to go or a lower chamber ratio 4th BP. Yes you did read this. After a ton of investigating and measuring with a friend, we modeled out a rough cabin environment in room EQ wizard. There was a massive peak with just my cabin gain alone. With two type r's and a single 16 band eq, we still couldn't get it anywhere near flat in the lower frequencies (30-100hz). The vehicle is a 2011 jeep liberty. I've tried multiple box sizes, tunings, sub/port orientations and it doesn't seem to really help much. Also tried a sealed box, but seemed to just lose a ton of output and still had a peak that matched the cabin model (50-60hz'ish range). I'm sort of downgrading to one sub to get half my trunk space back. My thoughts were a single HDS312 and if I can't eq to a somewhat flat bass response, to get like a 4 band parametric eq on top of my head unit's 16 band graphic eq to fine tune it better. Should I have taken a different route? The HDS312 is already ordered....guess I made an impulse decision after reading so many good things about those subs. EDIT: The problem exists right between the 50hz and 80hz band. Even by adjusting one or the other, it always either leaves a big dip or a big peak. I think an additional from of EQ that I can center in on this might fix the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe X Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 You need to use the RTA facility of that program along with a calibrated microphone to see a better picture of what is going on there for real, there will be things you can fix through box design, others not, use a DSP based parametric equalizer (so that you don't introduce phase shifts) to deal with any anomalies, specially the cabin resonant frequency which is a big peak appearing usually somewhere in the 30-70Hz range, you can't usually eq-out these things with a graphic EQ. Bear in mind that proper location and aiming of all your speakers is also very important, you should try to minimize the use of signal processors for a more natural sound IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csshakka Posted July 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 You need to use the RTA facility of that program along with a calibrated microphone to see a better picture of what is going on there for real, there will be things you can fix through box design, others not, use a DSP based parametric equalizer (so that you don't introduce phase shifts) to deal with any anomalies, specially the cabin resonant frequency which is a big peak appearing usually somewhere in the 30-70Hz range, you can't usually eq-out these things with a graphic EQ. Bear in mind that proper location and aiming of all your speakers is also very important, you should try to minimize the use of signal processors for a more natural sound IMO. Sorry I forgot to mention, we DID use the RTA capabilities to take measurements too. We used sine sweeps and measured 20-200hz range in multiple positions near where my head normally is and tried to EQ it flat. The simulated room model was pretty close in terms of where the peak happens (around 65hz). As you said, trying to EQ it out with a graphic EQ didn't work too well. You can do a lot of box enclosures, but can you build one to eliminate the peak here due to cabin gain? If I end up having to get a DSP based parametric EQ, do you have any suggestions on brand/model? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe X Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 If you don't want to invest in a parametric EQ you could try to just low pass the sub stage below those 65Hz and high-pass your front stage above those 65Hz (if it actually has strong enough midbass to get that low), and do some readings, pretty crude method to flatten out response but it may just suffice for your needs or not. An even harder way to reduce box gain at higher freqs. is using a bandpass box design (which I wouldn't really recommend). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csshakka Posted July 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 If you don't want to invest in a parametric EQ you could try to just low pass the sub stage below those 65Hz and high-pass your front stage above those 65Hz (if it actually has strong enough midbass to get that low), and do some readings, pretty crude method to flatten out response but it may just suffice for your needs or not. An even harder way to reduce box gain at higher freqs. is using a bandpass box design (which I wouldn't really recommend). Hmm this is a good idea. I'll definitely test this out. My guess is that my door speakers won't be able to play that low at a decent volume. Running Polk audio 6501s components at only half of the 100w rated power. Great sensitivity for mids/high, but always found them to be a bit lacking in the midbass department. Any suggestions on parametric EQs if this doesn't work out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe X Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 I would go with the Alpine HU with the imprint module since it saves a d/a a/d pass, but there are at least standalone DSP based processors from RF, Alpine, JBL and Audison, all stupid expensive. There are also a few HUs wit integrated parametric EQ but are quite limited in setup options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csshakka Posted July 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I would go with the Alpine HU with the imprint module since it saves a d/a a/d pass, but there are at least standalone DSP based processors from RF, Alpine, JBL and Audison, all stupid expensive. There are also a few HUs wit integrated parametric EQ but are quite limited in setup options. Alright, I definitely will consider everything you said and do the best I can with my current EQ, crossovers, etc before looking to additional processing equipment. That said, a box is still needed for a single HDS312. Could you possibly help with a box? Max Usable dimensions: 25" W x 21" D x 17.5" H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.