4th Order VS 6th Order subwoofer Enclosures 

Second order is when you blow the first pair ,6th order they decide for you that just not your game and block your #. Bear with me it's 4am lol

😂😂😂

awesome, it's funny to see how just recently companies have started making 6th order PA subs, true innovation starts with people

Well if your subs are as powerful as your electric bikes then I've gotta hear a video of that with a good mic.

@@Dakoustics Bose have been using 6th order for years.

Acoustimass had like a 4th order firing into a 6h order lol #Bose

Thomas Jester Tarulli of team orion has/had a (6) 15" sub system in a 6th order that is very high output with a wide frequency response. It's quite legendary his performance. His set up is 1:1 and tuned at 25 and 50hz. As always it seems it's about trial and error as each car/home is so different.

r

Yeah, car audio is a popular target for thieves. The 6th in my trunk would likely but a thiefs back out, and the amps are under it. Kind of bitter sweet, half the reason I'm into audio is because of the 15" sub my brother gave me, which was the only audio component from his car which wasn't taken.

@@Dakoustics Yeah, there were certainly more than one of them when they hit my cousin's car. You would have to be one of those world's strongest man types to make off with a large, awkwardly shaped object weighing roughly 150 lbs on your own. :) He actually found out who it was through the grapevine on his college campus, and there were three of them if I remember correctly. Couldn't prove it unfortunately though.

BASSN SANE I always tell people that the vids do not do justice to the sound. But I do have a few pictures on Facebook of it.

Id love to hear that design

That makes a very inefficient enclosure for reproducing lows that anybody would consider loud...... I did the basic math on it assuming you used .1-.2 of a cube, with your suggested port length the tuning would be entirely too high to effectively play 10hz without sounding like a wet fart and unloading the sub so "I will take things that didnt happen for $600, Alex"

@@zacharyhafer2806 With all due respect, if the enclosure was so bad I would not make it in the first place; in fact it’s my favorite enclosure for playing infrasonics which is what it’s mainly designed for. “I will educate those who have no experience for $1000 Alex”. Here’s a video. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-NeSC0C1R6tc.html

Will never go back

@@robertkurtz7587 From a 4th or 6th?

What program do you recommend for series tuned 6th order?

@@BARBELLS-AND-BUDS you can check out bassbox pro 6

How did your build turn out? If it’s monstrous I’ll put the same in my civic.

@@Ichabod_Jericho I scrapped it and went a massive audio 12. It can handle more power and hit way harder deeper bass. Sold that W6.

adaboy4z I knew it! Part of me wants to go JL, part of me knew big brand names have cheaped out

@@Ichabod_Jericho Don't get me wrong that JL W6 is a beast on 600 watts but there are better subs for cheaper and can handle more power. I already had a Kicker KXA800.1 amp and a Kicker KX1200.1 so it was natural to use that power!!!

Bandpass subs are known to be bad because of bad designs and lack of understanding from the user. Check out the "STM S118 SUB" it is a pro audio bandpass sub intended for most demanding concerts and festivals. When bandpass subs are designed by professionals and used by engineers, bandpass designs are very powerful and accurate desings.

Ole Kristian Rannekleiv c

Just in case you missed this: Audio Dynamics SoundVlog - Counting Enclosure Orders - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-41hDRYpZMME.html 5 Enclosures You've Never Heard Of - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CZaRQT3Rvaw.html

Imay have missed a point to be as loud as possible at 1 note. sorry.

Q is the ratio of reactance to resistance. It stands for "quality" because a century ago good radio transmission, and good radio reception, required antennas that delivered as much energy to the radio signal, and from the signal to the receiver, as possible--the resistance was a parasitic loss spent heating up copper. Since the thermal dissipation is (current squared) times (resistance), increasing Q meant arranging things so that current was low (so voltage high) and there were few and ineffective ways for the electrical signal to get converted to heat (both on the way out of the station and on the way into the listener's home. The claim that low Q drivers have a peakier response is incorrect. The maximally flat amplitude response vs frequency is obtained at Q = 2^^-.5 = .707 = sine 45 degrees (Butterworth); maximal phase accuracy Q = .57 (Bessel); maximal transient accuracy Q = .5 (Linkwitz); maximal efficiency (NOT sensitivity which is usually called efficiency but is not dimensionless as is every efficiency) at Q = 1.1 (Chebychev). Any value of Q greater than unity will exhibit ringing and overshoot. This was all worked out by the Australian mechanical engineer A.N. Thiele and his grad student R. Small and published in IEEE Transactions in 1961 (later republished in the Journal of the Acoustic Engineering Society in 1971 and 1972). Thiele realized that it was necessary to either transform all the electrical quantities into their mechanical analogs, or vice versa, in order to encompass both in a single framework that would enable the well-developed machinery of filter theory to be used. Unsurprisingly, being a ME he chose the former and--regrettably--published in the leading EE journal. By the time the word got passed quite a lot came and went: the Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Cream, and Woodstock. Oh well. Note that total system Q (Qts) depends on the electrical and mechanical Qs (Qes and Qms) of the driver only--which varies widely (15% and sometimes much more) but is independent of the enclosure. Putting a loudspeaker mechanism in an enclosure raises the Q. You are stuck with it when the driver is unpacked--the only way to lower it is via equalization (the Linkwitz transform). The Qs I listed are in-the-box Qs, which you have some control over (a smaller box yields a stronger air spring which is more capacitive reactance, similarly a larger port yields a more massive plug of coupled air, which is an inertance yielding inductive reactance--like a flywheel.

Cheers!

Just had a look in my curent version, couldn't see it, is it a default filter in a more recent version?

@@Dakoustics Okay because you are a good man and taught me a more with this video than I care to admit I'll revisit it again and see if I can show you how that works. It's kind of unintuitive and I'm high as a kite right now. Good video mister

Glad I could be of service, enjoy!

1:3 or 1:4, either could work depending on the driver. For the example, it should've been 1:3, the 1:4 given is a default for WinISD, not sure why I didn't change it.

100L each for 18" subs in the rear is pretty small, but 6000w each is a good amount of power, so a smaller box should prevent too much excursion. I'd go 6th order. Not sure what kind of constraints you have, but you'd get a bit more efficiency down low if you make a bigger rear chamber, 300L; on DD's website they suggest 5 cu ft, which is 140L as minimum suggested for an 18", but joniK's got 8 15s in a 450L box so it's not law.

@@Dakoustics So rear chamber 300L tune to 25hz, front chamber 200l and work on front port until it will play good? Also changing front port will change my peak right? I want to play low but at least have 150db+ on windshield.

@@NearZoneSiona oh yeah on 6k rms on a 6th order wall i'd be surprised if you weren't at 152 at least, I've seen 6k trunk systems to that, all increasing the back chamber should do is increase the lows, the highs will remain about the same, when it comes to the front port the higher you tune it the higher peak you'll get, both db and frequency, so its up to you when its tuning is no longer musical. Highest I'd go is 50, mine is tuned 50Hz and actually peaks at 60Hz oddly enough, but it is supposed to be a musical system, it's 210L tuned to 20 and 70L tuned to 50, and it's perfectly musical, but to get loud you'll want a larger than 3:1 ratio.

I'd personally put the cone in the sealed part, unless the motor makes a ton of chuffing

It’s best to have motor in the ported side. This helps with motor cooling as well as you being able to smell the coils if it gets too hot

Please tell me more

@@m.morininvestor9920 First, I disclose I'm not a music major nor do I know anything about notes, keys, whatever. I understand octaves, frequencies, etc because of the vast knowledge the car audio and other electronic publications of the 90s used to print. I was a dealer for a time, built many boxes...I know what I hear based on my experience with the different enclosure types. Your general off the shelf bandpass (4th or 6th order) boxes will typically play one note or 2.5 octaves (40-120 hz) and all you hear is BOOM...BOOM...BOOM...very loud and efficiently. If you build one and design it to play 30-80 HZ, you're still going to get one note sound and will possibly be a bigger enclosure. There are, however, several types of bandpass enclosures you can make could sound musical. Around 2006(?), Rockford Fosgate sold their HE2 subs in a bandpass enclosure and they were intense. They were ungodly loud and efficient but pretty musical overall. They were big and heavy, not for every vehicle. Ported (bass reflex) enclosures when made correctly will play every note of every octave between where you place the low pass filter and the tuning frequency of the port. When the enclosure and port is made well you can get great output at the tuning frequency of the port, ...booOM...booOM...booOM...boOOM...and so forth. Sealed (acoustic suspension) enclosures are the most musical in my opinion. They can ne crossed over as high as you need to or as low as the woofer and enclosure combination will play effectively without bottoming out the voice coil. But, their sound is judged by the "Q" or QTC of the enclosure design. A Q of .707 is said to be the perfect audiophile sound and a Q of 1.0 and higher for a more boomy and "uncontrolled" bass. Their biggest drawback is they require tons more power to get loud for bassheads. Overall, you get bOOm...BoooM...BoOoM...boooom...whatever the artist put on the track. Just do yourself a favor and put a low pass filter at 30 hz so you don't destroy your woofer. You can get more output from a sealed by loading it against a wall, corner or even down firing it if it has a stiff enough suspension to prevent sagging over time. Basically, to design your system, bring out a piece of paper or CAD program and sketch out what you want. List the audio qualities you're looking for, requirements, capabilities, limitations, etc. I recommend you read "The Loudspeaker Design Cookbook" by Vance Dickason. That is a must have book for beginners.

I'd say size is a major factor, people don't want to remove so much storage space for a 4th order, and if they're willing they'd just build a large 4th themselves. I've got a feeling too that bass reflex boom boxes might've been responsible too, more marketing for ported boxes.

Italians starting spending their money elsewhere.

I believe they went out because they had very small frequency range. The old school band pass boxes were very loud and bang good but dont cover lower frequencys so well. I liked them back in the day but preferred sealed boxes for the quick and hard hits. Now i run ported but that is just after growing my stereo over the years i have alot more rumble and airflow with the ported

Yeah, seems very odd, not sure what error is happening there. Probably use WinISD, I used it for my 6th and the thing is fantastic. Hornresp is very accurate also, and I've done some comparisons between WinISD and Hornresp and they were quite similar. Interesting observation though, I'm guessing it has something to do with cone damping, and possibly the high tuned box is acting practically like a sealed chamber to damp and control driver movement.

@@Dakoustics , thanks for your answer. Cone damping - maybe the super-high tuned high-chamber works like you wrote, because I tried it once in WinISD, and the driver had very similar (but not the same) movement in simulations like in speakerboxlite's simulator...and overall all graphs were similar but not the same... So at 4th order banpass the sealed chamber is for low bass, and this is the "main driver movement controller" too, and at 6th order bandpass like this the chamber for low bass is ported too, and this chamber is the "secondary driver movement controller" - this is the main difference in my opinion, just at 4th order bandpass you may not need to tune the high-chamber up to a super-high frequency - so that is the reason why I think that at a 6th order bandpass like this the low-chamber is the "active" chamber - this sounds, and the high-chamber is "passive" - this just controls the driver's movement... In your opinion this theory is OK, or I am totally wrong?

@@Dakoustics , I made a test-project in WinISD using the same woofer like in those projects what I shared with you before. I downloaded the speaker file from here: www.loudspeakerdatabase.com/Dayton/DCS165-4 . In WinISD I simulated an 1:1 ratio 2.7 / 2.7 Liters net volume box with 245.3 / 25.9 Hz tuning frequencies. On 100.0 Watts signal - which is the woofer's RMS power - it reached but not overpassed the Xmax at 20 Hz and higher frequencies. Then if I decreased the high-chamber's volume, or decreased it's tuning frequency, it worked similar like in speakerboxlite's simulator - overpassed the Xmax at 60ish frequencies, but if I decreased the tuning frequency more, the driver's movement started to decrease too - this not works on speakerboxlite's simulator. Btw, this box have very similar results on speakerboxlite too, even acceptable driver movement, and the movement itself is quiet comparable with WinISD's if I use the max power of the woofer on speakerboxlite - 200 Watts - but maybe it is a wrong idea... So, here is the test project: speakerboxlite.com/project-info/eb7b77b8f2976f30973ed36da8318ab7f9f168f5ba0de70907f880e1456886b1/tab-info , WinISD counted out shorter ports (maybe different constants for air density / ambient temperature, etc...), but less than 10 m/s vent air velocities between 20 and 60 Hz (official sub-bass range). The box itself is buildable with relatively acceptable outer dimensions (at least for me), but maybe too complicated for somebody...

Yeah, 6th orders are generally the biggest boxes, so doing isobarik can save some space

1 octave generally creates a dip in your graph, so you’ll lose some of your middle end.

@@camaroboi13 every 6th I've ever seen built or had designed/discussed with builders they/me have always done 1ocatve apart for best results. You think 1 octave is giving a dip in the middle a proper 6tg should have no dip it should be a large peak vs two peaks now placing the peaks more than an octave apart like in this video creates a way worse dip because the frequencies are even further apart

Interesting. I've seen something which was a ported box, with speakers firing out, but also had speakers inside, so it kinda acted like a 4th order as well. I'm not sure what you'd call that, maybe a 4th quazi 6th series, as it kinda acts like a 4th and a 6th. But maybe since one is 2nd order and the other is 4th order, it averages out to 3rd order, so would in total be a 5th order. Yeah, an odd one certainly.

From the specs on the website, if you've got the Dual 2 ohm, either, really up to you. If you've got the dual 4 Ohm, 4th order would be preferred, but still either or. They have a good multipurpose spec.

Right inbetween 4th and 6th, but I'd suggest 6th over 4th.

yeah, rear chamber is the one with the magnet in it, and is usually also tuned lower than the front chamber if it has one

@@Dakoustics Thanks for the clarification. Cheers

In relation to chambers, though for my 6th the low tuned side needed a port so long I just made them the same surface area. Sounded fine, but a tad muddy, so same area is preferable.

@@Dakoustics thanks man

I'd prefer a 6th.

And in my day people are lazy and shorten things as much as possible. I mention bandpass in the video, but 99% of the time when 4th order or 6th order is mentioned bandpass comes to mind rather than bass reflex.

I like the idea of a 5th order, so front of the driver is in a transmission line, and the rear of the driver is in a ported box, could be cool

I did it with cars in mind, though the graphs better represent how they sound in home systems. The main difference between a home system in a car is cabin gain.

@@Dakoustics nice... Yeah i figured great video brother

6th best

WinISD

@@Dakoustics for designing a 4th or 6th for my Morel Ultimo SC 122. I'd like mainly 16-20 hz tune. Thanks brother, very informative video.

In order for drivers to be capable of excursion, coil overhangs the gap, and that distance is turned into raw heat, super bad for efficiency. Sure, they can be independent, and a neodymium motors these days can make up for it, but for ferrite motors, higher excursion trends towards lower efficiency.

@@Dakoustics I have had subs with really long excursion and ferrite magnets with over 92dB sens and short excursion subs with a lower 88db sens. So there are other factors than just excursion. Higher watt rated subs tends to have lower sens. etc.

@@Oystein87 Yeah, good point. Diaphragm mass and Fs play a major role as well.

@@Dakoustics Yes, that has alot to do with it. Sorry if I seem rude btw.. That was not the on purpose. I liked the video and the explenations. Nice job👍

hmm, some options, possibly a very long external port, say run behind a couch or something, or a tapering transmission line enclosure, but your best bet is probably to put it in a sealed box, and eq to increase the lows

@@Dakoustics food for thought, thanks

Ported is better..sealed keeps ur subs running hot..they won't last long..

It’s a Rockford fosgate P3D4 12. I’ve got about 4 cu ft to play with and figured I should give it a go, but info on 4th and 6th order sub box designs are scarce.

Yeah, should work fine. As long as you're not sending it too much power, 16mm xmax is quite decent.