List of parts to build a speaker box

Auex: I won't flame you; before I came here, I never knew about liquid nails, and I had been building various items like doors, windows, bookshelves, and tons of other props for a local theater group for more than 2 years with nails or screws and simple wood glue, and never had a problem with it But I just used liquid nails to make 2 enclosures, the sealed box for my 2 subs, and a sealed custom box for under the seat of my friend's f150 truck. We used resin to seal his box, since it was really wacky shaped. I never had a problem with liquid nails. If anything I thought that it stuck better than the wood glue, but I am sure the wood glue would have worked fine. I am just curious why you have so much hate for the liquid nails mate, thats all :P

Ok then so far I think I will get back to my origial want, which is a sealed box, since I am after quality more than anything else. Definitely going to go with sealed box. I once went to Best Buy and they had a box that had a port that could be removed, which the sales guy said was for the same reason but I wonder why they even sell that. I guess they can sell anything but we got to be careful of what we're buying. And thanks for the info on bracing adn liquid nails. Very useful info to me. Also Focal's site shows 30 to 50 liters volume both for sealed or ported. I wonder why they have the same volume for both types. Here's the link on Focal's site Also whats the difference between having a rectangular box and a wedge shaped box? Anything to do with sound quality?

I stand corrected. Perhaps "impractical" would be a better word than "impossible" I simply meant that a sealed enclosure that had double the recommended volume would not work too well.

Wedge shaped fits better in a "hatch back" vehicle. NO difference in quality.

I don't know whats up with their volume recomendations. From my calculations, 30 liters is a tad over 1 cu. ft. So somewhere around there and you should be fine i suppose.

The key to making a convertible box is to design it so that when its in a sealed fasion its not double the size but actually the recommended size, and when its in ported fashion the trick is to make it so the box is not half as big as what its suposed to be but actually the perfect size. Im off to bed tonight but if you wanna know what the hell Im talking about,PM and Ill explain it tomorrow. Also I find a lot of recomended specs to k=be kinda inacurate and pretty much suck donkey dick. Most manufactures give you the smallest space you can use the sub in without causing damage but no nessasarily the best size. What comes to mind is Pioneer. They say for their subs you need 1.4 cubic feet sealed and 1.5 cubic feet ported. I thought that was BS so I made one box ported right to spec and then another box ported to 2.25 cubic feet and not a single person thought that the pioneer box sounded better than the one I built. This is something that comes with experience and knowing whos numbers to trust and which numbers sound right.double-secret reverse-osmosis speaker-cone-induced high-level interference distortion, Its a killer

I have sort of gotten a feel that for most subs that I am familiar with, which are mid power range 10's, many of them use sealed enclosures around .7-.9 cu ft. Below that and I start to wonder, and above that I disregard since they won't fit in the space I am working with :P

So far I understand that I should not take the manufacturer's size specs too seriously. That makes me confused as to what size I should build my box. If the manufacturer says 30 to 50 liters, is 40 a safe number I can assume? Also the pro sound shop I had visited this past weekend told me that "a wedge shaped box somehow sounds better than a rectangular shaped box, I don't know why but it just does" those were his exact words, but fo course I did not believe everything he said.     Also has anyone ever used this device that supposedly improves bass quality? Its rather expensive for what it does. Heres the link: http://www.speakercity.com/Sos/SubwooferOptimizer.shtml

markcars wrote: So far I understand that I should not take the manufacturer's size specs too seriously.

 

NO, this is incorrect.  If you are dealing with a reputable manufacturer (like most of the brand names discussed on this forum) they are very careful to recomend safe, good sounding enclosure sizes for their drivers.  Use the T/S parameters supplied with your driver and make your own decision, of course, but if what you come up with is too far off from the manufacturer's specs then it is more likely that you have done something wrong than that they have.

markcars wrote: Also the pro sound shop I had visited this past weekend told me that "a wedge shaped box somehow sounds better than a rectangular shaped box, I don't know why but it just does" those were his exact words, but fo course I did not believe everything he said.     .

 

He is correct.  A perfect square is the worst possible enclosure shape and a perfect rectangle is next worst.  A wedge shape ensures the back wall is not parallel to the front baffle where the loudspeaker mounts.  This helps minimize standing waves inside the enclosure.  Now, in most car audio subwoofers, the frequencies being generated are low enough and the enclosures small enough that this can be pretty much ignored, but that's the logic behind the statement.  HERE's a reference for you.

markcars wrote: Also has anyone ever used this device that supposedly improves bass quality? Its rather expensive for what it does. Heres the link: http://www.speakercity.com/Sos/SubwooferOptimizer.shtml .

 

Those kinds of active processors can make a big difference in some systems and none at all in others.  If you have the money to play with it, it can't hurt and you can always remove it if you don't like what it does to your sound.

Support the12volt.com

Couldn't you just make a "rectangular" box and fill it with polyfil/acousta-stuf and that would eliminate the standing waves too?