Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Closed box driver Qts?
Closed box driver Qts?
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 19th April 2011, 06:03 AM   #1
moray james is offline moray james  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary on the Bow
Default Closed box driver Qts?

I know that horn loading requires a low Qts and reflex cabinets like a Qts of 0.35 for optimum flat response. What's the optimum driver Qts for sealed boxes? Thanks, best regards Moray James.
__________________
moray james
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 12:29 PM   #2
Josephjcole is offline Josephjcole  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Josephjcole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Wisconsin
I would have to think it depends on your definition of optimum. Also wouldn't the "optimum" Qts depend on Fs? Sorry no answers from me, only more questions
Joe
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 03:06 PM   #3
Top Shelf is offline Top Shelf  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Top Shelf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ontario
Recommended sealed Qts is usually 0.4 and above, though Qtc (0.5-1.2) determines
response. Recommended ported Qts is usually 0.5 and below.
__________________
NO REST FOR THE WOOFER! 🔊😈
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 03:13 PM   #4
infinia is offline infinia  United States
diyAudio Member
 
infinia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SoCal
Quote:
Recommended sealed Qts is usually 0.4 and above
I would do not think upper range is boundless, unless peaky bass is your thing.
__________________
.
.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 03:25 PM   #5
Top Shelf is offline Top Shelf  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Top Shelf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ontario
Of course not but due to infinite variable T/S specs of drivers and endless tastes in the finished response of immeasurable people, it can get quite high. I have used drivers with 0.75 - 0.85 Qts and they are a pain to get good response out of in my chosen boxes.
__________________
NO REST FOR THE WOOFER! 🔊😈
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 03:40 PM   #6
chris661 is offline chris661  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
chris661's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sheffield
They (various sites I've seen) reckon between 0.4 and 0.7.
Higher, it's only really useful for IB or OB applications, the output peak around resonance would be too much for a sealed box, it'd need to be mahoosive.

Lower Qts will give an earlier roll off, but a smaller box. Higher will get flat response closer to Fs, but needs a bigger box to do so. Take your pick - it's all compromises.

Chris
__________________
My work: www.grimshawaudio.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 03:47 PM   #7
Top Shelf is offline Top Shelf  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Top Shelf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ontario
Mahoosive! Good one I've have good results with 0.5-0.6 Qts for sealed. Of course high power handling and large Xmax help.
__________________
NO REST FOR THE WOOFER! 🔊😈

Last edited by Top Shelf; 19th April 2011 at 04:01 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 04:48 PM   #8
geraldfryjr is offline geraldfryjr  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jackson,michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josephjcole View Post
I would have to think it depends on your definition of optimum. Also wouldn't the "optimum" Qts depend on Fs? Sorry no answers from me, only more questions
Joe

You must remember that the final Qts is detremined from the box volume.
.707 is considered flat
Graphicaly I prefer .9 and any more than this things start to become boomy. jer
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 04:50 PM   #9
chris661 is offline chris661  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
chris661's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sheffield
Don't some people prefer Qc=0.5 for optimum transient response and better integration with room gain and stuff?
__________________
My work: www.grimshawaudio.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2011, 04:52 PM   #10
geraldfryjr is offline geraldfryjr  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jackson,michigan
Good point.
I was going to add that but you beat me to it. jer
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Closed box driver Qts?Hide this!Advertise here!
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

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question regarding closed box driver resonance thoriated Full Range 6 6th August 2010 08:19 PM
Mid/Bass Driver QTS for Sealed Box Loudspeaker? bssk Multi-Way 0 7th November 2006 06:57 AM
Closed sub box Tenson Subwoofers 12 27th June 2006 05:53 PM
Closed box sub in vented box ? MadMax Multi-Way 3 17th May 2003 12:24 AM
QTS = closed or vented? dantwomey Multi-Way 6 15th March 2002 01:45 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:30 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.79%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio
Wiki