PR vs. Port. A quest for hard data.

Hi all,

In my forever quest to squeeze out the most output for a given volume, I have hit a data wall for the following statements:



1.
It is often quoted that PRs have 'less output' than a port, due to damping losses from the spider / surround.

2.
That PRs have slightly poorer transient response due to the initial acceleration of the mass before resonance and slower decay of resonance.



However, does data or measurements actually exist for either of these statements in any scenarios?

For example, a study may find a 1.2dB loss for a PR, with a 100ms ramp up / 150ms ramp down for a 50Hz tone?

Without this data (or building the two equivalent cabinets), then from a purely output POV, it is impossible for a decision to be made..

Thoughts?! Thanks!
 
Greets!

IME when properly designed, the PR system is superior when compared to a comparable vented alignment, which IME most aren't, due mainly to size, budget constraints. As for real world data, researching the Servodrive Contrabass sub and any other PR info from Tom Danley is all that comes to mind at the moment.

GM
 
below cutoff, the PR's suspension will give some resistance to the active speaker's movement. There should be less leakage (and generation) of unwanted noises. In some cases the PR cabinet can be made more shallow vs using a port.