Basshead

left4dead is where it's at!

double post ftl

x2. SMD isnt full of the smartest people, nor the dumbest. same as any forum imo. and lol yeah he already got his over there

very interesting read. nice find

no way. definitely more like 80/20 install/equipment put a good sub in a crappy ass box, and you'll get crappy ass sound. put a crappy ass sub in a spectacular box and you'll get great sound.

another thing i *may* consider, tho i doubt, is aero ports. they fluctuate a lot more than a slot/square port with their efficiency and whatnot. people say so many different things when it comes to them, i may just steer clear of them and leave that up to them to research for themselves.

yeah. this is intended mostly for a plain square ported box. if you build the box inside the car, i assume the person knows what they're doing to an extent to where they can fill in the boxes accordingly so the program sees the proper volume that their box will see. then they can adjust the port accordingly to gain the desired tuning. it's not exactly for the complete noob to use. tho i tried to help with that with boxes such as 'port area range' so they can use that as a guide to at least maintain the right amount of port area and make it as easy to use as possible. i should hopefully get the right one up in a few days. it will still be tricky as sub mounting depth will possibly come into play as to whether to snake it back and forth to steer clear of the sub, or just have one bend in the port. another checkbox may come into play for the number of bends perhaps...definitely will take some mapping out. but dammit i'm going to bed i have an advising appointment in 6 hours.

thanks

yep. and most of the time it's such a small syntax error. or a switched variable or one you missed. and at size 12 font, it's starting it's 4th page

the formula was a bitch to figure in lol. that was the hardest part i'd say. always ONE smallest thing wrong which threw off the calculations. finally ended up gettin everything sorted out. now just to work on the slot port stuff and i'm good. the open/save thing is something else we never worked on. so i gotta do a lot of research on that too

I knew you were going to say something about that. It is sub displacement not port and it is not factored in because of the 0 below it where it asks how many subs. i was looking at the overall tuning/volume to compare all aspects equally since they all come into play . make sub displacement 1 and the tuning goes up ~8 hz. only ~1 hz off at the moment. the slot port will definitely get looked at tho. i'll tweak it and check it like a mofo before posting it up again. i have a vague idea how i'm gonna do it already. just gonna get it down on paper before i start coding it up. a few variables and simple math will fix it right up. i just wish i could edit my original post glad you caught that tho. everyone including myself overlooked it

visual basic. i've been wanting to take the class for a while and finally got to take it. the print option i had to look up. never learned it in class so it was kind of a pain but i got it to work finally i forget which programming language i'm taking next semester. i wanna say C+ or the next step up in visual basic. lol yeah you're right too. i could post some of the coding and people be like wtf??? and even still...it's still pretty somewhat basic. no types of arrays or anything like that. just text boxes and variables used for one big calculation.

No, you were already taking to much. You only needed .75" instead of 1.5" because only one port wall is in the enclosure not both sides. yeah. i have it set now to where it takes .75" for the port wall instead of 1.5" since there's not techincally 2 port walls. and 0" for port width since 2 box walls would be used as the port walls. only thing left is to figure in the bends of the port to accurately figure in the port volume

i'll have to look more in depth into it tomorrow, as it's late here and i'm very tired. but i already fixed the formula to take the correct amount of displacement for a slot port. tomorrow i'll look into the bends and whatnot. the airspace may be affected by end correction. in the last pic it shows the calculation right at the end of the port. the effective length of the port would extend 1.5". not sure if i should count that out of the actual airspace or take the whole port--effective length and all-- and take that out of the net volume of the box. that i may have to look into. i'm not too worried about the RE calc as i've heard numerous times that that calc isnt 100% accurate. so i'd rather compare it to the first and last pics you posted. also in the first one, you have .25 as port displacement and in my calc you have it as zero. a small difference, but throws it off nonetheless. i'll definitely do some figuring and get it accurate tho

tomorrow when it's not so late, i'll have to look at the coding and see how to figure that in. take .75" for port displacement for port height, since the walls would be used as part of the port for the width. and if i can, figure in the bends of the port if they're needed. it will most likely require a few more variables, but should definitely be possible to do. i never took that into consideration. definitely will have to fix that

the calculator doesnt take into effect if it needs bends or not. i see what you're saying now tho i think. being a slot port does change it up, since with bends it does not necessarily need to be as long physically since curves somewhat effectively lengthen it without taking up as much volume as a 'non slot port' would.

only thing that may be different is if you're using a slot port. which the volume of the port uses a box wall as part of the port wall. with that into consideration, if the slot port is checked, i may need to change the formula to take 1.5" from the width of the port, and only .75" from the height of the port for displacement/tuning since it does not stick out from the box as a square/rectangle port would...good eye...

port volume takes into account 1.5" for wood displacement also, given that you're using .75" wood for it. i tested it along with a spreadsheet calculator i was using which is accurate. which was tested along with another spreadsheet calc. all came up with the same conclusions. only thing that would make it off would be sub displacement. which varies. tho would only throw off tuning/volume in a very small way. with sub displacement at 0, it's as accurate as any other calc. i still have it

lemme check it...

if a 154-155 is possible with 1 15", a 147 is definitely possible. i did a 147.xx with a solo x 18" in an old old setup. and imo BTL > solo x

how so? you put in the OD of the box, it takes in account for wood displacement, and it figures in ACTUAL airspace. i tested it multiple times...should be accurate. example...13.5 wide, 13.5 tall, 13.5 deep (outer dimensions) equals 1 cubic foot. takes into account wood displacement (whether it's .75", 1", 1.5", etc) and comes up with the answer. try it

7k ish watts and i dont have one and i'm fine. i will never get one. tho they have their place in car audio (albeit a small one) i'd rather buy something that supplies power rather than stores it

cool cool. lemme know what ya think

bump for potentially 337 users to see

oh...oh yes me too. that last pic is just drop dead gorgeous