There are two big holes in the body panel behind the cubby box (see below) I want to blank them off, does anyone know what they are for?
.
.
Holes in rear cubby
- Thread starter Magicarcher
- Start date
Wiring to pass through if you have the 10 speaker option I believe 
Out of interest, why do you want to block them off behind the cubby boxes that sit in there?
Out of interest, why do you want to block them off behind the cubby boxes that sit in there?
Darkangelv2 said:
I intend to build some custom sub woofers by fitting 18mm ply across the front of the enclosure, fitting a pair of Reckhorn 6.5" woofers and then porting it. But the cubby itself will need to be airtight. I will then cut away most of the plastic cubby box and cover it with speaker material. Sadly I will have even less storage, but all being well it will sound good.
Mr Tidy said:Seems a shame they didn't make the plastic cubbies anything like as big as the void they're fitted in!
They would/could/should have been far more useful. :lol:
Now there is a project for someone with a 3D printer or someway to mould a new insert......
You might get a reasonable result if you dynamat all the internal surfaces. It still won’t be completely airtight but good enough not to affect the sound too much.
The other option is to block the vents which allow air to move from the front to the rear of the bulkhead and then drill more holes in the back of the cubbys. You then essentially use the whole boot space as your enclosure which should give you a nice deep linear rolloff at the bottom end.
The other option is to block the vents which allow air to move from the front to the rear of the bulkhead and then drill more holes in the back of the cubbys. You then essentially use the whole boot space as your enclosure which should give you a nice deep linear rolloff at the bottom end.
srhutch said:
Surely a tube of silicon would see it done?
srhutch said:
Oh I just love a gauntlet being thrown.
ph001 said:
That will work fine for a sealed enclosure design, but my aim is for a bass reflex design and to optimise the port I need to have a good idea of the box volume. I may ultimately have to revert to a sealed enclosure design as there are a lot of constraints in designing the port correct in what is quite an inflexible area and I may end up with too much colouration at higher volumes. But challenges are good. Just want this weather to warm up a bit as I don't have a garage.
Darkangelv2 said:
I don't like using silicon as I find it messy to work with. My plan is to make discs out of 2mm aluminium and araldite them over all holes, then use butyl tape into all the creases and joints and then cover the whole inside with silentcoat. I am confident this should seal it enough.
Magicarcher said:
Sounds proper!I played around with this a fair bit and couldn’t get porting to work very well with an enclosure so small. On the simulations I just kept getting a resonance with a very high Q around 80hz no matter what length and diameter port I choose. Would probably sound quite boomy. With the back of the cubby opened up and blocking front to rear air paths I got a -3db rolloff at 41Hz and pretty flat elsewhere. Thats using the driver parameters for the Hertz HCX690.
ph001 said:
I got as far as reading your post, and realised I have absolutely no idea what any of it means.
sounds good though
ph001 said:
It is never easy to tune a port which is why when I have designed loudspeakers for home use I have always gone for a transmission line design which are a great deal easier to design. But transmission line into a 5-6L enclosure just isn't going to work. As I am sure you know, the relationship between the speaker parameters, the enclosure and the port are complex and even if it works out on paper, it often sounds poor. I chose the Reckhorn because they are quite long throw and compliant and if all else fails will work in a sealed 6L enclosure. So my plan is to try the porting and if it doesn't sound good I will revert to sealed. I must confess I didn't think of opening up the rear of the cubby to the boot because I expected a soundpath through the rear centre storage box. Had I have done so I would have favoured a less compliant 6x9 with a lower resonant frequency as it would be an easier and better sounding way to get more bass. I lloked at verious 6x9 speakers but they were all fairly high in compliance and the 6L cubby box took the -3dB point too high. I will see how it goes if ever the weather picks up.