Well, I don't know if nesting a front vent driver up near another's motor will cause enough overheating to raise its Qts enough to put it out of sync with the front driver or worse, cause VC damage. Turned magnet to magnet takes up more space and worse, lowers the isobaric loading, so cab design theory will typically yield a smaller than optimum net Vb.
If vented, it will need to be 5-6x longer than for a single driver, further negating any box reduction, though for sure it will be considerably smaller than the ~320 L I propose.
Then there's the issue of the driver's outputs becoming increasingly out of phase with increasing frequency, so the back driver will need to be rolled off ~ an octave above Fb for wide BW use.
I guess if there's the time/inclination/$$$ to experiment it might be worthwhile, but in the scheme of things it seems better to me to just build the biggest sealed cab that can be tolerated and use a LRT ckt. to EQ it ~flat in-room if large corner loaded cabs aren't an option. The downside though is that if he's using flea power, then this may eat up too much efficiency.
GM





It is a GM guided design.Triangular dual woofer ported corner cabs.
Here's some pics.IMO you may have to go higher instead of wider with those Dims to limit the floor space requirements.GM could he go vertical instead of horizontal with the woofers ? When Pano did some calculations on the differences, the side by side wasn't to big of a difference,better yes,but not by much.I think he did some polar response plots on the differences between the horizontal configuration and the vertical,they are posted in my thread somewhere (Crossover Design for New Project).They are colorized. I'm just wondering if he could go up in height to help with the small room size ?


Bookmarks