Subwoofer for 210

[cedarcreek216]

So would I be better off donating some leg room in the open area under the steering wheel instead of cramming it in the void space? I'm just not ready to give up my clam shell storage as that's precious on the 210.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[David Analog]

There's no comparison between a Malibu helm and a 210 helm. The Malibu is open wide open and the subwoofer can be direct-radiating into the cockpit.
There are many concerns other than the vibration if you are trying to do better than an indiscriminate jackhammer.
What compromises are going to be made in order to insert a large bass-reflex sub enclosure from the bow side into that space, an enclosure that normally should be at least 1.75 cu.ft. exterior? Box made smaller? Port made smaller?
Just the tip of the iceberg.

[cedarcreek216]

I did not think I need to be concerned, but just wanted to throw the question out there.

MLA, I have done, or seen a ported enclosure in the void under the helm on a 210 like I'm talking about? It's a decent amount of cash for just a sub and want to make sure I don't make a mistake.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MLA]

I know The Malibu dealer in town puts all their subs here,


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thats actually been the factory spot for Malibu for about 12 models years, same with Tige. Centurion, Moomba, Supra and Supreme all place their OEM woofer under the helm.

[cedarcreek216]

markj and lucky7t,
Then ask me specific questions and I'll be glad to answer.

David,

I have not pulled the trigger on this sub set up yet, but it's going in Friday to get something done, just not sure what yet. Would you have any concerns with the vibration created with putting the sub under the helm? I know The Malibu dealer in town puts all their subs here, but should I be concerned with the LINC or any other electronics suffering from the constant vibration?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[David Analog]

Hey! Wait a minute! I'd like to learn too!!! Why go off thread? This is interesting stuff here! Isn't that what forums are for?

markj and lucky7t,
Then ask me specific questions and I'll be glad to answer.

[lucky7t]

Yeah David put more info here for the readers .

[markj]

Good. I look forward to that exchange. There's so much more to consider in this case than just the port versus starboard side.

Hey! Wait a minute! I'd like to learn too!!! Why go off thread? This is interesting stuff here! Isn't that what forums are for?

[David Analog]

Thanks David, we listen to everything but instrumental basically. I will PM you as I am still confused. It seems to me that both options are a ported enclosure inside another enclosure, weather it's the storage compartment or the helm. The way cheaper option is the starboard storage, so if it's not only more cost effective but also the best sound option then I need to consider it. I thought hands the helm option would be the best for sound quality but I'm no expert by far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good. I look forward to that exchange. There's so much more to consider in this case than just the port versus starboard side.

[cedarcreek216]

Thanks David, we listen to everything but instrumental basically. I will PM you as I am still confused. It seems to me that both options are a ported enclosure inside another enclosure, weather it's the storage compartment or the helm. The way cheaper option is the starboard storage, so if it's not only more cost effective but also the best sound option then I need to consider it. I thought hands the helm option would be the best for sound quality but I'm no expert by far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[David Analog]

Okay. No doubt the starboard compartment location is an option if you want more output than a single IB 10-inch can provide, which is limited. But it doesn't solve all the issues associated with an enclosure inside an enclosure. It's not direct-radiating by any standard because both the woofer and the port cannot be connected in an airtight manner to a vent opening that is extended outward. So in no way will this nullify the impact of the helm console and adjoining cavities. Yes, you can get a bit more vent area on the starboard side but the port side allows for venting close to the sole. So the real advantage to the starboard side is that you are not losing storage space. Either way, whether the port or starboard side, will have all the same tactile bass tendencies with loss of tonal construction and transient response. The bass will be defined by the same percussive terms that apply to every woofer that is loaded in this manner. A bass-reflex enclosure can compound the issue. The type of woofer can compound the issue. There are many more elements than just the aperture. If you want me to elaborate then PM me. If you listen to nothing but rap with synthetic bass and drums, then don't worry about it.

[cedarcreek216]

I'm just trying to understand. Your boys at Earmark and Tim at Scream Marine both said this was the best location. Trying to understand how SQ will be comprised by putting it under the steering wheel if it's a properly designed enclosure. Your reasoning did not make sense to me, that's all. If I can get more vent area and not compromise the enclosure I'm curious as to how the SQ will be compromised.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[David Analog]

I'm going to have to disagree David. The enclosure will be designed, chambers and all, for the specific sub just as it would be if it was going into the enclosure. It's just being located in a different place that has plenty of volume for the 10" sub. I'm confused how you can say SQ is in question in an application like this when the first air the sound will hit is actually inside the cabin instead of a second chamber like the compartment under the passenger seat, then the vent into the cabin. Seems SQ would be much better and much more accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You asked for thoughts. Looks like you are set. I'll let it go at that.

[cedarcreek216]

Everything about that approach is all about the "HIT", not the SQ. There are so many issues to consider. The vent is just one of them.
The size of the woofer is a factor but the acoustic transparency of the aperture/vent/grill is a ratio of the vent surface area to the displacement of the compartment and all its adjoining cavities. Without question the larger the aperture the better.

I'm going to have to disagree David. The enclosure will be designed, chambers and all, for the specific sub just as it would be if it was going into the enclosure. It's just being located in a different place that has plenty of volume for the 10" sub. I'm confused how you can say SQ is in question in an application like this when the first air the sound will hit is actually inside the cabin instead of a second chamber like the compartment under the passenger seat, then the vent into the cabin. Seems SQ would be much better and much more accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[David Analog]

Everything about that approach is all about the "HIT", not the SQ. There are so many issues to consider. The vent is just one of them.
The size of the woofer is a factor but the acoustic transparency of the aperture/vent/grill is a ratio of the vent surface area to the displacement of the compartment and all its adjoining cavities. Without question the larger the aperture the better.