No idea. Less "potential" physical cabinet mass to resonate & diffract?
Nope.
The frequency will change, which in some cases can be good, but not enough to matter. Less massive cabinet means higher resonance frequency. We use bracing to cut the cabinet into smaller pieces. This moves the resonant frequency up, and also results in less total vibration since high frequencies don't vibrate as much (More often, yes, but 1khz doesn't move anywhere near the air that 200hz does.) So a smaller cabinet will be a little higher naturally, but we still need bracing and stuffing so who cares?
As far as diffraction is concerned, a smaller cabinet around a driver like the Salk SS12's tweeter baffle will work wonders, but a smaller overall baffle width is sometimes good, and sometimes bad. It depends on the goal.
For example, if i have a xo frequency of 2000hz, i could use a cabinet width that would result in diffraction at that frequency and adjust my xo to handle it. This way i don't have to
1. Use a roundover or passive parts
or
2. Just deal with diffraction.
Sometimes enclosures are intentionally large so that Baffle step compensation can be worked right into the xo. Less passive components, less sensitivity loss. It all depends on the design.
Why would a 201/2 have better measurements than a 207/2?
In what ways does it measure better? FR? Nonlinear distortion? Polar response? Link me to the measurements.
