6th order bandpass ratios?

[Kyblack76]

Oh.... and,  I hate "what ratio" is best almost as much as "how much port area per cube"  ...  Hate that shit. 

[WalledSonic]

Fact.  Im at like 5 cu ft for a 12".  Lol.  Its not a clean S10 with 2 18s on 10K or nothing, but ya know.

[Triticum Agricolam]

11 minutes ago, Kyblack76 said:

Oh.... and,  I hate "what ratio" is best almost as much as "how much port area per cube"  ...  Hate that shit. 

This x 1,000,000

[Raptorman]

1 hour ago, rocking.that.eclipse said:

There have been a couple parallel tuned that I really like

But with that being said I have built 3 different series tuned and they all seem to play just fine. I think that I will stick to 4ths tho. Easier and just as much output in my opinion

 

they can work for us. Just not the best option IMO. I hate having two exit ports, can cause some funky loading/cabin pressurization.

[kalilac619]

54 minutes ago, Kyblack76 said:

A "small" 6th order ...... phrase just sounds funny lol. Space eating mothers ...

I have a "small" 6th order...ratio wise it's only 1.35:1 but is 45 cubes gross Lol 

[the_garynator]

4 hours ago, WalledSonic said:

Low tuning, smaller volume @Raptorman? Is that right? Thought low tuning would have a larger volume. Simulations on WinISD seem to favor a large volume for the low side, but i dont have a sickkk low tuned sixth like yourself, either :-P

Low tuning smaller volume rear chamber, large front chamber tuned high would be what a series tuned 6th would require.

WinISD does not simulate series tuned 6ths, it only does parallel tuned 6ths.

4 hours ago, Raptorman said:

It's right.

And pay ZERO attention to the graphs in winisd or any other program. They are utterly useless. All you should use winisd for is vent mach and tuning.

if you are referring to using winisd to design a series tuned 6th, then yes, the graph is useless.  But if you are using it to design a parallel tuned 6th, it's actually quite accurate, I have quite a bit of testing to back it up.

[Raptorman]

This has been covered already.

Post 'em up man. Would love to see the graph vs real world response!

[the_garynator]

Just now, Raptorman said:

This has been covered already.

Post 'em up man. Would love to see the graph vs real world response!

Just realized it was covered and was about to edit my post but you were too quick hahaha.

 

I had them posted but photobucket had to go fuck things up, i still have like 20 pages of photos in my current build thread to fix and would need to go though those old threads and fix them to share the data again too lol.  i'll get around to it eventually lol

[the_garynator]

I'd also like to point out that port area of the rear chamber definitely has an effect on output in a series tuned 6th.  I have data showing quite significant gains from increasing port area of the rear chamber while maintaining the same tuning frequency and volumes.  I'll see if i can find the post.

 

EDIT: doesn't look like I ever posted the result of adding port area. I'll have to dig through my notebook and see if i can find it at some point.

[Raptorman]

Yes it does. I have tons of notes as well testing 20-50 at the headrest with windows down for every change ive made to my 6th. 

I have yet to see Winisd model up an accurate graph for any enclosure that I have designed/built. (I've designed over 3,000 enclosures alone)

Ported doesn't get as low as it says, it doesn't spike as hard as it says. It doesn't extend into the upper frequencies in a flat response as much as it says. It doesn't account for cabin gain, stiffness of panels within the vehicle, port areas, window configurations, box positions, etc. 

4th bandpasses are especially hilarious because a 4th that plays 20-60 completely flat in the real world has a huge freaking spike at tuning with virtually no bandwidth.

Those graphs crack me up lol