Sealed vs. Ported Speakers


.
Are ported speakers inherently inferior to sealed speakers? If so, why?

It seems the higher up you go on the speaker pecking order, the ports disappear. Same with subwoofers, ports disappear as the price goes up.
.
128x128mitch4t
No speaker design is inherently inferior to any other. It just depends on how well a particular design is implemented, and if the music played on it is appropriate for that design.

That being said, I do like rear ported speakers better than front ported speakers. (no snide remarks on my masculinity now, or my fondness for sheep, please)
4 of 5 pair of speakers I run are ported.

In order (largest to smallest):

OHM Walshes: bottom port
Dynaudio monitors: rear port
Triangle monitors: front port
Realistic Minimus 7s: no port

They are all very good, within their specific limits. Performance levels achievable happen to correspond directly to the relative size.
The Sonus Faber Stradivari is WAY more than $20k, and it is ported. The $200k Wilson Alexandria speakers are ported, as are Audionote speakers, Classica Audio, and a host of others. There are plenty of sealed box speakers under $100 a pair.

It is not hard to design and build speakers that are either ported or sealed, so cost is irrelevant.
The only thing that I haven't seen mentioned is that as woofers are used over time, their spec do change. Getting port tuning correct is more critical than the spec's straying a bit for a sealed box. So Sealed boxes tend to stay sounding as designed longer than a ported box.
Tim
IMHO, in the simplest terms:

Ports can offer better value.
Sealed speakers can offer better performance.