Hi all, I am new to DIY Audio. It started with a living room renovation and not being able to find off the shelf speakers\woofers at the right size to properly integrate into my design.
I am trying to design two enclosures that will each house a 10” subwoofer. The subwoofer’s I have picked up are Dayton Audio RSS265HO-44 10".
The two enclosures I have built so far can be seen here:
The right enclosure is the first attempt, it uses the starter enclosure package for a 10” sub from parts express. I did not have a router at the time so I thought this would save time. I used subbox.pro to get rough calculations. The port width is roughly 1.5” and length 13.5”. The outside dimensions are 25.5” x 13.75” x 13”.
Internal picture:
The left enclosure is the second attempt, using a double MDF wall on the front, and more precise box calculations from speakerboxlight.com. The port width is 1” and length is 33.25”. The outside dimensions are 26.5” x 16” x 11”. This site allowed me to select the exact model of my subwoofer and create an enclosure around the specifications.
Internal picture:
*note, when they were glued\screwed the port lines up with the front wall.
I have noticed the older enclosure is a lot louder and deeper, whereas the newer enclosures sound more muffled with less high and low end. However, the excursion of the subwoofers both appear to look the same. I *thought* I would get a much better sound from the second design as the calculations were followed more closely from the site.
I am getting in over my head here, and wondering if there is anything I can do with the second design to get similar resulting highs\lows I get from the first design. The height of the box is more ideal for my renovation. The only panel that isn’t glued on the second design so far is the top, but I should be able to make some slight changes with the port width\length if that could help.
This is for home theater, looking to fill in the lows and be decent with mid-range bass as well, mainly for movies.
I have tried polyfill, changing channels on the amp in case it had something to do with the l/r. But the first design continues to win.
Any advice would be appreciated. If I am missing any details let me know I will try my best to provide them!
I am trying to design two enclosures that will each house a 10” subwoofer. The subwoofer’s I have picked up are Dayton Audio RSS265HO-44 10".
The two enclosures I have built so far can be seen here:
The right enclosure is the first attempt, it uses the starter enclosure package for a 10” sub from parts express. I did not have a router at the time so I thought this would save time. I used subbox.pro to get rough calculations. The port width is roughly 1.5” and length 13.5”. The outside dimensions are 25.5” x 13.75” x 13”.
Internal picture:
The left enclosure is the second attempt, using a double MDF wall on the front, and more precise box calculations from speakerboxlight.com. The port width is 1” and length is 33.25”. The outside dimensions are 26.5” x 16” x 11”. This site allowed me to select the exact model of my subwoofer and create an enclosure around the specifications.
Internal picture:
*note, when they were glued\screwed the port lines up with the front wall.
I have noticed the older enclosure is a lot louder and deeper, whereas the newer enclosures sound more muffled with less high and low end. However, the excursion of the subwoofers both appear to look the same. I *thought* I would get a much better sound from the second design as the calculations were followed more closely from the site.
I am getting in over my head here, and wondering if there is anything I can do with the second design to get similar resulting highs\lows I get from the first design. The height of the box is more ideal for my renovation. The only panel that isn’t glued on the second design so far is the top, but I should be able to make some slight changes with the port width\length if that could help.
This is for home theater, looking to fill in the lows and be decent with mid-range bass as well, mainly for movies.
I have tried polyfill, changing channels on the amp in case it had something to do with the l/r. But the first design continues to win.
Any advice would be appreciated. If I am missing any details let me know I will try my best to provide them!
Last edited:
hi i'm a noob myself, so may be telling you lies 🙂
when i built my sub which is a sealed cabinet i was told that i would need three times the amplification to achieve the same level of sound compared to a ported design.
the port on the second cabinet looks half the size of the first!! maybe this has something to do with it.
there are some really smart blokes on this forum, hopefully one will be able to give you a definite answer.
gaz
when i built my sub which is a sealed cabinet i was told that i would need three times the amplification to achieve the same level of sound compared to a ported design.
the port on the second cabinet looks half the size of the first!! maybe this has something to do with it.
there are some really smart blokes on this forum, hopefully one will be able to give you a definite answer.
gaz
Thanks gaz, I think I'm going to separate some of these boards and try to make the port size bigger. I should've done a test before gluing!
Assuming the internal volumes are approx the same, your second design will have a much lower tuning frequency given its longer and appears to have a smaller cross sectional area. When mentioning the ports, you only refer to the width and the length. Your ports have 3 key dimensions which have to be modelled - length, and the two sides of the mouth. Are you sure you modelled the ports correctly?
Hey Mart34, you bring up a good point. I had used a tuning frequency of what the subwoofer recommended for a vented vented enclosure. But I'm not sure I necessarily want to tune the port at this frequency. I am going to do a bit more research on this!
By my rough calculations, your first enclosure is tuned to 23.5Hz, and your second enclosure is tuned to 11.5Hz. For the second enclosure, the tuning frequency has been pushed into (inaudible) infrasonic spectrum, and the gains/benefits of the ported enclosure have not been realised. The first will have much higher efficiency in the audible range, where the port will provide additional output around 20-30Hz, which aligns with your conclusion saying it goes lower (presuming you've made this judgement with your ears). In summary, I think you've accidentally tuned your second enclosure too low. Unless there was a specific reason you done this?
Please dont take what I say as fact, please use a modelling program to check.
Please dont take what I say as fact, please use a modelling program to check.