Ported vs Suspended
- Thread starter solarol
- Start date
- Status
Register to hide this ad
cwall99
Addicted Member
That's a bunch of nonsense. There's more to good bass than whether the speaker is ported or not. Speaker and driver design (including materials used in construction) is a good place to start. As is placement in the room.
I think that good designers will choose a ported or suspended design based more on design parameters they've been given to work with. There are lots of speaker manufacturers who use both ported and suspended designs.
My B&W 603s have two ports: one for the mid chamber and one for the bass chamber. They have very tight, clean bass. But, if I move them close to the wall behind them, the wall reinforces the bass coming out of them and makes for an almost overwhelming bass sound. But you'd run into this issue irrespective of whether the design was ported or suspended as it's the room interacting with the sound after the sound is out in the room, not while the sound is being generated by the driver.
I have plugs I can put in the ports, but my room is big enough that my speakers sound better with the ports unplugged.
I think that good designers will choose a ported or suspended design based more on design parameters they've been given to work with. There are lots of speaker manufacturers who use both ported and suspended designs.
My B&W 603s have two ports: one for the mid chamber and one for the bass chamber. They have very tight, clean bass. But, if I move them close to the wall behind them, the wall reinforces the bass coming out of them and makes for an almost overwhelming bass sound. But you'd run into this issue irrespective of whether the design was ported or suspended as it's the room interacting with the sound after the sound is out in the room, not while the sound is being generated by the driver.
I have plugs I can put in the ports, but my room is big enough that my speakers sound better with the ports unplugged.
Last edited:
poorman
Well-Known Member
I'm a big fan of the acoustic suspension design. In my subjective opinion, it produces a very musical-sounding bass. I especially enjoy listening to acoustic jazz on acoustic suspension speakers. I own or have owned speakers like Large Advents, smaller Advents, KLH 6, 17, 23, and 32, and some EPIs and they all had very enjoyable bass musicality.
My two cents.
My two cents.
RadShak1251
Super Member
I also favor acoustic-suspension bass over its ported cousin's.
To my ears, a.s. bass generally sounds smoother, "richer" and cleaner.
It only disadvantage is that an a.s. speaker needs more power to reach the same volume level than a ported design, but power is relatively cheap these days.
Oh and one other problem with a.s. speakers: while they are available out there in the form of vintage speakers, new ones are pretty much non-existant these days.
The only new acoustic-suspension speakers I know of off-hand that don't cost as much as a 2010 Buick is the Cambridge SoundWorks Model Six (2-way with an 8" woofer) and....er......that's it. Btw don't confuse a simple sealed speaker with a true a.s. design, which means it uses for example a relatively heavy woofer cone with a "mushy" suspension that allows a large amount of back-n-forth excursion capability.
To my ears, a.s. bass generally sounds smoother, "richer" and cleaner.
It only disadvantage is that an a.s. speaker needs more power to reach the same volume level than a ported design, but power is relatively cheap these days.
Oh and one other problem with a.s. speakers: while they are available out there in the form of vintage speakers, new ones are pretty much non-existant these days.
The only new acoustic-suspension speakers I know of off-hand that don't cost as much as a 2010 Buick is the Cambridge SoundWorks Model Six (2-way with an 8" woofer) and....er......that's it. Btw don't confuse a simple sealed speaker with a true a.s. design, which means it uses for example a relatively heavy woofer cone with a "mushy" suspension that allows a large amount of back-n-forth excursion capability.
Copa1934
My ears are bleeding
I lean towards AS due to the tight bass. As for efficiency my Mach One's stomp all over every speaker I've tested against them, both A.S. and Bass Reflex designs. Where I have noticed a difference, in favor of B.R. is with Piano's and Drum's. Because these instruments have natural reverberation charicteristics, bass reflex seem to reproduce that sound more accurately. I mentioned this in my head to head between my Mach One's and my JBL L3 speakers. The L3's did a more accurate job of rendoring these instruments, which I've noticed with other B.R. systems.
Problem for me is that I do notice a boomy sound with B.R., depending mostly on the recording, but definitely noticeable when doing A/B comparisons.
This is NOT a bad thing, just different. More and more I'm becoming an advocate of 2 pair of speakers (more if your budget allows). If you really really have to have the ultimate sound for any particular type of music or recording (whatever it might be) then you'll have the appropriate speaker for that job.
Of course this doesn't take into consideration Receivers/Amps/Integ-Amps, etc. but I really didn't want to go there since that wasn't the original question, I just wanted to address the question at hand.
I'll be running some HPM-40's later against the Mach's and the L3's and see what I come up with. If I'm correct the 40's and L3's will have more in common sound wise.
Problem for me is that I do notice a boomy sound with B.R., depending mostly on the recording, but definitely noticeable when doing A/B comparisons.
This is NOT a bad thing, just different. More and more I'm becoming an advocate of 2 pair of speakers (more if your budget allows). If you really really have to have the ultimate sound for any particular type of music or recording (whatever it might be) then you'll have the appropriate speaker for that job.
Of course this doesn't take into consideration Receivers/Amps/Integ-Amps, etc. but I really didn't want to go there since that wasn't the original question, I just wanted to address the question at hand.
I'll be running some HPM-40's later against the Mach's and the L3's and see what I come up with. If I'm correct the 40's and L3's will have more in common sound wise.
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
Not nonsense at all. A port is a second source of sound and is not in phase with the primary sound waves from the woofer. Therefore, ported bass cannot be tighter than sealed cabinet bass. Whether you think port or sealed bass is sounds better is a subjective call and entirely up to you.
audiozaz
rtfm!? - tl;dr
Both systems can be made to sound tight or flabby. Still, acoustic suspension takes the cake on this one if you put both schemes under the proverbial microscope. And as others said, whether one sounds better than the other is entirely subjective.
And then you got aperiodic enclosures, that can be wedged somewhere in between. These also have their proponents and detractors.
az
And then you got aperiodic enclosures, that can be wedged somewhere in between. These also have their proponents and detractors.
az
The damped ported or aperiodic approach -- as advocated by Fried, Dynaco, Von Schweikert and others -- may be the best approach of all. Stuffing the port in a controlled manner allows the Q at resonance to be adjusted for critical damping, thus providing better transient response than an undamped ported alignment.
That said, I'll add that I've heard and owned fine-sounding examples of air suspension, ported and aperiodic speakers over the years. IMO, quality of implementation is more important than the choice of design approach.
That said, I'll add that I've heard and owned fine-sounding examples of air suspension, ported and aperiodic speakers over the years. IMO, quality of implementation is more important than the choice of design approach.
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
IMO, stuffing the port is a must with various Pioneer HPM's and JBL speakers.
Those woofers which IMO do the best reproduction of upper bass and midrange are unsuited to AS use and are best used vented. It may be that the characteristics that make a woofer good for AS use compromise it's ability to do midrange.
In any event I never heard an AS woofer that reproduced what I consider first rate midrange.
In any event I never heard an AS woofer that reproduced what I consider first rate midrange.
Copa1934
My ears are bleeding
I believe that as the woofer gets larger, what you say is quite accurate, but with the smaller the woofer the better the mid/high transition, IF we're talking about a two way system. In a three way, or more drivers, I'm not sure that argument is entirely accurate. I say this as it applies to your better/high end speakers.
Here's another way of looking at the difference between A.S. and B.R. How many low end speakers do you find today utilizing A.S. design? Probably none (at least I haven't seen any in a long time). Why? B.R. efficiency per dollar. To get sound remotely equal to B.R. (dollar for dollar invested) from an A.S. you will have to move up the food chain quite a few notches. Most everyone agrees that B.R. tend to be more efficient, particularly in low end speakers.
This of course has nothing to do with which sounds better. As I've stated earlier in this thread I have both and each satisfies different needs (not all ear candy performs the same).
Here's another way of looking at the difference between A.S. and B.R. How many low end speakers do you find today utilizing A.S. design? Probably none (at least I haven't seen any in a long time). Why? B.R. efficiency per dollar. To get sound remotely equal to B.R. (dollar for dollar invested) from an A.S. you will have to move up the food chain quite a few notches. Most everyone agrees that B.R. tend to be more efficient, particularly in low end speakers.
This of course has nothing to do with which sounds better. As I've stated earlier in this thread I have both and each satisfies different needs (not all ear candy performs the same).
marc mc
Super Member
I agree and would add that after the design IMO is the quality of the driver itself.
I own a bunch of subs that I have made and as bass cabs in speakers. The 2 I like the most are the Dual 10" Eminence drivers in my Watson Labs (my favorite bass) and the 12" drivers in my Mac XRT-18's. Both are AS. I do own and like several BR's as well but at huge scale volumes they can't do it with the same control.
For 8" drivers in bass cabs I like TL's and BR's. I have a few that get down below 30Hz. Bigger scale its AS for me.
marc mc
dnewma04
The Healer
I prefer the more accurate, tighter, lower distortion, more natural bass produced by top notch ported designs, generally. And...they have better PRaT.
I do like sealed bass when there is enough surface area to keep excursion down low enough to not riddle the bass with distortion like most AS fans are forced to live with. things like giant IB subwoofer systems with 8-16 15" woofers can really produce nice, natural, low distortion bass, as well.
Also, ported systems are *only* more efficient at tuning to about 1 octave or so above tuning. Above that, they don't provide any efficiency improvement.
I do like sealed bass when there is enough surface area to keep excursion down low enough to not riddle the bass with distortion like most AS fans are forced to live with. things like giant IB subwoofer systems with 8-16 15" woofers can really produce nice, natural, low distortion bass, as well.
Also, ported systems are *only* more efficient at tuning to about 1 octave or so above tuning. Above that, they don't provide any efficiency improvement.
Every speaker I've really enjoyed employed the acoustic suspension principle . The ported systems I've owned tended to sound heavier in the bass end . It's like they had a pseudo or false deep bass end . To me the acoustic suspension speaker can have a tighter ,truer , better defined bass end than a comparably competently designed ported speaker . Every ported system I've ever owned ended up being sold . Heck , I even prefer the bass performance of my EPI-100 as compared to the newly acquired Dynaco A-25's . Unless I decide to build a clone A-35 system which is a sealed box design with a resistive vent . But basically it's a sealed box and I'm certain I'll like it more than the A-25's . I love the tight bass and sound of a well designed acoustic suspension loudspeaker . They just seem to be able to hold a tune/tempo better than ported systems .
Last edited by a moderator:
bluesky
Lunatic Member
Ported and Acoustic Suspension speakers. Two entirely different sounds. I like both. I prefer Acoustic Suspension.
Ported seem to have a lot of 'boom' in a good way. Acoustic suspension just sounds smooth and wonderful.
Ported is great for Rock and Roll. Acoustic suspension sounds great on everything else.
Acoustic suspension are 'a lot more musical'. No doubt about that. But for rock...ported.
.....Get Both.......the only way to go.
Ported seem to have a lot of 'boom' in a good way. Acoustic suspension just sounds smooth and wonderful.
Ported is great for Rock and Roll. Acoustic suspension sounds great on everything else.
Acoustic suspension are 'a lot more musical'. No doubt about that. But for rock...ported.
.....Get Both.......the only way to go.
Last edited:
- Status
