Upgrading sub

That’s just what I thought.

Arendal is quite different in its design and probably to keep within its aesthetic.

Most others have the port at the front and in line with the driver.
 
That’s just what I thought.

Arendal is quite different in its design and probably to keep within its aesthetic.

Most others have the port at the front and in line with the driver.
Can be placed under the cab aswell like Tom V has done with the PSA TV3612. He spoke about the benefits somewhere, port noises harder to hear etc.

649611384_thumb_0aba3eeb5094796e729823449465908e.jpg
 
I presume so. I’m not an acoustics expert but I would have thought a better (i.e. more comparable) measurement would be derived from summing the SPL output at 2 metres from each side of the sub and then derating the result by a fixed amount of dB. Either that or just use 4 microphones simultaneously somehow wired into one measurement device.
There's probably 10 different ways to go about it. The method I described is easy, repeatable, and accurate. The CEA protocol discusses the problem in the "example reporting---figure 8" specifically.

Along with proper cea "scoring" there's also the challenge of accurate FR representation as well. Again, there's easy work arounds to all of it.

some of the above is detailed here. Data-Bass: Subwoofer Measurements

Tom V.
 
In a groundplane test it isn’t summed properly
I'm probably thinking about this in a too simple and generalised way but does that imply the output is understated by about 2 or 3dB ?
 
I'm probably thinking about this in a too simple and generalised way but does that imply the output is understated by about 2 or 3dB ?
It's hard to say and the SPL deviation will vary massively by frequency. Logically, the measured output at the port tuning frequency might be suffering the most, especially if the reading is taken 2M from the face of the driver and the port's facing in the opposite direction. That said, lower frequencies suffer far less from being off-axis than higher frequencies so that should be a compensating factor and maybe the difference would not be that great in practice.

At least the upper frequency range shouldn't be suffering though once the contribution from the port falls away. For example, notice how the ported and sealed SVS 3000 series models (same driver, same amp) have effectively the same output from 63Hz upwards.

1628147559589.png
 
Thanks very much for the enlightening reply @Mr Wolf .

It's one of the things I love/hate about this sound reproduction stuff - so many variables, so few (if any) certainties :D
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom