Sealed box, Common or separate chambers?

[fritosaregood 0]

I've got an 15" Audiopulse Axis running on a Sundown 3000, Ive got another Axis that should be here tomorrow. I was thinking about making a sealed box for both of them, but I dont know whether to do a common chamber or separate chambers. What are the pros and cons of each?

[fritosaregood 0]

.

[Duran 387]

Separate them if you are running sealed.

[loudcav 1]

I say run a common chamber

[Duran 387]

I say run a common chamber

Why is that? With reversed polarity?

[fritosaregood 0]

I'm leaning towards separate because the center divider would help with bracing, but does anyone know reasons behind which is better?

Edited November 4, 2008 by fritosaregood

[95Honda 486]

If they are identical subs, being driven with identical signals, then there is absolutely no reason to have them in seperate enclosures. There is no technical data that will dispute this. Period.

Now, if you are adding structural integrity by placing in a divider, than that may help your box. BUT not do to the fact that it divides the chambers, only because it adds rigidity.

[NB50 206]

If they are identical subs, being driven with identical signals, then there is absolutely no reason to have them in seperate enclosures. There is no technical data that will dispute this. Period.

Now, if you are adding structural integrity by placing in a divider, than that may help your box. BUT not do to the fact that it divides the chambers, only because it adds rigidity.

What happens when one driver fails in a common chamber??

[fritosaregood 0]

If they are identical subs, being driven with identical signals, then there is absolutely no reason to have them in seperate enclosures. There is no technical data that will dispute this. Period.

Now, if you are adding structural integrity by placing in a divider, than that may help your box. BUT not do to the fact that it divides the chambers, only because it adds rigidity.

both Axis's, goin to wire both at a .5 ohm load on the sundown. so it should be alright to do a common chamber, if i do that, would a 2x4 goin from front to back and another from top to bottom in the center of the box work for bracing? Ive never built a seal box with this much power yet.

Edited November 4, 2008 by fritosaregood

[fritosaregood 0]

If they are identical subs, being driven with identical signals, then there is absolutely no reason to have them in seperate enclosures. There is no technical data that will dispute this. Period.

Now, if you are adding structural integrity by placing in a divider, than that may help your box. BUT not do to the fact that it divides the chambers, only because it adds rigidity.

What happens when one driver fails in a common chamber??

might just turn the sub into a passive radiator.

[Duran 387]

If they are identical subs, being driven with identical signals, then there is absolutely no reason to have them in seperate enclosures. There is no technical data that will dispute this. Period.

Now, if you are adding structural integrity by placing in a divider, than that may help your box. BUT not do to the fact that it divides the chambers, only because it adds rigidity.

What happens when one driver fails in a common chamber??

might just turn the sub into a passive radiator.

Then why the hell are you asking?

[fritosaregood 0]

If they are identical subs, being driven with identical signals, then there is absolutely no reason to have them in seperate enclosures. There is no technical data that will dispute this. Period.

Now, if you are adding structural integrity by placing in a divider, than that may help your box. BUT not do to the fact that it divides the chambers, only because it adds rigidity.

What happens when one driver fails in a common chamber??

might just turn the sub into a passive radiator.

Then why the hell are you asking?

im not askin about failure of a woofer, i asked why one design was better than another

[Duran 387]

If they are identical subs, being driven with identical signals, then there is absolutely no reason to have them in seperate enclosures. There is no technical data that will dispute this. Period.

Now, if you are adding structural integrity by placing in a divider, than that may help your box. BUT not do to the fact that it divides the chambers, only because it adds rigidity.

What happens when one driver fails in a common chamber??

might just turn the sub into a passive radiator.

Then why the hell are you asking?

im not askin about failure of a woofer, i asked why one design was better than another

Oh, okay!

[KU40 173]

I say run a common chamber

Why is that? With reversed polarity?

you don't reverse polarity in one sub if you run common chamber.

[///M5 2,833]

I'd always run a common chamber if possible. Please brace like you would if you had a center divider, but keep the chambers together. Separate chambers need to be identical, but then the woofers need to be identical as well. Considering this isn't real possible as there are production variances keeping them in the same chamber makes sense. Of course as hinted above if one of the drivers fails and you are wailing on your system you will kiss your other driver goodbye as well; however, the cure for this is to use your ears and brain. A stressed woofer will sound stressed and is easily turned down. The only benefit I see in separate chambers is that you can put the subs in two different locations.

[fritosaregood 0]

Please brace like you would if you had a center divider, but keep the chambers together.

So it would be a center divider with a whole in the middle?

[///M5 2,833]

Please brace like you would if you had a center divider, but keep the chambers together.

So it would be a center divider with a whole in the middle?

Err, perhaps just call it a brace.

[fritosaregood 0]

Please brace like you would if you had a center divider, but keep the chambers together.

So it would be a center divider with a whole in the middle?

Err, perhaps just call it a brace.

Yea a brace, but i was just makin sure thats what it would look like

[///M5 2,833]

Don't make symmetric holes in it, but asymmetric ones. Not that it makes a huge difference in a sub box, but generically it is a good idea.

[fritosaregood 0]

alright thanks for the help

[mdexxxiv 1]

It doesn't matter, really. It depends on what you feel like building at the time.

[95Honda 486]

If one fails, it will actually take the acoustic load from the good driver and REDUCE cone excusion above Fc, this is actually a good thing.

[KU40 173]

Please brace like you would if you had a center divider, but keep the chambers together.

So it would be a center divider with a whole in the middle?

Err, perhaps just call it a brace.

haha that made me laugh

[RobClay 20]

id say double baffle the top also

[fritosaregood 0]

If one fails, it will actually take the acoustic load from the good driver and REDUCE cone excusion above Fc, this is actually a good thing.

would it damage the sub that fail even further?