Front ported floorstanders vs rear ported standmounters

[Leeps]

Just after your anecdotal thoughts please. I've had experience with quite a few different rear-ported speakers over the years, both standmounted and floorstanding. Some of these have had issues with bass boom in reflective / awkward rooms.

We all know that in general, floorstanders tend to produce more midrange / bass, which can cause additional problems controlling bass in similarly acoustically difficult rooms, but what about front-ported floorstanders?

Rather than theory, I'm interested in the experience of those of you who own or have owned front-ported floorstanders and how well or badly these have coped controlling bass in the room. (I wanted to zone in on front ported rather than confusing the question with downward-firing drivers).

In theory, I would imagine a front-ported floorstander is somewhere in between a smallish rear-ported standmounter and a rear ported floorstander, but I'd like to know your practical experience. Does the fact that bass is omni-directional anyway mean that front-porting a floorstander doesn't actually stop bass boom in practice?

 

[Al ears]

Just after your anecdotal thoughts please. I've had experience with quite a few different rear-ported speakers over the years, both standmounted and floorstanding. Some of these have had issues with bass boom in reflective / awkward rooms.

We all know that in general, floorstanders tend to produce more midrange / bass, which can cause additional problems controlling bass in similarly acoustically difficult rooms, but what about front-ported floorstanders?

Rather than theory, I'm interested in the experience of those of you who own or have owned front-ported floorstanders and how well or badly these have coped controlling bass in the room. (I wanted to zone in on front ported rather than confusing the question with downward-firing drivers).

In theory, I would imagine a front-ported floorstander is somewhere in between a smallish rear-ported standmounter and a rear ported floorstander, but I'd like to know your practical experience. Does the fact that bass is omni-directional anyway mean that front-porting a floorstander doesn't actually stop bass boom in practice?

My floorstanders are front ported and, by and large, they can handle the awkward room I currently have them sited in. That's why I bought them. They are, however, the exception to the rule. My opinion is that any speaker producing significant bass, whether front or rear ported, or indeed sealed, is going to create problems in an awkward room.

Emphasis has to be put on the mid-range in these situations and most speakers prefer to have some space behind them. It's a challenge to find good speakers that are designed to work well within the confines of your average new build UK living room. I should know, mine are currently located in my bedroom.

Front ported obviously gives you a bit more leeway in positioning but this does not mean all front ported speakers will work well within a given space. Sealed box designs are there for a reason.

You cannot compare front ported floorstanders to small rear ported standmounts, it's a bit like apples and pears. ;-)

The closest I came to my current set up was with the large sealed-box EB Acoustics EB2 standmounts.

 

[davedotco]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

Bass performence is all about the design of the speaker and the way it interacts with the room. Big floor standing speakers will, almost always, have more bass, it is expected, so provided.

Secondly, and this is from experience, the better the amplifier, the better the control and the tighter the bass. This is not to be under estimated.

 

[Leeps]

It's a challenge to find good speakers that are designed to work well within the confines of your average new build UK living room.

Agreed. It's amazing how few designs really address this. I know the USA is a large market, but you'd think there would be a greater percentage of designs out there that would suit the smaller homes of the UK, Hong Kong or Japan and so on.

And most of the speaker designs that are suited to this such as the typical mini-monitors from Proac, Neat and ATC, are British made. I wonder whether the reason is more down to aesthetics - there a lot of customers out there who like the visual impact of a floorstanding speaker in the room, even though this might not be the best solution for them sonically.

Thanks for sharing your experience though. I'll try to remember it if ever I'm in danger of being seduced by some floorstanders, front-ported or otherwise.

 

[Leeps]

Secondly, and this is from experience, the better the amplifier, the better the control and the tighter the bass. This is not to be under estimated.

That's certainly been my experience too with different amps feeding identical speakers in the same room. I remember hearing two Hegel amps back to back and noticing the bass by its absence with the more powerful of the two. A friend of mine had an Audiolab 8200 and got an 8200P to bi-amp. His initial reaction was "where has all the bass gone?" which was just indicating that it was being much better controlled by the extra power.

I know AV receivers aren't everyone's cuppa, but setting the speakers to 'small' and handing over to a reasonably oomphy subwoofer, which I can control independently does also help tame the bass should certain tracks need it.

As much as the purity of a stereo amp appeals, I can't imagine a system with no bass management in my current listening room.

 

[Al ears]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

Bass performence is all about the design of the speaker and the way it interacts with the room. Big floor standing speakers will, almost always, have more bass, it is expected, so provided.

Secondly, and this is from experience, the better the amplifier, the better the control and the tighter the bass. This is not to be under estimated.

+1

Sort of my point exactly. Room response to bass frequencies is unrelated to port position, as stated, sealed box speakers will still pose the same problems.

 

[davedotco]

One thing to remember is that the average american home not only has larger rooms but, more importantly, usually of timber frame construction.

Britsh homes are, in the main, smaller and more ridgedly constructed of brick/concrete which are naturally more resonant. The effect is that timber frame construction works almost as a huge bass trap and this, combined with larger rooms, allows a bass response that many british enthusiasts can only dream of.

 

[Andrewjvt]

One thing to remember is that the average american home not only has larger rooms but, more importantly, usually of timber frame construction.

Britsh homes are, in the main, smaller and more ridgedly constructed of brick/concrete which are naturally more resonant. The effect is that timber frame construction works almost as a huge bass trap and this, combined with larger rooms, allows a bass response that many british enthusiasts can only dream of.

Explain why the sound in my room is so good as i have massive oak beams.

 

[Al ears]

One thing to remember is that the average american home not only has larger rooms but, more importantly, usually of timber frame construction.

Britsh homes are, in the main, smaller and more ridgedly constructed of brick/concrete which are naturally more resonant. The effect is that timber frame construction works almost as a huge bass trap and this, combined with larger rooms, allows a bass response that many british enthusiasts can only dream of.

If the bass is at such a frequency that it moves walls then God help them.

 

[steve_1979]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

+1

At the bass frequencies you get from ports the sound is omnidirectional. Provided the speaker isn't positioned so close to a wall that it obstructs the airflow the the position of the port in the enclosure is irrelevant.

 

[Leeps]

Oddly though, my previous house's listening room had very few issues with bass, even though the room was smaller. There was one bass node in one corner, but there wasn't any seating there so you didn't notice.

But I think the reason for the very good acoustics was that as it was an old place, there were almost no parallel surfaces in the room. A fire place on one wall and a very curiously shaped ceiling seemed to stop any echoes before they got started. So despite having rear-ported floorstanders actually quite near a wall, there were no bass problems. The exact same system in my new place, in a larger albeit plain rectangular room had no end of difficulties, hence a fair bit of speaker-swapping subsequently until I managed to get the balance right.

 

[Macspur]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

Bass performence is all about the design of the speaker and the way it interacts with the room. Big floor standing speakers will, almost always, have more bass, it is expected, so provided.

Secondly, and this is from experience, the better the amplifier, the better the control and the tighter the bass. This is not to be under estimated.

I'm inclined to agree with these comments. My current pair of Harbeths and their predecessors the SHL5 are both large stand mount front ported speakers and it wasn't until I changed my Sugden Masterclass forthe Accuphase that I was able to tame the base boom in my small listening room and finally realise Harbeths full potential.

Mac

www.macsmusic.blogbubble.net

 

[paulkebab]

but just to mix things up.. I had front-ported Wharfedale E70's which sounded superb. We moved house and the room they went in was a similar shape but about a foot narrower - they just didnt make any bass whatsoever. Got some Jamo Pro 200 which were rear-ported but a different design and they were excellent. We moved again and I had that feeling of deja-vue but they worked yet again in the new house. One divorce later I started from scratch and got the front-ported IPL M3tl transmission lines in a modern house and no problems. Moved again to a bigger older house and they sounded awful. Got the bigger S4tl which cured the bass end, moved again to a similar but very slightly smaller house and they still sound great. A bit too great sometimes so I might downsize slightly. Rooms and their shape and contents hold all the cards in terms of SQ and response, a good amp definitely improves control.

 

[davedotco]

One thing to remember is that the average american home not only has larger rooms but, more importantly, usually of timber frame construction.

Britsh homes are, in the main, smaller and more ridgedly constructed of brick/concrete which are naturally more resonant. The effect is that timber frame construction works almost as a huge bass trap and this, combined with larger rooms, allows a bass response that many british enthusiasts can only dream of.

If the bass is at such a frequency that it moves walls then God help them.

This is not a subject I have researched in great detail but reflects some involvement with US speaker designers. The subject of the way a timber frame structue alters the bass response has come up on a number of occasions.

There are a lot of factors that determine the sound of a room but given the subject of this thread I thought it might be interesting.

By way of a contrast, my apartment in spain has a big (27 x 18ft), somewhat irregular shaped room that is 'solid', ie concrete floor and ceiling, plastered brick wall etc. Despite the generous size and shape, the high ceilings etc, the sound is pretty poor for an otherwise well furnished room.

 

[NSA_watch_my_toilet]

I had both ways on different speakers. And, my experience about that, is that they they are numerous factors that will influence the way bass and mediums are rendered, before coming to the fixing of the loudspeakers. You can find front fixed systems with averagely low bass capacity and others with the same construction that are incompetent to go further down that 60hz, the same goes for back mounted speakers.

Quote : "We all know that in general, floorstanders tend to produce more midrange / bass..."

Especially today, it is not so the case anymore. There is a trending going on (already discussed in other threads) about floorstanders cutting around 50hz, because, probably, of the incidence in critical rooms. Some speakers, like the B&W803 D3 are more extreme than that and start rolling off at 70hz.

My advice : Treat your rooms.

 

[nopiano]

Straying slightly from the question, but I cut my hifi teeth in the 70s and 80s when small infinite baffle (sealed box) speakers were the norm. I wonder if the popularity of reflex speakers coincided with the move away from LP - with the risk of warp sub-bass - to bass smooth CD?

I never really liked reflex or abr designs much, as I remember models like the KEF 104-ab which always sounded muddy to me. Transmission lines, by IMF and then TDL seemed to work though. To my surprise, the Sonus faber grand piano concertos were abr, but I loved them so much I never cared!

I wonder if the infinite baffle designs will re-emerge along with the renewed interest in LP replay, or vinyl as it has be re-named?

 

[Al ears]

One thing to remember is that the average american home not only has larger rooms but, more importantly, usually of timber frame construction.

Britsh homes are, in the main, smaller and more ridgedly constructed of brick/concrete which are naturally more resonant. The effect is that timber frame construction works almost as a huge bass trap and this, combined with larger rooms, allows a bass response that many british enthusiasts can only dream of.

If the bass is at such a frequency that it moves walls then God help them.

This is not a subject I have researched in great detail but reflects some involvement with US speaker designers. The subject of the way a timber frame structue alters the bass response has come up on a number of occasions.

There are a lot of factors that determine the sound of a room but given the subject of this thread I thought it might be interesting.

By way of a contrast, my apartment in spain has a big (27 x 18ft), somewhat irregular shaped room that is 'solid', ie concrete floor and ceiling, plastered brick wall etc. Despite the generous size and shape, the high ceilings etc, the sound is pretty poor for an otherwise well furnished room.

Interesting indeed although to my mind even timber framed houses are dry-lined and plastered normally. It would be this layer that reacts to sound waves and not the outer structure of the house.

 

[davedotco]

One thing to remember is that the average american home not only has larger rooms but, more importantly, usually of timber frame construction.

Britsh homes are, in the main, smaller and more ridgedly constructed of brick/concrete which are naturally more resonant. The effect is that timber frame construction works almost as a huge bass trap and this, combined with larger rooms, allows a bass response that many british enthusiasts can only dream of.

If the bass is at such a frequency that it moves walls then God help them.

This is not a subject I have researched in great detail but reflects some involvement with US speaker designers. The subject of the way a timber frame structue alters the bass response has come up on a number of occasions.

There are a lot of factors that determine the sound of a room but given the subject of this thread I thought it might be interesting.

By way of a contrast, my apartment in spain has a big (27 x 18ft), somewhat irregular shaped room that is 'solid', ie concrete floor and ceiling, plastered brick wall etc. Despite the generous size and shape, the high ceilings etc, the sound is pretty poor for an otherwise well furnished room.

Interesting indeed although to my mind even timber framed houses are dry-lined and plastered normally. It would be this layer that reacts to sound waves and not the outer structure of the house.

This is not a function of reflexion, you can still get hard reflective rooms in any type of construcion.

As I said, I have not really researched this, just repeating what I have been told by some designers, ie that timber frame construction absorbs (?) bass frequencies, smoothing out resonances.

You can simply put more bass energy into such a room, without issues, than you can into a solid brick or concrete structure, given my experience I would say that this is the case in practice.

 

[Gazzip]

One thing to remember is that the average american home not only has larger rooms but, more importantly, usually of timber frame construction.

Britsh homes are, in the main, smaller and more ridgedly constructed of brick/concrete which are naturally more resonant. The effect is that timber frame construction works almost as a huge bass trap and this, combined with larger rooms, allows a bass response that many british enthusiasts can only dream of.

If the bass is at such a frequency that it moves walls then God help them.

This is not a subject I have researched in great detail but reflects some involvement with US speaker designers. The subject of the way a timber frame structue alters the bass response has come up on a number of occasions.

There are a lot of factors that determine the sound of a room but given the subject of this thread I thought it might be interesting.

By way of a contrast, my apartment in spain has a big (27 x 18ft), somewhat irregular shaped room that is 'solid', ie concrete floor and ceiling, plastered brick wall etc. Despite the generous size and shape, the high ceilings etc, the sound is pretty poor for an otherwise well furnished room.

Interesting indeed although to my mind even timber framed houses are dry-lined and plastered normally. It would be this layer that reacts to sound waves and not the outer structure of the house.

This is not a function of reflexion, you can still get hard reflective rooms in any type of construcion.

As I said, I have not really researched this, just repeating what I have been told by some designers, ie that timber frame construction absorbs (?) bass frequencies, smoothing out resonances.

You can simply put more bass energy into such a room, without issues, than you can into a solid brick or concrete structure, given my experience I would say that this is the case in practice.

Possibly because the lower frequencies can pass with less resistance through in to the cavity where they can disipate/disperse more easily?

 

[Gazzip]

This is how double skin party wall construction works between new semi-detached houses and flats...

 

[busb]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

Bass performence is all about the design of the speaker and the way it interacts with the room. Big floor standing speakers will, almost always, have more bass, it is expected, so provided.

Secondly, and this is from experience, the better the amplifier, the better the control and the tighter the bass. This is not to be under estimated.

Forgive the pun but this is a pretty sound observation. I would add that seating position is equally important & if you can touch a wall with the back of your head, you'll nearly always suffer from unwanted room modes. If you can setup your room with plenty of free space behind you chair/sofa - do so.

I have gone from very small 2 way/twin driver floorstanders (Totem Arros) to much larger Quadrel Chromium 8 floorstanders (both rear ported with the Quadrel's being 3 way/4 driver) & now have much better bass with less boom from my Quadrerls with much more treble that's also very smooth). I live in a flat with wooden floorboards with the speakers firing out of recesses split by a fireplace so the room is not perfect.

 

[chebby]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

+1

At the bass frequencies you get from ports the sound is omnidirectional. Provided the speaker isn't positioned so close to a wall that it obstructs the airflow the the position of the port in the enclosure is irrelevant.

Mine are positioned as close to the wall as stands/skirting board and connections allow (about 2.5 inches) and pretty close to corners (one 'corner' is formed by two large, back to back, solid wood book cabinets that we use to divide the room into different areas. The cabinets are full with books and DVD/Bluray storage boxes and files etc. almost to ceiling height.

I'll get back to you on reflex ports after i've finished reading (and hopefully, finally, understanding) messrs.Briggs and Villchur on the subject

 

[Al ears]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

Bass performence is all about the design of the speaker and the way it interacts with the room. Big floor standing speakers will, almost always, have more bass, it is expected, so provided.

Secondly, and this is from experience, the better the amplifier, the better the control and the tighter the bass. This is not to be under estimated.

Forgive the pun but this is a pretty sound observation. I would add that seating position is equally important & if you can touch a wall with the back of your head, you'll nearly always suffer from unwanted room modes. If you can setup your room with plenty of free space behind you chair/sofa - do so.

I have gone from very small 2 way/twin driver floorstanders (Totem Arros) to much larger Quadrel Chromium 8 floorstanders (both rear ported with the Quadrel's being 3 way/4 driver) & now have much better bass with less boom from my Quadrerls with much more treble that's also very smooth). I live in a flat with wooden floorboards with the speakers firing out of recesses split by a fireplace so the room is not perfect.

Very nice speakers those Quadrals by all accounts. I think we can thank the home cinema brigade for most speaker manufacturers now realising their speakers are likely to be used close to rear walls and designing them with this in mind.

 

[busb]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

Bass performence is all about the design of the speaker and the way it interacts with the room. Big floor standing speakers will, almost always, have more bass, it is expected, so provided.

Secondly, and this is from experience, the better the amplifier, the better the control and the tighter the bass. This is not to be under estimated.

Forgive the pun but this is a pretty sound observation. I would add that seating position is equally important & if you can touch a wall with the back of your head, you'll nearly always suffer from unwanted room modes. If you can setup your room with plenty of free space behind you chair/sofa - do so.

I have gone from very small 2 way/twin driver floorstanders (Totem Arros) to much larger Quadrel Chromium 8 floorstanders (both rear ported with the Quadrel's being 3 way/4 driver) & now have much better bass with less boom from my Quadrerls with much more treble that's also very smooth). I live in a flat with wooden floorboards with the speakers firing out of recesses split by a fireplace so the room is not perfect.

Very nice speakers those Quadrals by all accounts. I think we can thank the home cinema brigade for most speaker manufacturers now realising their speakers are likely to be used close to rear walls and designing them with this in mind.

A friend had a pair of Gradient speakers that only worked hard up against a wall. Such speakers are now called near-field or studio monitors? Interestingly, although I was never that struck by these Gradients, they weren't boxy (were open frame). As for non-ported or infinite baffle speakers, the only ones I,ve owned were Celestion SL6s & the only contemporary ones I've heard were a pair of Naim Ovator S400s.

 

[davedotco]

It makes no difference whether the port is on the front or on the rear of the speaker, one of hi-fi's biggest current myths.

Bass performence is all about the design of the speaker and the way it interacts with the room. Big floor standing speakers will, almost always, have more bass, it is expected, so provided.

Secondly, and this is from experience, the better the amplifier, the better the control and the tighter the bass. This is not to be under estimated.

Forgive the pun but this is a pretty sound observation. I would add that seating position is equally important & if you can touch a wall with the back of your head, you'll nearly always suffer from unwanted room modes. If you can setup your room with plenty of free space behind you chair/sofa - do so.

I have gone from very small 2 way/twin driver floorstanders (Totem Arros) to much larger Quadrel Chromium 8 floorstanders (both rear ported with the Quadrel's being 3 way/4 driver) & now have much better bass with less boom from my Quadrerls with much more treble that's also very smooth). I live in a flat with wooden floorboards with the speakers firing out of recesses split by a fireplace so the room is not perfect.

Very nice speakers those Quadrals by all accounts. I think we can thank the home cinema brigade for most speaker manufacturers now realising their speakers are likely to be used close to rear walls and designing them with this in mind.

A friend had a pair of Gradient speakers that only worked hard up against a wall. Such speakers are now called near-field or studio monitors? Interestingly, although I was never that struck by these Gradients, they weren't boxy (were open frame). As for non-ported or infinite baffle speakers, the only ones I,ve owned were Celestion SL6s & the only contemporary ones I've heard were a pair of Naim Ovator S400s.

No, they are not, you are getting your terminology mixed up.

Speakers designed to go close to a wall are simply balanced to take account of the enhanced bass such positioning will generate. This tends to involve other compromises which will or will not be acceptable depending on circumstances and the users preference.

Real nearfield monitors are balanced to be used up close, so that the listener really only hears the direct sound from the speaker, not the reflections in the room(ie, is in the 'near field'). Since these reflexions are most obvious in the bass region (room gain) such speakers will generally be balanced to have more bass to make up for the lack of room gain.

In the real (pro and semi-pro) world, nearfield monitors are used up close as room treatment is often minimal and because they do not go loud enough to be used at a distance. They often have bass adjustment, allowing a degree of flexibility with regard to positioning.

From personal experience I find that when used for hi-fi at normal distances, they work fine, my preference for a tight bass means that the bass adjustments are usually at the lowest settings.