Sealed vs Ported Subs
So what's the verdict on sealed vs ported subs? Does one perform better for music vs HT? Does one fill a room better than the other/a greater thump to the chest. Does one have a faster response than the other, etc, etc??? As always, looking forward to everyone's opinions and experience. I have a large room to fill, 600 sq ft. Thanks
Parasound HCA-2003A & 2205A
Front: Rti12's
Center: Csi A6
Side surrounds: Polk Rti A1's
Atmos: Mirage Nanosats
APC H15
Power cords by Pepster, Morrow MA4 IC's, AQ Midnight, AQ Chocolate HDMI's[/SIZE]
The rest is TBD.
Front: Rti12's
Center: Csi A6
Side surrounds: Polk Rti A1's
Atmos: Mirage Nanosats
APC H15
Power cords by Pepster, Morrow MA4 IC's, AQ Midnight, AQ Chocolate HDMI's[/SIZE]
The rest is TBD.
Post edited by mufsoman on
Comments
-
It's all in the design. Sealed generally has tighter bass but diminished output.
Ported generally has a +3db boost at a given tuning frequency (of the port).
All this means nothing if it's not designed correctly.....
Read some reviews and you will see what works better. My dad has the PSW1200 (the gigantic one) and its bass is awesome for movies (bottom power port) but I feel it leaves something desired for music. I have the PSW150 (i thought it was a 200) and I love how punchy it is, but for 600sq ft it wouldn't even put a dent in a room that size.Main Surround -
Epson 8350 Projector/ Elite Screens 120" / Pioneer Elite SC-35 / Sunfire Signature / Focal Chorus 716s / Focal Chorus CC / Polk MC80 / Polk PSW150 sub
Bedroom - Sharp Aquos 70" 650 / Pioneer SC-1222k / Polk RT-55 / Polk CS-250
Den - Rotel RSP-1068 / Threshold CAS-2 / Boston VR-M60 / BDP-05FD -
I was using an entry level ported 12", Acoustech H100. I am now using a sealed Rythmik 12".
http://www.acoustechspeakers.com/showpage.php?brand=1&type=8&spkrID=26
http://rythmikaudio.com/F12G.html
The H100 was very punchy for HT and LFE, IMO, especially for an entry level unit. I considered the bass too sloppy for music listening, however, in many cases. The Rythmik is much tighter and controlled, and I prefer it by far, but it does cost at least double, in general, and I'm still not convinced it's entirely useful for music the way I like it.
To be honest, using a NAD receiver yielded the biggest improvement in tight, controlled bass in my system (4 x RT55 and 1 x CS400), and I was able to lower the crossover from 60Hz to 40Hz because of this. With this setup, including the sealed Rythmik, the subwoofer blends totally seamlessly with the speakers IMO. Prior to that, you could always tell when the subwoofer was really kicking in.
Disclaimer: my subwoofer experience is fairly limited, and my opinion therefore of limited value, in reality.Alea jacta est! -
I tend to like sealed, however I will say that my Snell (ported) doesn't sound like many ported subs. There is a lot of research that goes into a good ported sub.Living Room:....................[HTML] [/HTML] Zone 2 (Workout Room):
AVR - Yamaha RX-V757......JBL 4312 Pro Monitors
Pre - Nak CA-5
AMP - Adcom 555 (Main)
Main - Polk RTI8**/RTiA5
AMP - Adcom 545II (Center)
Center - Polk CSiA4**
Sub - Snell Basis 300:p......Zone 3 (Outside)
CD - Yamaha CDC-555.......Def Tech AW5500
TV - Pani TH-42PZ80U
BR - LG BD390
Monster HTS1600 Power Center
Dedicated Circuit - (2) 20amp, (1) 15amp
Ben's IC, Canare 4S11
**Dayton and Sonicap Caps with Mills Resistors**