Scanspeak Flow Resistance

DirkD · 20th August 2004, 01:47 PM

Does anyone have experience using the Scanspeak Flow Resistance Vent. I am planning on using one in a 13 liter sealed enclosure with a Scanspeak 18W/8535 woofer. How about substituting a Flow Resistance Vent for the port in a Proac R2.5 clone (32 liter box)?

D.

tiroth · 20th August 2004, 01:58 PM

In my limited experience, it doesn't have a big effect in relatively low-Q designs; for example, in a sealed Q=0.9 box adding the vent raised Fs and lowered Q but didn't really alleviate the sense of boominess despite taking off a good bit of extension. It was much more effective to simply heavily stuff with fiberglass. I've heard there is more of a difference when we are talking Q ~ 1.3.

My gut feeling is that since the Proac 2.5 is a fairly large box you won't see much advantage going aperiodic--if you want to avoid the port I would just seal it. There is still a good amount of bass.

So, I guess my answer is your 13L box is probably a more promising candidate. But I think building a larger box and sealing it is usually preferable if it is an option.

20th August 2004, 01:47 PM	#1
DirkD diyAudio Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Paarl, South africa	Scanspeak Flow Resistance Does anyone have experience using the Scanspeak Flow Resistance Vent. I am planning on using one in a 13 liter sealed enclosure with a Scanspeak 18W/8535 woofer. How about substituting a Flow Resistance Vent for the port in a Proac R2.5 clone (32 liter box)? D.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Flow Chart for Subwoofer Design	Viking552	Subwoofers	23	21st January 2007 12:47 AM
Wave/Pressure Flow question	johninCR	Multi-Way	1	10th October 2006 07:53 PM
Do you think this cabinet restrict air flow	andy2	Multi-Way	3	6th August 2005 11:36 AM
current flow, which direction?	garbage	Tubes / Valves	16	31st October 2004 07:16 PM
Newbie Q re physical current flow	dc	Parts	16	14th September 2002 04:40 PM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	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

20th August 2004, 01:58 PM	#2
tiroth diyAudio Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA	In my limited experience, it doesn't have a big effect in relatively low-Q designs; for example, in a sealed Q=0.9 box adding the vent raised Fs and lowered Q but didn't really alleviate the sense of boominess despite taking off a good bit of extension. It was much more effective to simply heavily stuff with fiberglass. I've heard there is more of a difference when we are talking Q ~ 1.3. My gut feeling is that since the Proac 2.5 is a fairly large box you won't see much advantage going aperiodic--if you want to avoid the port I would just seal it. There is still a good amount of bass. So, I guess my answer is your 13L box is probably a more promising candidate. But I think building a larger box and sealing it is usually preferable if it is an option.

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