Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way
Home Forums Rules Articles Store Gallery Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 5th January 2010, 12:38 PM   #1
SaSi is offline SaSi  Greece
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Default Vented box alignments and Qtc

With sealed enclosures we have the "well-known" alignments as per Qtc value. The lower the Qtc, the better the transient response.

With vented enclosures we have lots of different alignments. However I see no reference to Qtc for them. Is there a correlation between alignment and Qtc?

If I "sort" the responses of the alignments suggested by WinISD, I see that the bigger boxes are also tuned lower and exhibit lower group delay figures and a less steep rolloff before f3 (bass shelf) while the smaller boxes are tuned higher and show a steeper rolloff or even a bump.

I would expect the larger boxes to behave better in transients and exhibit a lower Qtc. Is that correct? Is there a correlation between box size, vent tuning frequency and Qtc?
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th January 2010, 03:27 PM   #2
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaSi View Post
With sealed enclosures we have the "well-known" alignments as per Qtc value. The lower the Qtc, the better the transient response.

With vented enclosures we have lots of different alignments. However I see no reference to Qtc for them. Is there a correlation between alignment and Qtc?

If I "sort" the responses of the alignments suggested by WinISD, I see that the bigger boxes are also tuned lower and exhibit lower group delay figures and a less steep rolloff before f3 (bass shelf) while the smaller boxes are tuned higher and show a steeper rolloff or even a bump.

I would expect the larger boxes to behave better in transients and exhibit a lower Qtc. Is that correct? Is there a correlation between box size, vent tuning frequency and Qtc?
As a system all forms of enclosure have a "Q" which depends on the alignment. But since there are two resonances to consider - the driver and the box, a single Q as is possible with a closed box, is not as easy for a ported one. But the Q is simply that of the finished systems HP response.

But I wouldn't worry too much about things like "Q" and transient response for woofers in real rooms. It all gets washed away by the room.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th January 2010, 04:41 PM   #3
Ron E is online now Ron E  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Ron E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: USA, MN
Qtc is not a concept that works for vented boxes. A vented box becomes at the limit a closed box when the tuning frequency is 0Hz, or the port losses are made so high as to effectively close the box. This is the limit for transient response. For any given box size, this Fb=0 condition represents the best transient response possible for a ported box.

It is said that the SC4 alignments represent good transient response. An EBS aligned vented box can approach the transient response of a sealed box, essentially, with the ringing of the port (which you will never hear if it is <40Hz) overlaid.

Tailoring the response to match the room is arguably more important than any concept such as Q in either vented or sealed boxes.
__________________
Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works. --Carl Sagan
Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge. --Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th January 2010, 04:45 PM   #4
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron E View Post
Tailoring the response to match the room is arguably more important than any concept such as Q in either vented or sealed boxes.
Or just use any old box and driver - as long as it has enough "capability" (Power handling, excursion, etc.) -and don't worry about any of that Thiele-Small stuff, just fix the whole shebang with EQ in-situ. Multiple subs assumed of course.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th January 2010, 08:55 PM   #5
SaSi is offline SaSi  Greece
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Thanks for the informative replies. What I am worried about is group delay in specific that is much higher with vented enclosures compared to sealed. I have tried several WinISD simulations showing different group delay values peaking in the 15 ~ 30msec range around resonance.

I have yet to find any definitive answer as to how audible this delay can be in the 20 ~ 30Hz region. (The port in my simulations is tuned at 18~20Hz and the enclosure is 160lt with two compound drivers having Fs=23 and Vas=250).
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th January 2010, 09:26 PM   #6
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaSi View Post
Thanks for the informative replies. What I am worried about is group delay in specific that is much higher with vented enclosures compared to sealed. I have tried several WinISD simulations showing different group delay values peaking in the 15 ~ 30msec range around resonance.

I have yet to find any definitive answer as to how audible this delay can be in the 20 ~ 30Hz region. (The port in my simulations is tuned at 18~20Hz and the enclosure is 160lt with two compound drivers having Fs=23 and Vas=250).
Its not audible. Just build whatever is easiest, but make sure that there are several of them. Different types and tunings can actually help. One ported, one closed, one dipole. Its all in the setup.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vented alignments Mikeng43 Multi-Way 22 23rd August 2008 04:08 AM
Overdamped vs. classic vented alignments sreten Multi-Way 19 12th January 2004 09:02 PM
Qtc in vented boxes luisma1972 Multi-Way 8 2nd January 2003 02:06 AM
Vented box alignments Vg Multi-Way 7 26th May 2002 09:18 PM
Relationship between Fcb, F(3) and Qtc in a closed box sub Dave Bullet Subwoofers 11 9th January 2002 03:52 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:17 AM.

Page generated in 0.09310 seconds (76.67% PHP - 23.33% MySQL) with 10 queries

Copyright ©1999-2012 diyAudio