Regular vs Slim subs also General Box Size questions

[dlink 0]

So I'm looking for sub. Nothing huge, a 10" would most likely be best. I would prefer a small footprint, so I was looking at some of the slimmers subs out there. Kickers, JL, etc. What is the deal with slim subs? Do they perform as well as their deeper counterparts? Any benefits to them other than the small boxes needed?

ANd on the topic of boxes, I read how you needed a proper box to make the sub sing, but I am curious.

1) how do you determine port length?

2) pro/con of doing a bended port?

3) the box can easily be too small, but can a box be too big?

Just some questions while I am learning everything.

[///M5 2,833]

They aren't made for your application. The goal of a slim sub is to be as thin as possible, not fit in a small box. Typically used in applications for going behind the seat of a single cab pickup truck. If you just want small there are normal drivers that will take less cubic feet than most thin subs and do a better job actually playing the low frequencies.

[NB50 206]

They dont fit in smaller boxes its shallower boxes.

1. http://mobile.jlaudio.com/support_pages.php?page_id=165

2. Pro get the length you need. Con turbulence

3. Depends on goals, driver, environment, etc......

[Duran 387]

Slim subs are meant to be smaller to conserve space, ie small sealed boxes. NO PORTED!

[dlink 0]

The goal of a slim sub is to be as thin as possible, not fit in a small box

Poor wording on my part.

They dont fit in smaller boxes its shallower boxes.

This is what I meant by smaller.

Let\'s define the box dimensions to be width * depth * and height. We will call width left to right that touches the floor, depth: front to back as touches the floor, and height be from the floor to part of teh box furthest from the floor (the top).

My assumption was that a slim sub would have a small footprint, ie, the area of the base (width*depth) would be smaller than a regular box. Granted it would have a larger height, but in terms of cargo space, I could put more in the hatch, as I do not normally stack items.

My question still stands, though, do they perform as well as their regular depth counterparts?

Also, no ported for slim? Then why do some sites give ported specs for their slim line? ie: The new RE Audio SL Series

http://www.reaudio.com/specs.html

SL SERIES

Enclosure Recommendations

10\" Compact - Optimal

Sealed: 0.35 - 0.5

ported: 0.65@35Hz - 1.0@35H

12\" Compact - Optimal

Sealed: .05 - .074

ported: 1.25@35Hz - 1.5@35Hz

Edited November 4, 2008 by dlink

[NB50 206]

My question still stands, though, do they perform as well as their regular depth counterparts?

What is your definition of perform??

[dlink 0]

If I had a well built 10" slim next to a well built 10" regular, If I closed my eyes would I be able to tell the difference? Are there general differences in wattage, frequency range, etc.

[aznboi3644 2]

Well being a slim line subwoofer mechanical clearances are not like regular subwoofers

[KU40 173]

Slim subs generally will not be SPL beasts. They are generally for lower wattage applications (1000 watts or under). There is no difference in sound.

[///M5 2,833]

Slim subs generally will not be SPL beasts. They are generally for lower wattage applications (1000 watts or under). There is no difference in sound.

No difference in sound, but definitely a difference in dynamic capability. Low depth = low excursion which means low output at low frequencies. Many "slim" subs are better off being used as a midbass although there are exceptions. Personally I would avoid them if I could.

I also disagree with your footprint statement. A small sub can fit in a smaller footprint box than a slim sub. Slim subs take more volume typically than some small box woofers which increases their footprint.

Considering you speak about SQ and not output in most of your threads, you really want a sub that plays the lows. This of course means a sealed box and a driver with some dynamic capability, not IMO a slim sub.

[dlink 0]

I also disagree with your footprint statement. A small sub can fit in a smaller footprint box than a slim sub. Slim subs take more volume typically than some small box woofers which increases their footprint.

That is interesting! I would not have though that.

Considering you speak about SQ and not output in most of your threads, you really want a sub that plays the lows. This of course means a sealed box and a driver with some dynamic capability, not IMO a slim sub.

Well ok then. A full sub it is Although, this thread wasn't 100% just to see what would fit my car, I did have a general curiosity of the differences. I am a math major, so playing with these numbers amuses me. I read that whole ported tutorial for fun, for example

[KU40 173]

Slim subs generally will not be SPL beasts. They are generally for lower wattage applications (1000 watts or under). There is no difference in sound.

No difference in sound, but definitely a difference in dynamic capability. Low depth = low excursion which means low output at low frequencies. Many "slim" subs are better off being used as a midbass although there are exceptions. Personally I would avoid them if I could.

This is true. I guess right now I have SI's Mag and BM on the mind, but those aren't true slim subs. Although I suppose, if you built the right box, you could have decent enough low end extension with a slimline sub in relation to the rest of the FR that the sub plays. But you'd probably be limited to about 110 db out of it due to cutting the upper frequencies so much Plus if you needed that big of a box to help the lowend, wouldn't that be defeating the purpose of a slim sub? But yeah slim subs are generally limited to 10-12 mm excursion, which doesn't help lowend at all.