Fun with the new ND Passive's - The Passive Aggressives

[3rutu5]

whyt do i get the impression that most folks actually do this i was thinking about what i actually want out of my speakers yesterday when working from home. Most of my time im at my PC and enjoying some music at a lower level. I think that these would be a great setup at a pc, maybe even for when people come around. Even though i give my builds an absolute thrashing to make sure that they can hit ear drum bursting levels, i wouldnt actually use that in a day to day. A prime example of this is that phantom clone i built recently, at a low to mid volume the bass note is very noticeable and gives me a little grin and the 12v battery setup just keeps on going, but when i was testing i wanted to get all the 60 watts that amp had to give and wanted no distortion..... i would easily just take it outside and let it play.

I also assume most of you guys have a few sets of speakers and have some large towers or 2 ways that are very capable of filling a large room, so wouldnt actually use the PA's for that anyhow I know i have more speakers than i have ears and barely use them all.

[a6walter1]

mattp I am considering this little powerhouse of a speaker. However, I would like to make new cabinets so that the PRs are on the front baffle below the woofer. The volume of the enclosure I am thinking about is 0.15 ft^3. When I model this, it appears that I should not add any weight to the PRs and just leave them at their standard mass. Does that sound right to you? Thanks!

[Chris Roemer]

If your desired tuning is in the mid 50s (which should yield another 10-20Hz extension in 0.15 cf), then you COULD just use 4" of 1" tubing for tuning. While the larger box will reach lower, you'll lose power handling.

[a6walter1]

The biggest thing I would be concerned about with a ported enclosure is the over excursion of the woofer below the tuning frequency. That is why i was thinking of going the PR route.

[Chris Roemer]

I don't see your concern.
PRs model similarly to ported boxes, not closed boxes.
It DOES look like in a box 3x the size, that you would not add extra mass to the PRs.

In a 0.15cf box, I see a plotted F3 (using 2 unweighted PRs) near 70Hz (Fb also near 70).
OTOH, a 1"id port that's 4" long tunes the box to the mid 50s (which is actually listed as the "target" on the P/As), with an F3 near 50.
The 2 plots look nearly identical, except the PRs roll off about 20Hz higher.

[a6walter1]

Chris Roemer will port noise be a concern with a port that small of a diameter?

[Chris Roemer]

Exiting it out the back, and/or running a (router) "roundover" around the exit will greatly diminish chances that you'd hear any chuffing (even a 1/4" RO is quite beneficial).
OR you could go up to a 1-1/4"id port, but then it needs to be 6" long.