An experiment in box materials

[WalledSonic]

Truth, which is why I mentioned burp SPL. I figure it would sound like sh*t for music, but for a particular frequency, could get LOUD.

[Krakin]

I'm more attuned towards the latter group.

I want to hear what was recorded, not what I create from a recording.

Same reason I don't like the idea of tube amps for replicating recordings. If you are playing live, I could understand the want to have either an amp or enclosure with a specific sound signature, but I personally wouldn't want to play something different than what the artist wanted me to hear.

That's right I also play sheet music as written.

[kalilac619]

I'd like to see a strength test with multiple layers involved when it comes to stiffness....since most usually double up or even triple up on the layers...I.e are 2 mdf layers or 2 China ply as strong as single Baltic?

[WalledSonic]

I'd like to see a strength test with multiple layers involved when it comes to stiffness....since most usually double up or even triple up on the layers...I.e are 2 mdf layers or 2 China ply as strong as single Baltic?

Good question, I'll ask it slightly differently: is the relationship for deflection linear for multiple sheets? If so, it could make 'rules of thumb' quite easy... such as "4 layers of X are equal in rigidity to 3 layers of Y". Or whatever. Then, a reference chart could be created that would make building heavyweight boxes easier.

I am very interested since I am building a wall Friday, or starting at least. I dont actually know how many layers of BB I need, so I'm gonna build a shell and add inner panels as necessary.

We're hungry for more data Triticum!

[Triticum Agricolam]

I'd like to see a strength test with multiple layers involved when it comes to stiffness....since most usually double up or even triple up on the layers...I.e are 2 mdf layers or 2 China ply as strong as single Baltic?

Good question, I'll ask it slightly differently: is the relationship for deflection linear for multiple sheets? If so, it could make 'rules of thumb' quite easy... such as "4 layers of X are equal in rigidity to 3 layers of Y". Or whatever. Then, a reference chart could be created that would make building heavyweight boxes easier.....

I'm going to answer both you guys at once.

A double thickness panel, if properly glued together, is way, WAY stiffer than single thickness panel. However, a single thickness panel with proper bracing is significantly stiffer than a double thickness panel. My post on bracing is coming, I've got all the data, I just need to organize my thoughts and write it out. I'll start on it tonight and probably post it tomorrow when I get it done.

Also I wanted to address something with this experiment. My goal was not to get everyone to use baltic birch or to get people to stop using MDF. The only time I use baltic birch is under some very specific circumstances and it doesn't happen very often. When it comes to subwoofer boxes I mostly use Arauco plywood or if I can't get that I'll use the Chinese pine. My goal with this thread was to get folks thinking about the materials they use, what their differences are, and what it takes to build a strong enclosure. Baltic birch is wonderful, it very stiff, very strong, looks good and is very nice to work with, but its heavy and quite expensive. MDF is pretty much the complete opposite, but it has its things it does well too and very good enclosures can be (and certainly have been) built out of it. It just needs to be approached differently.

[fecupe2001]

I guess the only way to know is that someone makes an serious testing about those the materials using clamped power, spl, box for lows, box for spl, etc etc, i would definitely love to test that myself as i always test everything i can, but i´m a father now and don´t have the time to fool around on this matter.

All i know is, many times i´ve gotten better results having a little bit of flex on my boxes believe it or not, resonance maybe? who knows...

[bassl0va]

There's a company that makes speakers with tuned strings on the sides of the cabinet. I can't for the life of me find them, but I think their claim was something about the resonances creating the under/overtones of live performances...

Doesn't make any sense to me why that would ever be a good idea when you're trying to accurately reproduce a recording.

[Krakin]

There's a company that makes speakers with tuned strings on the sides of the cabinet. I can't for the life of me find them, but I think their claim was something about the resonances creating the under/overtones of live performances...

Doesn't make any sense to me why that would ever be a good idea when you're trying to accurately reproduce a recording.

The undertones are the same aspect that Bösendorfer uses in their 225 and 290 imperial grand pianos by adding more keys in the lower resister up to 9 more keys in the 290. They build off the idea that a dark undertone is appealing and makes and overall richer tone.

[bassl0va]

The undertones are the same aspect that Bösendorfer uses in their 225 and 290 imperial grand pianos by adding more keys in the lower resister up to 9 more keys in the 290. They build off the idea that a dark undertone is appealing and makes and overall richer tone.

Yeah but that's the whole point of musical instruments, it makes perfect sense there. It allows the musicians to chose what sound they want for their music.

Expensive audio gear is meant to be accurate, which it can't be if you have half a harp strapped to the sides of your speakers.

The concept might work on very specific genres and give a pleasing sound, but it still doesn't make it accurate.

[ckeeler11]

Expensive audio gear is meant to be accurate, which it can't be if you have half a harp strapped to the sides of your speakers.

That's a pretty generalized statement. It's like saying expensive cars are meant to be fast.

The intent, design, and material used decide what the equipment is capable of doing has nothing to do with cost. Everything has its own design criteria and tries to accomplish different things.