posted
Every enviornment has the cabinet that will work best for it, and every car is different. So the most efficient is to use the optimum design as described by a manufacturer. Mainly because it's simpler.
------------------
E.C. Wuz here
Posts: 1057 | From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 'eh | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The most efficient box design is arguably a horn. Trying to fit a full bass horn in anything but an Excusrsion may prove impossible however. Large ported boxes with huge ports seem to be popular right now.
------------------
And that's the bottom line, cuz: LORD DUKK SAYS SO!
The Big Show The Dukk says: Know your bass: PORT your damn box!! Have HoleSaw, Will Travel!
posted
Your full of it Dukk! I've go a triple bypass quad full folded horn in my GEO metro thats flat to 3 HZ... Of course I have to drive while running alongside the car and had to build a "Tim Maynor" custom extension on the back, but it fit!!! LOL! Sorry, Its late
posted
I'd agree that horn-loaded is efficient, but usually subs that have an EBP of under about 80 (I.E. most autosound woofers) usually don't sound or work very good in them... I would think that, were one to use a 6th order bandpass with both chambers tuned very close to each other, there would be an abominably large peak.. As abominable as the sound quality that such a box would have.
I would say, Isobarically loading a 6th order bandpass with high excursion drivers and making both chambers large and tuning them within 10hz of each other, then applying major power, would be about the best efficiency I could think of.. But a "one-note wonder" for sure!
ShadowStar
Posts: 2578 | From: Somewhere In the Northeast | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since when do snowmen have anything to do with bass???? The Griz has funnied. Posts: 732 | From: Omaha, NE | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic