Wet Sounds HT-AS10

[CDENsomnia]

Anyone have one of these? I am thinking it would fit under the seats but haven't measured yet...

 

[drjames1107]

I have one. I put it to the right of the cooler on the starboard side toward the shower water tank.

 

[jcyamaharider]

What does it sound like? Is it muffled or did you port that area to get the sound out?.....Details..... Details.....

 

[drjames1107]

It sounds really good. BUT.... I do believe it would sound a bit better with some porting. I did not port as we usually have the seat cushion cracked to get in and out of the cooler all the time and this lets enough sound out for us. Actually anymore bass and it might be too much for my liking. I also have a pair of rev-10's, 3 pairs of xs650, Syn4, HT6 and a WS 420 eq. all hooked up to 2 optima blue tops in parallel. It sound phenomenal!! oh and I used the Stock Clarion cdm7 head unit. I can run all day and only get down to about 70% on the batteries.

 

[David Analog]

Tough to beat the cost efficiency of a waterproof fiberglass enclosure, 10-inch sub and Class D amplifier built into a single package at that price. You won't get more value any other way. So I really like this Wetsounds offering.
Yes, the output of the sub when concealed within a compartment should definitely be vented. The best scenario is a vent equal in surface area to the 10-inch driver or larger with the vent located as close to the sole as possible.
Virtually all 10-inch woofers that are powered the same will deliver roughly the same output level. The most important and efficient factor in output, particularly in an open field environment, is cone surface area. Excursion is second. A sealed enclosure type has a moderate advantage over an infinite baffle type within the same size. However, if you do not vent the storage compartment, you are taking one step forward in going with an air suspension sub/enclosure while taking one step backwards by losing the multiple advantages in both output and sound quality of direct radiation. The perfect scenario would be both direct-radiating and air suspension. To do that you need to seal off the sub drivers output from the seating or helm console interior space entirely. With the right location, if the boat cooperates, it's possible.

 

[txav8r]

@David Analog , could you explain this...
"The perfect scenario would be both direct-radiating and air suspension. To do that you need to seal off the sub drivers output from the seating or helm console interior space entirely. With the right location, if the boat cooperates, it's possible." Are you just saying that an enclosed sub with appropriate vent is best, with no air loss in the compartment?

 

[redthumper9]

@txav8r I think he is saying do a sealed enclosure, but direct radiating. Basically cut your hole in the compartment like you would for an infinate baffle, but do a sealed enclosure behind it.

 

[David Analog]

What I meant was that a woofer can be front-mounted into the bench console vertical elevation. The enclosure can be pre-mounted to the back side of the same surface. The woofer and enclosure now seal up against and sandwich the wall. This gives you air/acoustic suspension loading, direct-radiation into the listening environment, and cuts off the compartment space entirely. Now in the case of something like the HT AS-10, where the sub driver is already seated in the enclosure, you could separate them and still sandwich the wall, ...or... you could mount the sub/enclosure as is completely from the back side and pressed against the opening with the introduction of a shallow interior acoustic coupling manifold and exterior vent. Either way you would get an airtight isolation from the seat console compartment.
Here's the difference. With a sub/enclosure mounted at the rear of or somewhere within the bench seat console and a vent you have effectively placed the sub/box in a large bottle (compartment) and flowing through a comparably small mouth (vent). The large displacement compartment constitutes significant compliance while the small mouth constitutes resistance. There is less impetus for the bass radiation to flow through the vent (and virtually none if you don't have a vent). So you have a substantial output loss as a great deal of the sub energy is dissipated within the compartment and adjoining cavities. More impactful is that you have altered both the phase response and frequency response of what exits the vent. The more tactile bass survives but the upper transients, leading edge attack and tonal construction is filtered out. This also makes it difficult to seamlessly integrate the subwoofer and cockpit coaxial satellites. The sub sounds more detached as a separate entity.
Again, the prescribed method would be ideal if only the particular boat cooperates with the plan. Other times you have to take the best that the given boat permits and get as close to direct-radiation as you can.

 

[jcyamaharider]

That is the route I think I am going to end up going this winter. @redthumper9

 

[txav8r]

Thank you David...I think this is exactly why we settled for the IB sub and dynamics it offered. The enclosure just didn't lend itself to the boat given the desire to maintain as much of my storage compartments as possible. The new boat is even less friendly to even an IB sub, with the curved front wall. I know I can tackle that and neutralize the curve with King Starboard, but the loss of the slanted wall the 230 has, lets the magnet end of the drive extend a good ways into the compartment that it didn't on the 230. It is all about balance, and getting as much as you can for as little effort and expense. I think with a sub, I lose too much of either cockpit benches to locate it there. I could possibly get it below the starboard combing pocket and beside my right foot, but I am guessing I would be a little thin on the One Foot requirement of space behind the speaker. I may be able to locate it just beside the helm storage door but that is almost forward of the windshield and not optimal either. I don't think guys realize just how versatile the 230's were vs the 240's without a bigger sacrifice. I will continue to research it.

 

[David Analog]

We have discussed the applicational differences between the two types of acoustic loading and how they generally manifest in the boat. Here are a few general comparisons between IB (infinite baffle) and AS (air/acoustic suspension) drivers.
AS has the inherent advantage over IB of longer excursions under control as AS is a more linear form of suspension/control, especially at higher output levels. But that increase is limited to about a 10 to 15% difference and requires more power to drive the woofer to a greater excursion. In the big picture it takes twice the excursion and twice the amplifier power to obtain a modest 3 dB increase. Is it worth it for the true bass head? Sure. Any modest increase is hard to come by in an open field where bass energy seems to flash evaporate.
A good IB woofer might have a free-air resonance of 46 Hz and a free-air Qts of 0.8. The Qtc and resonance stays mostly consistent and unchanged when loaded into its IB application. In contrast a very respectable AS woofer might have a free-air resonance of 31 Hz and a Qts of 0.45. With a target system Qtc of 0.8 once loaded into the correctly matched enclosure, the AS resonance will rise to around 50 Hz with a - 3 dB down point in the roll-off at about the same area. So the actual bass extension of an installed 10" IB woofer and a small-enclosure-loaded 10" AS woofer is about the same.
The automotive AS woofer might handle twice the power but might also require nearly twice the power to reach the same output level as the marine IB woofer.
So here is the bottom line. Most don't execute an IB woofer correctly. So most don't get to hear an IB woofer close to its real potential. An AS bass system has an inherent performance advantage but lets make sure we have it correctly applied so as we are taking a step forward we are not simultaneously taking a step in reverse. The AS advantage isn't great enough to overcome the disadvantages of poor execution.