# Best SQ head unit for iDevice



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

I'm currently searching for a car head unit to meet my "audiophile" needs. The majority of my music library is on my iPhone, excluding some of my lossless music that won't fit on 64GB. So I really would prefer to connect my iPhone via USB to the head unit and play back my music that way, changing songs on the iPhone. 
I currently have two JL 10W7 subwoofers in a sealed enclosure powered by an HD 750 amp. I'm planning to purchase Focal KRX3's or KRX2's, which ever will sound better in my Genesis Coupe with the best amplifier to power them (currently undecided). I'll also purchase some cheaper coaxial speakers for the rear. Most likely Focal Access coaxial. If you guys have any recommendations for speakers, please feel free to chime in. 

So I figured: "Why don't I contact Focal and ask them what head unit they recommend". So I contacted them and they informed me that modern head units use a secondary DAC/pre-amp for the USB input. They said iDevices will sound like rubbish unless I buy their expensive Focal iBox. This sounded incorrect to me so I then contacted Pioneer, since I was already eyeing the DEH-80PRS. The Pioneer engineers replied saying that, "No the head unit uses the Burr-Brown DAC for USB input". _So Focal gave me incorrect information..._

*Now for the important part: I'm considering the DEH-80PRS, but only because I want the best sound quality. I don't need all the bells and whistles, SQ is my main concern. A double DIN touch screen would look better in my Genesis but that's not my primary concern. Again I do not need Navi, App syncing, video playback, none of the add ons are important to me, just SOUND QUALITY.*

By the way this is my first post! Thanks in advance for any help.


----------



## 69Voltage (Jul 30, 2013)

I also use an iPhone/iPod for my music and I needed a double DIN touchscreen HU. I narrowed my choices down to a Kenwood DDX790(didn't want to pay extra for the default NAV), the Pioneer X8500bhs and the Sony 701HD. 

After a lot of research, I chose the Kenwood. The Sony was geared towards Andriod and the Pioneer lost out barely to the Kenwood after researching. The price difference between the two is minimal.

Hopefully someone who has had experience with those units can give more input


----------



## neo_styles (Oct 18, 2012)

P99 is the mamma jamma for iDevice-friendly HUs. Full DAC bypass, auto EQ/TA, copper chassis, no onboard amp, and just looks so PRETTY sitting in the dash. Just get ready to fork over some serious cash for one.


----------



## 69Voltage (Jul 30, 2013)

neo_styles said:


> P99 is the mamma jamma for iDevice-friendly HUs. Full DAC bypass, auto EQ/TA, copper chassis, no onboard amp, and just looks so PRETTY sitting in the dash. Just get ready to fork over some serious cash for one.


But the OP states he would prefer a double DIN to go with the look of his vehicle.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

I kinda went through the same exercise, but in the end didn't go for a headunit at all. Built a CarPC that runs XBMC. XBMC has AirPlay built in...  The car runs a wifi hotspot to which the CarPC connects as well as the phone. 

Then just Airplay it to the car.


----------



## neo_styles (Oct 18, 2012)

kapone said:


> I kinda went through the same exercise, but in the end didn't go for a headunit at all. Built a CarPC that runs XBMC. XBMC has AirPlay built in...  The car runs a wifi hotspot to which the CarPC connects as well as the phone.
> 
> Then just Airplay it to the car.


What's the bitrate on that stream, though?


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

neo_styles said:


> What's the bitrate on that stream, though?


Airplay itself does not mangle the stream in anyway. If the source sends the stream as lossless, it arrives at the destination as lossless.

Any limitations are imposed by the source and/or destination. Since the CarPC is running Windows 7, XBMC has full support for lossless even over Airplay.


----------



## neo_styles (Oct 18, 2012)

kapone said:


> Airplay itself does not mangle the stream in anyway. If the source sends the stream as lossless, it arrives at the destination as lossless.
> 
> Any limitations are imposed by the source and/or destination. Since the CarPC is running Windows 7, XBMC has full support for lossless even over Airplay.


Then that's a definite plus. I normally cringe when people say theyre submitting any media wirelessly due to the heavy transcoding required for play over BT, but it's good to know the Airplay protocols don't act the same.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

pure i20 doc using a 12v to 7.5v converter. go rca into your deck.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

neo_styles said:


> Then that's a definite plus. I normally cringe when people say theyre submitting any media wirelessly due to the heavy transcoding required for play over BT, but it's good to know the Airplay protocols don't act the same.


Actually, while this was one of the benefits when I decided on the setup, I don't really use it that much. Reason being.. Plex. 

I run a Plex server at home that sits on top of all my media. Since the car has wifi/Internet connectivity, I can access my entire library directly in XBMC (small plugin required, PlexBMC) in the car. That's straight lossless to the car. And Verizon's 4G is quite enough for everything... 

The Airplay functionality comes in very handy though, when me and my wife are on roadtrips. She fires up her iPad in the car (hooked to the same network) and trolls Youtube for stuff that she can play in the car.

While her choice of media is....well...hers...  the fact that she can do it in the car is reward enough. Keeps her happy.


----------



## ccapil (Jun 1, 2013)

If u have the money, go IStreamer to bit ten or bit one. Do u want optical output? I'm currently running iPad in my dash to a Kenwood top of the range single din, 3 preouts, time alignment active eq etc. If not the Kenwood look at the Sony range GE I think, u can control it from the I device with app control or the pioneer 80prs is solid


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

WestCo said:


> pure i20 doc using a 12v to 7.5v converter. go rca into your deck.


Most head units bypass the iPod DAC now. Hell, you can even search on Crutchfield with a filter of "bypass iPod DAC".


----------



## gtsdohcvvtli (Aug 17, 2011)

TBH focal wasn't entirely incorrect. They did say the majority. And I'm pretty sure the majority don't use super awesome DACs.


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

I'm told my Alpine uses it's Burr-Brown 24 bit for the USB connection... but I could be wrong. Regardless - good luck finding a true SQ oriented 2-DIN with a USB. Someone forgot to make one of those (aka, Pioneer forgot to make a 2-DIN 99!)


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

neo_styles said:


> P99 is the mamma jamma for iDevice-friendly HUs. Full DAC bypass, auto EQ/TA, copper chassis, no onboard amp, and just looks so PRETTY sitting in the dash. Just get ready to fork over some serious cash for one.


I considered getting one to replace my DEH-80POS. Unfortunately, my hate for Pioneer runs as deep as my hate for Ford, Alpine PDX amplifiers, and Linear Power.

I also considered an Alpine HU, with the RUX, and a H800. While that would look nice in my dash, I don't know if I will do it or not.

Next option is an Alpine or Kenwood HU with a 3sixty.3.


----------



## neo_styles (Oct 18, 2012)

ChrisB said:


> I considered getting one to replace my DEH-80POS. Unfortunately, my hate for Pioneer runs as deep as my hate for Ford, Alpine PDX amplifiers, and Linear Power.
> 
> I also considered an Alpine HU, with the RUX, and a H800. While that would look nice in my dash, I don't know if I will do it or not.
> 
> Next option is an Alpine or Kenwood HU with a 3sixty.3.


What?! I thought LP was the best SQ ever...

I feel your pain. Just ditched a DD Pio for a single-din Arsenal deck. I don't use an iPhone so don't really care about integration

Sent from my SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> Most head units bypass the iPod DAC now. Hell, you can even search on Crutchfield with a filter of "bypass iPod DAC".


Bypassing the ipod dac is important, I am suggesting using the dac on the i20 and not the dac on the deck.

The dac on the pure i20 is very good, better than that in most source units to my ears. The i 20 has a lot of neat features including both optical and digital coaxial out. Rca output trumps the ipod dac for most decks, that is the reason to use it.

Yes the p99 is king for ipod, not for CD IMHO... The dac for ipod and dac for cd are independent. I actually preferred listening to pandora than most cd's with that deck. The dac for cd's is kind of clinical, not super fun to listen to, but very clean with low noise.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

Since we are on the topic, my latest plan is to use the i20 and go digital coax into an mda5000. From there aux into a panasonic bottle head then into a ps8 for processing. 

Great dac + tube sound + processing ^.^


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1HkUhd4t8I
Speakers arent so great, neither is the mic.
But it makes the music sound sooo good.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

ChrisB said:


> I considered getting one to replace my DEH-80POS. Unfortunately, my hate for Pioneer runs as deep as my hate for Ford, Alpine PDX amplifiers, and Linear Power.
> 
> I also considered an Alpine HU, with the RUX, and a H800. While that would look nice in my dash, I don't know if I will do it or not.
> 
> Next option is an Alpine or Kenwood HU with a 3sixty.3.


Alpine HU (with optical), rux, and the 800 would be superior to the 3sixty.
You would love it...

I would take that combo any day vs the p99...


----------



## deeppinkdiver (Feb 4, 2011)

Im in the market for a new deck, budget is pretty open. I like the idea of a DD but want the SQ for my ipod/phone music as well. Nav would be cool but not needed.

Ive been tooling around with the XBMC at home and love it, which makes me wonder about a carPC instead like kapone did. Im not a savy PC builder, at all.. Im sure I could build one for what Im looking to spend on either an Alpine or Kenwood HD. But I lack the know how. Id love to feed my car with Spotify wireless and connect/dock to home from the car.

Im up for suggestions/ideas also.

Car is 09 xB


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

My reasoning for a CarPC vs Head unit was relatively simple. Most modern head units are nothing more than customized computers, generally with a Linux/Windows CE/QNX front end. But they are closed platforms, you cannot customize them, for the most part.

A Windows based PC offers far more "openness" and customization possibilities. And Windows 7 is stable, rock solid stable. In addition, with SSDs, the boot times for PCs is now lickety split quick. My CarPC goes from turning the key in the ignition to XBMC active in 11 seconds. That's a cold boot, not resume from hibernation or anything.

Now, where the typical PC motherboards fall short is the audio side of things. That does need to be addressed. I chose to go a USB DAC route (I'm using the EMU 0404 USB), but that cat can be skinned in many ways.

Next problem is front end. Windows 7 has the excellent Windows Media Center built in, if all you're looking for is music and video playback. You really don't anything else, and it is a "10ft UI", meaning, it is designed to be viewed from a distance. If you want additional features, then you dive into the deep dark world of front ends... . But frankly, there's nothing that can beat XBMC in terms of sheer functionality.

The problem with XBMC (and the default skin it comes with) is that it is not really designed for viewing on small screens, what you typically see in a car. Changing the front end to Quartz (which is very Apple TVisque) brings it closer to a small screen friendly viewing experience. I think what XBMC really needs a skin designed specifically for car applications. (I'm building one at the moment, but we'll see if I release it into the wild or not).

Building the actual PC is relatively simple these days. Choose a modern ITX motherboard, a proven automotive power supply (M4-ATX/M2-ATX/others), and your choice of storage. The case for the PC depends on where you're gonna mount it. Lots of options there.

I'm mounting my carPC on the false floor that I'm building, so my restriction was height, not length or width. I eventually went with a chopped up 1U case that holds everything.










That's an Asrock Z77e ITX motherboard, an M4-ATX power supply, a 120GB SSD, and a 1TB 2.5" hard drive. Everything else is external to the PC. It runs Windows 7 and XBMC and a few other custom bits.


----------



## deeppinkdiver (Feb 4, 2011)

Very impressive post. I didn't understand all of it of course because well I'm not a PC guy...

I guess my question for you Mr. Kapone, Are you in the position of wanting to or being able to support someone else's habit? Given some more details I might be interested in having something like this built for me. If something like that would interest you let me know by PM. I'd be happy to exchange phone numbers with you and talk over details of what I would like to be able to do.




In the spirit of DIY, I have no problem trying to do something like this myself with the proper guidance. Either way get in touch with me if you don't mind


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

Deeppink - I'll be happy to help in general, but the problem in actually building it for others, is that no one wants to pay the price. Knowledge is power and doesn't come cheap....in theory.

What would you pay for a CarPC built on your requirements, ready to go, fully assembled, ready to be hooked into the car?


----------



## deeppinkdiver (Feb 4, 2011)

I would be willing to discuss that on a personal level. I'm a contractor myself I know what it takes to get things done by other people, That doesn't scare me.

I prefer you give me a ballpark of what it would take to make your time worth it to do something like what we're talking about. Im not afraid to pay for quality parts or service. I need an idea so I can compare my options.

You can ask anybody that I've dealt with on a personal level on here, I only run high-end product and I'm not afraid to pay for it!


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

I'd rather not go through the trouble of building a car PC. Space is limited in my coupe. Although in theory you could output digital coaxial direct from the car PC to a bit one or bit ten. Not sure why you would use a USB DAC. What do you guys with car PC's use to control the volume?


69Voltage said:


> I also use an iPhone/iPod for my music and I needed a double DIN touchscreen HU. I narrowed my choices down to a Kenwood DDX790(didn't want to pay extra for the default NAV), the Pioneer X8500bhs and the Sony 701HD.
> 
> After a lot of research, I chose the Kenwood. The Sony was geared towards Andriod and the Pioneer lost out barely to the Kenwood after researching. The price difference between the two is minimal.
> 
> Hopefully someone who has had experience with those units can give more input


The problem with the DDX790 is that in only has a 3-band equalizer. I don't think that's enough. Again I don't have to have a double DIN. I'm trying to avoid spending over $1000 total for the sound processing/head unit. But if I really need a bit one or bit ten for SQ I may have to go that route. Keep in mind this is merely for day to day listening and not for competing.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

> I'd rather not go through the trouble of building a car PC. Space is limited in my coupe. Although in theory you could output digital coaxial direct from the car PC to a bit one or bit ten. Not sure why you would use a USB DAC. What do you guys with car PC's use to control the volume?


I use an MS-8, which has no digital input, hence the DAC. As far as volume control goes, my CarPC is hooked into the OEM BMW radio, and the volume in Windows is fixed. The volume control is done by the BMW radio.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

kapone said:


> I use an MS-8, which has no digital input, hence the DAC. As far as volume control goes, my CarPC is hooked into the OEM BMW radio, and the volume in Windows is fixed. The volume control is done by the BMW radio.


By hooked in I hope you mean that you are simply using the volume knob for control. If you are connecting the source to the stock head unit and then the car PC there will be a significant loss in audio quality.


WestCo said:


> Alpine HU (with optical), rux, and the 800 would be superior to the 3sixty.
> You would love it...
> 
> I would take that combo any day vs the p99...


I'm interested in this. But I recently spoke with a gentleman who's worked in car audio for 20 years and runs one of the most reputable car/home theater shops in Florida. He told me he ran an Alpine unit with the Imprint processor for several years and then switched to a Kenwood eXcelon. He said the Kenwood sounded far superior, despite having no automatic EQ or time correction. Perhaps Alpine has improved on the technology but I can't believe there isn't a stand alone head unit solution out there with an equal level of sound processing.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

> By hooked in I hope you mean that you are simply using the volume knob for control. If you are connecting the source to the stock head unit and then the car PC there will be a significant loss in audio quality.


I'm not sure I follow...

The DAC's output goes to the CD signal inputs on the OEM HU (The BMW radio has inputs for a CD changer). The DAC/Windows volume is fixed. The HU controls the volume.


----------



## 13SQCivic (Sep 29, 2013)

If you decide to go the single din route I have a brand spanking new p99rs


----------



## jensclaudius (Sep 10, 2012)

I use my iphone4s - HRT iStreamer - Alpine H800 - Amps and it works great!


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

kapone said:


> I'm not sure I follow...
> 
> The DAC's output goes to the CD signal inputs on the OEM HU (The BMW radio has inputs for a CD changer). The DAC/Windows volume is fixed. The HU controls the volume.


As long as the OEM head unit is not doing any additional sound processing you should be ok. But if it is going to the input there may be some sound processing that takes place. For example if I did this with my stock head unit it would equalize the sound using it's ****ty 3-band equalizer designed for the stock system.



13SQCivic said:


> If you decide to go the single din route I have a brand spanking new p99rs


Please PM me a price on that.


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

NateZ28 said:


> By hooked in I hope you mean that you are simply using the volume knob for control. If you are connecting the source to the stock head unit and then the car PC there will be a significant loss in audio quality.
> 
> I'm interested in this. But I recently spoke with a gentleman who's worked in car audio for 20 years and runs one of the most reputable car/home theater shops in Florida. He told me he ran an Alpine unit with the Imprint processor for several years and then switched to a Kenwood eXcelon. He said the Kenwood sounded far superior, despite having no automatic EQ or time correction.


I agree.

If you look at the DNN990, it has a 13 band EQ and time alignment built in. If you want to go the cheaper route, the Kenwood Excelon units have had the same basic internals for the past few years and the same processing options. They have been way ahead of the game. Therefore, you could always purchase a previous years top model.

Look at the 9980HD, and 9990HD as well.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

The BMW OEM radio has no processing in it. The processing is done by the DSP amp, which I've already junked. Once the radio has converted to analog operation (by junking the DSP amp) it does offer tone and fader controls. 

Since I'm using only the FL and FR signals from the radio to the MS-8, the fader is meaningless and is set to default. The "tone" controls (bass and treble) are set to the default midway point, which produces a completely flat signal on the output. This has been measured by many people with some heavy duty equipment.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> I agree.
> 
> If you look at the DNN990, it has a 13 band EQ and time alignment built in. If you want to go the cheaper route, the Kenwood Excelon units have had the same basic internals for the past few years and the same processing options. They have been way ahead of the game. Therefore, you could always purchase a previous years top model.
> 
> Look at the 9980HD, and 9990HD as well.


Those are a bit pricey. Is there a huge difference in SQ between a 9-band parametric EQ and a 13-band? 
Is there a difference in DAC's (for example Burr-Brown) or are they all basically the same nowadays?

How much difference in sound quality would I hear between using the 80PRS and saying a bit one/ten processor?


----------



## jensclaudius (Sep 10, 2012)

I have a/b tested the p99rs and the 80prs using the iPhone. 89prs was so far away in SQ, sounded flat and hard and lost details.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

jensclaudius said:


> I have a/b tested the p99rs and the 80prs using the iPhone. 89prs was so far away in SQ, sounded flat and hard and lost details.


Was that a blind ab test?


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

jensclaudius said:


> I have a/b tested the p99rs and the 80prs using the iPhone. 89prs was so far away in SQ, sounded flat and hard and lost details.


Which sounded bad? The 80PRS or 99PRS?


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

NateZ28 said:


> Those are a bit pricey. Is there a huge difference in SQ between a 9-band parametric EQ and a 13-band?
> Is there a difference in DAC's (for example Burr-Brown) or are they all basically the same nowadays?
> 
> How much difference in sound quality would I hear between using the 80PRS and saying a bit one/ten processor?


You can find all of them for less than $1k which you stated was your limit. The 80PRS is only good for one thing; going fully active really cheap. If you aren't going fully active, then I would look elsewhere.

I would suggest limiting and listing what you have to have in a headunit. You seem to be all over the board so the responses you are getting are also.


----------



## jensclaudius (Sep 10, 2012)

The 80prs sounded bad, it was so obvious that no blindtest was needed. Used dls ultimate amps, gladen 80 fullrange and dls sc6 mid and dls rw10sub. P99rs is a really good machine, used mine for some years in my competitioncar.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> You can find all of them for less than $1k which you stated was your limit. The 80PRS is only good for one thing; going fully active really cheap. If you aren't going fully active, then I would look elsewhere.
> 
> I would suggest limiting and listing what you have to have in a headunit. You seem to be all over the board so the responses you are getting are also.


I apologize for being vague. I'm really looking for the best I can get for the price, with the best sound. If I have to spend $1000 to get good sound quality I'll just have to do it.

As far as going fully active vs passive, I'm undecided on that. Most have told me the Focal KRX series is hard to beat with passive crossovers. Again I am completely open to recommendations. I'm looking for accurate sound reproduction, sound separation, and a large sound stage. I know I'm asking a lot for car audio but my current living situation doesn't allow me to listen to my music at full volume...


jensclaudius said:


> The 80prs sounded bad, it was so obvious that no blindtest was needed. Used dls ultimate amps, gladen 80 fullrange and dls sc6 mid and dls rw10sub. P99rs is a really good machine, used mine for some years in my competitioncar.


Are there any other head units that are cheaper than the P99RS that are equal in sound quality?


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

I would buy this head unit and be done with it. You will have a 13 band graphic EQ, full iPod control with iPod DAC bypass (which you wanted), Burr Brown Op Amps, NAV, T/A, very extensive crossovers with 4 slope settings, etc.

These units even give you the option to have a 13 band Right/Left EQ if you aren't running rear drivers. 

Kenwood Excelon DNX9990HD RB 6 95" Navigation w GPS HD Radio Bluetooth Pandora 019048198600 | eBay


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> I would buy this head unit and be done with it. You will have a 13 band graphic EQ, full iPod control with iPod DAC bypass (which you wanted), Burr Brown Op Amps, NAV, T/A, very extensive crossovers with 4 slope settings, etc.
> 
> These units even give you the option to have a 13 band Right/Left EQ if you aren't running rear drivers.
> 
> Kenwood Excelon DNX9990HD RB 6 95" Navigation w GPS HD Radio Bluetooth Pandora 019048198600 | eBay


Buying a refurb item from ebay makes me a little nervous. I'm not sure about how the warranty works on that.
There's a lot of features on that unit I don't need, like the Navi. I don't care about controlling the iPod from the HU, I'll control it by hand. Don't all head units with USB iPod input bypass the iPod's DAC? Otherwise the iDevice would be converting the signal to Analog and then back to digital.

My plan is to build a Nexus 7 into the dash above where the head unit goes. There is a kit for my car that makes it easy to install. I can use the Nexus 7 for navigation. This is why I only need a head unit for media playback.


----------



## jtaudioacc (Apr 6, 2010)

i feel without a good install, real DSP and a great tune, you'll have far more things to worry about than the purest signal of the idevice. 

but, what i will be switching to in the not too distant future is, ipad-pure i20-h800. i may use the seagate wifi drive and stream uncompressed music to the ipad. bigred is doing so with great success as his win at the Ca. MECA finals with this combo showed. but, you should also hear his truck running 320k spotify.

i'll be switching from a P99RS, btw, which is awesome, obviously.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

jtaudioacc said:


> i feel without a good install, real DSP and a great tune, you'll have far more things to worry about than the purest signal of the idevice.
> 
> but, what i will be switching to in the not too distant future is, ipad-pure i20-h800. i may use the seagate wifi drive and stream uncompressed music to the ipad. bigred is doing so with great success as his win at the Ca. MECA finals with this combo showed. but, you should also hear his truck running 320k spotify.
> 
> i'll be switching from a P99RS, btw, which is awesome, obviously.


Bypassing the pre-amp and DAC of the iDevice is extremely important. Otherwise you're using the low power pre-amp/DAC intended for headphones.

You're saying the Pure i20 dock has a better DAC than $1,000+ head units? That's pretty sad if true. But are you saying that you're using the DAC in the i20 and the DAC in the h800? That doesn't seem like a good idea...

A lot of people have mentioned the H800. That seems interesting...


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

NateZ28 said:


> Buying a refurb item from ebay makes me a little nervous. I'm not sure about how the warranty works on that.
> There's a lot of features on that unit I don't need, like the Navi. I don't care about controlling the iPod from the HU, I'll control it by hand. Don't all head units with USB iPod input bypass the iPod's DAC? Otherwise the iDevice would be converting the signal to Analog and then back to digital.
> 
> My plan is to build a Nexus 7 into the dash above where the head unit goes. There is a kit for my car that makes it easy to install. I can use the Nexus 7 for navigation. This is why I only need a head unit for media playback.


Your original post suggests you want a double din screen. Now you don't. As I stated, if you are really looking for help then state what is important to you and what you really want.

Most better decks are going to use the same quality dac for iPod input as they will for CD playback. Therefore, pick a deck that suits your needs (whatever those actually are) and sounds good to you. Done.

I do agree with jt. If the rest of your install isn't up to par, you shouldn't be worrying about the minor playback loss from a less than superior DAC.


----------



## ecbmxer (Dec 1, 2010)

OP, look into some of the Pioneer Appradios as well. If you have an iPhone or android, you can get an app that will essentially mirror the phone onto the screen, with any and all apps you want. I believe that is only supported for the Appradio 2 and maybe non iOS7 phones. However, you would need all sound processing to happen externally, since the Appradios don't have that great of sound tuning tools. But the prices on the appradio 2's are low enough now that you could probably get one plus an RF 3sixty or Bit Ten for the same as a comparable double din unit.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> Your original post suggests you want a double din screen. Now you don't. As I stated, if you are really looking for help then state what is important to you and what you really want.
> 
> Most better decks are going to use the same quality dac for iPod input as they will for CD playback. Therefore, pick a deck that suits your needs (whatever those actually are) and sounds good to you. Done.


Yes I said I would prefer a double DIN simply for aesthetics, but I don't need all of the other bells and whistles not related to sound quality. The unit you recommended is overkill and retails in the $1,400 range. I'm not trying to come across as rude or condescending and I really do appreciate any advice given.

My needs are simply this: Getting the best sound quality possible in my car, but not outside the range of human hearing. Granted when I listen to music I can usually pick out details that many people would not. I'm not going to compete with my system. I just don't want the head unit or DSP to be a bottleneck.


----------



## jtaudioacc (Apr 6, 2010)

NateZ28 said:


> Bypassing the pre-amp and DAC of the iDevice is extremely important. Otherwise you're using the low power pre-amp/DAC intended for headphones.
> 
> You're saying the Pure i20 dock has a better DAC than $1,000+ head units? That's pretty sad if true. But are you saying that you're using the DAC in the i20 and the DAC in the h800? That doesn't seem like a good idea...
> 
> A lot of people have mentioned the H800. That seems interesting...


no, i will be, as others are, using toslink out to the H800. with the ease of connecting the analog outputs to the H800 also, it's an easy button push to compare digital to analog.

H800 vs P99RS as far as DAC, hard to say, but not sure it's going to matter enough. both are excellent and H800 ftw in processing power.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

jtaudioacc said:


> no, i will be, as others are, using toslink out to the H800. with the ease of connecting the analog outputs to the H800 also, it's an easy button push to compare digital to analog.
> 
> H800 vs P99RS as far as DAC, hard to say, but not sure it's going to matter enough. both are excellent and H800 ftw in processing power.


The more I read about the H800 the more interested I am. It sounds like it may be superior to the Bit one, not sure about the Bit ten.

How are you avoiding using the DAC of the i20? Is there a bypass feature built in? Is there not another option for connecting an iDevice to H800? I need some type of volume control up front, so I'm guessing I would also need the RUX-C800 unit.


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

NateZ28 said:


> The more I read about the H800 the more interested I am. It sounds like it may be superior to the Bit one, not sure about the Bit ten.
> 
> How are you avoiding using the DAC of the i20? Is there a bypass feature built in? Is there not another option for connecting an iDevice to H800? I need some type of volume control up front, so I'm guessing I would also need the RUX-C800 unit.


Because he is going to output digitally. There is no need for a conversion.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> Because he is going to output digitally. There is no need for a conversion.


So when converting the USB input to coaxial there is no conversion or transcoding?


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

NateZ28 said:


> So when converting the USB input to coaxial there is no conversion or transcoding?


He clearly stated that he will be using Toslink out to the H800.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> He clearly stated that he will be using Toslink out to the H800.


He said:


jtaudioacc said:


> ...what i will be switching to in the not too distant future is, *ipad - pure i20 - alpine h800.*


Am I misunderstanding what input source he is using? Because if it is coming from his iPhone it would have to be converted to Toslink. Plus the iPhone 4 has the capability of outputting analog via the 30-pin dock connector. 

I also don't want to control volume from the iPhone. You guys probably hate me by now. But whenever I try to skip to the next song from the new music player I always end up adjusting the volume. So whatever connection I use I want to disable the volume control on the iDevice and use a knob or button.


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

NateZ28 said:


> He said:
> 
> Am I misunderstanding what input source he is using? Because if it is coming from his iPhone it would have to be converted to Toslink. Plus the iPhone 4 has the capability of outputting analog via the 30-pin dock connector.
> 
> I also don't want to control volume from the iPhone. You guys probably hate me by now. But whenever I try to skip to the next song from the new music player I always end up adjusting the volume. So whatever connection I use I want to disable the volume control on the iDevice and use a knob or button.


You answered your own question. The iPad. I don't think you are understanding.

iPad digitally out to the iPure, digitally out of the iPure via Toslink to the H800.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

jensclaudius said:


> The 80prs sounded bad, it was so obvious that no blindtest was needed. Used dls ultimate amps, gladen 80 fullrange and dls sc6 mid and dls rw10sub. P99rs is a really good machine, used mine for some years in my competitioncar.


Oh well.

OP, you'd be doing yourself a great favor by going to the link in my signature before putting any stock in "obvious" *subjective* experiences.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> You answered your own question. The iPad. I don't think you are understanding.
> 
> iPad digitally out to the iPure, digitally out of the iPure via Toslink to the H800.


I understand that. But what the dock is doing is reading the file system on the iDevice and converting that to digital audio data. So some type of conversion is taking place. It's not the same as say if the iPhone actually had optical output. The claim of the makers of the Pure i20 is that it uses "digital end-to-end technology". But whether that means it's a 1:1 output copy of the music file depends on the software used on the dock.

When using the dock my guess is that volume control is done from the iDevice, correct?



t3sn4f2 said:


> Oh well.
> 
> OP, you'd be doing yourself a great favor by going to the link in my signature before putting any stock in "obvious" *subjective* experiences.


I understand this and I've known that for years. It's the infamous placebo effect. I would like to see some raw data supporting his claim...


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

t3sn4f2 said:


> Oh well.
> 
> OP, you'd be doing yourself a great favor by going to the link in my signature before putting any stock in "obvious" *subjective* experiences.


I choose to believe what my own ears tell me, not some guy on the internet. They have never failed me.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

NateZ28 said:


> I understand that. But what the dock is doing is reading the file system on the iDevice and converting that to digital audio data. So some type of conversion is taking place. *It's not the same as say if the iPhone actually had optical output.* The claim of the makers of the Pure i20 is that it uses "digital end-to-end technology". But whether that means it's a 1:1 output copy of the music file depends on the software used on the dock.
> 
> When using the dock my guess is that volume control is done from the iDevice, correct?


It's the same exact thing. Just a different physical software/hardware location performing the file -> toslink transformation. Now, if you feel that there is a difference in SQ between digital output sources, then that's a different topic.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

NateZ28 said:


> I understand that. But what the dock is doing is *reading the file system on the iDevice and converting that to digital audio data*. So some type of conversion is taking place. It's not the same as say if the iPhone actually had optical output. The claim of the makers of the Pure i20 is that it uses "digital end-to-end technology". But whether that means it's a 1:1 output copy of the music file depends on the software used on the dock.
> 
> When using the dock my guess is that volume control is done from the iDevice, correct?
> 
> ...


er....file system data *is* already digital.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

NateZ28 said:


> I understand that. But what the dock is doing is reading the file system on the iDevice and converting that to digital audio data. So some type of conversion is taking place. It's not the same as say if the iPhone actually had optical output. The claim of the makers of the Pure i20 is that it uses "digital end-to-end technology". But whether that means it's a 1:1 output copy of the music file depends on the software used on the dock.
> 
> When using the dock my guess is that volume control is done from the iDevice, correct?
> 
> ...


Volume is controlled by the iDevice with the pure i20, unless you use the digital outputs, which do not have volume associated with them.

I believe the sound I get from the i20 sound vibrant than that of the majority of the source units for car audio, decent top end and mids, bass is acceptable. Others may feel differently.

As for the article in your sig, many of our opinions are entirely subjective. Its important to remember at a certain level this ALL becomes subjective. However preforming drop in tests on source units can illuminate differences in the raw signal. 

I would go a step further and say that there is a HUGE difference in car audio sources. It is easy to dismiss these differences as being "all in our heads" or "magic."

Some of the sources I have used in the last 2 years. The Panasonic cq-tx5500w, the mda5000 (using an off brand unit with digital coax out), and the sony cdx-c90 with the xdp-4000x processor. It would be the most difficult to distinguish between the c90 and the mda. The tell take give away would be detail the 4000x, and the high end rolloff of the mda. Overall the mda is much more expensive and the 4000x gives more detail and has a better bass response. (One of the best processors for bass frequencies I have ever heard.) It would be a total toss up to which a given person would use.

To break this down easily for everyone concerned.
As far as equipment is concerned is has almost always boiled down to the source unit, followed by drivers, processing, amps, then rca cables. Admittedly any weak link in the chain is going to be devastating to the end sound. If you want the most flexibility for iDevices the best way to do that is getting a digital signal (digital coax, or optical) and sending that to a dac of your preference. The i20 does that in addition to being a stand alone dac, which to my ears is acceptable considering pretty much all the files I play are compressed. There are a few other dac's for iDevices out there, which the op may find better. I am just saying for 100$ it's pretty nice to my ears. 

Measuring the response from these DAC's is possible and could be done with a laptop and trueRTA direct from any source unit. The next step is interpreting the data, which would be a nightmere...


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

WestCo said:


> Volume is controlled by the iDevice with the pure i20, unless you use the digital outputs, which do not have volume associated with them.


Do you have anymore details on this? Last time I used mine with a 3gs and an older iOS with the 30 pin dock connector, it disabled the volume slider and delegated master volume control to the i20's internal master volume circuitry that applied simultaneously to both the digi and analog outputs. 

I assume that if that has changed, Apple has implemented some type of digital domain app volume control independent of the digital stream leaving the idevice and into the i20. Here's a screen shot of what would happen to the screen in i20 mode. Basically same as what you would get when connecting a line out dock.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Disclaimer: Results may vary based on the automotive power supply you use. If Clarion has something like *this* as a DC to DC PS on their flagship head unit (as well as others), don't think that you can just slap a cigarette lighter converter on it and expect the above result in *every* install.




t3sn4f2 said:


> Hey guys, just wanted to post up a Rightmark Audio Analyzer test I ran on my Pure i-20 iPod Dock.
> 
> This dock takes the digital bits from the iDevice and sends it to it's own built in DAC. It also has a bit-perfect digital Toslink and Coax output that can be used instead the DAC. That digital output bypasses the iPod's DAC as well.
> 
> ...


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

The XBMC skin (based off of Quartz) that I was talking about earlier. Still some work to be done, but it's fully functional.


----------



## deeppinkdiver (Feb 4, 2011)

^^ that is sweet!!!


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Are there any head units with a high quality DAC, DSP, and pre-amp that come close to the Alpine H800?


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

NateZ28 said:


> Are there any head units with a high quality DAC, DSP, and pre-amp that come close to the Alpine H800?


So now iPod input doesn't matter? Does going fully active matter?


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> So now iPod input doesn't matter? Does going fully active matter?


No iPhone input via USB is still my main priority. I'm just trying to figure out if there is an all-in-one solution rather than having to use an external DAC/DSP.
I'm not sure about going active vs passive. If active truly will sound better than high quality passive crossovers then I will go that route.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL (Jan 31, 2011)

It absolutely will sound better.


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> It absolutely will sound better.


Come on. You can't lay a blanket statement for every passive set up out there. This is the problem here at DIYMA. Everyone tells people to go active no matter the circumstances. It's ridiculous.

OP - I think I stated this previously. You need to figure out your system and then look for what supports that system. 
As stated before, if you are going to run passive, Kenwood and Alpine both have head units that come with a lot of processing internally. They both also use Burr Brown DAC's. I prefer the way the preamp sounds in the Kenwood. Other's will tell you there isn't a difference. Kenwood uses a 13 band graphic, and Alpine uses a 9 band parametric. They both include T/A and extensive passive crossover settings. I am referring to their top level units.

Now if you decide you want to run active, then you need an amp channel for every driver, and a full blown DSP. This will limit you to a handful of head units if you want an all in one.

You stated you don't care about iPod CONTROL in the head unit. If I were you then, and you want to run active, I would look for a used Clarion DRZ9255. If you want brand new and good build quality, then you have to rely on the P99RS. If you want crap build quality, and mediocre sound (IMO), then go for the 80PRS.


----------



## Timelessr1 (Feb 12, 2010)

My opinion is keep your factory head unit....run the high levels off it into a BitONE, let the bit one "de-equalize" the signal, and you can have a good starting sound quality. Then purchase a Pure i20 and use that to send a digital signal to the BitONE....now you can toggle back and forth betwen digital signal and yuor stock head unit. If your stock head has hand free calling , and steering wheel controls its a win-win. keep the stock speakers untill you ecide what you want to upgrade to...this way you dont buy un needed equipment right off the bat.

I personally had both a Pioneer Nav unit AND a Kenwood Nav unit...both over $1000...both annoyed the hell out of me...they both had some moronic engeneering behind them, so i went back to the stock head unit along with the digital input from the Pure i20 to a bit one.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Timelessr1 said:


> My opinion is keep your factory head unit....run the high levels off it into a BitONE, let the bit one "de-equalize" the signal, and you can have a good starting sound quality. Then purchase a Pure i20 and use that to send a digital signal to the BitONE....now you can toggle back and forth betwen digital signal and yuor stock head unit. If your stock head has hand free calling , and steering wheel controls its a win-win. keep the stock speakers untill you ecide what you want to upgrade to...this way you dont buy un needed equipment right off the bat.
> 
> I personally had both a Pioneer Nav unit AND a Kenwood Nav unit...both over $1000...both annoyed the hell out of me...they both had some moronic engeneering behind them, so i went back to the stock head unit along with the digital input from the Pure i20 to a bit one.


The stock HU in the Genesis is an absolute POS. Most modern head units have a steering wheel adapter and a microphone.

It looks like the pure i20 does not allow direct connection to an iPhone 5. But instead uses the 30-PIN old style connector. So the lightning adapter would have to be used, which has it's own built in DAC. This rules out the i20 for me. I would prefer a head unit or DSP with actual USB input. But it's starting to sound like modern head unit selection is a crap chute...


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

NateZ28 said:


> But it's starting to sound like modern head unit selection is a crap chute...


It can be. However, the true confusion is being created by your own indecisiveness; which is fine. Create a pros and cons list and then narrow your search based on YOUR needs and wants.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

NateZ28 said:


> But it's starting to sound like modern head unit selection is a crap chute...


Join the club....


----------



## Timelessr1 (Feb 12, 2010)

NateZ28 said:


> The stock HU in the Genesis is an absolute POS. Most modern head units have a steering wheel adapter and a microphone.
> 
> It looks like the pure i20 does not allow direct connection to an iPhone 5. But instead uses the 30-PIN old style connector. So the lightning adapter would have to be used, which has it's own built in DAC. This rules out the i20 for me. I would prefer a head unit or DSP with actual USB input. But it's starting to sound like modern head unit selection is a crap chute...


Actually you dont need the 30 pin to lighting connector....there are ways around it....like this cheap unit....has a lightning to usb....you could go 30 pin to USB, and then use this unit to go from usb to lightning

8-Pin Lightning Charging Dock for iPad Mini / iPad 4 - White - Free Shipping - DealExtreme

only DAC would be the bitone...


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> It can be. However, the true confusion is being created by your own indecisiveness; which is fine. Create a pros and cons list and then narrow your search based on YOUR needs and wants.


I want to directly connect my iPhone via USB to the unit. I want the best sound quality possible that my ears can realistically hear. I don't want to spend a fortune, so under $1000. Like I said I have been considering the Focal KRX3's or KRX2's. Most people seem to be recommending an active configuration. I want to eliminate the stock head unit and would like a way to directly control the sound volume, either knob or button. I don't like the dock idea, at least not the i20.

I can't think of anything more specific. I feel like I haven't really been indecisive. I just haven't liked the options that have been presented, other than the Car PC. The car PC + DSP might be the best solution, but expensive, unless there is a magical head unit out there no one has mentioned thus far.
I guess maybe I'm asking too much. I would figure with modern day technology there would be multiple solutions to suit my needs. But from this discussion I'm gathering that car head unit manufacturers don't really care about "audiophile" music listening.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

NateZ28 said:


> I want to directly connect my iPhone via USB to the unit. I want the best sound quality possible that my ears can realistically hear. I don't want to spend a fortune, so under $1000. Like I said I have been considering the Focal KRX3's or KRX2's. Most people seem to be recommending an active configuration. I want to eliminate the stock head unit and would like a way to directly control the sound volume, either knob or button. I don't like the dock idea, at least not the i20.
> 
> I can't think of anything more specific. I feel like I haven't really been indecisive. I just haven't liked the options that have been presented, other than the Car PC. The car PC + DSP might be the best solution, but expensive, unless there is a magical head unit out there no one has mentioned thus far.
> I guess maybe I'm asking too much. I would figure with modern day technology there would be multiple solutions to suit my needs. But from this discussion I'm gathering that car head unit manufacturers don't really care about "audiophile" music listening.


Your last sentence is correct... The focus today seems to be "how many features can I cram into a 180 x 50 mm panel?" and not "how good can I make this headunit sound".

I would go to a car audio shop or best buy and demo some decks with usb inputs and see if you can find one that is acceptable.

There are other docks available if your not keen on the i20. Crutchfield sells some. All the best in your search.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

NateZ28 said:


> The stock HU in the Genesis is an absolute POS. Most modern head units have a steering wheel adapter and a microphone.
> 
> It looks like the pure i20 does not allow direct connection to an iPhone 5. But instead uses the 30-PIN old style connector. So the lightning adapter would have to be used, which has it's own built in DAC. This rules out the i20 for me. I would prefer a head unit or DSP with actual USB input. But it's starting to sound like modern head unit selection is a crap chute...


The iPhone5 *moved* the DAC and other circuitry to external modules in order to reduce size and maintain a relative price point (arguably ). That however, like the internal DAC in previous generations, has nothing to do with the digital hardware path the i-20 uses. It's essentially simply providing a hardware converter in this case. The 30pin to lightning connector is needed to give the i-20 those digital pins. A lightning to USB won't work as the i-20 has no USB input.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

So I still haven't made up my mind. I think going active would probably be the best path but I am concerned about tuning an active system, as I have no experience doing so in a car audio installation. 
Should I ask the shop that will be installing my system what they recommend? Or is tuning the H800 easy enough that anyone with technical prowess can do it?


----------



## jtaudioacc (Apr 6, 2010)

NateZ28 said:


> So I still haven't made up my mind. I think going active would probably be the best path but I am concerned about tuning an active system, as I have no experience doing so in a car audio installation.
> Should I ask the shop that will be installing my system what they recommend? Or is tuning the H800 easy enough that anyone with technical prowess can do it?


tuning any active system with a dsp takes great talent, understanding and most of all a great set of ears.

without all that, this whole discussion really isn't going to matter much, honestly, imo. unless you're listening to a set of cans through the rca output. 

i would ask the shop. also, ask to listen to some cars they have done. you can decide if they sound good enough for you or not.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> Come on. You can't lay a blanket statement for every passive set up out there. This is the problem here at DIYMA. Everyone tells people to go active no matter the circumstances. It's ridiculous.



Yet oddly, mostly true. 

While some "passive" crossovers have more adjustability than others, by and large an active processing setup is vastly superior simply for it's ability to tailor the sound to the environment. Every car model is different and poses different challenges in tuning. A passive crossover designed for "best fit" is not optimal.
Yes, there are many factors that lend in the decision of which way to go (mostly cost based), but do you honestly believe that a passive setup can not be easily improved upon with the additional tools available via active dsp?


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

captainobvious said:


> Yet oddly, mostly true.
> 
> While some "passive" crossovers have more adjustability than others, by and large an active processing setup is vastly superior simply for it's ability to tailor the sound to the environment. Every car model is different and poses different challenges in tuning. A passive crossover designed for "best fit" is not optimal.
> Yes, there are many factors that lend in the decision of which way to go (mostly cost based), but do you honestly believe that a passive setup can not be easily improved upon with the additional tools available via active dsp?


My local audio installer claimed that the passive crossovers present in the KRX2/KRX3 component/3-way speakers are excellent. The last time I talked to them they usually recommend going passive. 
But that may be because I did not mention using a high end DPS like the H800.


----------



## Jagged Corn Flakes (Sep 10, 2013)

captainobvious said:


> Yet oddly, mostly true.
> 
> While some "passive" crossovers have more adjustability than others, by and large an active processing setup is vastly superior simply for it's ability to tailor the sound to the environment. Every car model is different and poses different challenges in tuning. A passive crossover designed for "best fit" is not optimal.
> Yes, there are many factors that lend in the decision of which way to go (mostly cost based), but do you honestly believe that a passive setup can not be easily improved upon with the additional tools available via active dsp?


Yes, I do believe that and my experience has proven it to me. There is nothing wrong with active. It's just not the end all be all that is preached on this website. Just because you may have heard some good sounding active set ups, it doesn't mean active is always better simply because you haven't heard the best sounding passive ones. 

Also, stop clumping active with DSP. That is the problem. Active is active. DSP can be applied to active and passive.


----------



## Konnan101 (Sep 12, 2006)

I have a p99 and absolutely love it. I previously owned a Clarion DRZ and find the p99 to be very comparable if not superior in SQ


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

Konnan101 said:


> I have a p99 and absolutely love it. I previously owned a Clarion DRZ and find the p99 to be very comparable if not superior in SQ


p99 rocks the ipod and an awesome fm tuner

drz is a bit more 3dimensional then the p99 for cd's


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

Konnan101 said:


> I have a p99 and absolutely love it. I previously owned a Clarion DRZ and find the p99 to be very comparable if not superior in SQ





WestCo said:


> p99 rocks the ipod and an awesome fm tuner
> 
> drz is a bit more 3dimensional then the p99 for cd's


Isn't the sound output nearly identical with the P99 and 80PRS? As shown by this comparison:


bikinpunk said:


> Seriously, where do you guys get these ideas the 80prs is so horrible? Aesthetically, it's hideous. But I own it and have tested it. It tests just as well as any other high end deck electronically. Buy based on features such as DSP, iPod. Bluetooth, etc and/or design style. But don't bother wasting your time comparing sonics as if there was really any audible difference (other than maybe the way the pre out voltage is incremented). If you know how to tune, ANY minute differences can be overcome (not that there are in reality anyway). Sweating indistinguishable differences is a waste of time.
> 
> I've got the data comparing it directly to the p99. Id be happy to post it for anyone who doubts what I say or just wants to see it. Trust me, if it were bad I wouldn't have removed the p99 and replaced it with the 80prs/mosconi DSP combo.
> 
> ...


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

NateZ28 said:


> Isn't the sound output nearly identical with the P99 and 80PRS? As shown by this comparison:


No, it's not, huge differences can easily be noticed...
P99rs - high clarity, semi clinical dac. great bass
p80 - a little warmer sound overall, mids sound a bit funky (off)
drz - warmest sound of the 3, mids aren't aggressive, very dynamic bass response similar to the p99 (pioneer's bass is hard to beat). However you get a more 3 dimensional quality with the drz which is manly due to the mids/midbass. It sounds like you are on stage with the band.

This was the same gentleman who compared an mx5000 to alpine double din and found no major differences. 

He has posted RTA curves with no explanation of what was being played through the source. 

2nd, the curves are similar but not the same. This is the same slippery slope that is degrading this hobby... Unit x is not equivalent to unit y. The p99 has a morel detailed and smooth sound then the 80prs.

These tests aren't comparing music, which is why they are flawed and deceiving. Through some hard rock or some Charlotte Church at those decks and you'll soon start to see huge differences in the sound.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

WestCo said:


> No, it's not, huge differences can easily be noticed...
> P99rs - high clarity, semi clinical dac. great bass
> p80 - a little warmer sound overall, mids sound a bit funky (off)
> drz - warmest sound of the 3, mids aren't aggressive, very dynamic bass response similar to the p99 (pioneer's bass is hard to beat). However you get a more 3 dimensional quality with the drz which is manly due to the mids/midbass. It sounds like you are on stage with the band.
> ...


okay, then. where is your data that backs up _your_ statements?
it's easy for me to say that product X sounds warmer than product Y if I don't have to provide proof (much less explain what 'warm' means to me, given it's such a subjective term). 

as far as me not knowing what I'm talking about, which is construed from your "this is the same guy who compared mcintosh to alpine...", feel free to go to my site below and view more information on various products I've tested. I may not know everything, but I do know that simply saying "oh, well it sounds better to me and you're wrong" isn't evidence enough. But, by all means, buy with your emotions. I'm not knocking it. I just wish people would realize it for what it is. let's swing it the other way: prove where I'm wrong in saying a current alpine DD "sounds worse" than a 15+ year old headunit (ballpark; I'm not going to look up the dates). Do you really think there's no way for technology to have progressed in the manner that would permit this? 

FWIW, that alpine DD is still in the car and has done pretty well for me the past few months. *shrugs*


Edit: I didn't want to spend much time on this but since you are the one who really doesn't seem to undestand what I've posted, let me clarify before this gets out of hand:



WestCo said:


> This was the same gentleman who compared an mx5000 to alpine double din and found no major differences.


Except that the alpine is much more modern and does completely fine in a double blind A/B test against the Mcintosh playing off the same power supply and the same source material. 



WestCo said:


> He has posted RTA curves with no explanation of what was being played through the source.


No. An RTA curve is not at all what I posted in regards to the 80prs/p99 results. That's not an RTA curve. 




WestCo said:


> 2nd, the curves are similar but not the same. .


Indeed, they aren't the 'exact' same. But for all intents and purposes, they are very much the same. FR is the single most contributing factor to audibility of distortion (it's called linear distortion) and they're tit for tat. The other measurements are so small in differences, any differences could easily be chalked up to measurement error and that's at the 0.0x% level. 

If you want to test with music, you do a double blind test. When I see someone here actually do that and document it with repeatable results that clearly show a winner, then you can point to that as much as you want. Until then, the measurement data speaks volumes for the acoustics and psychoacoustics that drive product purchases. There's a whole lot of money to be made here which is why more money is spent by smaller companies on marketing than real R&D. 



WestCo said:


> This is the same slippery slope that is degrading this hobby...


by the same token, your posts simply claiming my results as erroneous and instead expecting us to take your word for it based on a simple subjective opinion isn't really helping this hobby either, is it? 




WestCo said:


> The p99 has a morel detailed and smooth sound then the 80prs.


You can disagree with my results all you want; whether the disagreement has merit or not is another topic in and of itself. But until you can tell me something that really drives dissent in my objective results vs what you hear, then you're just posting for the sake of discrediting me which doesn't really do anything to help anyone here. But, like I said, it's the internet and you're welcome to do whatever you want. I just wish people wouldn't be so quick to dismiss objective data while expecting us to believe their simple hearing 'test' which is fundamentally flawed from the get-go. Which is typically all that took place. Leaders in the industry and science of audio spent countless years of their lives doing all sorts of real-world testing and the measurements we are provided today by well-regarded build houses, 3rd party sources, etc are based on those ideas of what is and isn't important. I post the data that matters and note the limitations where needed. It's up to the user to determine if it's helpful or not. The reason I backed off doing these kind of tests is because of replies like yours, TBH, though. A lot of people try to argue results they already don't understand yet provide nothing at all to back up their own claims. That's an uphill battle for me to fight and I just don't really care to fight it anymore. This reply being the one exception of late. 


FWIW, I'll be at the car audio championships in a couple weeks. If you'd like to talk about this subject in person, just track me down. I'm always up for an audio chat as long as it's after 10am. I'm not a mornin person and tend to gloss over when someone even mentions anything related to the hobby. 

- Erin


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

Erin,

the drz
stone in love demo on drz9255 - YouTube

the panasonic bottlehead
panny tube 3 - YouTube

the dva9861


the p99rs


All drop in tests, different songs same recording device. I know I will have to do some serious work with an HD mic to convince some of you that there is a major difference in source units. Challenge accepted.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

BTW, to answer the OP of the thread: I'd recommend the p99 simply based on it's form factor, built in DSP and USB input. It's my favorite all in one solution. So much so, I've owned it four times now. lol.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

WestCo said:


> Erin,
> 
> the drz
> stone in love demo on drz9255 - YouTube
> ...


I'll just be honest and say there's no way you're going to get me or anyone that really understands testing to derive any useful comparisons from what you've provided. I know that's going to sound dickish, but it's the truth.

you can accept the challenge all day, but the only proof I will even look at is one where you've done a double-blind test, along with numerous others, all within an incredibly fast time window of source selection swapping, with all variables eliminated and the only changing function being the source unit. Once you do that, you'll have to provide repeatability scores with legitimate statistics. I can tell you right now that it's near impossible. Vance Dickason has even told me the same himself. 

I _truly_ mean no offense, but if you're trying to prove something to _me_, you really are wasting your time. If it's the rest of the gang here, then go ahead and post youtube videos. But, frankly, I'm just not going to waste my time arguing over it. I value that free time too much.

If you want to catch me in person @ Finals, though, do it. I drive a black civic sedan that could use a paint job and a hand from a body shop. I'm easy to find.  

Take care, man.

- Erin


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

bikinpunk said:


> If you want to test with music, you do a double blind test. When I see someone here actually do that and document it with repeatable results that clearly show a winner, then you can point to that as much as you want. Until then, the measurement data speaks volumes for the acoustics and psychoacoustics that drive product purchases. *There's a whole lot of money to be made here which is why more money is spent by smaller companies on marketing than real R&D. *


That is why we shouldn't discount seemly minor differences. I may just be hearing the differences you demonstrated. 

Those curves you show are not on music, they are test tones at a few select frequencies and pink noise if I am not mistaken. You have a spectrum analyzer hooked into the rca jacks of the deck, correct? So what are these graphs referred to as so I can use the correct lingo? 

I would really love to see these curves at a given time stamp in the same song. 

I would like to meet with you and discuss this further. Just for fun I'll be installing an mda5000 and coupling that to my pure i20 on some flac files. I'll make some HD recordings with and without the mda using a dayton mic and laptop.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

WestCo said:


> That is why we shouldn't discount seemly minor differences. I may just be hearing the differences you demonstrated.
> 
> Those curves you show are not on music, they are test tones at a few select frequencies and pink noise if I am not mistaken. You have a spectrum analyzer hooked into the rca jacks of the deck, correct? So what are these graphs referred to as so I can use the correct lingo?
> 
> ...



http://audio.rightmark.org/downloads/RMAA%206.0%20User's%20Guide.pdf

That's the user manual for the analyzer software used by Erin in those results.


----------



## sszyma (Feb 7, 2013)

FWIW, I use the P99rs with 7th gen ipod nano with ALAC tracks and it is quite nice.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

WestCo said:


> No, it's not, huge differences can easily be noticed...
> P99rs - high clarity, semi clinical dac. great bass
> p80 - a little warmer sound overall, mids sound a bit funky (off)
> drz - warmest sound of the 3, mids aren't aggressive, very dynamic bass response similar to the p99 (pioneer's bass is hard to beat). However you get a more 3 dimensional quality with the drz which is manly due to the mids/midbass. It sounds like you are on stage with the band.


I don't see the huge differences. Now if you're saying that you can hear a difference at 0.01-0.03 db........in a car......really?

Whatever and however you tested, I think the #1, 2, & 3 were already decided in your minds eye. Your ears validated that for you.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

jtaudioacc said:


> tuning any active system with a dsp takes great talent, understanding and most of all 'trained' ears.


^^^^ fixed. If you can train your ears, tuning is much easier.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Jagged Corn Flakes said:


> Just because you may have heard some good sounding active set ups, it doesn't mean active is always better simply because you haven't heard the best sounding passive ones.


He's gone, but just for the record, a well tuned active setup will always sound better than the best passive system


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

sqnut said:


> He's gone, but just for the record, a well tuned active setup will always sound better than the best passive system


I noticed you're using the Bit Ten and the Pioneer PRS80. Is the PRS-80 outputting to the Bit Ten? If so, how do you have it configured?
How do you connect a USB device to the Bit Ten?


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

Is there any other decks that work good with android other than the app radio?

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

bikinpunk said:


> BTW, to answer the OP of the thread: I'd recommend the p99 simply based on it's form factor, built in DSP and USB input. It's my favorite all in one solution. So much so, I've owned it four times now. lol.


With the P99 costing over $1000 is it really worth it to purchase that over the PRS-80? Considering the evidence that has been provided to suggest that the quality of the audio output between the two units is so close. If only the PRS-80 had digital out, I would have made up my mind already.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

The test results are a comparison of the two units base line performance, no dsp applied.

If you're looking at these units you should be looking at the dsp they offer. If dsp is not a criteria then a basic $ 150 unit will also give similar measured results. 

The p99 offers more processing power at a finer resolution. 31 band eq vs 16 band, eq in 0.5 db steps vs 2 db steps etc. The p99 also gives you a 3 way option while the p80 limits you to 2 way. If tuning is going to be plug and play for you then the p80 might be plenty. But if you want to get into tuning, then the p99 will take you much further. The p99 is just a step below a stand alone processor and the best option for an all in one solution.


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

I am actually considering going with the panny bottlehead for the cd transport. since I will be going with the mosconi 6to8 I could get the amas board for direct bluetooth conection for streaming purposes and hands free use with the cell. Would this be a bad idea?

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

sqnut said:


> I don't see the huge differences. Now if you're saying that you can hear a difference at 0.01-0.03 db........in a car......really?
> 
> Whatever and however you tested, I think the #1, 2, & 3 were already decided in your minds eye. Your ears validated that for you.


Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I'll believe what I choose to believe. For me the source unit has the ability to change the entire personality of the system. 

I am also not saying that any of the source units are "bad" or "inferior". It is a matter of personal preference. 

But saying that for all intents and purposes they are sonically identical is a big stretch. I am not trying to start a quarrel or claim that my hearing is better than anyone else. When I switch from Alpine to Mac, or from Mac to Eclipse; there is a difference in the output. 

I'll leave the conversation with this quote from a Sound monitor engineers report.
"It is often said that you will never get the sound
quality you want (concert sound stage) if you focus only
on the physical characteristics of the hardware. During
the process of creating a product, the task of "confirming
by actually listening to the music" is extremely important."

These are actual engineers claiming that their ears were required in the development of their source units in this case the sound monitor series. There is a reason why soundjunkie consistently runs a panasonic bottle head in SQ competitions, and it's not because of looks.

Have a good day!


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

fast94tracer said:


> I am actually considering going with the panny bottlehead for the cd transport. since I will be going with the mosconi 6to8 I could get the amas board for direct bluetooth conection for streaming purposes and hands free use with the cell. Would this be a bad idea?
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


Bluetooth is a form of transport that deals with compression and loss. I wouldn't recommend it for audio, but for phone calls, sure!

(For me) the Panasonic has outstanding mids/highs, the bass is a bit sluggish. Upgrading the tube to a western electric 396A adds a bit of clarity and helps the bass response some.

If you send the 3.5mm jack on the phone into the panasonic it brightens up the mids and highs (because it is amplified by the tube). You'll enjoy the sound a lot more (at least I do). Or even better get a hi-fi doc with a good dac (if you have an iphone) and go RCA into the panasonic for music.

The 6 to 8 is a wonderful piece.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

WestCo said:


> Bluetooth is a form of transport that deals with compression and loss. I wouldn't recommend it for audio, but for phone calls, sure!
> 
> (For me) the Panasonic has outstanding mids/highs, the bass is a bit sluggish. Upgrading the tube to a western electric 396A adds a bit of clarity and helps the bass response some.
> 
> ...


The DSP AMAS uses wireless and there is no loss during the digital transport of the audio: DSP_AMAS


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

NateZ28 said:


> The DSP AMAS uses wireless 802.11 and there is no loss during the digital transport of the audio: DSP_AMAS


It's only lossless if the data rate from the phone's bluetooth is > version 3, but they did make some advances I see!

Thanks for the correction. That does open some doors!


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

Last time I did bluetooth transport was 2005, and after hearing that... I never did it again lmao


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

My galaxy note 2 has a wolfson dac built in and is said to be very good so maybe it would beneficial to just use the line in?

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

WestCo said:


> Everyone is entitled to their opinion.


Sure, everyone has opinions. But all opinions aren't facts.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

fast94tracer said:


> My galaxy note 2 has a wolfson dac built in and is said to be very good so maybe it would beneficial to just use the line in?
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


I would try it both ways and see which you prefer. ^.^

RCA into the panny and bluetooth into the 6to8.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

Sigh... I do believe audio equipment CAN sound different, the big question is can they sound different if they measure very similar? I don't think so. I'm no expert by no means and don't pretend to be, but arguing about tonality in a headunit/amplifier is absurd if the measured frequency response is "flat" 20Hz-20kHz and non-linear distortion products are in the 0,0**% range. Any audible differences will be measurable whether it's FR, noise, distortion, gain or channel separation. RIAA might not be the most advanced measurement software on the planet but it does confirm what I already believe, that there are no distinctive differences between the major range of modern headunits out there. ABX double blind tested several HUs and I heard difference in terms of noise, otherwise not much else. The noise floor on those units showed up quite clearly in RIAA. Here's the part where I say that I'm not an audiophile, I can't tell the difference between a 320k MP3 and lossless. While driving even that is useless debate, any differences will be drowned out by vehicle noise/road noise. 

P99 is about the best headunit out there since it got zero noise and a powerful DSP, IMHO. 80PRS also got a very low noise floor and a great L/R EQ for the price. I still like Alpine but they should really implement a good L/R EQ in some of their models.


----------



## 69Voltage (Jul 30, 2013)

fast94tracer said:


> Is there any other decks that work good with android other than the app radio?
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


I ran across this while looking for a HU. It's geared towards Android. 

Sony Car Stereo GPS | A/V Receiver with Bluetooth | XAV-701HD Review | Sony Store


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

It only states a2dp which is bluetooth

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

sqnut said:


> Sure, everyone has opinions. But all opinions aren't facts.


I don't understand why everyone is so very defensive on this topic. 

It doesn't take but 30 minutes to test several decks on a home theater system and see if you can discern differences. If you hear no differences, great!
If you hear differences, great!

Let me share this with you.
Groups of grown men listening to source units (vs a reference sound system).
Their results below:
Taken from ECA:

Today we set up a "reference" system consisting of an Arcam Full Metal Jacket CD player, a Pathos Classic One amplifier (hybrid tube) and Infinity Kappa 600 speakers. The RCA's were the Stealth Audio "Nanofibers", the speaker wire were IXOS Ixotica.

We listened to Alanis Morrisette's "You ought to know" from her unplugged album, and Dire Straits "You're latest trick". Both recordings are excellent, and provide several sonic cues that we were listening for.

These are our observations after listening to the refence setup:


The H/Us that made it in the showdown:
Denon DCT-Z1:
The soundstage instantly became 2-D - the depth was gone.
With was expanded compared to the FMJ
Strings were sharper and more defined, but not fatiguing
The low end was not as full as the FMJ, and lacks energy.

McIntosh MX5000:
Great bottom end, with "space" around the kickdrum and bass guitar.
Vocals are forward
Image is perfect
Not as 3-D as the FMJ, but better than the Z-1

McIntosh MX4000:
Vocals are almost as good as the FMJ!
Center cohesion is BETTER than the FMJ!
Bass is just as good as the MX5000
Overall - slightly better than the MX5000

Nakamichi CD700ii:
Nice low end
No "shimmer"/"sparkle" on the top end seemed to roll of quite a bit
Good vocals and center image
No depth, much like the Z-1
Drums sound flat, and not defined and full like the MX's
Very sweet, mellow, and warm sounding

Clarion DRZ-9255:
Top end is clear and neutral
Well balanced
Center image is very good
Nothing stands out as "wrong"
Depth is comparable to the MXs
Lacks low end definition to the MXs, but better than Z-1
Overall a very sweet, neutral sounding H/U.

Panasonic TX-5500W
Top end is SWEET!
Not as shallow as the Z-1, but not deep like the MXs; like the DRZ-9255
VERY Clear and transparent!!
Rich midbass/midrange like MXs, but added spakle of Z-1
Great low end definition/clarity

Grundig:
"Cold" - lacks richness
Sharpest upper end
"Sterile"
Focus and image very well
Fatigues ears quickly
Uninvolving

Eclipse ECD-510:
Best low end extension of all H/Us
Vocals are very good
Staging was on par w/ 9255
Another very good h/u and very easy to listen to


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

WestCo said:


> I don't understand why everyone is so very defensive on this topic.
> 
> It doesn't take but 30 minutes to test several decks on a home theater system and see if you can discern differences. If you hear no differences, great!
> If you hear differences, great!
> ...


If you went by that it sounds like the bottlehead is one of the best

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

fast94tracer said:


> If you went by that it sounds like the bottlehead is one of the best
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


Yes, definitely a show stopper for me.
Love the mids/highs.

Honestly it between panny and the mac's and the drz its 100% personal preference...


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

The only thing I don't like about the panny is the orange back light as the rest of my car is red and white

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

fast94tracer said:


> The only thing I don't like about the panny is the orange back light as the rest of my car is red and white
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


You can turn the light off lol


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

So here's my newest idea: Using an Apple TV and connecting the optical output on the Apple TV to a DSP. I could create a wireless hotspot in my car and connect my phone wirelessly to the Apple TV. As long as the Apple TV doesn't transcode the music, which I'm pretty sure it doesn't, I would have a digital connection directly to the DSP. I could additionally run an HDMI cable to either a small mounted display up front or a double DIN head unit with video input. This would give me access to a full fledged media center.
I think I would get the best of both worlds, concerning price and audio performance, since the Apple TV only costs $100. 

What do you guys think of this idea?
My next question would be: What is the best, most affordable DSP with optical input?


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

NateZ28 said:


> So here's my newest idea: Using an Apple TV and connecting the optical output on the Apple TV to a DSP. I could create a wireless hotspot in my car and connect my phone wirelessly to the Apple TV. As long as the Apple TV doesn't transcode the music, which I'm pretty sure it doesn't, I would have a digital connection directly to the DSP. I could additionally run an HDMI cable to either a small mounted display up front or a double DIN head unit with video input. This would give me a full fledged media center.
> I think this would give me the best of both worlds concerning price and audio performance since the Apple TV only costs $100.
> 
> What do you guys think of this idea?
> My next question would be: what is the best, most affordable DSP with optical input?


3sixty.3 is fairly budget friendly, comes with optical in and volume control.

I think that would be a highly functional setup.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

NateZ28 said:


> So here's my newest idea: Using an Apple TV and connecting the optical output on the Apple TV to a DSP. I could create a wireless hotspot in my car and connect my phone wirelessly to the Apple TV. As long as the Apple TV doesn't transcode the music, which I'm pretty sure it doesn't, I would have a digital connection directly to the DSP. I could additionally run an HDMI cable to either a small mounted display up front or a double DIN head unit with video input. This would give me access to a full fledged media center.
> I think I would get the best of both worlds, concerning price and audio performance, since the Apple TV only costs $100.
> 
> What do you guys think of this idea?
> My next question would be: What is the best, most affordable DSP with optical input?


The apple tv re-samples to 48kHz, but so do all currently available car audio processors. The conversion is high quality and will replace the one performed in the processor.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

t3sn4f2 said:


> The apple tv re-samples to 48kHz, but so do all currently available car audio processors. The conversion is high quality and will replace the one performed in the processor.


The ps8 is supposed to be able to handle 192khz / 32bit.

I am ignorant on apple tv.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

WestCo said:


> The ps8 is supposed to be able to handle 192khz / 32bit.
> 
> I am ignorant on apple tv.


It does, as do other processor support higher and lower than their native 48kHz sample rate because they use an Asynchronous sample rate converter chip. Look at the PS8's spec sheet, the high frequency cut off point on the output is exactly what the digital resolution limit of 48kHz is, that's not a coincidence. Analog output stages like amps can easily exceed that rating. That tells you that its digitally limited by the DSP output since it is limited by that sample rate. Regardless of how high a sample rate you input.

This is an FR graph of a rightmark analyzer test file set to 48kHz. No equipment was tested just ran the test file through as if it had passed through a device and onto the software for analysis. You can where the top end just stops at the digital resolution limit.


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

WestCo said:


> You can turn the light off lol


Is it possible to change the color or is the color in the plastic

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

t3sn4f2 said:


> The apple tv re-samples to 48kHz, but so do all currently available car audio processors. The conversion is high quality and will replace the one performed in the processor.


I came across that when researching the Apple TV. So does it matter if it resamples to 16/48? I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to maintain using my steering wheel controls and hands free microphone in the car.
I may just purchase the PRS-80 right now and them move to the Apple TV setup down the road.


fast94tracer said:


> Is it possible to change the color or is the color in the plastic?


Not to be rude, but could you please create your own topic or post in a thread related to your specific head unit? I'm trying to keep this discussion limited to the original topic.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

fast94tracer said:


> Is it possible to change the color or is the color in the plastic
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


I don't think they are under the plastic. The meters are illuminated in orange and so is the leds toward the bottom of the tube enclosure. I am sorry I have no clue how hard it would be to swap them.

The dials are illuminated and so is the digital display.

In all honesty the panasonic sticks out like a sore thumb in my car, but I can't bring myself to take it out.


----------



## WestCo (Aug 19, 2012)

And orange isn't too terrible, if your car is red/white.

At least its not blue or green lol


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

Apple TV was on my (very) short list of potential candidates as part of the signal chain. After a lot of doodling (and swearing and yelling....mostly at myself), I decided against it. A couple of reasons (and some are unique to my setup):

- I needed an analog video out (VGA). The BMW uses RGB signaling and it's a snap to integrate VGA with it. With an Apple TV, I'd have to go through hoops to do that.
- Car friendly power supply. While Apple TV can be hacked to run off of a car power supply, it's a lil bandaidish.
- I did not want to limit myself to Airplay. While Airplay is certainly something I wanted, I didn't want to limit myself. XBMC (what I run now, will do uPnP, DLNA, you name it.
- I needed to integrate the IBUS messaging from the BMW to the "device", and it is darn hard to do that with an Apple product. With Windows, it's a snap.
- I wanted to be able to do custom resolutions (since the BMW runs 800 x 480 interlaced with sync on green) and can't do that with an Apple TV.
- I wanted.....


The list goes on. The point being, one, with all these additional things necessary to run an Apple TV in the car, the cost is far above $100. Two, it's just too limiting.

But that's me.


----------



## fast94tracer (Jun 23, 2013)

Then don't be rude. I dont own an aftermarket deck and I am looking for a Sq deck myself. I was asking about things I want to know about. and who knows it might help others. 

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

NateZ28 said:


> I came across that when researching the Apple TV.* So does it matter if it resamples to 16/48?* I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to maintain using my steering wheel controls and hands free microphone in the car.
> I may just purchase the PRS-80 right now and them move to the Apple TV setup down the road.
> 
> Not to be rude, but could you please create your own topic or post in a thread related to your specific head unit? I'm trying to keep this discussion limited to the original topic.


No, modern sample rate conversion is transparent and has been around for at least a decade. A quality piece like the apple tv is sure to have one.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

kapone said:


> Apple TV was on my (very) short list of potential candidates as part of the signal chain. After a lot of doodling (and swearing and yelling....mostly at myself), I decided against it. A couple of reasons (and some are unique to my setup):
> 
> - I needed an analog video out (VGA). The BMW uses RGB signaling and it's a snap to integrate VGA with it. With an Apple TV, I'd have to go through hoops to do that.
> - Car friendly power supply. While Apple TV can be hacked to run off of a car power supply, it's a lil bandaidish.
> ...


So what did you end up using to run XMBC and Windows, a car PC or Raspberry Pi? How much did it cost? 



t3sn4f2 said:


> No, modern sample rate conversion is transparent and has been around for at least a decade. A quality piece like the apple tv is sure to have one.


That's what I thought. I was reading on a different forum where some "audiophiles" were complaining about the resampling, but I think at that point they're just being snooty.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

NateZ28 said:


> So what did you end up using to run XMBC and Windows, a car PC or Raspberry Pi? How much did it cost?


CarPC.










And it's way more expensive than an Apple TV, but also offers way more functionality.


----------



## NateZ28 (Oct 2, 2013)

kapone said:


> CarPC.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well I've built computers since I was a wee lad. I might be able to undertake building one myself. How much custom work was involved and what was the total cost? Is there any way to buy something like this pre-built (laziness)?
Are you using a touch screen to control the interface?

The design of that system is very clean. I bet with the SSD that thing is extremely responsive.


----------



## kapone (Sep 22, 2009)

> How much custom work was involved and what was the total cost?


Not really a whole lot of custom work on the PC itself. The components are straightforward. Motherboard/CPU/RAM/SSD/2nd hard drive/car friendly power supply (M4-ATX)/wires and connections.

The case is a hacked up 1U chassis, that was shortened in length to just about 8", while leaving the width unchanged (about 17"). The height was unchanged (1.75"). Reason for the 1U, is that this is going under my false floor in the trunk, where height is at a premium, width and length, not so much.

The PC ended up somewhere around $800, I think.



> Is there any way to buy something like this pre-built (laziness)?


There's a few places that sell pre-built CarPC's. Mobile Computing Solutions comes to mind, and they pop up on ebay from various sellers, now and then.



> Are you using a touch screen to control the interface?


No. The video output is hooked into the BMW stock screen, which is non touchscreen. 

- The PC is mostly controlled by a SpaceNavigator (iDrive ish...kinda knob) mounted in the center console, although it's interfaced with the rest of the BMW (IBUS). Theoretically it can accept button and knob inputs from all existing controls in the car. 
- In addition, I've run an array microphone up into the headliner (right near BMW's mic is) and the PC can accept voice commands as well. I haven't gone too deep into the voice recognition/control yet, but it's on the agenda.



> The design of that system is very clean. I bet with the SSD that thing is extremely responsive.


From the moment you turn the key to XBMC active...11 seconds. That's a cold boot. (I've customized the Windows install to be quite lean, but it's still a full Windows 7 installation.)

With the SSD, Windows flies.


----------

