ultra-wide sealed subwoofer enclosure - is it going to work?

[Arcsabre]

Hi I am just wondering if a sealed subwoofer box with a size of, say, 30cm x 30cm x 2 meters, is going to work out? this gives us around 6.35 ft³ of box size, which is ideal for some 15" drivers to have a Qtc of around 0.7, which seems to work out on paper.

I am trying to build something that stays as close to the back wall as possible without having to knock a hole on the wall. With such proximity to the wall (thinking of it as a wedge against the backwall) the phase cancellation would not occur until goes up to above 200hz. way above the crossover point.

This design would allow it to stay close to the wall and have decent box size without standing out like a sore thumb in the room (and got Mrs as "excited" as you could imagine)

But seem to be a weird design aside from on the paper. (Anyone seen such thing before?) Do you think it's going to work similarly to a traditional shaped subwoofer of the same internal size?(like 1.8' x 1.8' x 1.8')

I suppose with a sealed box it is less concerned about the internal structure? (compared to a ported one, which may require complicated air path internally)

Anyone could shed some light? Much appreciated

[Arcsabre]

Like this - although ultimately I'm looking at building one with sloped front baffle. More like a trapezium or triangle, viewed from left and right side.

indicative only - would need to develop internal bracing , stuffing .etc in the official design

[SME]

Sure!  But your picture is missing a whole lot of *braces*.    Other things to consider: material use is inefficient vs. a more square-like shape.  And, the enclosure will develop internal standing wave resonances that are particularly low.  You'll definitely want more depth of stuffing/fill at each end.

Also, see my replies to your other thread about preferring corner placement for higher efficiency among other things.

[kipman725]

I have made subs that are long like this and yes you need a lot of stuffing to combat standing waves, the higher you can push the first standing wave up in frequency the more effective the stuffing will be:

Another thing to consider is your driver placement is a worst case scenario for standing wave generation (mid pipe).  If you consider possible standing waves in the pipe you can have a maximum at the driver and two minima at either end at 86Hz (fundamental modes.  You would be better off putting the driver at one end.

[Arcsabre]

1 hour ago, kipman725 said:

I have made subs that are long like this and yes you need a lot of stuffing to combat standing waves, the higher you can push the first standing wave up in frequency the more effective the stuffing will be:

Another thing to consider is your driver placement is a worst case scenario for standing wave generation (mid pipe).  If you consider possible standing waves in the pipe you can have a maximum at the driver and two minima at either end at 86Hz (fundamental modes.  You would be better off putting the driver at one end.

Make sense to me actually my speakers Dynaudio C5 is designed in the way you described. Instead of using the conventional design which is the woofer in the middle of the cabinet, they had the woofer on top end of front baffle and they have one of the tightest and most accurate bass for that price. (although not much, as they are sealed and I put them away from the corner. they sound so bad when you put them in the corner)

Perhaps I would put one driver on each end of the long box haha...