I agree; it's a rather misunderstood concept. If you attempt to use it over a wide bandwidth, you lose the efficiency gains that it provides; if you can accept average extension (both top and bottom), you can get quite excellent output. The argument is akin to the sealed vs. ported argument: yes a sealed enclosure is technically louder than a ported enclosure at low frequencies, but within the audible and usable range, a ported enclosure can/will be much louder.

This all assumes an anechoic chamber, of course; in a vehicle, I prefer sealed because it mates best with the transfer function of the vehicle for a realistic and relatively accurate reproduction of the source. In the house, I need something to pick up that bottom end for me, more times than not. There is no single correct solution: it's simply a matter of matching the utilization to the intended by-product.

 

I wondered what was taking you so long to jump in on this one....

Any news on that hearse with the gigantic ported enclosure in it?.....

 

For burping, a design that load the woofer more will always be louder, when done right.

When it come to listening to music, sealed is louder, in the end. When you consider what you need to get a ported box behave as close as possible to the theorical model (port location vs woofer, size, lenght and flare; box shape) you understand that you rarely end with a box that is smaller or take less room than the sealed box needed for the next-size woofer, wich overall, is gonna be as efficient or more, won't suffer from port noise, phase/delay shift and unloading.

I'm not saying that you cannot make good sounding ported box that get loud, i'm saying that in most case, it won't get any louder out of the same power than a similary sized sealed enclosure with woofers that will take advantage of this space.

 

^ So your argument is that for a given box size, let's say 1.5cuft, that an optimal sealed 12 will be louder than an optimal vented 10. I'd readily argue that but the thread author wants to avoid arguments

 

I think you read his post wrong Paul, to me it read as a similar size boxed between the ported and sealed but a larger size woofer in the sealed vs. the smaller in the ported.

 

Isn't that what I said?

vented rules

 

OK, I am so going back to bed.

 

If you are talking about the same pioneer truck I am, they used a 4th order bandpass. Although it technically had a sealed chamber in it, the transfer function as well as the tuning is not even close to a sealed box. Due to the overdamped response of the typical 4th order bandpass which limits potential SPL, I imagine their new higher order bandpass will be louder if properly tuned.

In terms of bandpass though, technically a ported box is a 2nd order bandpass so saying a bandpass is better than a ported is a very vague assertion.

A PROPERLY TUNED ported box will always be louder than a sealed box at or near the tuning frequency.

 

the owner and North American record holder told me it was sealed, sealed is sealed band pass is not... a record holder wouldn't fib would he?

 

Put a sealed box inside a ported box, and you have a 4th order bandpass. This "sealed" box is used by a lot of US competitors and has had a lot of success.