# Observation of the vehicles at Marv's BBQ



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

(Disclosure - The following statements are not the views, thoughts, or espressed concerns of Arc Audio Inc and are only that of the individual commenting on his personal thoughts, observations and opinions.)




Im almost sure Im going to get some heat for this but what the hell.... Here goes the black sheep at his best....



I was waiting to see if anybnody was going to post anything about this especially from the shear quantity of comments that were made from different people getting out of all of the vehicles.... But since not Ill start the fire....


Ive been into the 12 volt industry since 1989 and a competitor from 1992 - 2002 and I have seen many disturbing changes in "Sound". Now let me put the disclosure of that yes I understand that sound is 100% a personal taste but since my start in audio and the days of when IASCA and USAc actually meant something especially here on the west coast. The days when accurate reproduction of sound was more important than anything.....

Now frist off I will say it was very refreshing and pleasing to see that there is still som kind of "scene" with people who love their stereos and are still willing to make the time and investement into somehting that both sounds and look good. I was also very happy to see the thrun out at Marv's BBQ over the show in So Cali especially with my current position on the lack of support from IASCA to creat adiquite rules and an enviorment that makes new blood want to come on board and my personal position of Boycotting these orginizations and supporting more indiidual events like the BBQ.

Now back to my complaint.... At the BBQ I got to sit in a lot of vehicles.... and quietly there was several of you that attended that expresed the same concerns.... but here we go..... WHAT HAPPEND TO SYSTEMS THAT SOUNDED REALISTIC?

Over the years there has been such a switch from creating a system that tonally sounded realistic to systems that are more technical in staging and imaging. I come from a major instrumental background playing the Alto, Tenor, and Baritone Sax's as well as the drums since the mid 80's and I cn even tell you how many cars I got in that the saxaphone didnt even sound like a reeded instrument...... and the snare drums had no snap or even relavant pitch to them and sounded like I was listening with pillows strapped to my head..... Even twice just to make sure I was crazy I walked across the street to listen to the drummers of the bands of the mini concerts they had in front of city hall and found that my observations were correct. 

I think the most disturbing comment I head repeatidly this weekend was "Great sounding systems are all about the processor", but I think we have lost the concept of putting the focus on the basics and have put such a focus on using Processors as a Bandaid and a quick fix instead of rooting the problem in depth. Some of the systems were so overprocessed that they were tinny and extremey unnatural. There used to be a big focus on ambience and realism, now its all about "The Imaging doesnt hit the marks" BLAH BLAH BLAH ..........

There was several cars there that technically were incredible but were off base in reproducing instruments tonally and realistically.....

I still remember the day of when systems were a Deck, Amp and Speakers and we had to make different Passive Networks to adjust the sound and tonal correction was made by modifying the applicaiton with different enclosures and materials..... Ohhhh the days.........


Ok now that my personal opinion and thoughts have been voiced......








FLAME AWAY!!!!!!!


----------



## azngotskills (Feb 24, 2006)

I have actually been thinking about this for awhile since 3.5max6spd (Manny) decided to take out his DSP in favor of a more tonaly accurate sound and not worry too much about the imaging and JUST ENJOY THE MUSIC....no flames here


----------



## scott_fx (Mar 31, 2006)

that is suprising to me, were there any systems that you enjoyed?


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

scott_fx said:


> that is suprising to me, were there any systems that you enjoyed?



I said this was several...... not all.... Yes there was some systems that I did enjoy that showcased exceptional tonal characteristics..... Personally I enjoyed all of them from a technical aspect but I was dissapointed to hear the sacrafices that were made in the tonality and realism department....

Please do understand this was jsut a observation that I have seen growing over years now and Im sure there are quite a few people who are not going to step up and admit they made these same comments at the events... but its just my $.02 and my own personal opinion.... 

All of the vehicles there were a breath of fresh air and all were a result of a lot of hard work, time and dedication so I will not name out vehicles jsut to prevent a pissing match with anybody.... But I felt it was woth a "Almost" Blanket statement...


----------



## Vestax (Aug 16, 2005)

Honestly, Fred, I wish you sat in my vehicle. I like enjoyable and realistic sounding systems. I also enjoy up front comments as well. Low, dual700, shinjohn, alphakenny1, and a few others auditioned my system and they were all critical but HONEST about how it sounded. This helps me decide whether or not I'll improve or keep the system the way it is. I love it!


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

What did you feel was causing the over processing? Was there a specific piece of equipment through out cars that you felt was over processing the music. Or just that instead of using install to fix problems, tons of processing was applied to try and fix problems. 

I am curious what processing or processors you felt where causing this problem? or Just the use of multiple processors linked together to try and fix problems?


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

Insane01VWPassat said:


> I said this was several...... not all.... Yes there was some systems that I did enjoy that showcased exceptional tonal characteristics.....


AAAWWWW, thanks Fred, you are such a sweetheart


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

So Fred,

I caught the remark about live reference music,

Maybe a jazz club with some stand up bass will help, and of course some serious horns!


----------



## Vestax (Aug 16, 2005)

There was a live band across the street, with colorful rainbow flags. Maybe someone was at the wrong "meat"!!!


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Is tonality something that is hard to discern?

Would this be something that was easily overlooked, when you are concentrating on other things?


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

Hic said:


> So Fred,
> 
> I caught the remark about live reference music,
> 
> Maybe a jazz club with some stand up bass will help, and of course some serious horns!



No amps... No Processors.... all acoustical.... When I lived in Los Angeles I used to go to see the LA Philharmonic several times a year.... I also Played sax in a Jazz band for several years... all acoustical....


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

Vestax said:


> Honestly, Fred, I wish you sat in my vehicle. I like enjoyable and realistic sounding systems. I also enjoy up front comments as well. Low, dual700, shinjohn, alphakenny1, and a few others auditioned my system and they were all critical but HONEST about how it sounded. This helps me decide whether or not I'll improve or keep the system the way it is. I love it!


 I wished I had the oppurtunity to sit in all of the vehicles.... but you hit it on the mark.... You love it..... thats all that matters.... If your happy with it and its to your personal liking then there is no reason to change...


----------



## AudioBob (May 21, 2007)

Are you saying tonality as it pertains to an octave to octave balanced sound???

Interesting observation that you made. What I am seeing out there now is that everyone just wants it LOUD and CLEAN and to hell with anything else!!! I have even heard the comment, "I want it to sound loud outside the car" with no reference as to caring how it sounds inside the car where it should really matter.


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

Genxx said:


> What did you feel was causing the over processing? Was there a specific piece of equipment through out cars that you felt was over processing the music. Or just that instead of using install to fix problems, tons of processing was applied to try and fix problems.
> 
> I am curious what processing or processors you felt where causing this problem? or Just the use of multiple processors linked together to try and fix problems?



Im definately not saying that it was one piece or series of pieces of equipment that cause these issues... I think its mearly a case of that people use processors to correct issues with their insallation and get out of control and make things worse in other areas. People in most cases become to dependant on technology to fix the problems with their system rather than address is from the source and in the continous effort to correct these issues they become so mind set on one goal they overlook other parameters of their system. I personally know a few competitors on the east coast that have processors in their cars jsut for points..... hell IASCA has it on their score sheet and practically made it to where you have to have on to get max points.... It doesnt matter if its a F#1, or DXE, or 701, or hell any kind of processor for this matter.

Im simply stating that Processing has IMO led certain people (Owners, tuners, insallers, etc) to not put as much focus, research, and design criteria in their systems with the expectation that the processor will fix everything and in the end they loose touch with what real and natural sound is....


----------



## rimshot (May 17, 2005)

Would you agree that the Dynaudio van was the most realistic sounding vehicle there? That was my observation with the next runner up being the genesis BMW

I would also like to agree that people are relying far too much on processing these days and worrying less and less about proper speaker placement and path lengths. I didn't enjoy doing anything more than some Eq'ing and VERY light time alignment on my last setup which sounded great despite a lack of midbass.


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

Hic said:


> Is tonality something that is hard to discern?
> 
> Would this be something that was easily overlooked, when you are concentrating on other things?




Whenever I listen to any system I lsisten for the tonal reproduction of acoustical representation..... simply enough.... does a saxaphone sound like a sax? does it still sound like a woodwind instrument? Does a Snare drum sound like a Snare drum? can you actually hear the snap and harmonic resonance of the snares resonating off of the bottom skin? Its simple listening...... 

I even stopped listening to vocals.... since they vary so much from singer to singer.... Instrumentation (Acoustical) has been a mear standard for centuries and should always be used (IMO) as the foundation and referance for any system since in most cases these traditional forms of instruments have not been altered.


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

rimshot said:


> Would you agree that the Dynaudio van was the most realistic sounding vehicle there? That was my observation with the next runner up being the genesis BMW


I unfortunatly didnt have the pleasure to audition the Van. THey were in the process of having high volume jam sessions in it when I went to listen to it so I stepped back. But from what I heard outside the vehicle it sounded incredible....


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

AudioBob said:


> Are you saying tonality as it pertains to an octave to octave balanced sound???
> 
> Interesting observation that you made. What I am seeing out there now is that everyone just wants it LOUD and CLEAN and to hell with anything else!!! I have even heard the comment, "I want it to sound loud outside the car" with no reference as to caring how it sounds inside the car where it should really matter.


 Unfortuantly that Loud and Clean stereotype has been constant thru the industry and I deal with it daily..... But it is afterall 95%+ of the consumer audio market.

I like my music Loud as well.... I appretiate nothing mroe than a system that can play at volume similiar to that of a good rock concert or that of one that can properly replicate the intense crescendo of a large scale at the Hollywood Bowl but only as long as everything sounds real....


----------



## zukiaudio (Jan 31, 2007)

Insane01VWPassat said:


> Whenever I listen to any system I lsisten for the tonal reproduction of acoustical representation..... simply enough.... does a saxaphone sound like a sax? does it still sound like a woodwind instrument? Does a Snare drum sound like a Snare drum? can you actually hear the snap and harmonic resonance of the snares resonating off of the bottom skin? Its simple listening......
> 
> I even stopped listening to vocals.... since they vary so much from singer to singer.... Instrumentation (Acoustical) has been a mear standard for centuries and should always be used (IMO) as the foundation and referance for any system since in most cases these traditional forms of instruments have not been altered.







what song do you use, which has the saxaphone and snare drum ?

cd artist and or title ?

thank you


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

zukiaudio said:


> what song do you use, which has the saxaphone and snare drum ?
> 
> cd artist and or title ?
> 
> thank you





I never claimed it to be one song, track or disc.... I use multiple artist and songs to demo a system.... considering each song is recorded and mastered differently I prefer to take into consideration that any vehicle may react or sound differently to the music selection played....


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

Well Fred .... I could NOT agree more with you. I've been preaching this for quite some time. Shinjohn and i had a related converstaion about this very thing. When Shinjohn listened to my car , he commented on the beauty of how systems can sound so very different , and yet both of them sound good in their own way. I hear and respect exactly what he is saying ( the beauty of personal taste and individualism ) , yet I thought to myself *" But does it sound like real music "*
I heard a lot of really clean and well balanced systems , with NO mid-bass and very little sub. They had a LOT of wonderful traits , and some were amazing in some regards , but I wonder this .... If I had of brought out some Disturbed , Rob Zonbie , ect .... how would they have fared ? I can tell you , they would have NOT been able to accurately reproduce what is on the CD at any reasonable volume level.
I say , a person CAN have the best of all worlds , IF the person takes the time to make their TOP priority : " Does it sound like real music " 
My car images as well as any car I heard out there , with a soundstage that is eye level and above , and spreads from side mirror to side mirror , yet can play without distortion at concert levels. If I can acomplish this , then surely the MUCH better car audio minds that were out there can accomplish this as well.
I agree with you Fred .... It's sad to see realistic music reproduction take a backseat in car audio.
PS : The only processing I use , is what is built into the DRZ.


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)




----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Are there particular tracks which you feel if they were played in a vehicle, then this would be easily seen?

Is there any you would reccomend


----------



## rimshot (May 17, 2005)

I thought I was the only one who could barely hear the snap/kick from the subs (or midbasses for that matter) and for my money the lexus that didnt even have an aftermarket head unit (although it did have a clean sweep) , used factory locations had a great overall sound compared to the other cars there. Personally I dont see the point in having 10 grand+ worth of equipment if you are going to play it at low volume where you have no dynamics whatsoever. Besides, once you get on the interstate, no matter ho well deadened your car is, however the radio sounded parked goes right out of the window. 

I like a powerful sound but im not a basshead and I DO believe you can cover alot of different sound types with one system without having to eq every other track (ive seen it done before)

As for more compliments, the lexus was great considering the simple setup and the altima had good upfront bass but those scans in that BMW were just awesome. The dynaudio van was just  It basically sounded like my greatest car audio fantasy does.


----------



## zukiaudio (Jan 31, 2007)

Insane01VWPassat said:


> I never claimed it to be one song, track or disc.... I use multiple artist and songs to demo a system.... considering each song is recorded and mastered differently I prefer to take into consideration that any vehicle may react or sound differently to the music selection played....




what cd's and artist can you give me then ?

thank you.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

John Coltrane anyone http://www.elusivedisc.com/prodinfo.asp?number=JVCXR-0202


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Just a ton of music here http://www.elusivedisc.com/products.asp?dept=1190

It's not priced very inexpensively though 

This might make your system shine


----------



## zukiaudio (Jan 31, 2007)

zukiaudio said:


> what cd's and artist can you give me then ?
> 
> thank you.



i was looking for specific titles used by the thread poster.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

hmmm when I first read this post I thought about phase adjustments. Everytime I play around with that I seem to loose my head, improvements in imaging are readily apparent but I have yet to filp phase once without some serious tonality downfall. 

In my experience D/A, A/D conversions do take a lot of realism out of music but I have not experienced this with the h701. The processing itself if done properly, ie. in the digital domain shouldn't have any audible fingerprint. However, I'm guessing you implied much more than that.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

I wish I could have attended.

I'd be curious what the concensus was on my system. Tonally, I think it's pretty good, it definetely doesn't hurt your ears with frequency imbalance, imaging is decent, stage height is not bad, but I do like midbass and I like my subs presence to be known. Not to the point that it's overbearing or anything, but there is no doubt that there is one in the system somewhere, and I like realistic sound levels (read pretty loud). I don't think mine is quite concert level loud, but it gets up there and stays clean doing it.

I think listening to a system should be fun, and low level bassless systems are not fun at all to me. I of course didn't hear any of them so I'm saying that it was truley the case with many systems there.

BTW, the only processing I have is what's built in to the 880PRS and it's enough for me.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

With the industry pushing idiocies like ankle-biting speakers and high-Q bass systems, why would anyone expect anything to sound like actual music?


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

Passat, I can understand your concern, but realize we are enthusiasts who havent been doing this half as long as you have. If some folks were making what you consider ignorant comments, thats fine.

Many of us are simply limited by lack of ability to tune.

Some of the most respected hobbyist tuners here may not be able to tune up a car that can compare with a job done by you or Keith.

But even an entry level enthusiast can tell when an instrument is not in focus.

Rather than lament the condition of the cars bolstered by a few ignorant comments from a number of attendees, I hope you can at least understand why they are the way they are. 

Personally, I'd love you to walk up to me and introduce yourself next year. I was the very tall very skinny white guy. Owned the black 2001 Honda civic, and I would be delighted if you spent 20 minutes in the car with me listening to some music with the processor controller going over what you are listening for, what you hear, how it affects your decision to change the crossover in what way, etc.

Teach a man to fish, and the enthusiasts next year might have entirely different cars!

Something else to notice is that year after year, the tunings all change depending on the trends on the forums. Firegate can talk much more about this. Some years we find female vocals in vogue, others bass guitar. and often independant folks will tune up and then get together to determine that they sound similar.


----------



## sqkev (Mar 7, 2005)

I'm willing to bet that any realistic sounding vehicles do not RTA flat. Did any vehicles you heard back in the days sounded real but measured flat across? 

I disagree with you, Fred, on one thing though. Although it's true that many inferior processors out there do have a "processed" signature, not all DSPs are created equal and they all don't sound "processed".


----------



## zukiaudio (Jan 31, 2007)

i spent a very long time getting some cd's together for a prize package for your event.

and the cd's did not arrive in time for the event.

i take great pride in the cd's i make, and would like to know if there is some recording, that i may have overlooked, and or failed to get on a cd, that would help demonstrate how a system being demoed, sounds.

is this an acceptable track for drum or snare ?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/music/wma-...08/ref=mu_sam_wma_001_008/103-3504332-8668661

or a saxaphone ?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/music/wma-...09/ref=mu_sam_wma_001_009/103-3504332-8668661

artist and cd titles are all i need.

thank you


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Zuki,

I wonder how many people are aware that Kenny G plays a SAX 

There is a full range of saxophones from the top to the bottom.


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

sqkev said:


> I'm willing to bet that any realistic sounding vehicles do not RTA flat. Did any vehicles you heard back in the days sounded real but measured flat across?
> 
> I disagree with you, Fred, on one thing though. Although it's true that many inferior processors out there do have a "processed" signature, not all DSPs are created equal and they all don't sound "processed".


I'm willing to bet live music performances do not RTA flat either


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

AVI said:


> I'm willing to bet live music performances do not RTA flat either



I think you guys are on to something here


----------



## zukiaudio (Jan 31, 2007)

Hic said:


> Zuki,
> 
> I wonder how many people are aware that Kenny G plays a SAX
> 
> There is a full range of saxophones from the top to the bottom.


maybe i should have said. is this the reed sound you would like conveyed through the recording/system ?


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

One of the major reasons I did this BBQ and invited guests like Keith, Steve, Fred, Matt, Leon etc was so that guys with not as much experience could get some constructive criticism as well as help with their systems. I think I have a pretty good ear and can tell when something doesn't sound "quite right" _to me_ however I don't always know what exactly to do to fix it. I believe this is the case with some of the other guys as well however I also believe some do not have a real "reference" to base the sound on. I know a lot of this hobby is based on "personal preference" and I personally don't care how an engineer "wanted it to sound". I am a live music fan so to me "accurate" is making my system sound as close to how a live instrument sounds as I can. Imaging/sound stage etc are just icing on the cake for me (since there are no comps around here) and although I would prefer to "have it all" I would take tonality over technical  as do the vast majority of people I install for locally.

Best lessons I have learned over these years on the forums:

"Installation,! Installation! Installation! A good speaker installed properly will sound better than a great speaker installed improperly." unknown

"K.I.S.S.=Keep It Simple Stupid"  unknown

"Listen with your ears, not your eyes" Justin W

BTW, I was very busy at the BBQ and did not get a chance to listen to very many cars however I will say that although some frown when they see the install in Lukes van, they may be pleasantly surprised with the tonality if they sat down and gave it a listen without pre-judging it based on looks. 

Almost forgot, "Blues in the Park" is starting up this Sunday down here (every Sunday through August I believe) and if anyone in the area would like to join us there to listen to some great live music just let me know!  (it's free  and at the same park as the BBQ)


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

AVI said:


> I'm willing to bet live music performances do not RTA flat either


I know I voice my PA pretty damn far from flat   

Chad


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Saxophone music http://www.elusivedisc.com/prodinfo.asp?number=JVCXR60102


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

That's really interesting feedback as to how the sound has changed in your experience. I guess this hobby is susesiptable to trends like any other. Maybe it will return to the "basics" one day?

I just have to add my personal comments, or course. I'm a complete wannabe in this hobby. I've 'done' it for probably 3-4 years now (more like its done me. ) In this time I have NEVER heard a competition vehicle! I have no freaking clue what a properly set up car is "supposed" to sound like. How sad is this?? And I know that I'm not the only one. I'm not musician and I'm technically tone deaf (according to this.) It's like I'm handicapped or something. Taking my car to the BBQ would no doubt be very embarrasing. :blush: 

So when I read something like this, it's very frustrating to hear someone vent as such. I think those of you who have the luxery of sampling other cars as a cross reference and having someone else hear yours and provide helpful feedback, should consider yourself lucky.

Also those that are able to attend Marv's BBQ should also consider themselves fortunate as well. If I was able to go, you can be damn sure I'd be bringing my reference CD and plenty of paper to take notes! I suppose many of you would look at me like "WTF is this toolbox from MN doing??!"  

I've talked to Marv on the phone quite a bit and he's taught me a lot. Hell I might even start another thread just on that!    My point is, if you're a learn-by-doing type of person, talking and reading and asking questions on an internet forum will only get you so far. Get your butt to a competition or Marv's and be greatfull that you have the opportunity to experience the diversity and individuality of this hobby. I read people arguing how so in so's system was 'better' and all kinds of ********. It's kind of sad really. Be thankful you have competition, because you'd be less without them.


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

B-Squad said:


> That's really interesting feedback as to how the sound has changed in your experience. I guess this hobby is susesiptable to trends like any other. Maybe it will return to the "basics" one day?
> 
> I just have to add my personal comments, or course. I'm a complete wannabe in this hobby. I've 'done' it for probably 3-4 years now (more like its done me. ) In this time I have NEVER heard a competition vehicle! I have no freaking clue what a properly set up car is "supposed" to sound like. How sad is this?? And I know that I'm not the only one. I'm not musician and I'm technically tone deaf (according to this.) It's like I'm handicapped or something. Taking my car to the BBQ would no doubt be very embarrasing. :blush:
> 
> ...


You may have misunderstood Fred's intent. You may also need a little more listening experience in different vehicles of this level to understand where he is coming from. His point was NOT to whine about anything , but to point out a VERY valid issue in car audio today. 
As far as your own learning curve , just remember to enjoy the journey. there is NO WAY you can overcome plain old time itself to elevate your knowledge base. Experience is the very best educator in this hobby , and it takes time. I've been doing this for 23+ years , and I am still learning


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

No I read everything he said. I also completely understand. My post was geared toward the percentage of us that are doing this for fun and are not experienced. So, you have experience? Fantastic! MANY of us n00bs don't!


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

To further Fred's point .... There seems to be a " sound " in car audio today , that many strive for. It is sweet , polite , refined , and just oh so .... Please tell me where those things come in to play in a realistic sounding musical experience ? How can you have missing dynamics ? How can certain frequency ranges be turned down soooo far , they are barely audible , and people believe they are anywhere near correct ? Will we turn the mid-bass and bass down , in order to better hear the delicacys of the upper mid-range and treble ? God , I hope not ...


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

B-Squad said:


> No I read everything he said. I also completely understand. My post was geared toward the percentage of us that are doing this for fun and are not experienced. So, you have experience? Fantastic! MANY of us n00bs don't!


Best thing is , you're only a noob for so long


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

B-Squad,

The BBQ is a get together of like minded souls, fun at it's finest! 

To set your vehicle up as best as it can be go to live shows and then try to recreate what you here, be it horns, drums, guitars, etc..,


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

No, I'm a noob forever and I plan to stay that way. I have no "car audio ego" and I don't intend to develope one. Not to say it's bad to have one, it's just not how I personally view this hobby. Maybe I should just back out of this thread since it's more about competition??


----------



## Abmolech (Nov 2, 2006)

Processors are not the problem, realism is.

Your simply not going to get realism without some a lot of fiddling with a stereo system.

Thats why I keep saying..

A monophonic system would give most stereo systems a run for their money.


----------



## Guy (Feb 16, 2006)

Upon listening to several vehicles at the meet, I really wasn't sure what to think- fortunately I was able to spend some time afterwards with someone who has far more experience in car audio than I ever will, and our observations were very similar. 
I really agree with the OP- Since I showed up with a factory BOSE system, I sure wasn't going to be saying anything.


----------



## tard (Jul 13, 2006)

Insane01VWPassat said:


> Im definately not saying that it was one piece or series of pieces of equipment that cause these issues... I think its mearly a case of that people use processors to correct issues with their insallation and get out of control and make things worse in other areas. People in most cases become to dependant on technology to fix the problems with their system rather than address is from the source and in the continous effort to correct these issues they become so mind set on one goal they overlook other parameters of their system. I personally know a few competitors on the east coast that have processors in their cars jsut for points..... hell IASCA has it on their score sheet and practically made it to where you have to have on to get max points.... It doesnt matter if its a F#1, or DXE, or 701, or hell any kind of processor for this matter.
> 
> Im simply stating that Processing has IMO led certain people (Owners, tuners, insallers, etc) to not put as much focus, research, and design criteria in their systems with the expectation that the processor will fix everything and in the end they loose touch with what real and natural sound is....


i'm not picking out anyone. this is just my general 2 cents from what i see as a whole from everywhere combined.

and i have to agree to someone elses quote of "LISTEN WITH YOUR EARS, NOT YOUR EYES"!!!!!!

i also agree with insanevw. many, many people think an eq or TA will fix everything. imo, end eq processing is supposed to be final polishing compound, not the meat and potato's. 

and to any one who's newer into the audio scene, do just as fred has done when questioning his memory or ears. go listen to live bands. that needs to be your referance for sound. period. not someone elses system and not manufacturer driver data.

in combination with mr. lynch's thoughts and the top quote.... it seems the masses want to focus on paper specs and distortion plots as to their choice in speakers. that all has it's place, but it's way overrated. focus on real and natural sound first and foremost.

the best on paper theory motor design, cone material, flat simulated response graph, lowest distortion data..... is really neither here nor there when that speaker sounds flat, dull, slow, unnatural, and all the other bad traits they may or may not have. 

shoot for the speaker that sounds the best for that application and accept the trade off's. maybe not the best cosmetic looking, lowest distortion rated, or T/S para's that you think is optimal.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

B-Squad said:


> No, I'm a noob forever and I plan to stay that way. I have no "car audio ego" and I don't intend to develope one. Not to say it's bad to have one, it's just not how I personally view this hobby. Maybe I should just back out of this thread since it's more about competition??


Why would you feel that way?

I wasn't at the BBQ, but I have a feeling my system would be more in line with what the poster and AVI are talking about, but probaby considered lacking somewhere else, and more than likely rightfully so. My system sounds tonally good, yet it's fun to listen to. You know I have a sub, and when I'm playing something like NIN, well...that's fun.

I don't feel the need to take my sub down so low, that some might even think I didn't even have one. This "SQ" thing may have gone over board. I think some are affraid to run their system to where you can even tell they have one and actually enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Is my system perfect? Not at all, but it sounds very good, get's quite loud, and the sub bass can be fun to listen too.

I say we get back to actually enjoying our systems, rather than trying to set them up to where some audio snob likes it.


----------



## rimshot (May 17, 2005)

89grand said:


> I say we get back to actually enjoying our systems, rather than trying to set them up to where some audio snob likes it.


Well said fine sir  this statement is sig worthy


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

Insane01VWPassat said:


> Im simply stating that Processing has IMO led certain people (Owners, tuners, insallers, etc) to not put as much focus, research, and design criteria in their systems with the expectation that the processor will fix everything and in the end they loose touch with what real and natural sound is....


 
I've been venting about this recently. Along with too many people switching tons of drivers in & out, when most of the problem lies within the install.

Fireworks were tuesday night, and they are right by my house. There is a public park and baseball field right across the street from me, and around 800 people pack in there to see the fireworks. So, I always have a little get together.

So many sterile, lifeless vehicles..


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

Insane01VWPassat said:


> I still remember the day of when systems were a Deck, Amp and Speakers and we had to make different Passive Networks to adjust the sound and tonal correction was made by modifying the applicaiton with different enclosures and materials..... Ohhhh the days.........


How easy is it to change a passive crossover to correct some issues with the drivers used once they are placed in car? Or modify a car quickly? A processor allows you to quickly and easily make adjustments. I prefer to use drivers that can overlap each other quite a bit so that I have flexibility to make quick adjustments.

I have listened to a few cars that used an off the shelf passive crossover and some drivers that were not designed for the crossover and then EQ'd like crazy. How is that any different really than what some of us are doing?

I don't really think there is anything wrong in where the "shift" of how things are done has occured. I think the market has responded with realizing the car sucks for creating an accurate sound once you start driving, but it is much easier to achieve a proper soundstage and still hear it as you drive down the road. I'd love to listen to some of these GREAT tonality cars as they drive down the highway at 80mph. I'm not talking about loudness, just the overall effect of how tonality will change once you introduce the outside elements.


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

Durwood-Damn those are some good points you brought up. Thanks for making me do some thinking about the camparisons of old, new and the effects.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

its not hard fellas? 

you want your sound as high (on the windsheild) as possible, as wide as possible with the best tonality possible.


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

Also remember, DSP processing power was hard to come by and was not cheap "back then" either. The processor can be used correctly, but as someone else stated, many of us lack the ability to properly EQ/tune for tonality. We "noobs" are forced to deal with how newer music is recorded and not all of us listen to acoustic music like jazz and classical on a regular basis. I'll admit I sure don't and I'm not good with an EQ to dial in tonality-yet. That is an area I am trying to work on and continually improve.


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

durwood said:


> I'd love to listen to some of these GREAT tonality cars as they drive down the highway at 80mph. I'm not talking about loudness, just the overall effect of how tonality will change once you introduce the outside elements.


So what are you trying to say? That these "great sounding cars" sound worse when going down the highway, but yours sounds "better" when the outside elements are introduced?

 

That's a pretty weak excuse.

You may have a vehicle, that just absolutely demolishes anything I have ever done, but I gaurantee that there are vehicles out there that even you would agree sound better then yours, no matter the situation.

Seems I am arguing the same thing in two threads... 

Audio isn't some big enigma. It is very hard to accomplish, but when its stripped down, everyone has very similar tastes. If you want a bloated bass region, fine, go with a driver that matches. If you want a brighter top end, fine, change that. But that's just personal preferences, the nuts & bolts of the deal, to get to that point are all very similar.

It's kind of like hot dogs at a bbq. Some like them plain, some like mustard, and others relish.

But, it's still just a freakin hot dog.


----------



## the other hated guy (May 25, 2007)

backwoods said:


> So what are you trying to say? That these "great sounding cars" sound worse when going down the highway, but yours sounds "better" when the outside elements are introduced?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


agreed...I get tired of the whole...what does it sound like at "X" mph..who cares..that's what they make presets for..I have a few myself..one for driving...and one for IASCA and one for MECA... 

when I listen to a high end home system..I sure as hell don't have somebody vacuuming in the same area when I'm listening for detail...realism...tonality etc... so why should this be done when critiquing a car?


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

backwoods said:


> So what are you trying to say? That these "great sounding cars" sound worse when going down the highway, but yours sounds "better" when the outside elements are introduced?
> 
> 
> 
> That's a pretty weak excuse.


I'm not making excuses, I have heard some cars that sound great sitting in a parking lot but they had no volume. I was just commenting I wonder what they sound like when they actually drive the car somewhere? What's wrong with that?



> You may have a vehicle, that just absolutely demolishes anything I have ever done, but I gaurantee that there are vehicles out there that even you would agree sound better then yours, no matter the situation.


Whoa I never said that. I just know what my listening tastes are, just as everyone else has. I might not even like the way a sax is supposed to sound like in real life-then what do I do?


Flame away....



> Audio isn't some big enigma. It is very hard to accomplish, but when its stripped down, everyone has very similar tastes. If you want a bloated bass region, fine, go with a driver that matches. If you want a brighter top end, fine, change that. But that's just personal preferences, the nuts & bolts of the deal, to get to that point are all very similar.
> 
> It's kind of like hot dogs at a bbq. Some like them plain, some like mustard, and others relish.
> 
> But, it's still just a freakin hot dog.






the other hated guy said:


> agreed...I get tired of the whole...what does it sound like at "X" mph..who cares..that's what they make presets for..I have a few myself..one for driving...and one for IASCA and one for MECA...


So those that don't compete only need one or two presets-right, that is for those who don't compete?



> when I listen to a high end home system..I sure as hell don't have somebody vacuuming in the same area when I'm listening for detail...realism...tonality etc... so why should this be done when critiquing a car?


So you just leave your car in the driveway then?

I was only pointing out some things I have observed, I'm in no way stating right or wrong, merely different approachs to a problem.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

the other hated guy said:


> agreed...I get tired of the whole...what does it sound like at "X" mph..who cares..that's what they make presets for..I have a few myself..one for driving...and one for IASCA and one for MECA...
> 
> when I listen to a high end home system..I sure as hell don't have somebody vacuuming in the same area when I'm listening for detail...realism...tonality etc... so why should this be done when critiquing a car?


because thats what a car is for? going somewhere


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

Things I would not do to my car and would rather correct using a processor if I can get it work.

-Cutting holes in metal kick panels 
-Moving/rebuilding seat rails so the seat sits in a different spot
-rebuilding my entire dash
-adding so much weight to car in dampening material that I completely kill the performance aspects of my car.
-adding so much power I need to upgrade my alternator or add a second just to power the 1.21 gigawatts of flux capacitance to travel back to the future. 


...hmmm have I missed anything?


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

durwood said:


> Things I would not do to my car and would rather correct using a processor if I can get it work.
> 
> -Cutting holes in metal kick panels
> -Moving/rebuilding seat rails so the seat sits in a different spot
> ...


 
these don't have to be done though. 

The biggest problem is, people are planning out there system, why relying on the processing to fix it all.

Plan your install as if you don't have any control outside of some crossover points, level matching, and phase.

When you have an install that will give you the best performance possible within your fabrication limits, and you have it tuned using JUST those 3 items, then you can play with your processor.

But, it really needs to be a last resort.

You'll be amazed at how much more natural and realistic everything sounds.


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

backwoods said:


> these don't have to be done though.
> 
> The biggest problem is, people are planning out there system, why relying on the processing to fix it all.
> 
> ...



I agree with you. I did plan. There are few constraints that have limited my setup, and I have accepted them because I am unwilling to give up set parameters be it space, power, speaker size, etc. There are SO many variables to have to include in the plan that is can get overwhelming sometimes. But yes, if you don't plan then how do you know what you want to acheive? I think most of us here plan.


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

Whiterabbit said:


> Passat, I can understand your concern, but realize we are enthusiasts who havent been doing this half as long as you have. If some folks were making what you consider ignorant comments, thats fine.
> 
> Many of us are simply limited by lack of ability to tune.
> 
> ...


I totally agree with you and please do not take it as Im pin pointing out particular vehicles. Plus my ears are far from ideal..... same with anybody....Its not a matter of experience.... it a matter of listening to your own ears.... and then opening horizons to other forms of musical expresion other than your own or other peoples vehicles.... Im wondering how many people have actually taken the time to go to a live acoustical perfomance to use as a referance... Id probally say less than 1/3

There were a lot of great things there however the realism factor jsut bit me the wrong way and made me open my eyes to another problem within the industry and the direction it has gone.... Next year Id love to be able to sit in every car there and listen to the changes people have made.... yes it is a growth and learning curve..... but my point is simply.... music is music..... until you make it a recording.....then its everything but what it is supposed to be... Im not goig to be in the office long today so if I can get our Rhino project put back together today ill address this tomorrow.... Otherwise Ill reply once I get back from the Rhino Photoshoot when I get back in the office next Wednesday....


----------



## chuyler1 (Apr 10, 2006)

I think the problems start before you even get to the "processor" stage. Any time an RTA is brought in before initial tuning is done you run into trouble. 

24db/octave crossovers are great but they make it very difficult to blend tweeters and midranges and it makes differences in gain settings very obvious as you turn up the volume.

Atttempting to get up-front bass at the expense of sound quality also doesn't help. A subwoofer and midbass can both play 70Hz...but a subwoofer does it with much more authority and richness. Go to a live jazz concert and listen to the bass player. What do you prefer? up front bass or a rich full sound? I myself will choose the proper sound even if a few notes sound like they come from behind....but you can also fix that with a little sound deadening.

Finally, I have never been a fan of metal dome tweeters. I don't care how accurate they are for reproducing cymbals...they never reproduce vocals correctly. Again, go to a concert...does the treble stick out that much? No. Unless you are standing next to the drummer the treble will blend in seamlessly with the mids.


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

B-Squad said:


> That's really interesting feedback as to how the sound has changed in your experience. I guess this hobby is susesiptable to trends like any other. Maybe it will return to the "basics" one day?
> 
> I just have to add my personal comments, or course. I'm a complete wannabe in this hobby. I've 'done' it for probably 3-4 years now (more like its done me. ) In this time I have NEVER heard a competition vehicle! I have no freaking clue what a properly set up car is "supposed" to sound like. How sad is this?? And I know that I'm not the only one. I'm not musician and I'm technically tone deaf (according to this.) It's like I'm handicapped or something. Taking my car to the BBQ would no doubt be very embarrasing. :blush:
> 
> ...


 Dont be deturred by this.... this is exactly why I have not named vehicles.... remember thi is mearly my opinion and it has been an effect of trends within the industry...... and as far as referance goes... the best thing you can do is check with a local collage or highschool and see if they have jazz band that plays locally or even a chamber ensamble..... or if your town has a philharmonic orchestera even if it isnt your kind of music it is a worthy experience to go takea listen and take note of the articulated sounds of each kind of instrumentation....


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

B-Squad said:


> No I read everything he said. I also completely understand. My post was geared toward the percentage of us that are doing this for fun and are not experienced. So, you have experience? Fantastic! MANY of us n00bs don't!


 And keeping it fun is the most important part of car audio..... My comments are simply a stated observation of thouhts Ive had over time and this weekend made my thouhts very black and white...


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

durwood said:


> How easy is it to change a passive crossover to correct some issues with the drivers used once they are placed in car? Or modify a car quickly? A processor allows you to quickly and easily make adjustments. I prefer to use drivers that can overlap each other quite a bit so that I have flexibility to make quick adjustments.
> 
> I have listened to a few cars that used an off the shelf passive crossover and some drivers that were not designed for the crossover and then EQ'd like crazy. How is that any different really than what some of us are doing?
> 
> I don't really think there is anything wrong in where the "shift" of how things are done has occured. I think the market has responded with realizing the car sucks for creating an accurate sound once you start driving, but it is much easier to achieve a proper soundstage and still hear it as you drive down the road. I'd love to listen to some of these GREAT tonality cars as they drive down the highway at 80mph. I'm not talking about loudness, just the overall effect of how tonality will change once you introduce the outside elements.


 And you have very valid points..... all of these changes were timely and difficult and took a lot of time...... but my point here is about the almost addiction and dependancy of installers and users today on processors. 

Iknow the ways of the old were not the most time or in some cases cost effective and it took expeience but the way to learn was to do it and not just read about it.... much like many things in life Car audio is about trial and error and if you never try and rely on a little box with a display and filled with electronics to process (manipulate, change, alter and/or deviate) the signal to make the corrections within your systems original signal.... how will you ever learn where the problems within your system lye and allow you to make these corrections without messing up the signal that is so important to the quality of the finished product.....


Its like trying to build a BWM from scratch and only building it on a foundation with the quality of a Ford Contour and then trying to use a programmer and a computer to achieve the same results..... Why wouldnt you want to achieve as close to the desired goal as you can before even thinking about altering the foundation with that computer.....


----------



## fej (Feb 8, 2006)

I am just going to throw my 2 cents in .. and after having a few conversations with Marv post BBQ and reading this thread I figured wth.

First and foremost, Car audio is all about COMPROMISE. What are YOU willing to do for your audio experience in your vehicle? Do you want drivers that drop in and play in stock locations? Are you willing to rip your entire interior out to deaden in multiple layers every square inch you can reach? Do you want to make the effort to compromise between the time it takes to properly deaden a panel, regardless of the layers necessary to achieve your desired outcome vs the added weight and expense that this may take? Do you feel that 10-20 hours of deadening is worth the improvement you gain while doing 75mph down the highway? Are $300 drivers WORTH having in your car for the diminishing returns that you receive over the performance of $70 drivers? Can you REALLY measure the difference in performance between the two WHILE DRIVING? Are you willing to cut holes in your sheetmetal or floor boards to truly build the "proper" kickpanel/enclosure for your particular vehicle or application, or do you want to stay below this level of effort?



I could pose 50 more diy or car audio related questions all of which come back to my main point. COMPROMISE. 

Although this is a DIY forum, there are really 3 main types of people here IMO, true DIY people, that do everything themselves via hardwork, trial and error, wood/fiberglass/fabrication skill, research, tinkering, and experimentation. DIY installers that like more "plug and play" solutions and less complex installs, and people that go pay for the above listed skills.

Me personally, I have NEVER had what I consider to be a "great" install, because to me it is not worth the time, effort, impact to my vehicle, or money required to get to that "level". Example is George's BMW, what I consider to be a great install, super clean amp rack, sub integration, the kick panels are one of the best I have seen, etc. I will never go to that level because the compromise for me is the $$$ required vs my personal enjoyment gained from that level of installation. Just not worth it to ME.

I agree somewhat with the original poster that the hobby has turned more toward "stage height, width, and depth" as the "goal" of a good system vs great tonality, with those characteristics being secondary. However, to get ALL of those things your personal level of dedication to your "car audio" needs to be HUGE, as the install, amount of work, amount of deadening, amount of time, amount of money, and amount of tuning required to get there is quite substantial. Keep in mind as well that in a car environment this also usually means custom kick builds, a highly modded or rebuilt dash, relocated seats etc etc etc. Basically having the ability to tear your car completely apart, fabricate new pieces as needed, finish to a near OEM level (or better) and re-assemble. A very large undertaking. Oh btw you need to maintain a job, a family, your social life etc while this is all going on so you better have 2 cars ... oh and don't even bother trying unless you have a garage to work in .... the list of compromise can go on forever. 

This all brings us back to what I think was part of the original complaint, over processed cars. IMO this is a direct result of the current "stage over tonality" trend in the hobby, fueled by the amount of inexpensive processors available over the last 5-8 years ( ppi 730, 360.2, 701 etc). The level of processing that many cars have today cost several thousand dollars to achieve 10 years ago, now you can run a very solid "active" setup with a $300 HU (or less). Cars back then were more tonally focused because the majority of the hobby just flat out did not HAVE the processing available to them like they do now. Processing is now readily available and substantially less expensive, and what happens? The trend shifts to stage importance away from tonality because it CAN now.

Oh well this is getting very long and I have not even gotten into what I feel through my many installs is one of the most important things to a proper install .. pathlength.


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

durwood said:


> I think most of us here plan.


I disagree. For instance, the pld conversations that I have seen on alot of forums. Normally the response is "why do I need to worry about them when I have TA".

THAT is planning with the processor in mind. 

Often, I see people throwing a driver in an undeadened door, but using a $500 processor to eq the hell out of it, till they get the midbass response they want.

How about when someone throws a tweeter in a sail panel, or on the dash out of ease without correctly aiming them, or getting phase right, then has all sorts of problems with them being too harsh, or "in your face".

None of those symptoms, along with several others, show any indication of proper planning & installation. People often do it, and figure they'll leave the processor there to clean up the mess.

Then the problem sets in, everything sounds very unnatural, voices get almost robotic, sybilance becomes so nonexistant, that it sounds fake, bass get's bloated, midbass loses it's snap and becomes muddy...yadayada.

Mostly all signs of bad installation and overprocessing.


----------



## chuyler1 (Apr 10, 2006)

We're all adults here. Lets "name names". I personally would like to see what people thought of various setups (since I wasn't there to listem for myself). If you felt a particular car would have sounded better with different tuning then say so. if you liked a particular speaker placement, subwoofer choice, etc...then say that too. I think people here can handle a little constructive criticism. How else are we going to progress in this hobby?


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Insane01VWPassat said:


> as far as referance goes... the best thing you can do is check with a local collage or highschool and see if they have jazz band that plays locally or even a chamber ensamble..... or if your town has a philharmonic orchestera even if it isnt your kind of music it is a worthy experience to go takea listen and take note of the articulated sounds of each kind of instrumentation....


Take it from the man who knows, listen to "Real music as a reference for what you are trying to get your vehicle to sound like"


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

Just an observation on how people react after listening to my system-When an "average" person gets in they tend to make comments such as "those are nice sounding speakers" or "it sounds almost real" or "it's very clean" etc. When an "audio fanatic" type person gets in the first comments they tend to make are things like "your depth is good but your height is a little low" or "your stage is a little to the left" or "I can detect a little bass in the rear on certain notes" etc etc.


----------



## fej (Feb 8, 2006)

"Real" music is even debateable. What kind of pa system is it being played through, how does the sound tech have it setup? What does his ear prefer? Enclosed area or open space? Real music played live without mic's? Real music sitting in a small bar/club? Real music on a 10,000w arena setup?


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

fej said:


> "Real" music is even debateable. What kind of pa system is it being played through, how does the sound tech have it setup? What does his ear prefer? Enclosed area or open space? Real music played live without mic's? Real music sitting in a small bar/club? Real music on a 10,000w arena setup?


 I have been to amplified performances where the PA system was very "natural" and seemed to "disappear" however I have also been to other amplified performances where the sound was "amplified sounding" if that makes sense (maybe chad can chime in on this one? ). This is why Fred (and myself) go to as well suggest going to "non-amplified" performances as a reference for how "instruments" actually sound.


----------



## chuyler1 (Apr 10, 2006)

Mr Marv said:


> Just an observation on how people react after listening to my system-When an "average" person gets in they tend to make comments such as "those are nice sounding speakers" or "it sounds almost real" or "it's very clean" etc. When an "audio fanatic" type person gets in the first comments they tend to make are things like "your depth is good but your height is a little low" or "your stage is a little to the left" or "I can detect a little bass in the rear on certain notes" etc etc.


I think audio fanatics only get to this line of suggestions once the tone of the system has met their expectations. I won't mention anything about stage height or upfront bass to someone who has ear piercing highs and enough bass to kill a cow from 30 yards. I'll politely mention they have some gain and tuning issues in their midbass/midrange region and leave it at that.


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

As someone who is very NOOB the BBQ helped me quite a bit

Disclaimer - I did not listen to all cars and my ears were not working properly due to surgery. I also do not have "trained" ears and experience. I also did not have one test disc and nor the ability to evaluate like many here.

*What I experienced *
1. Of the cars I heard, I definitely preferred the tweeters and/or midrange high on the dash. 

2. Many of the cars sounded really good, but different in many ways. 

3. a better understanding of terms as they relate to mobile audio. I know most of them, but have not experienced them in the mobile environment until now.

4. Feeling awkward. I heard and shared that many I heard sounded good. But did not share when I didn't like it that much. I did not critique because I did not have the ability to help with my critique

5. Some of these guys seriously know their stuff. 

6. Some people have some serious addictions to certain equipment. GRahn and Soundstream.... I really appreciated hearing his knowledge about them

7. Feeling mostly welcomed, sometimes I really struggle socially (and did) but overall felt welcomed, invited to participate and involved.

8. My two cars I preffered the most were Eng's(dual700) Maxima and Lukboa's van (hard to look at, great to listen to)

*What I walk away with.*
1. Better connection to the community

2. A much, much greater understanding of mobile audio.

3. Some decisions about my own system - Tweets and mids on the dash

4. The desire to keep it simple and clean

5. A great time


Thanks to everyone that let me and others listen to their system, move their seats and touch their stereo 

Fred Lynch, thanks for your honesty and Arc's commitment
*
Most of all
Marv, thank you for all your hard work and making this event a great one. *


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

i didn't read the whole thread cuz i need to to the dent doctor right now  but i'll come back and read through the whole thing later.

i agree with the op on this one. while i wasn't at the bbq i have heard several competition grade systems and some of them left me with something to be desired. being in band during gradeschool i know how wind and percussion instruments are supposed to sound. i also had a grandpa who played the acoustic guitar A LOT back when he was alive and physically able so i know how that's supposed to sound UNAMPLIFIED. with my system i push for something that's tonally accurate to my ears and put only minor attention to staging. this is the reason i refuse to compete unless it's just for ****s and giggles to see how i stand against the locals. the closest i ever came to thinking there was someone playing a guitar in my truck with me was with my seas L18's and morel 57.05 tweets. i could hear every resonance and everything else a lot of high loss drivers will mask. one particular acoustic guitar solo that russ freeman from the rippingtons does gave my goosebumps with that particular frontstage. now i'm going for something with higher loss so my poorly recorded cd's from producers that slide all the sliders forward will sound decent. i'm known for being brutally honest no matter whos feelings it hurts. and i'm one of the last people you'll see compromise realistic sound for accurate staging.


----------



## Dan (May 14, 2007)

Mr Marv said:


> I have been to amplified performances where the PA system was very "natural" and seemed to "disappear" however I have also been to other amplified performances where the sound was "amplified sounding" if that makes sense (maybe chad can chime in on this one? ). This is why Fred (and myself) go to as well suggest going to "non-amplified" performances as a reference for how "instruments" actually sound.


Its good to get a reference of how your speakers should be accurately reproducing acoustical instruments, but in the end, isn't it how much you enjoy listening to your stereo that matters? I sure as hell don't like the way a kazoo sounds, so if I could adjust it to be more pleasing for me, then what's wrong with that?


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

usually the destruction it wreaks on other recordings.


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

Dan said:


> Its good to get a reference of how your speakers should be accurately reproducing acoustical instruments, but in the end, isn't it how much you enjoy listening to your stereo that matters? I sure as hell don't like the way a kazoo sounds, so if I could adjust it to be more pleasing for me, then what's wrong with that?


Certainly personal preference and your enjoyment should prevail _with your personal system_ but if you "sure as hell don't like the way a kazoo sounds" why would you play music that has them in it


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

Whiterabbit said:


> usually the destruction it wreaks on other recordings.


Good point as well


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

I just LOVE the Kazoo , and my system plays it accurately


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

AVI said:


> I just LOVE the Kazoo , and my system plays it accurately


Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeet!  I also like bagpipes


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

when you can tell a coronet from a french horn, you have a pretty realistic system. they sound a lot alike but have certain sonic traits that set them apart. coronet has more "bite" to it.


----------



## Dan (May 14, 2007)

Mr Marv said:


> Certainly personal preference and your enjoyment should prevail _with your personal system_ but if you "sure as hell don't like the way a kazoo sounds" why would you play music that has them in it


Good point. However, my point wasn't to necessarily focus on a particular instrument, but on preference on how you like your overall music to sound, i.e. the reason some people choose metal dome vs. textile tweeters or one headunit over the next. I don't think I have enough experience to comment any further on this though, especially regarding your comments on what you feel is "overprocessed" sound. All I know about live performances is the amount of time I spent playing my trumpet for 8 yrs. Sometimes, I end up preferring a modified sound over what a live performance would really sound like. Kind of like the way a photoshopped picture can look better than the original. Or even how a picture can look better or worse than the real thing.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

Mr Marv said:


> One of the major reasons I did this BBQ and invited guests like Keith, Steve, Fred, Matt, Leon etc was so that guys with not as much experience could get some constructive criticism as well as help with their systems. I think I have a pretty good ear and can tell when something doesn't sound "quite right" _to me_ however I don't always know what exactly to do to fix it. I believe this is the case with some of the other guys as well however I also believe some do not have a real "reference" to base the sound on. I know a lot of this hobby is based on "personal preference" and I personally don't care how an engineer "wanted it to sound". I am a live music fan so to me "accurate" is making my system sound as close to how a live instrument sounds as I can. Imaging/sound stage etc are just icing on the cake for me (since there are no comps around here) and although I would prefer to "have it all" I would take tonality over technical  as do the vast majority of people I install for locally.
> 
> Best lessons I have learned over these years on the forums:
> 
> ...


I would have loved to have gone to the BBQ for the above mentioned reasons. Being very new to Car Audio I have been plagued with problems creating a natural sounding system. I grew up listening to live music both natural and amplified. Some people consider quality sound: thumping and bumping and drum machines so a lot of what's being sold is geared for this market.


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

Oh boy, coming to this discussion rather late, I think alot has been said already but.....

Fred, as a whole, I agree with your comments. It's interesting for me because I started getting into car audio in the late 80s myself, and have seen similar shifts over the years. Today, it seems there is a huge emphasis on staging and why this has become so so important, I really don't know. Trends will always happen, I guess.... However, I don't necessarily think that staging/imaging and tonality have to be mutally exclusive. (they are simply just hard to achieve individually, much less together )

At the BBQ, I spent most of my time listening to individual's cars as oppossed to the more popular "demo" cars. These are DIY guys looking to get the best sound out of their own personal vehicles, and I had alot of fun doing so. I actually think alot of the DIYers are really striving to "have their cake and eat it too", in other words, have staging as well as good tonality. In perhaps 1 or 2 cases, I though the tuning was a pretty good compromise of the two. Not perfect, knowing that it's really impossible to obtain perfection.

Having said all that, I'm going to go out on a limb and make comments on two particular vehicles:

1) Dynaudio van: I'll say it again... exceptionally good tonality. Very good staging too; not surprising given the location of the front stage speakers.  This is not your typical "mobile" audio system!
2) Jeff's (JMichaels) Toyota GTS: since I know him well, I'll comment openly on his car as an example. Most would complain that his kick enclosures cause his stage to be too low, and a bit too close. However, he did a good job getting his car tuned more or less tonally correct (flat), with a bit of emphasis on bass, because he likes to crank it up . I really liked his car this time, since the last I saw him at my place, his tonality was, quite frankly, terrible. He made alot of changes since the last time I saw him, building new enclosures for his midrange drivers, and addressing issues both in the install and tuning. The end result is that I think he's really close to his goals, and that includes good tonality, natural timbre, and a fairly "realistic" sound. IMO, he's close to the point of dimishing returns.

So I'll stop for now to simply say that trends aside, people are still interested in accurate, natural, realistic sound.  Let's keep this discussion rolling, because I think it's a really good one!

p.s. - I also have to keep reminding myself of my own goals as I revamp my system, which went from one extreme (pre-out deck, single amp, passive front stage + subs) to another (Alpine H701 processor, added amp channels, more speakers). I hope in the end I have a system that sounds as realistic as possible.


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

Mr Marv said:


> Just an observation on how people react after listening to my system-When an "average" person gets in they tend to make comments such as "those are nice sounding speakers" or "it sounds almost real" or "it's very clean" etc. When an "audio fanatic" type person gets in the first comments they tend to make are things like "your depth is good but your height is a little low" or "your stage is a little to the left" or "I can detect a little bass in the rear on certain notes" etc etc.



Funny Marv,
I've had alot of people comment exactly the same way about my vehicle! Hee, hee! Hope to seeya soon and chat more with ya!


----------



## Dan (May 14, 2007)

TEAM SHIMANO/FALCON said:


> when you can tell a coronet from a french horn, you have a pretty realistic system. they sound a lot alike but have certain sonic traits that set them apart. coronet has more "bite" to it.


That would be timbre. No offense though, but I think a cornet (trumpet) sounds very different from a french horn! Not too hard to distinguish them even with a factory stereo IMO.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

fredridge said:


> 8. My two cars I preffered the most were Eng's(dual700) Maxima and Lukboa's van.


im honoured  

i drove home happy with the way my van was sounding, which means all the super excellent instals on the day didnt leave me wanting....to much.

and maybe ill do some tidying up for next year


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

lukeboa said:


> im honoured
> 
> i drove home happy with the way my van was sounding, which means all the super excellent instals on the day didnt leave me wanting....to much.
> 
> and maybe ill do some tidying up for next year


He he he .... I'm wondering just how much tuning was done on that van , *after* I sat in it ... LOL


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

lukeboa said:


> im honoured
> 
> i drove home happy with the way my van was sounding, which means all the super excellent instals on the day didnt leave me wanting....to much.
> 
> and maybe ill do some tidying up for next year


Im thinking a french fry box and some opened mail

you know. For stealth.


----------



## technobug (Mar 15, 2005)

Hmmmm interesting. 

Well we all know why the technical aspects of "proper" imaging and staging are important right? So that car audio sanctioning bodies can have some sort of objective scoring of a purely subjective hobby. I have huge issues with this as your score sheet can vary greatly by the size, shape, hearing abilities, and mental aptitude of the person "judging". IASCA and other organizations supply said "judge" with a list of criteria, and he is to score how closely you meet these criteria according to his best discretion. Again, problems if you are unluckey enough to have some baboon "judging" your car. And what's the fun in having some primate tell you what is "correct" and what isn't?

Music, like all other forms of art is only what you want it to be. Really.

I've read here that car audio reproduction should be as close to a live performance as possible. REALLY?! So what you're saying is that my car stereo should sound like ****?! AMAZING! Because, honestly, I have to say that most live concerts sound like absolute donkey balls. Errrrr...sorry if you're having a hard time imaging what donkley balls sound like. Trust me....it's unpleasant.  There are exceptions I suppose. I most recently went to see Celine Dion at Caesars. Concert hall designed and constructed SPECIFICALLY for her show. It was good. Was it the most amazing thing ever? No. I was also fortunate enough to sit in on choir and orchestra rehersal in the convention hall, and pipe organ recitals at the Mormon Tabernacle in Salt Lake. It's widely considered one of the finest instruments of it's kind in the world. Did it sound good? Of course. Did it sound great? Of course. Did it make my body spasm wildely in loose cordination to some rhythm? Of course not. What do you think I am? Some kinda freak? BUT I can say that winding the volume knob to the stop in my car has. Strange huh? I sit in somber silence while listening to one of the finest musical instruments in the world while my car stereo evokes waves of pure emotion that my body simply cannot control. Which is the more pure musical experience? Quite a difficult question to answer I think. The answer is certainly something that you cannot fathom. How do I know this? Because only I have the answer. Because music is art. And art is personal expression. There are no rules. There are no guidelines. It is anything you want it to be.










So getting back to the topic of reproducing music as it should be. Well.....how should music sound? Should it sound like it did at Moe's Alley? Upper freqs, ear piercing....bass bloated, and heavy.....midrange distorted beyond recongnition? Or should it sound like the Cleveland Orchestra playing in Severance Hall, where you can hear the principal cellist scratch her ass between pages?

Honestly who knows what the actual LIVE performance sounded like? Only the recording engineers know. Do our CDs come with notes from the engineers describing the setting and the mood of the recording? NO Does he explain the subtle details in the recording that he tried to enhance? NO We listen to our music blindly. No guidance. So because of this, I look at music recordings as just a type of media. A media that lets us shape it into whatever form we want. That's what's so great about music. I think this is the idea that ShinJohn was trying to get across also. You can take 2 people with identical cars and give them the same equipment. Come back in a month and what you will hear, is two completely different sounding systems. Installation locations, tuning. All different. And both equally pleasing to it's owner.

Peace.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

AVI said:


> He he he .... I'm wondering just how much tuning was done on that van , *after* I sat in it ... LOL


zero.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

Whiterabbit said:


> Im thinking a french fry box and some opened mail
> 
> you know. For stealth.


or maybe a few yards of 'black shag' carpet to mimmik one of the other cars there


----------



## chuyler1 (Apr 10, 2006)

Dan said:


> That would be timbre. No offense though, but I think a cornet (trumpet) sounds very different from a french horn! Not too hard to distinguish them even with a factory stereo IMO.


A cornet has a more mellow sound than a trumpet...if you can tell the difference between a cornet and a trumpet on your system that is a start. 

When you can tell the difference between a trumpet and a trumpet...you are finished. 

Every trumpet player plays the instrument a little different. I have a few live tracks where trumpets trade 4s. On a mediocre system it sounds like a single soloist but on a good system the two sounds break apart on the stage (even though the trumpeters are standing at most 4-5 feet away from one another) and you can tell which one is playing at any given moment. You can't use such a recording to tune your system...but you can use it to know when you are finished.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

Maybe its just me but shouldn't the music be reproduced in a car the way it was recorded? With tonal clarity to sound correct and so ALL the instruments could be heard the way they were meant to be, true to the way they sound naturally. I designed my system with the speakers I like, so they reproduce the music the way I like it, not an RTA. Flat on an RTA is not a desireable sound to me personally, it is exactly that, flat. 

Just my .02, I am not an expert by any means......


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

http://www.essentialsofmusic.com/glossary/t.html

This site has the word tonality and for an example[ that you can listen to ], they have Bach "Minuet in G"


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

89grand said:


> I say we get back to actually enjoying our systems, rather than trying to set them up to where some audio snob likes it.


I concur! I'm actualy a bit spooked to let snobs hear mine. All my live sound buddies LOVE IT but it WILL rip your head off at about your knees! if the recording hurts, the system will hurt, nuff said. But, that's the way i dig it


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

lukeboa said:


> zero.


Ah ... Then it just makes my evening to know that a little something I did brought a smile to your face .... It was my pleasure


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

You know .... This thread is great , but it has definitely moved away from the original point that Fred was making.
I heard some wonderful sounding cars there , and each had good and bad traits about them , but this is for sure ... None of the cars I got to hear had anywhere close to enough dynamics to sound realistic to a true musical experience. Almost regardless of the venue , music has drastically varying dynamic shades in every track. I'm talking about the chest pounding kick of a floor tom. The dynamic strikes of drum toms. The crash of cymbals. The rip into you resonance of a stand up bass .... NONE of the cars I heard demonstrated they had that ability , and that ALONE makes a boring system to my own preferences. It also makes for a NON realistic musical experience. 
Two cars in particular , had centered vocal images so realistic , I thought I could probably walk a circle around the vocalist .... But with almost ZERO mid-bass or sub bass present. That alone is a compromise I can not understand , nor enjoy.
So Fred's point , was understood and agreed on by me , if no-one else.
Lukeboa , please join in here .... You commented on how wide and high my stage was , as well as how perfectly centered the vocals were in that stage. And yes , we listened to Disturbed .... VERY loudly. *So yes , it can be done.*
Back to Fred's question .... Where did this strange new idea of what music should sound like in a car come from ? And why do people subscribe to it ?


----------



## Dan (May 14, 2007)

chuyler1 said:


> A cornet has a more mellow sound than a trumpet...if you can tell the difference between a cornet and a trumpet on your system that is a start.
> 
> When you can tell the difference between a trumpet and a trumpet...you are finished.
> 
> Every trumpet player plays the instrument a little different. I have a few live tracks where trumpets trade 4s. On a mediocre system it sounds like a single soloist but on a good system the two sounds break apart on the stage (even though the trumpeters are standing at most 4-5 feet away from one another) and you can tell which one is playing at any given moment. You can't use such a recording to tune your system...but you can use it to know when you are finished.


It's easy to generalize that a cornet has a mellower sound than a trumpet, but a lot has to do with the player and unless the same player is picking up different instruments to play throughout the track, it can be impossible for some to tell which is brighter. Another factor is the material of the instrument or even the mouthpiece. Gold and brass trumpets are much mellower/warmer than a silver trumpet with a large bore and bell. 
I agree with much of what technobug said, music is art, and no one can tell you what are the proper things to appreciate about it. All that ends up happening is that people end up scrutinizing the technicalities of [insert musical term here] that relate to the recording, which are unknown to begin with!


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

Competition?? 

This is just a theory, but as we have said, sound preferences are really subjective. So when you start with competition only one person can take first. So other will complain, not fair, not objective and so on.... so how do you handle that?

You make the competition more mechanical and easily measurable even for people who hear differently. This creates something that tends to be more mechanical and technical, but maybe not as pleasing or creative. 

Then this filters down because everyone wants to emulate the winners...


This is just a theory. 



AVI said:


> Back to Fred's question .... Where did this strange new idea of what music should sound like in a car come from ? And why do people subscribe to it ?


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

AVI said:


> You know .... This thread is great , but it has definitely moved away from the original point that Fred was making.
> I heard some wonderful sounding cars there , and each had good and bad traits about them , but this is for sure ... None of the cars I got to hear had anywhere close to enough dynamics to sound realistic to a true musical experience. Almost regardless of the venue , music has drastically varying dynamic shades in every track. I'm talking about the chest pounding kick of a floor tom. The dynamic strikes of drum toms. The crash of cymbals. The rip into you resonance of a stand up bass .... NONE of the cars I heard demonstrated they had that ability , and that ALONE makes a boring system to my own preferences. It also makes for a NON realistic musical experience.
> Two cars in particular , had centered vocal images so realistic , I thought I could probably walk a circle around the vocalist .... But with almost ZERO mid-bass or sub bass present. That alone is a compromise I can not understand , nor enjoy.
> So Fred's point , was understood and agreed on by me , if no-one else.
> ...


id struggle to say anything useful?, all this is way above my head.  i listend to a lot of cars at the bbq, they all sounded good:blush: 

weird how speakers mounted in the bottom of a door create sound above the dash tho


----------



## technobug (Mar 15, 2005)

AVI said:


> Back to Fred's question .... Where did this strange new idea of what music should sound like in a car come from ? And why do people subscribe to it ?


I guess I would have to question whether it has changed. Is it really so different?

I think I understand what you are saying and what your tastes in "music" are. But who's to say that is correct? Is what you describe what "music" is about? 

Like I stated above, we all know why the technical aspects of musical reproduction is important to some. And to say that sacrificing some aspects of a live show to achieve those things is wrong or strange, is in itself wrong in my mind. It is what it is.

I think in the end to achieve the most realistic reproduction of music in our cars is what we strive for. But is impossible I think. Because there are too many contradictions for it to happen. You CANNOT have proper imaging nor staging and have "live" sound. Why? Because most recordings are absolutely artificial and un-natural. That's why. The only thing you could truely call real sound is purely acoustic. Unamplified, unprocessed sound. Something that Disturbed most definately is not. 

Minimal alteration of the original should be the goal of sound reproduction since anything else is a falsification. For many pieces of recorded material it may not matter, because the performance is so highly processed and the listener shares no common sonic reference. Also, a listener may be so used to amplified music that the characteristic sound of certain types of loudspeakers becomes the reference. However, ultimately only a system with minimal distortion can hope to achieve the reproduction of an original and, in particular, of a familiar live sonic event such as a choral performance, a solo female voice, or symphony orchestra. 

I can most certainly guarantee that what you describe in believing to be an accurate representation of what it would be like to experience Disturbed live is incorrect. I would suspect that Disturbed sounds much better in your car than live. Not to say that there isn't a certain enjoyment found in being surrounded by scantily clad, drunk women, gyrating their bodies till the few scraps of sweat soaked clothing come flying off. But sonically speaking, I would most definately say that we are capable of much higher fidelity in our cars in comparison.


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

i guess i could reinstall my car so i can play Disturbed loud...if that is the reference..lol.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Na, AVI hit the nail right on the head, the saxophone in disturbed is to die for

Was that your van AVI, the best sounding vehicle at the BBQ!!


----------



## technobug (Mar 15, 2005)

Hic said:


> Na, AVI hit the nail right on the head, the saxophone in disturbed is to die for
> 
> Was that your van AVI, the best sounding vehicle at the BBQ!!


The van belongs to John. A SoCal guy. He's an IASCA competitor.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

low said:


> i guess i could reinstall my car so i can play Disturbed loud...if that is the reference..lol.


Is it the new Reference Music/CD now?
I QUIT car audio.


----------



## technobug (Mar 15, 2005)

dual700 said:


> Is it the new Reference Music/CD now?
> I QUIT car audio.


Hey I like Disturbed.....well the first 2 albums anyway till they sold out.


----------



## dual700 (Mar 6, 2005)

technobug said:


> Hey I like Disturbed.....well the first 2 albums anyway till they sold out.


Stupified! 

That's the thing, I am sick of them, ROFL...


----------



## JMichaels (Nov 17, 2006)

Thanks ShinJohn. 

I'll go out on a limb and say that if you are complaining about not hearing the realistic timbre of instruments or proper sound stage in a semi-practical install than you didnt sit in my car or Leons.
I agree with Marv in the old saying its install, install, install! But Along with the install and the tuning its having like minded individuals to reflect off of. The best part of this hobby is that you can take your car to a certain level and than you can meet up with other passionate people who will push you on to the next level.
Without meeting up with the local guys I would probably still be fighting the issues I knew were there but was struggling with. After talking with them and fixing some real small things, nothing compared to the full install, I am very close to what I feel are my goals based on listening to live music,studio grade monitors and headphones. The best part is that with meeting more people over the last weekend I actually feel I can go even farther and meet 99% of my goals now in a box with wheels on it. And honestly I didnt think it was going to happen.
Oh yeah and just to kill the myth, if you sat in my car you know you can have spl and sq cause I like it loud!


----------



## Luke352 (Jul 24, 2006)

chefhow said:


> , not an RTA. Flat on an RTA is not a desireable sound to me personally, it is exactly that, flat.
> 
> Just my .02, I am not an expert by any means......


Well think about it if your system is tuned flat to pink noise you are hearing exactly what the artist (more so the recording engineer) wants you to hear. Because flat on a RTA playing pink noise doesnt mean the music is being played flat as the recording engineer will have some freq's boosted or cut as he thought sounded right, so RTA flat is true to accurate, does it sound good to you or alot of other people NO, but for all the people it sounds bad to there will be people which it sounds good too.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

the 1st 2 disturbed albums are recorded extremely well imo, 

and theyre not easy to play loud in a car without sounding bad or stressing 

the system beyond its ability.

those recordings will show flaws in a system, 

just different flaws than behthoven.


----------



## Luke352 (Jul 24, 2006)

Insane01VWPassat said:


> And you have very valid points..... all of these changes were timely and difficult and took a lot of time...... but my point here is about the almost addiction and dependancy of installers and users today on processors.
> 
> .


This reminds me of something someone else said, you might know him since you work for Arc Audio ( is this correct?) Steve Hutchison the Australian, DYN, ARC, Tru, and Audiosystem distributor, he made this comment about the install he has done in his current car, qoute " I'm from the old skool where we measure everything out, do the maths then start the install" I think to many people don't do that they just throw it in, and think well I can fix that with tuning, vs the old days when they didnt have all the fancy tuning ability we have, they relied on driver positioning and so on to achieve sonically accurate music. I mean how many times do some graphs get posted and people say "oh I can eq that up or down" shouldnt we be trying to setup our systems so they require the least amount of tuning possible because everything we do to a signal imparts imparts its own fingerprint to the music????

Luke


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

lukeboa said:


> the 1st 2 disturbed albums are recorded extremely well imo,
> 
> and theyre not easy to play loud in a car without sounding bad or stressing
> 
> ...


I totally agree. If you get your system to play loud, rip your head off guitars and monkey man screams right, you've done something. Who the hell wants to listen to the damn picollo driving down the street??  That is NOT fun!!


----------



## B&K (Sep 20, 2005)

chuyler1 said:


> Every trumpet player plays the instrument a little different. I have a few live tracks where trumpets trade 4s. On a mediocre system it sounds like a single soloist but on a good system the two sounds break apart on the stage (even though the trumpeters are standing at most 4-5 feet away from one another) and you can tell which one is playing at any given moment. You can't use such a recording to tune your system...but you can use it to know when you are finished.


Not only do I want to know who is playing what solo I want to hear which side of Rashaan Roland Kirk's mouth has which saxophone. 

And here in MN we have a great place to use as a reference. The Dakota bar and grill not only pulls in top name talent, they have a great stage and presence as well. Most of the worlds top jazz musicians love to play there and it surely isn't because the door puts a lot of money in their pockets.


----------



## chuyler1 (Apr 10, 2006)

Luke352 said:


> Well think about it if your system is tuned flat to pink noise you are hearing exactly what the artist (more so the recording engineer) wants you to hear. Because flat on a RTA playing pink noise doesnt mean the music is being played flat as the recording engineer will have some freq's boosted or cut as he thought sounded right, so RTA flat is true to accurate, does it sound good to you or alot of other people NO, but for all the people it sounds bad to there will be people which it sounds good too.


I don't agree at all. In theory what you stated is correct, and it works perfectly in a living room when you place a mic 1 meter from your speaker and make adjustments.

However, in a car, the mic is picking up reflections and summing cancelation and other stuff. What looks flat on an RTA is certainly not "FLAT" as you listen to it. Your ears are smarter than the RTA, they will correct the cancelation and use it to determine stage width/height. If you try to boost a range that has been canceled out it just doesn't sound right. Use the RTA to find resonances and deal with them appropriately...but never set up the RTA and boost cut every band on a 30-band EQ.

Back before digital processors were the norm, competitors used to have two EQs. One was set for RTA and the other for music. In many cases these settings were totally different. Keep that in mind when you tune.

Edit:
And one more thing, audio engineers usually use small monitor speakers, not huge 15" subwoofers. They increase the bass on a recording to sound good on small speakers. That means with your huge subwoofers you actually need to lower the gain on your bass to get the same affect, especially in a car where cabin gain intensifies the bass.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

B-Squad said:


> I totally agree. If you get your system to play loud, rip your head off guitars and monkey man screams right, you've done something. Who the hell wants to listen to the damn picollo driving down the street??  That is NOT fun!!


jethro tull plays a mean flute tho


----------



## Luke352 (Jul 24, 2006)

chuyler1 said:


> However, in a car, the mic is picking up reflections and summing cancelation and other stuff. What looks flat on an RTA is certainly not "FLAT" as you listen to it. Your ears are smarter than the RTA, they will correct the cancelation and use it to determine stage width/height. If you try to boost a range that has been canceled out it just doesn't sound right. Use the RTA to find resonances and deal with them appropriately...but never set up the RTA and boost cut every band on a 30-band EQ.
> 
> Back before digital processors were the norm, competitors used to have two EQs. One was set for RTA and the other for music. In many cases these settings were totally different. Keep that in mind when you tune.
> 
> ...


Some good points I will definitely take note of and lock away in my head, where I live IASCA and any other SQ based comps that got judged for RTA curves died out several yrs ago, I only use a RTA for pointing out the major problem areas and to tune to a EAR flat response and then I fine tune from there to my personal preferance.

Here's a link to the rules of the comps I enter, http://www.caraudioaustralia.com/content.php?contentID=44 there quite basic rules really ,which was the whole point to keep it simple and fun to enter, most of the sound relevent stuff is judged out of 1-10, I'm in street which means no show aspect to the judgeing only basic safety judging.

As to the sub thing, that's one of the reasons why I have my sub set to -14db through the TA and 0 on the main non-Fade control for comps, and when I want a little fun I just turn up the Non-fade, and when I really want to flex my windows I turn it right up through the TA. 

Luke


----------



## Insane01VWPassat (May 12, 2006)

Luke352 said:


> This reminds me of something someone else said, you might know him since you work for Arc Audio ( is this correct?) Steve Hutchison the Australian, DYN, ARC, Tru, and Audiosystem distributor, he made this comment about the install he has done in his current car, qoute " I'm from the old skool where we measure everything out, do the maths then start the install" I think to many people don't do that they just throw it in, and think well I can fix that with tuning, vs the old days when they didnt have all the fancy tuning ability we have, they relied on driver positioning and so on to achieve sonically accurate music. I mean how many times do some graphs get posted and people say "oh I can eq that up or down" shouldnt we be trying to setup our systems so they require the least amount of tuning possible because everything we do to a signal imparts imparts its own fingerprint to the music????
> 
> Luke



Extremely Wise words..... and a pure reinforcement of my point I was trying to make.... I was hoping to be able to spend some time on replying to lot of these very benificial comments however the Rhino is far from done and it leaves Sunday for the shoot..... Ill come back to reply next week after I get back from the shoot....


----------



## saMxp (Jun 22, 2007)

Simple question - is it likely that a sound system that was tuned to realistically reproduce the sound of various brass and woodwind instruments, sound good when playing rock music, or even bluegrass, for that matter?


----------



## technobug (Mar 15, 2005)

Luke352 said:


> Well think about it if your system is tuned flat to pink noise you are hearing exactly what the artist (more so the recording engineer) wants you to hear. Because flat on a RTA playing pink noise doesnt mean the music is being played flat as the recording engineer will have some freq's boosted or cut as he thought sounded right, so RTA flat is true to accurate, does it sound good to you or alot of other people NO, but for all the people it sounds bad to there will be people which it sounds good too.


*X2*


----------



## munkeeboi83 (Jul 7, 2007)

Wow! I'm surprised by the amount of activity on DIY. Anyways, let me begin by saying:

"Any monkey can EQ the be-jeebus out of a car" 

I totally agree with Fred's mentality. For example, I think it's more impressive for a car not using the top of the line equipment, but with an ideal install and proper placement to get good sound. Perhaps the car might not sound as nice as other cars with EQs looks like a roller coaster ride, but it's impressive because of their lack of the use of EQ. 

It's impressive to see a stock N/A four banger run a 10 second qtr mile run, but you could also turbocharge that four banger, add a 50 shot of nitrous and run a 10 second qtr mile. Anyone could do that, but again going back to the KISS principle. 

I remember Fred telling me last year at Mr. Marv's house about getting sound in your car that is realistic. Some people go overboard with tuning and the sound starts beginning to sound unnatural. Everyone has their own ideas or preferences on how a certain piece of music sounded. But being audiophiles, I think our goal should be to recreate live music in our cars, the way it may be played in a club or concert hall. 

Just my 2cents for my first post on DIY.


----------



## technobug (Mar 15, 2005)

chuyler1 said:


> I don't agree at all. In theory what you stated is correct, and it works perfectly in a living room when you place a mic 1 meter from your speaker and make adjustments.
> 
> However, in a car, the mic is picking up reflections and summing cancelation and other stuff. What looks flat on an RTA is certainly not "FLAT" as you listen to it. Your ears are smarter than the RTA, they will correct the cancelation and use it to determine stage width/height. If you try to boost a range that has been canceled out it just doesn't sound right. Use the RTA to find resonances and deal with them appropriately...but never set up the RTA and boost cut every band on a 30-band EQ.
> 
> ...



I think you guys are talking about the same thing. We most definately want to RTA to find our anomalies and tune them out by EQ. I think once done, you can more accurately reproduce the sound that the engineer created. Cabin gain in the sub bass region included. You will see that in the RTA measurement and you can address it accordingly. If after doing so, you still feel as if the sub bass is overwhelming, well then you can thank the r3ecording engineer for boosting those frequencies.


----------



## technobug (Mar 15, 2005)

saMxp said:


> Simple question - is it likely that a sound system that was tuned to realistically reproduce the sound of various brass and woodwind instruments, sound good when playing rock music, or even bluegrass, for that matter?


Well I think that's a bit of a trick question. Any system that can accurately reproduce one type of music will reproduce ALL music accurately. So then if one CD sounds better than the other, then well it's either poor sound engineering, or your particular room enviroment is better suited for a particular set of frequencies associated with certain types of music. Does that make sense? 

We all know that the car enviroment is horrible for sound reproduction. Audio purists will scoff at the notion that good audio can be achieved in the car. I know because my father is one of those audio snobs.

Depending on where and how your speakers are installed you will have issues with resonance and reflextions. It can't be avoided. It happens even in the best listening rooms. Far more in the car because of all the complex shapes and obstructions found in a car interior. So we RTA using pink noise to find these anomalies and correct them. Now depending on where these anomalies are found in the frequency range, certain music will either mask them or expose them. Unfortunately for fans of rock music, that type of music has alot of information in the precise range of the frequency spectrum that causes the most problems in the car. This isn't a blanket statement as not all rock music exploits this, nor are all interiors the same. It's just a generalization. But I think fairly correct one. 

I'm jumping all over the place here so sorry.

One of the guys at the BBQ asked me what my reference for sound was. I wasn't able to answer right away. I mistakenly told him that I didn't have one. That I just knew when music sounded right. More of an emotional thing that an auditory one. I think I was mistaken. I grew up listening to good audio. My father has been in the audio business for as long as I have been alive. Recording engineer, Amp designer/manufacturer, speaker design engineer. I used to go to recording sessions with him. Lay on the floor behind the mixing board with headphones on while my father worked. I must have retained some memory of those times somehow, and built an image of what music should sound like to me. Don't ask me how it is that I can compare Alice In Chains played on my car stereo to a live recording session with Michael Jackson, but I think I do. Wierd.


----------



## Abmolech (Nov 2, 2006)

> I remember Fred telling me last year at Mr. Marv's house about getting sound in your car that is realistic. Some people go overboard with tuning and the sound starts beginning to sound unnatural. Everyone has their own ideas or preferences on how a certain piece of music sounded. But being audiophiles, I think our goal should be to recreate live music in our cars, the way it may be played in a club or concert hall.


If this is true, you would never use stereo to do it. Unless the room resembles (acoustically) the orginal recorded space, stereo will always be a dismall failure, 70 years of trying has adequeitley proven this. 

If you want realism, try formats that specialise in this genre, (stereo is not one of them) Mono, ambiphonics, quadraphonics, ambisonics and VBAP. All these have a proven history of realistic performance within various limitations. (monophonic is the most limited, however it is "strange" that it is the one that stereo is trying to emulate, IE live amplified concerts)

Still 3.1 5.1 etc would be a serious upgrade from stereo IF you can get a proper recording.


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

A couple of quick comments...

1) The carpenter... not the tools... DSP, RTAs, data acquisition and measurement... All tools. Tools that can be used, or not. Each has a function and place. I agree that a bad carpenter with good tools will likely not end up with a good result. It doesn't mean the Porter Cable router he's using isn't a good tool though!

2) Given #1, I'd like to see this discussion turn more technical, into the appropriate used of said tools. I agree that I've heard way too many "over processed" cars. Let's do something about it. Let's talk about how to educate each other on how to get the best results.... I'll put my money where my mouth is too: stay tuned on the tutorials section. I've got my laptop measurement system up and running, and plan to post my findings in the not-too-distant future. (that is, if/when I get said findings! )

Now let's discuss and share! Isn't that the point of all of us being here? 

edit: BTW, I hope that if it isn't clear, I'll say that the final judge of any system's worth should always be the listener's ears. If it isn't, there's no point in doing it in the first place. (I know, it should be obvious )


----------



## saMxp (Jun 22, 2007)

technobug said:


> Well I think that's a bit of a trick question. Any system that can accurately reproduce one type of music will reproduce ALL music accurately. So then if one CD sounds better than the other, then well it's either poor sound engineering, or your particular room enviroment is better suited for a particular set of frequencies associated with certain types of music. Does that make sense?


Yes, that makes sense and you're right - there are other variables that could muddy this comparison. So I'll be more direct to the point - given two great recordings of different genres, isn't it unlikely that a sound system optimized for one would not sound good with some others? Some genres are close enough that it wouldn't matter, but I've found that when I get it sounding "just right" for folk music, tonality goes out the window when the next song in the shuffle comes on and it is blues. (this is why I seldom listen on shuffle)
I'm just proving a possibility that the cars you listened to that sounded poor, weren't being demonstrated with the same music to which they were tuned. If the owner of the vehicle chose that song to demo, then it is definitely their fault!


----------



## AudioBob (May 21, 2007)

When I used to compete I used two EQ's as was nentioned above. I had a Rockford Fosgate OEQ-1 parametric equalizer that I tuned to get rid of any peaks/dips in the curve to essentually have it as flat as possible.

I had a Precision Power EQ in the dash that had adjustments for sub bass, bass, mid and high frequencies and that was enough adjustment for me to make any music sound really good with a few minor turns.

When I went to a show I just set the dash EQ back to no cut or boost and I was set. I was one of the first to have two EQs and I remember one of the judges asking me why I had two EQ's??? When I told him, I got extra points because he thought that was really cool.

I have won several IASCA events with a couple of different cars. I love car audio, but have not been to a comptition in years because I got burned out.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Although I have the ability to have 140 presets on the Rane, I generally, well, actually only had 1 preset that I used. For SPL I would just mute the rest of the outputs on the SQ/everyday preset. Car would RTA pretty well too. 2nd and 3rd at IASCA Finals with one preset, and I never changed it for demoing or every day listening- Fred can tell you that I beat the car up pretty good in Memphis demoing it...Jason Ewing did too that year with 1 preset.

Now if I do MECA RTA shootout, I will have a preset for that.


----------



## legend94 (Mar 15, 2006)

anyone take pictures? if so how about a thread in off topic


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

legend94 said:


> anyone take pictures? if so how about a thread in off topic


http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15286&highlight=picture+depot


----------



## MiloX (May 22, 2005)

Wow. I know I am late getting to this thread, and most of you probably won't appreciate what I am going to say... but frankly, I don't care. 

I must say that after I read your initial post Fred, I was quite taken aback. So I re-read it. And re-read it again. Then I read all of your responses that followed hoping to get some type of contextual validation that your post was not as pompous and elitist as it seemed, but so far I have yet to see any reason to believe otherwise. 

I WASN'T there so the following is just my pure conjecture based on what I have read here. If any of the below is NOT the case, I'll STFU. 

From what I gather, you went to this event, put up some swag (which is VERY cool BTW- Kudos to you and Arc for doing that), listened to a bunch of cars, had some sidebar conversations about the lack of realism in the systems you listened to, then walked across the street TWICE to validate your impressions, and then came on here and started this thread. 

I am curious if you mentioned the lack of realism to any of the owners of the cars you auditioned. After all, you have a background in music. If there is ANYONE there at the BBQ that could possibly have helped them get their tonality more in line it would probably be you. Did you offer to help them, or did you just go out of your way to validate your thoughts by walking across the street to listen to some bands? I am not about to question what you have done for the industry as a whole. That is not debatable. But I am questioning whehter or not you did anything constructive to help out some fellow audio enthusiasts at the meet. Like I said... I wasn't there. I hope you did. 

Maybe the owners of the cars you listened to don't know *how* to make their cars sound accurate. But through the use of some processing they got their technicals dialed in. 

I think we all agree that the blocking and tackling you mentioned are very important to having a great sounding car. However, many folks just aren't willing to cut their kick panel sheet metal to have the perfect driver placement. So what are they to do? Use blunt force instruments like the balance control to try to get a center focus? I guess we should all be handwriting these messages and have the pony express send them to each other, right? After all... the integrity of the message will in no way be compromised by all of the zeros and ones. Ok... I got a bit hyperbolic there. I apologize. My point is that to me you *kind of* sound like a bitter old man lamenting about how much better the old days were. 

I can tell you that some of the most dynamic, tonally accurate, and technically solid vehicles I have heard use A LOT of processing. They also spent A LOT of time on blocking and tackling. 

Ever heard Matt Robert's truck? Joe Karpus' truck? Kirk Proffitt's TL? These vehicles are tonally amazing, have technicals that are spot on, and a visceral impact that will smack the taste out of your mouth. ALL of them use a LOT of processing. Looking at the EQ curve in Matt's van alone would probably send most purists to the loony bin. But all it takes is one audition to "get it".

So don't blame the processing. IMO, what this hobby needs are more experts (and I am certainly not one of them) who are willing to get out and HELP teach and show others what *good sound* really is. 

Flame on.


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

MiloX said:


> Wow. I know I am late getting to this thread, and most of you probably won't appreciate what I am going to say... but frankly, I don't care.
> 
> I must say that after I read your initial post Fred, I was quite taken aback. So I re-read it. And re-read it again. Then I read all of your responses that followed hoping to get some type of contextual validation that your post was not as pompous and elitist as it seemed, but so far I have yet to see any reason to believe otherwise.
> 
> ...


I'm certainly not going to flame you but I just wanted to mention that the _*major*_ purpose of me having these meets is to have guys like Fred, Keith Turner, Matt Hall, Leon etc come out and lend their expertise to us guys without as much experience. They and others were available all day to anyone needing their help and I applaud them for taking the time and expense to do so! .


----------



## MiloX (May 22, 2005)

I totally get that Marv. What you are doing out there is awesome, and the work that you do day in and day out to support all of us is fantastic. Same goes to Fred and everyone else mentioned. I am thrilled that I finally get to meet Keith next week. 

And Arc offering up that sweet amp for the raffle shows awesome support and dedication. 

Like I said... My intent was not to question anybody's integrity, or dedication to the hobby. 

Marv, if you got the impression that I was in any way speaking negatively about the meet or all of the time, effort, and dollars invested to make it happen, I sincerely apologize for that. That is not my intent at all. 

Here's where I am coming from:

If I came to the meet, and my car sounded like poo... I would WANT guys like Fred to tell me that, and help me make it sound better. Not to whisper about it in a side-bar. Again, I was not there... but by reading this thread it really seems like that is what happened! In the absence of any real competition scene where judges can help break your system down, your BBQ is the best opportunity for that to occur. 

I am just a bit disappointed. I hope I am completely off base. I just went through the thread again... and from what I have read... I don't see anything to lead me to believe otherwise.


----------



## Mr Marv (Aug 19, 2005)

MiloX said:


> I totally get that Marv. What you are doing out there is awesome, and the work that you do day in and day out to support all of us is fantastic. Same goes to Fred and everyone else mentioned. I am thrilled that I finally get to meet Keith next week.
> 
> And Arc offering up that sweet amp for the raffle shows awesome support and dedication.
> 
> ...


No worries Milo and thanks for the kudos!  I did not think you were speaking negatively about the event at all and although I must admit I did not re-read the entire thread I do understand where you are coming from (based on what you said after re-reading). I can't speak as to what Fred said as I wasn't in the cars with him but I would like to believe he did mention to the owners his opinions as that's what it was all about! BTW, all the guys were a great help and you're a lucky one if you get to have the benefit of Keith Turners expertise!


----------



## MiloX (May 22, 2005)

Mr Marv said:


> No worries Milo and thanks for the kudos!  I did not think you were speaking negatively about the event at all and although I must admit I did not re-read the entire thread I do understand where you are coming from (based on what you said after re-reading). I can't speak as to what Fred said as I wasn't in the cars with him but I would like to believe he did mention to the owners his opinions as that's what it was all about! BTW, all the guys were a great help and you're a lucky one if you get to have the benefit of Keith Turners expertise!


Most welcome sir. I am really looking forward having KT break my car down.


----------



## legend94 (Mar 15, 2006)

Mr Marv said:


> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15286&highlight=picture+depot


damn marv
in a few years you will have to rent out a lot large enough for a carnival


----------



## MiloX (May 22, 2005)

So Fred and I were able to chat about this at dinner the other night. First of all, Fred, thanks for picking up the tab!!!!

We had a great conversation regarding this post. I'll admit that I got a bit riled up. I think we are totally in agreement with the approach. It starts with blocking and tackling... getting driver placement as clost to "right" as possible, and then breaking out the processor. I also agree that adding more components into the signal path can wreak havoc on the signal. It's why I am tossing the H701 after MECA finals. Just going to use the onboard processing on the DC amps. 

As far as the main beef I had... I was totally off-base, for that I will publicly apologize. Fred, I now realize that you were pulled in 5000 different directions and just didn't have the time necessary to help everyone get their ish sounding right. Like I said before... If I was wrong... I'll STFU. 

Consider this post me Shutting the f up!

Mad love ya'll!


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

Impressed to see someone own up to the less than pleasant side of the audio game 

Props to Fred & MiloX


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

I agree with MiloX. I think you can either rebuild your car OR learn to correct those problems electronically. Neither method is "superior" to the other as I see it, and both have their limitations and advantages. In fact using both in conjuction often tends to yield the best results.

Fwiw, I think it's also possible to have a setup that posseses greater realism, but doesn't necessarily reproduce the recording accurately.


----------

