For a near field portable system with a 3 to 4 inch woofer, and using heavy EQ, which enclosure will give me the lowest and tightest bass (down to 32 hz) for music in a small box? I bought a $45 Tangband w3-2108 3” with a fs of 45 hz. I don’t want to go isobaric because of the cost.
I use a computer to send the audio signal to the amp so I will be using a neat free EQ program to help with the low end. I placed another tread on the full range forum “Great EQ program – Should I use it? “ to answer questions about that, ie phasing.
I will use a 24db high shelf EQ filter to limit above 250Hz and a low shelf at 30hz. Using that EQ software, I can get down to really low bass (near field) but what enclosure will make best use of it? My dilemma is which of the below is best for my portable small situation? I believe all of the below will get to low bass with the EQ but which is the best choice assuming all you guys know about the different enclosures?
I use a computer to send the audio signal to the amp so I will be using a neat free EQ program to help with the low end. I placed another tread on the full range forum “Great EQ program – Should I use it? “ to answer questions about that, ie phasing.
I will use a 24db high shelf EQ filter to limit above 250Hz and a low shelf at 30hz. Using that EQ software, I can get down to really low bass (near field) but what enclosure will make best use of it? My dilemma is which of the below is best for my portable small situation? I believe all of the below will get to low bass with the EQ but which is the best choice assuming all you guys know about the different enclosures?
- Bandpass - but then I will have a narrow bandwidth (30 to about 60) so I will need a “midwoofer” to get to the 250 hz crossover needed for the other planar speakers. But will I get muddy bass?
- Ported – same as above
- Dual reflex (Weems - DCR) – it will spread out the excursion and impedance but will it be muddy too?
- Sealed – best for tightness but I will have to EQ it so much that I’m wondering if that will affect the music or phasing (that is why I placed the other tread, to get the answer about phasing.)
- MLTqwt – I can use a 3d printer to build a small one with many folds but will 7 to 10 folds in a 4x6x12 box affect the music? Is it true that you can get almost ½ to 1 octave lower than the speaker’s fs with this enclosure?
- Or ???
No offense, but I don't think your 3-4inch woofer will be happy trying to even reach 32Hz. If you have to eq it alot, then you'll reach thermal and physical limits before you reach your goal, and it'll sound terrible even before. 6.5Inch woofers are nice for 50-40, maybe 30Hz in a good designed box.
no offense taken - normally, I would agree with you but I have run this tangband speaker for several hours in a 4x5x8 inch box with a 6" passive radiator (woox) with some low (50 hz but not 32hz) music and no physical damage. Remember, it is used as near field at 80 to 85 db. My main question is, what is the best small music enclosure type for the lowest bass possible?
Normally it would be sealed and frequency, Qtc [re]shaped with a LRT: https://www.google.com/search?q=lin...ome..69i57.19703j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
GM
Well I guess there are exceptions. My excuses :shrug:
i'd go sealed too, though. A good sealed box can hit lows nicely too.
i'd go sealed too, though. A good sealed box can hit lows nicely too.
I'm a big fan of Linkwitz, I'm an OB head, I'm a bit suspicious of large amounts of EQ and excursion though, tis the fashionable way to go, power is cheap. To my mind large excursion equals distortion. There are pros and cons, which makes this hobby (lifestyle ha!) so interesting
Me too, but when the cab size is acoustically like a 75 pc. orchestra playing perched on the head of a pin, something's got to be sacrificed: https://www.trueaudio.com/st_trade.htm
GM
GM
Thanks scottJoblin - that was informative as that fellow is using about the same tangband (an earlier version) of the one I'm using. Mine has an f3 of 35 in a .08cuft ported enclosure. Also, I read GM's article on LRT and that was fascinating but out of my electronics realm.
I guess the question I have, goes back to my original question: Is it better to have a ported box with an F3 of 35hz, or:
1. a sealed box and use EQ to get to the same point? or
2. a Bandpass without EQ but maybe with a muddy bass? or
3. MLTqwt with the possibility of lower octave without EQ? or ??
I thank you'll for your comments but I would like to get back to my first notes and help me decide which of those (or another) would be the best enclosure for this small woofer in a small portable box or maybe even a tube?
Thanks
I guess the question I have, goes back to my original question: Is it better to have a ported box with an F3 of 35hz, or:
1. a sealed box and use EQ to get to the same point? or
2. a Bandpass without EQ but maybe with a muddy bass? or
3. MLTqwt with the possibility of lower octave without EQ? or ??
I thank you'll for your comments but I would like to get back to my first notes and help me decide which of those (or another) would be the best enclosure for this small woofer in a small portable box or maybe even a tube?
Thanks
Sixth order vented box: vented plus second-order high-pass EQ.
How tight? It depends on woofer Qts and box design.
Sealed with heavy EQ will reach at 32 Hz, but with very low SPL.
When faced with a similar question, my solution was to go with a ported box, with provision to plug the port & hence make it sealed. That way, I can try it both ways to see what I prefer. And of course it's easy enough to adjust the equalization for either configuration.
(And - in case you're wondering - no, I didn't complete this project yet; it's still in my "to-do" pile.
)
(And - in case you're wondering - no, I didn't complete this project yet; it's still in my "to-do" pile.
)
The limiting factor with such a woofer probably will be displacement. Then sealed and 4th order bandpass simply will not go sufficiently loud; ported or 6th order bandpass will be louder, maybe even loud enough. Bass tightness will be OK if you apply parametric EQ based on measurements.
OK, thanks for your suggestions. I will go with ported and will use the suggestion to plug the port or maybe use one of my WOOX Passive Radiators since much easier to design and implement than bandpass. However, if anyone has experience with Tqwt or MLTqwt with multi-folds in a small enclosure than I would like to hear about it.
I would like to keep the tread open for other suggestions.
thanks
I would like to keep the tread open for other suggestions.
thanks
Here's what I'm going to do after a few comments from you'll (so less mistakes) and will get back with results using my spl meter:
1 Build an proof of concept box out of 1" foam
2. Make it larger than necessary and place foam inside to adj the box vol to accommodate the various type of boxes below - brace the long side
3. Make several tops that use my tangband w3-2108 45fs speaker with everything on the outside (spk with magnet out, Passive Radiator, ports, etc)
a. First top = Only spk and and measure the sealed
response
b. Spk and port (cuft=.08 with an adjustable port between 14 and 18 inches and 1 inch dia) low volume so no port noise at that dia
c. Spk and one of my 6" WOOX Passive radiator. I have no idea of the Fs of the PR nor the cone weight so I will need to add weights to adjust.
d. For fast changing (and I would like comments here if there is a way to make faster changing of tops) = place weather stripping foam on the side top edges, then place the top with the speaker and seal down the top with pressure force by using bungee cords.
Questions:
1. Is there a faster way to change the tops?
2. I will take measurements a couple of inches from the speaker using low volume to eliminate room resonance. Since the port is on the outside of the box and will be 14 to 18 inches away from my spl meter, I assume the low frequency wave length will automatically be included in the measurements. Is that correct?
3. What is the best idea to add temporary weights to the passive radiator?
4. I'm now using sine wave files in VLC to measure but should I use pink noise files and if so, where can I download them?
Thanks for any comments
1 Build an proof of concept box out of 1" foam
2. Make it larger than necessary and place foam inside to adj the box vol to accommodate the various type of boxes below - brace the long side
3. Make several tops that use my tangband w3-2108 45fs speaker with everything on the outside (spk with magnet out, Passive Radiator, ports, etc)
a. First top = Only spk and and measure the sealed
response
b. Spk and port (cuft=.08 with an adjustable port between 14 and 18 inches and 1 inch dia) low volume so no port noise at that dia
c. Spk and one of my 6" WOOX Passive radiator. I have no idea of the Fs of the PR nor the cone weight so I will need to add weights to adjust.
d. For fast changing (and I would like comments here if there is a way to make faster changing of tops) = place weather stripping foam on the side top edges, then place the top with the speaker and seal down the top with pressure force by using bungee cords.
Questions:
1. Is there a faster way to change the tops?
2. I will take measurements a couple of inches from the speaker using low volume to eliminate room resonance. Since the port is on the outside of the box and will be 14 to 18 inches away from my spl meter, I assume the low frequency wave length will automatically be included in the measurements. Is that correct?
3. What is the best idea to add temporary weights to the passive radiator?
4. I'm now using sine wave files in VLC to measure but should I use pink noise files and if so, where can I download them?
Thanks for any comments
This seems quite familiar territory... Though I wasn't mooting a 3" sub, but the W5-1138. 🙂
The frequency plot for the W3 indicates a 5dB hole immediately after FS. That also drops the efficiency to 70dB1W1M.
If you plan to pair this up with anything like a full range speaker, you'll be at 1W on the full range but more like 16 the W3. Double that if you run a stereo pair.
IMO you need more subs. At least one per channel. If you really need 32 or 35hz, maybe try a bass shaker attached to your desktop?
The frequency plot for the W3 indicates a 5dB hole immediately after FS. That also drops the efficiency to 70dB1W1M.
If you plan to pair this up with anything like a full range speaker, you'll be at 1W on the full range but more like 16 the W3. Double that if you run a stereo pair.
IMO you need more subs. At least one per channel. If you really need 32 or 35hz, maybe try a bass shaker attached to your desktop?
No. Put mic at 1/8" from the center of the woofer cone (diameter of the cone+1/2 surround = D), and measure the driver output (minimum output is at bass-reflex resonance frequency). Than put mic at the port out (center of the diameter d) and measure the port output. Scale the port output with d/D and add driver output.
Last edited:
Bass shaker to the desktop - now that is innovated but no reason to stop there, let's go for under the seat!!!
Thanks Sonce, but not sure what you mean about scale the port output with d/D and add driver output?
Thanks Sonce, but not sure what you mean about scale the port output with d/D and add driver output?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.