# Update on new JL Audio Processors



## slowsedan01

JL Audio to Intro Two Signal Processors | ceoutlook.com



> JL Audio said it will introduce two car audio digital signal processors this year that can be used together or separately.
> 
> One model is the FiX, which is an OEM integration processor that can take the analog signal (or set of signals) from a car radio, analyze them, sum them up and correct them to create a clean signal in order to add aftermarket components to the system.
> 
> It’s joined by the TwK (Tweak), which is JL Audio’s first tuning processor. It can be used with a laptop computer to analyze the car audio system for tuning adjustments.
> 
> JL Audio says it helped launch the DSP/OEM integration market with the CleanSweep a decade ago. VP Marketing Manville Smith, said “The FiX will be the descendent of the original CleanSweep but with much more capability. It will address some of the challenges that today’s cars are presenting.”
> 
> He said the FiX will be easy to use with a simple set up. “Put in a CD, play a track, press a button and move on with your day. That’s the idea.”
> 
> JL Audio revealed no other details, except that the processors are expected by the end of the year.
> 
> Source: CEoutlook


From another site:



> Thankfully, JL Audio is working on two new products that will solve this problem: the Fix and the Twk (pronounced Tweak). The Fix will address an issue that all other processors on the market do not seem to address. It will account for and correct factory time correction before auto equalization which will allow for an even cleaner signal than ever before. Additionally, it will have 4 channel summing built in. For additional equalization control, the Twk can be added. The Twk adds 8 analog inputs and 2 optical inputs, 10 band equalization adjustable separately for left and right channels. It will have multiple EQ preset options for various driver preferences and driving scenarios. You know what it’s really going to do? It will give Audison’s Bit One and Alpine’s PXA-H800 Processor a run for their money. JL Audio is still in the process of developing the product and software at this point. JL Audio probably has at least another 9 months to a year in development. Details on pricing have not been released yet, but I’ve been told by we will all be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## Lycancatt

still don't see it overtaking the alpine offerings anytime soon at least with the twk, but I like the idea of the fix.


----------



## t3sn4f2

MS-8 also fixes OEM T/A.


----------



## diy.phil

get me the serial number One!!!


----------



## rton20s

slowsedan01 said:


> The Twk adds 8 analog inputs and 2 optical inputs, 10 band equalization adjustable separately for left and right channels.


If the TwK is truly limited to 10 band (even parametric) L/R EQ, they are going to have a very hard time competing in the DSP market at large. I could see them selling a ton to JL dealers who haven't done a lot of fully active installs in the past, but if what is quoted above is true it just doesn't stack up to the competition.


----------



## Angrywhopper

rton20s said:


> If the TwK is truly limited to 10 band (even parametric) L/R EQ, they are going to have a very hard time competing in the DSP market at large. I could see them selling a ton to JL dealers who haven't done a lot of fully active installs in the past, but if what is quoted above is true it just doesn't stack up to the competition.


They will sell well because there is a demand for low cost, fast installation/tuning DSPs.


----------



## sirbOOm

Angrywhopper said:


> They will sell well because there is a demand for low cost, fast installation/tuning DSPs.


Agreed. There's a middle ground that has a gaping hole - easy processors (that aren't the MS8 which really didn't get the JBL support it needed to last).


----------



## t3sn4f2

Angrywhopper said:


> They will sell well because there is a demand for low cost, fast installation/tuning DSPs.


Also the target consumer group won't be as picky. Chances are that most will be using limited installs and speaker locations. Tonal balance will be the biggest thing for them. Basically a louder more full range OEM type sound.

I'm not saying it won't also sound great for those that put the effort into installation though. Just that that's not the main target group since it would require that uncommon extra effort.


----------



## rton20s

Angrywhopper said:


> They will sell well because there is a demand for low cost, fast installation/tuning DSPs.


I probably worded my statement incorrectly. I have no doubt that JL will sell a metric crap ton of whatever they make. They always do. 

Regardless of cost though (which remains to be seen), is it not a bit disappointing that JL doesn't see a need to develop a "do all" processor that can compete with the current heavyweights in the DSP space?


----------



## sirbOOm

rton20s said:


> Regardless of cost though (which remains to be seen), is it not a bit disappointing that JL doesn't see a need to develop a "do all" processor that can compete with the current heavyweights in the DSP space?


I don't think so at all. For one, there are already great players out there. And, second, each have had problems either because of user error or the electronics/software/UI. I bet JL thinks they're not ready to BEAT the competition (or it's not worth it) so instead they're taking advantage of a gap in the market that the competition isn't. Processors are already a niche market - growing, no doubt but only because of necessity with modern factory integration requirements, not a want. It's hard for us at a shop to sell a $700 processor to someone even when a processor is really the only way to pull factory signal in the cleanest fashion and 90% of them don't need or want all that EQ and learning curve, just some customization is 80% of the battle. Plus, let's be honest, some people will buy JL stuff just because it says JL.


----------



## slowsedan01

I think that its a brilliant area in the product mix. If you think about easy, simple, DSP's or integration processors there really aren't too many out there. I think JL realizes that there needs to be a product that serves the needs of 90% of most customers who buy the whole deal from a B&M dealer/installer. Not everyone needs a PS8, 6to8, BitOne, MS8, et al...


----------



## msmith

Interesting feedback, guys. 

Curious: What is the perceived limitation of a 10-band parametric, especially if it can be deployed fully in the channel's passband, as opposed to a 30-band graphic which may only have 8 fixed bands in the passband in some applications?

Discuss.


----------



## claydo

Aw ****......man done dropped some flexibility into his parametric not normally seen....haha!


----------



## pocket5s

msmith said:


> Interesting feedback, guys.
> 
> Curious: What is the perceived limitation of a 10-band parametric, especially if it can be deployed fully in the channel's passband, as opposed to a 30-band graphic which may only have 8 fixed bands in the passband in some applications?
> 
> Discuss.


The quote listed in the original post stated 10 bands for left and right. Your statement makes it sound like 10 bands per channel, i.e. per driver. Huge difference  If the unit has 10 per individual channel, that will likely suffice. Only my midrange drivers use more than 5, and they use about 14 due to the install location. 

Personally, now having experience with parametric I will take it all day, every day over graphic. To me a graphic only makes sense if you are stuck in the 90's working on a AC-3055 or equivalent


----------



## diy.phil

The 10 band parametric (per channel) is more than good. I only have 8 parametric now (and multiplied by 8 channels) and I didn't have to use all of them, ie. more than sufficient.


----------



## rton20s

Agreed with the previous two posts. The initial information of 10 Band L/R (not even listing parametric) was a big shortcoming for me. Knowing now that it is 10 band parametric per channel make a huge difference! I'll leave it to some of the DSP pros to poke and prod for more information regarding resolution, phase angles, et al.


----------



## ErinH

Definitely agree with the previous posts. However, I'm more interested in other features like shelving filters, variable phase, and crossover options such as selectable frequency instead of fixed and adjustable Q filters. Those kind of things are what I dig about the Helix DSP offerings. Then GUI type options of linking channels to adjust delay, levels, etc.


----------



## slowsedan01

Sorry guys, I started this thread only with the info that I obtained from ceoutlook.com. If it was wrong blame them, not me! We're all still friends, right guys? Guys????


----------



## msmith

It's okay... we haven't exactly been crystalline in releasing details yet. 

If the challenge is to meet the needs of every type of user, then the product definition becomes really difficult. The product that would make Erin H happy is very different than the product a typical installer needs to tune an "every day" system.

We are trying to span a pretty decent range of users, from the "quick tuner" to the "advanced user", by having the product features grouped in different levels of complexity. So, the "quick tuner" might use only a L-R 10 band to tune the whole system, set some crossover points, gains and that's about it.

A different user level would engage more options and more flexibility, and yet another would unleash everything the processor is capable of. These details I'm not willing to divulge yet, but I am open to suggestions.


----------



## msmith

diy.phil said:


> The 10 band parametric (per channel) is more than good. I only have 8 parametric now (and multiplied by 8 channels) and I didn't have to use all of them, ie. more than sufficient.


There are up to eight 10-band parametrics (one for each output channel, if you want), but you don't have to use all of them if you don't want to. You can use only two 10-band parametrics and feed all 8 outputs with them, if you want. The signal routing is very flexible.


----------



## Viggen

Any ETA on its release?


----------



## Angrywhopper

sirbOOm said:


> Agreed. There's a middle ground that has a gaping hole - easy processors (that aren't the MS8 which really didn't get the JBL support it needed to last).


Yep. Had a guy in today with a 2014 Silverado with the 8" screen. Obviously not changing that out, but wants good sound. Willing to spend $299 on the Cleansweep, not willing to spend $699 (RF 3sixty.3) or $999 (Audison BitOne). And those prices are just for the hardware, not the cost for my hours of tuning. 



t3sn4f2 said:


> Also the target consumer group won't be as picky. Chances are that most will be using limited installs and speaker locations. Tonal balance will be the biggest thing for them. Basically a louder more full range OEM type sound.
> 
> I'm not saying it won't also sound great for those that put the effort into installation though. Just that that's not the main target group since it would require that uncommon extra effort.


Correct. An 'every day' install. Somebody looking to spend $2-$3k on *everything* (products & install).



rton20s said:


> I probably worded my statement incorrectly. I have no doubt that JL will sell a metric crap ton of whatever they make. They always do.
> 
> Regardless of cost though (which remains to be seen), is it not a bit disappointing that JL doesn't see a need to develop a "do all" processor that can compete with the current heavyweights in the DSP space?


I don't think it's disappointing. JL Audio understands the current car audio climate. The $500 DSPs + tuning is a super niche market. People just aren't spending the money on this stuff as much as forum members here think..


----------



## brumledb

I currently do not have a DSP nor have ever owned one. I am wanting to get into the tuning game but have been unable to decide which model would be best for a novice. Now it seems I may need to let this hit the market before making a final decision. :shrug:


----------



## Bayboy

10 bands is more than enough when it is relegated to a specific range. As a budget minded consumer, where would the TWK fit in amongst the other processors? Bang for the buck?


----------



## msmith

Pricing will be announced closer to the release date. 

The release date for TwK is not firm yet. Best estimate I can give is 4th quarter, 2015, but I reiterate, this is not firm.

The FiX integration processor will likely be ready in the 3rd quarter. Again, not firm.

We are working hard on both pieces.


----------



## msmith

Bayboy said:


> 10 bands is more than enough when it is relegated to a specific range. As a budget minded consumer, where would the TWK fit in amongst the other processors? Bang for the buck?


A 10-band parametric should be enough eq for any full-range application, as well.


----------



## ErinH

msmith said:


> IThe product that would make Erin H happy is very different than the product a typical installer needs to tune an "every day" system.


Completely understand. My reply was more in the vein of the 'blue sky'... 

Your target audience is understood by most of us here. The problem is we are a niche market and when things like this are announced we immediately start comparing it to products made for this niche. I am still curious to see what you guys come up with because I imagine with your engineering crew and resources it will be fantastic. That's not just lip service, either.


----------



## miniSQ

msmith said:


> Pricing will be announced closer to the release date.
> 
> The release date for TwK is not firm yet. Best estimate I can give is 4th quarter, 2015, but I reiterate, this is not firm.
> 
> The FiX integration processor will likely be ready in the 3rd quarter. Again, not firm.
> 
> We are working hard on both pieces.


How does the FiX differentiate from the Cleansweep?


----------



## msmith

miniSQ said:


> How does the FiX differentiate from the Cleansweep?


The original Cleansweep CL441dsp has four analog inputs and four analog outputs, requires a full-range input (external summing), and only corrects frequency response.

The FiX™ is considerably more sophisticated:

First of all, like the Cleansweep CL441dsp, FiX™ is designed to correct electrical signals, not to tune a car acoustically.

The first model in the FiX line is the "FiX™ 82" 

Up to eight channels of input (up to 30V), can handle 4-way systems as input
Two channels of output, S/PDIF digital (optical), or analog (4V). The optical output is particularly useful when paired with a TwK, which has a digital input, thus avoiding a D/A and A/D conversion.

To use it, you make your OEM connections, play a calibration track and press a button for:
-Auto level correction
-Auto delay/polarity correction
-Auto summing
-Auto frequency response correction

The whole calibration process takes less than 20 seconds.

Master volume control is optional.


----------



## msmith

ErinH said:


> Completely understand. My reply was more in the vein of the 'blue sky'...
> 
> Your target audience is understood by most of us here. The problem is we are a niche market and when things like this are announced we immediately start comparing it to products made for this niche. I am still curious to see what you guys come up with because I imagine with your engineering crew and resources it will be fantastic. That's not just lip service, either.


Thanks, Erin... I can't promise it will meet every one of your desires, but it should definitely keep you entertained in its most advanced mode.


----------



## rton20s

msmith said:


> A different user level would engage more options and more flexibility, and yet another would unleash everything the processor is capable of. These details I'm not willing to divulge yet, *but I am open to suggestions.*


This and your subsequent correspondence with ErinH have me more excited than just about anything else in this thread. Your responses have already put my initial concerns at ease.


----------



## mmiller

I've been waiting a long time for JL to throw their hat into the Processor ring. Looking forward to this!!


----------



## emilime75

Considering "JL Audio says it helped launch the DSP/OEM integration market with the CleanSweep a decade ago", it's a bit surprising they haven't stepped up sooner. I can see the FiX being a good interface between a modern, factory system and a processor that may not have summing and FR correction. With that said, it's not all that different from the CleanSweep so, not really all that exciting. As far as the TwK is concerned, I guess it really all depends on what it's actual capabilities, quality, features and cost will be but, then again, the same thing goes for the FiX. When you take into account that you still need a processor after the FiX does it's thing, why not go with a DSP that does it all in one box?


----------



## groberts

JL Audio builds well engineered, top shelf, high quality, reliable products. I have enjoyed my JL Audio Amps and subs for years and just bought another JL audio amp (HD900/5).

I have no doubt the new JL Audio products will be well thought out. 
I am always happy to see companies like JL Audio re-invent themselves. It's amazing to watch companies evolve along with a change industry to redefine themselves.


----------



## evo9

msmith said:


> The original Cleansweep CL441dsp has four analog inputs and four analog outputs, requires a full-range input (external summing), and only corrects frequency response.
> 
> The FiX™ is considerably more sophisticated:
> 
> First of all, like the Cleansweep CL441dsp, FiX™ is designed to correct electrical signals, not to tune a car acoustically.
> 
> The first model in the FiX line is the "FiX™ 82"
> 
> Up to eight channels of input (up to 30V), can handle 4-way systems as input
> Two channels of output, S/PDIF digital (optical), or analog (4V). The optical output is particularly useful when paired with a TwK, which has a digital input, thus avoiding a D/A and A/D conversion.
> 
> To use it, you make your OEM connections, play a calibration track and press a button for:
> -Auto level correction
> -Auto delay/polarity correction
> -Auto summing
> -Auto frequency response correction
> 
> The whole calibration process takes less than 20 seconds.
> 
> Master volume control is optional.



Mr Smith, please tell me the FiX processor will have the capability to correct Acura's ELS system. I'm sure you are aware some of the tech package ELS system volume control is done inside the amplifier. Apart from that, there is the source EQ differential & low end roll off as the volume increases. I'm one of those Acura owners with such a system, who is dying to get a proper processor to work with this car factory system.









.


----------



## Angrywhopper

emilime75 said:


> Considering "JL Audio says it helped launch the DSP/OEM integration market with the CleanSweep a decade ago", it's a bit surprising they haven't stepped up sooner. I can see the FiX being a good interface between a modern, factory system and a processor that may not have summing and FR correction. With that said, it's not all that different from the CleanSweep so, not really all that exciting. As far as the TwK is concerned, I guess it really all depends on what it's actual capabilities, quality, features and cost will be but, then again, the same thing goes for the FiX. When you take into account that you still need a processor after the FiX does it's thing, why not go with a DSP that does it all in one box?


Not everyone needs a DSP that does it all.


----------



## evo9

groberts said:


> *JL Audio make well engineered, reliable products.* I have enjoyed my JL Audio Amps and subs for years. I have no doubt the new products will be well thought out. I am always happy to see companies like JL Audio re-invent themselves, following the ebb and flow as the industry evolves/ devolves in some cases, changes.


Absolutely agree with you on this point!


----------



## Bayboy

Angrywhopper said:


> Not everyone needs a DSP that does it all.


Agreed! One that simple and reliable is just as desirable. Why be just another DSP with the same features with a few things different or standing out. One unit with glitch free software that's flexible enough for an advanced daily driver and has solid manufacturer support is whats missing. That's really not a lot to ask for.


----------



## djfourmoney

slowsedan01 said:


> I think that its a brilliant area in the product mix. If you think about easy, simple, DSP's or integration processors there really aren't too many out there. I think JL realizes that there needs to be a product that serves the needs of 90% of most customers who buy the whole deal from a B&M dealer/installer. Not everyone needs a PS8, 6to8, BitOne, MS8, et al...


 Nobody "needs" anything when it comes to car audio, it's a hobby.

90% is being kind, it's more like 96%. I am a member of SEMA, the general automotive aftermarket is 4% and that includes everybody from AMG to some chrome wheel with a Z in the name.

In car audio I am fairly sure it's even less, maybe 1% that demands studio, $10,000 home audio level SQ in one of the harshest environments to accomplish this.

Most music has synthesized bass and small speakers don't cut it. So the number one add-on these days is a sub woofer, specifically powered sub woofers and that market is expanding faster than the DSP market, that should tell you something.

JL is making the next logical step. People are still buying Clean Sweep so either they see their market advantage slipping or they want to expand their market.

Being a car audio enthusiast site, the bias is going to be towards the enthusiast side of the market which is niche and tiny. This is not the world the major players play in; they throw you a bone every so often just to show you technical prowess but 98% of the public doesn't want or is easily confused with that much range of adjustment.


----------



## Angrywhopper

djfourmoney said:


> Nobody "needs" anything when it comes to car audio, it's a hobby.
> 
> 90% is being kind, it's more like 96%. I am a member of SEMA, the general automotive aftermarket is 4% and that includes everybody from AMG to some chrome wheel with a Z in the name.
> 
> In car audio I am fairly sure it's even less, maybe 1% that demands studio, $10,000 home audio level SQ in one of the harshest environments to accomplish this.
> 
> Most music has synthesized bass and small speakers don't cut it. So the number one add-on these days is a sub woofer, specifically powered sub woofers and that market is expanding faster than the DSP market, that should tell you something.
> 
> JL is making the next logical step. People are still buying Clean Sweep so either they see their market advantage slipping or they want to expand their market.
> 
> Being a car audio enthusiast site, the bias is going to be towards the enthusiast side of the market which is niche and tiny. This is not the world the major players play in; they throw you a bone every so often just to show you technical prowess but 98% of the public doesn't want or is easily confused with that much range of adjustment.


Hello logic, thanks for coming by today.


----------



## rton20s

Bayboy said:


> One unit with glitch free software that's flexible enough for an advanced daily driver and has solid manufacturer support is whats missing. That's really not a lot to ask for.


As someone who is currently in the market for a DSP, can you tell me where some of the more popular options fall short on these fronts? Namely the Mosconi 6to8v8, Alpine H800 and Helix DSP Pro? Genuinely curious.


----------



## ben54b

djfourmoney said:


> Nobody "needs" anything when it comes to car audio, it's a hobby.
> 
> 
> 
> 90% is being kind, it's more like 96%. I am a member of SEMA, the general automotive aftermarket is 4% and that includes everybody from AMG to some chrome wheel with a Z in the name.
> 
> 
> 
> In car audio I am fairly sure it's even less, maybe 1% that demands studio, $10,000 home audio level SQ in one of the harshest environments to accomplish this.
> 
> 
> 
> Most music has synthesized bass and small speakers don't cut it. So the number one add-on these days is a sub woofer, specifically powered sub woofers and that market is expanding faster than the DSP market, that should tell you something.
> 
> 
> 
> JL is making the next logical step. People are still buying Clean Sweep so either they see their market advantage slipping or they want to expand their market.
> 
> 
> 
> Being a car audio enthusiast site, the bias is going to be towards the enthusiast side of the market which is niche and tiny. This is not the world the major players play in; they throw you a bone every so often just to show you technical prowess but 98% of the public doesn't want or is easily confused with that much range of adjustment.



That pretty much sums this part of car audio up. It's a bummer, at least they do throw us some scraps every now and then. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## omnibus

I have the Cleansweep in my garage. I didn't like it, mostly because I had to use it's little volume knob instead of my head units control. Then still I didn't notice any difference so maybe that particular OEM HU already had a pretty flat signal.


----------



## Kevin K

Looking forward to getting some hands on time with this


----------



## Bayboy

rton20s said:


> As someone who is currently in the market for a DSP, can you tell me where some of the more popular options fall short on these fronts? Namely the Mosconi 6to8v8, Alpine H800 and Helix DSP Pro? Genuinely curious.




You've read the reviews & threads like I, I would imagine. All of those units seem good, but many are too complicated. The lower lines such as the 88R, I would have thought to fill that niche, but comes with a bit of limitation in flexibility or stability. Something that is simple, works, yet is capable enough to do a bit more is ideal to me. Heck, I still have a 3sixty.3 sitting in the closet in it's original wrapper. Laziness, and the fact that I probably don't really need something so complex is why it's still there. 

I'm so used to the workings of simple machines like a DQX or 80prs, that all else is somewhat intimidating in price, problems, & software. I don't compete so do I really need all of that? Perhaps in a intermediate build, but the bother of it doesn't seem so.


----------



## Angrywhopper

omnibus said:


> I have the Cleansweep in my garage. I didn't like it, mostly *because I had to use it's little volume knob instead of my head units control.* Then still I didn't notice any difference so maybe that particular OEM HU already had a pretty flat signal.


Wrong.


----------



## t3sn4f2

evo9 said:


> Mr Smith, please tell me the FiX processor will have the capability to correct Acura's ELS system. I'm sure you are aware some of the tech package ELS system volume control is done inside the amplifier. Apart from that, there is the source EQ differential & low end roll off as the volume increases. I'm one of those Acura owners with such a system, who is dying to get a proper processor to work with this car factory system.


It looks like it should work, as long as you can completely disable multichannel output from the head unit (ie enable some type of multichannel downmix to stereo option). And tap into the signal after the OE amp. If you want to use the signal directly from the head unit then you'll likely need to use the optional master volume control.


----------



## omnibus

Angrywhopper said:


> Wrong.


They told me when I asked clarification.

I asked them that question because if I used the radio's knob, the OEM deck would tone down the bass once the volume goes so high. I could easily hear it. That's when they told me I had to set the volume first, calibrate it and use the Cleansweep's knob.

Right or wrong, that's what they told me and was the only way I could bypass the deck unit's curve.


----------



## bkjay

If I use this DSP in a 2way set up like 80hz and under for my sub and 80hz and up for mids and hi's is 10 bands enough?


----------



## Victor_inox

regardless of features it`s gonna be The **** just like everything else from mediocre product manufacturer.


----------



## Bayboy




----------



## bbfoto

Victor_inox said:


> regardless of features it`s gonna be The **** just like everything else from mediocre product manufacturer.


I don't understand this statement either.


----------



## MacLeod

I'm really glad to see JL finally come out with a processor. They've been one of my favorite brands since the late 90's and are one of the very few brands to remain focused on car audio enthusiasts. I can't wait to see what they bring to the table. I have no doubt it will be very cool.

I also see the sense in not making a processor with a bazillion different features. I'm one of the odd ones I guess that doesn't think you need 3,000 bands of EQ to tune properly. Plus the market for $800 processors is extremely small especially in this day and age. 8 channels with 10 band PEQ per channel, time alignment (in ms increments and not inches please for the love of God) and a 1/3 octave crossover up to 24 dB is more than enough to dial on a superb system especially if it costs considerably less to offer it.


----------



## quality_sound

Bayboy said:


>






bbfoto said:


> I don't understand this statement either.



Victor thinks no one but him can make any audio product worth owning. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bayboy

quality_sound said:


> Victor thinks no one but him can make any audio product worth owning.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's a pretty condescending stance if so... There's more than enough processors out there to be drooled over and all have become some sort of forum boner at one time. But I will stand behind my remark of one that is simple, flexible enough for a 4-way, without major constraints & glitchy software while still fetching a reasonable price tag is what's missing. Most are either at the bottom or very top of the heap. I expect JL will have great support as all of their products do so that's a major plus also. What's not good to say about that?


----------



## bkjay

bkjay said:


> If I use this DSP in a 2way set up like 80hz and under for my sub and 80hz and up for mids and hi's is 10 bands enough?


bump


----------



## quality_sound

Bayboy said:


> That's a pretty condescending stance if so... There's more than enough processors out there to be drooled over and all have become some sort of forum boner at one time. But I will stand behind my remark of one that is simple, flexible enough for a 4-way, without major constraints & glitchy software while still fetching a reasonable price tag is what's missing. Most are either at the bottom or very top of the heap. I expect JL will have great support as all of their products do so that's a major plus also. What's not good to say about that?


He also ****s on anything he doesn't see as "high end" or is for the mass market.


----------



## bbfoto

bkjay said:


> If I use this DSP in a 2way set up like 80hz and under for my sub and 80hz and up for mids and hi's is 10 bands enough?


I think this was indirectly answered in Post #20 & #26 and others but, YES.

Unless I've misunderstood, this DSP will have 10-band PEQ available Per Each of the 8 Channels.

See post #20...



msmith said:


> There are up to eight 10-band parametrics (one for each output channel, if you want), but you don't have to use all of them if you don't want to. You can use only two 10-band parametrics and feed all 8 outputs with them, if you want. The signal routing is very flexible.


Are talking about just using a Subwoofer and then a single "full-range" driver per channel to handle your mids AND highs, with no tweeter? If so, aiming and driver placement will be even more critical.

I've never been _completely_ satisfied with that type of setup. I always opt for 2-way front + sub as a minimum. Will you be using a single-channel coaxial driver for the front mids & highs? Same applies though, driver aiming and placement will be critical.

.
.


----------



## bkjay

Thanks. I missed that post some how. Ten bands from 80hz to 20,000hz seemed a little odd but it am new to the Dsp tuning thing.


----------



## Bayboy

quality_sound said:


> He also ****s on anything he doesn't see as "high end" or is for the mass market.



Hmmmm.... well, that's pretty messed up. I suppose only guys with high end gear are allowed to enter the realm of SQ. Not sure what to categorize myself at that point.


----------



## Blinkybill

Very excited about this!


----------



## evo9

Victor_inox said:


> regardless of features it`s gonna be The **** just like everything else from mediocre product manufacturer.



Not sure if this means what I'm thinking......... But a bit of advise to you. The last time a small insignificant so called hi end company owner got into it with Mr Smith over JL products it did not go very well. This community suffers when BS like this is injected when no good reasons warrant such statement. That small so called hi end company I mention, today is still just that. While JL has gotten much much bigger & racked up a great deal of industry awards & recognition.


----------



## evo9

omnibus said:


> They told me when I asked clarification.
> 
> I asked them that question because if I used the radio's knob, the OEM deck would tone down the bass once the volume goes so high. I could easily hear it. That's when they told me I had to set the volume first, calibrate it and use the Cleansweep's knob.
> 
> Right or wrong, that's what they told me and was the only way I could bypass the deck unit's curve.




That is how it was explained to me too when I was considering it. You don't have to use the knob. But you would be losing out otherwise.


----------



## MacLeod

Yeah I talked a friend into buying a Clean Sweep several years ago and installed it for him and while you didn't have to use the remote volume, your noose level was pretty much nonexistent if you did. Using the head unit volume meant you ran into hiss a lot sooner. Wasn't unbearable but it just worked a lot better by using the remote.


----------



## SQram

Victor_inox said:


> regardless of features it`s gonna be The **** just like everything else from mediocre product manufacturer.



I would suggest you look into hiring a PR guy to represent your company on the internet....you're not good at it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## omnibus

MacLeod said:


> Yeah I talked a friend into buying a Clean Sweep several years ago and installed it for him and while you didn't have to use the remote volume, your noose level was pretty much nonexistent if you did. Using the head unit volume meant you ran into hiss a lot sooner. Wasn't unbearable but it just worked a lot better by using the remote.


I think it depends on your OEM HU. Some are real bad about changing EQ curve as you turn up or down the dial. I suppose to prevent distorting cheap OEM woofers. And of course Cleansweep is only calibrated to whatever curve your HU produces at said volume #.
The OEM unit in my Honda sounded terrible when you turned up the volume beyond halfway, sounding like all it did was increase the mid range frequencies.

But I didn't like the little CLeansweep knob so I got an aftermarket HU instead. I'm sure this new processor will be a lot better.


----------



## msmith

bkjay said:


> If I use this DSP in a 2way set up like 80hz and under for my sub and 80hz and up for mids and hi's is 10 bands enough?


10 bands of *parametric* is MORE than enough for a full-range system. If that isn't enough, there is something very wrong with your system that would probably be best addressed through means other than EQ. 

That being said, you can deploy 10 bands per output channel, if you wish.


----------



## msmith

omnibus said:


> I think it depends on your OEM HU. Some are real bad about changing EQ curve as you turn up or down the dial. I suppose to prevent distorting cheap OEM woofers. And of course Cleansweep is only calibrated to whatever curve your HU produces at said volume #.
> The OEM unit in my Honda sounded terrible when you turned up the volume beyond halfway, sounding like all it did was increase the mid range frequencies.
> 
> But I didn't like the little CLeansweep knob so I got an aftermarket HU instead. I'm sure this new processor will be a lot better.


There is no processor on the planet that can fix volume position-dependent EQ curves dynamically. Without knowing the position of the volume control on the OEM HU and the nature of the boost/cut parameters with respect to volume position, you can't fix it. 

If your OE system has this "feature" and you don't want the system EQ to change with volume, use the processor's volume control. It's really that simple, and why we include one.


----------



## msmith

omnibus said:


> I have the Cleansweep in my garage. I didn't like it, mostly because I had to use it's little volume knob instead of my head units control. Then still I didn't notice any difference so maybe that particular OEM HU already had a pretty flat signal.


1) you don't have to use the Cleansweep's volume control
2) if the signal was flat or close to it, you won't hear a big difference


----------



## msmith

evo9 said:


> That is how it was explained to me too when I was considering it. You don't have to use the knob. But you would be losing out otherwise.


Correct. If you want to eliminate the volume-dependent EQ, you have to use the Cleansweep knob. That's why it has one.


----------



## msmith

emilime75 said:


> Considering "JL Audio says it helped launch the DSP/OEM integration market with the CleanSweep a decade ago", it's a bit surprising they haven't stepped up sooner.


Better late than never. 



> I can see the FiX being a good interface between a modern, factory system and a processor that may not have summing and FR correction. With that said, it's not all that different from the CleanSweep so, not really all that exciting.


Did you miss the auto delay and polarity correction and built-in auto summing? Those are pretty huge differences right there. Optical out, too. 



> As far as the TwK is concerned, I guess it really all depends on what it's actual capabilities, quality, features and cost will be but, then again, the same thing goes for the FiX. When you take into account that you still need a processor after the FiX does it's thing, why not go with a DSP that does it all in one box?


Yes, I can understand that when you need both, having it in one box can be more convenient. But, you don't always need both. Sometimes you need only the TwK, or only the FiX... and sometimes you might need two FiXes and one TWk... or one FiX and two TwK's. The modular approach gives you the flexibility to deal with many different system scenarios. The pricing is obviously a big factor, too. As is the size of the product... these will become more clear in the next few months.


----------



## msmith

MacLeod said:


> Yeah I talked a friend into buying a Clean Sweep several years ago and installed it for him and while you didn't have to use the remote volume, your noose level was pretty much nonexistent if you did. Using the head unit volume meant you ran into hiss a lot sooner. Wasn't unbearable but it just worked a lot better by using the remote.


True... another reason we include the knob. Any time you open up gains downstream and turn them down upstream you increase noise floor. This isn't a fault in the product. The noise is in the factory system and you are choosing a sub-optimal gain structure by not using the Cleansweep's knob.

This will also be the case with any of the newer integration processors. You can't get around it.


----------



## msmith

evo9 said:


> Mr Smith, please tell me the FiX processor will have the capability to correct Acura's ELS system. I'm sure you are aware some of the tech package ELS system volume control is done inside the amplifier. Apart from that, there is the source EQ differential & low end roll off as the volume increases. I'm one of those Acura owners with such a system, who is dying to get a proper processor to work with this car factory system.
> .


What year, and what model Acura are you referring to?

The original ELS system in the TL had five full range flat outputs right out of the head unit. Are you referring to a newer one?

Differential outputs are no problem. Low end rolloff at high volumes is best dealt with by using the TwK's volume control (which will do more than volume).


----------



## evo9

msmith said:


> What year, and what model Acura are you referring to?
> 
> The original ELS system in the TL had five full range flat outputs right out of the head unit. Are you referring to a newer one?
> 
> Differential outputs are no problem. Low end rolloff at high volumes is best dealt with by using the TwK's volume control (which will do more than volume).


Thanks for answering Mr Smith. The system in my TSX 2013 Tech Package is different from the 3 Generation TL. I have attached some info from the service manual to show what this system is about Here is a quote from a member over acurazine that spent sometime digging into this cars system . 




> _The ELS audio system uses a multichannel amp with internal DSP tuned to get the best sound out of the cheap factory speakers. Each source is independently Eq’d so when you play a CD the eq is different from say XM. The power output is typical 12volt car audio at 12-18watts/ch with each speaker having its own amp channel for a total of 7. The front tweeters are connected to the door speakers via a cap mounted on the tweeter.
> The HU feeds a constant level audio signal to the amp where it is converted to digital for processing. All the audio adjustments take place in the amp via a control channel, so when you adjust the HU volume/bass and what not the changes happen in the amp. This means that you can’t just bypass the amp without losing the ability to control the sound.
> 
> Link to that forum> My ELS Audio upgrade, ELS preamp - AcuraZine Community
> 
> _


----------



## JoeHemi57

Can't wait to see prices and more info on these, sounds like they will be fairly reasonable and as one of those OCD people that likes their brands too match i could see myself going with a complete JL system on the next car i get.

Thank you to Manville for providing is with the information and answering all the questions!


----------



## EAllen

Looks like I will finally bump up out of MECA Stock class, next year.


----------



## Babs

msmith said:


> The original Cleansweep CL441dsp has four analog inputs and four analog outputs, requires a full-range input (external summing), and only corrects frequency response.
> 
> The FiX™ is considerably more sophisticated:
> 
> First of all, like the Cleansweep CL441dsp, FiX™ is designed to correct electrical signals, not to tune a car acoustically.
> 
> The first model in the FiX line is the "FiX™ 82"
> 
> Up to eight channels of input (up to 30V), can handle 4-way systems as input
> Two channels of output, *S/PDIF digital (optical)*, or analog (4V). *The optical output is particularly useful when paired with a TwK, which has a digital input, thus avoiding a D/A and A/D conversion.*
> 
> To use it, you make your OEM connections, play a calibration track and press a button for:
> -Auto level correction
> -Auto delay/polarity correction
> -Auto summing
> -Auto frequency response correction
> 
> The whole calibration process takes less than 20 seconds.
> 
> Master volume control is optional.


Already having a Helix DSP, I'm seeing the benefit of optical output to feed a DSP with the FiX. Cost depending, it brings even more functionality of the mobridge units the BMW guys are using to the rest of us. While it would introduce an A/D conversion in the chain, it still may be a an awesome way to keep the OEM functionality but build a nicely tuned system with it and certainly eliminate noisy RCA's in a noisy vehicle.

Also, one begins to way the cost.. Swap to aftermarket head unit, or do OEM with the FiX. Questions also like how clean is that darn OEM head unit? hmm

Until some company or companies get together with some standard volume data protocol from source to processing, we'll be wrestling with multiple A/D - D/A conversions for a long time coming I think. 

Example: Imagine a head unit feeding full resolution 1's and 0's along with volume level data in a standardized protocol. That head unit thus becomes just tuner and source switch with volume knob pretty much, and a fancy UI of course. Then the DSP or DSP/Amp at the other end of the car just reads that ONE little data cable, processes, splits, decodes, controls volume and plays. One D/A conversion. Where can I apply to Product Development?  LOL! But probably why a lot of guys are dabbling with tablets direct in their dash. It does it all and sends USB out to convert to toslink to the optical DSP inputs.

But for now in the real world, with volume-varying craziness, including even some OEM systems doing T/A as well as EQ stuff, the FiX will certainly provide a big step forward.

TGIF!


----------



## djfourmoney

Mr Smith, been a fan a long, long time when JL first appeared on the national scene all those years ago.

The new JL CL is interesting and affordable option. That said, I don't know if I want to find a mounting place for the processor's volume control since my stock HU has volume dependent EQ cut as mentioned.

Is there any way else to integrate the processor's volume into stock HU's, say steering wheel controls?

Otherwise I will have to reconsider my stance on obvious aftermarket appearing head units.


----------



## edub13

msmith said:


> Pricing will be announced closer to the release date.
> 
> The release date for TwK is not firm yet. Best estimate I can give is 4th quarter, 2015, but I reiterate, this is not firm.
> 
> The FiX integration processor will likely be ready in the 3rd quarter. Again, not firm.
> 
> We are working hard on both pieces.



I am so looking forward to this for my 2015 Canyon!


----------



## DDfusion

This is going to be a $500 unit. It's JL. 

The clean sweep is a bust. 
Let's wipe out everything but give you know way to tune it. I can't see a single reason to buy one. You will still need a another processor to tune it. 

JL has a huge market of people that don't know how to use google. 
They make a few good products but most are just a name. I remember when JL was elite 

Funny thing is this is the same road a rather loved internet brand is starting to go down.


----------



## subterFUSE

The Fix sounds very interesting.

I was just reading about the issue of OEM time alignment causing problems with signal summing in DSPs in another thread the other day. I think it's great to see a company working hard to add to our available toolkit for resolving these issues with OEM integration.

I wish more than anything that I could have a car that allowed me to replace the head unit, but alas none of my cars in the last 15 years were capable of this. Luckily for me, I have the mObridge available... but a device like the Fix can really offer benefits for cars where the OEM source can't be changed out.


----------



## aholland1198

It sounds like a product that is long overdue. Now we need something to bypass ANC. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pocket5s

to take that one step further, just bypass factory amps all together. You wouldn't then have to correct for time alignment, crossovers and probably ANC that is going on in factory amps. At least in my vehicle that is where all that crap takes place.


----------



## subterFUSE

pocket5s said:


> to take that one step further, just bypass factory amps all together. You wouldn't then have to correct for time alignment, crossovers and probably ANC that is going on in factory amps. At least in my vehicle that is where all that crap takes place.



Mobridge already does this, but you have to have MOST bus in the car.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Babs

subterFUSE said:


> Mobridge already does this, but you have to have MOST bus in the car.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Yeah it's making me think V-dub for the next car. I can imagine the deer in the headlights look if I ask the sales guy if this new Jetta has MOST with optical capability via mobridge and FLAC. LOL!! Checked mobridge's site.. Aaaaaand no! Ok.. Checking beemers now.


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rton20s

Babs said:


> Yeah it's making me think V-dub for the next car. I can imagine the deer in the headlights look if I ask the sales guy if this new Jetta has MOST with optical capability via mobridge and FLAC. LOL!! Checked mobridge's site.. Aaaaaand no! Ok.. Checking beemers now.
> 
> 
> Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


Please do ask a salesman that. And get video.


----------



## Lycancatt

actually the vws have a headunit that has rca outputs that you can program for high level or low level via a usb dealy I forget the name of. it works pretty good and sounds ok, but the digital would still be better


----------



## subterFUSE

Babs said:


> Yeah it's making me think V-dub for the next car. I can imagine the deer in the headlights look if I ask the sales guy if this new Jetta has MOST with optical capability via mobridge and FLAC. LOL!! Checked mobridge's site.. Aaaaaand no! Ok.. Checking beemers now.
> 
> 
> Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


I don't think the VW cars use MOST.

Just looking at the mObridge website for compatibility and they don't show the DA1 preamps as working. Just the CAN-bus stuff. None of the MOST-bus items.


Pretty sure MOST is limited to Merc, Audi, BMW and Porsche. Maybe Range Rover?


----------



## Babs

rton20s said:


> Please do ask a salesman that. And get video.


Yeah, I'd share it for sure unless I got *****-slapped 



subterFUSE said:


> I don't think the VW cars use MOST.
> 
> Just looking at the mObridge website for compatibility and they don't show the DA1 preamps as working. Just the CAN-bus stuff. None of the MOST-bus items.
> 
> Pretty sure MOST is limited to Merc, Audi, BMW and Porsche. Maybe Range Rover?


And Mini! Who'd a thunk it.. Well I guess their BMW ties pays off.

Yep, I've taken the liking to three cool little digits.. 340i 
Looks like a fun fun little car.


----------



## subterFUSE

VW you can still remove the head units, I think.

A Jetta GLI with Alpine NAV unit would be something I might have, if not for the Audi.


----------



## Babs

subterFUSE said:


> VW you can still remove the head units, I think.
> 
> A Jetta GLI with Alpine NAV unit would be something I might have, if not for the Audi.


I'll always have a soft spot for an A4 or S4 maybe.


----------



## quality_sound

Lycancatt said:


> actually the vws have a headunit that has rca outputs that you can program for high level or low level via a usb dealy I forget the name of. it works pretty good and sounds ok, but the digital would still be better


VCDS, used to be called VAG-COM (Ross-Tech: Home). It's not RCAs, but it is a wired, analog connection.



subterFUSE said:


> I don't think the VW cars use MOST.
> 
> Just looking at the mObridge website for compatibility and they don't show the DA1 preamps as working. Just the CAN-bus stuff. None of the MOST-bus items.
> 
> 
> Pretty sure MOST is limited to Merc, Audi, BMW and Porsche. Maybe Range Rover?


Correct. Audi uses MOST, VW does not. If the new Minis use MOST I'm going to use a mObridge.


----------



## ChrisB

subterFUSE said:


> VW you can still remove the head units, I think.
> 
> A Jetta GLI with Alpine NAV unit would be something I might have, if not for the Audi.


That will change once everything is on the MQB platform. Currently, the MQB platform has a touch interface in the dash with the "brains" for the unit behind the glove box. At least that is how the Golf and A3 platform is setup. When the Jetta goes that route, I expect the same thing.

The S3 is the only Audi/VW vehicle that interests me, but man that first year depreciation is a bummer.


----------



## subterFUSE

ChrisB said:


> The S3 is the only Audi/VW vehicle that interests me, but man that first year depreciation is a bummer.



How long do you keep cars?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ChrisB

subterFUSE said:


> How long do you keep cars?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



1 to 3 years


----------



## Babs

ChrisB said:


> 1 to 3 years



Pick one up that's 1.5 years old. 


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ChrisB

Babs said:


> Pick one up that's 1.5 years old.
> 
> 
> Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


I think I just got spoiled with the trade-in value on my 2012 Subaru WRX. Every time I looked to trade it, it held it's value, regardless of dealership. With my 2013 GTI, it basically reminded me of a public company that went to penny stock status. After one year of ownership, a car with a MSRP of $31,000 was fetching $15k for trade-in at all non-VW dealerships. OUCH! It makes me wish I had gone with a Forester XT instead...


----------



## Babs

So derail enough. Sorry. 

When's this JL Twk processor coming?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SkizeR

JL Audio Ships Its first New Processor for hte car in 10 Years | ceoutlook.com


----------



## DDfusion

That's what I figured it would be. A beefed up clean sweep and you still need a DSP after it. 

For a brand that thrives off sound quality they sure fail in that aspect.


----------



## SkizeR

300 dollars for retail


----------



## aholland1198

That's not a terrible price. Obviously most here are not going to pay retail, but If you can utilize your factory setup and still get a clean signal why not. What would you pay for a head unit that has all the options of the new factory setups?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DDfusion

aholland1198 said:


> That's not a terrible price. Obviously most here are not going to pay retail, but If you can utilize your factory setup and still get a clean signal why not. What would you pay for a head unit that has all the options of the new factory setups?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You could just get a DSP that does everything it does and has full DSP function for a bit more.


----------



## pocket5s

Really? What dsp on the market corrects for factory ta, xo and eq? 

Only thing I've ever seen is simple summing. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## aholland1198

Not aware of a processor on the market that will do what the fox does. I have a Helix Pro and it only has a five band peq for input correction. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pocket5s

Beat you by 10 seconds Adam 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DDfusion

MS-8, Alpine 800, 360.3.


----------



## subterFUSE

pocket5s said:


> Really? What dsp on the market corrects for factory ta, xo and eq?
> 
> Only thing I've ever seen is simple summing.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




Nail... Head.


The FiX is a game-changer for people who must integrate with OEM systems with factory time alignment. Especially when the 8 channel version comes out next year.


----------



## SkizeR

DDfusion said:


> MS-8, Alpine 800, 360.3.


i dont the h800 does TA correction, and the 360.3 doesnt. pretty sure the ms8 does though.


----------



## subterFUSE

MS8 does it, I think... but it doesn't really exist unless you find a used one.


The Helix DSP Pro has the option of NOT summing signals, but you can't sum them and apply corrective TA. This is different than the FiX where the corrective TA is done before summing the signals. It's a lot more flexible in that regard.


----------



## aholland1198

I fear the ms8's technology is going to be dated sooner than later and won't integrate with stock systems. I could be wrong though, usually am. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DDfusion

I'm pretty sure the 3 I mentioned wipe out everything. The MS-8 does for a fact. 
It may one day be outdated but I don't see how. It gives a clean slate and tunes. What else is there? 
In most stock units you can turn the TA off.


----------



## DDfusion

Just because it says JL on it does not mean everyone has to make a reason to justify it.


----------



## subterFUSE

DDfusion said:


> Just because it says JL on it does not mean everyone has to make a reason to justify it.



Well, the FiX is useless for me because the mobridge is a better option.

But, I can still admit that it's a very promising device for people who need to integrate with OEM but aren't lucky enough to have the mobridge available to them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Babs

Yep.. My future car-buying habits would follow a certain decision path concerning audio:

Can the head unit and any/all crap OEM amp stuff come out, replaced by a slick-looking 2-din?

If yes "Party on Wayne! "
Else is it M.O.S.T. with a compatible mObridge device to pull straight digital?
If yes "Party on Garth! "
Else "No joy.. Go look at a different car."


----------



## trumpet

DDfusion said:


> That's what I figured it would be. A beefed up clean sweep and you still need a DSP after it.
> 
> For a brand that thrives off sound quality they sure fail in that aspect.




Not every installation needs this signal correction. Separating the factory signal correction from the rest of the DSP makes sense for shops, you know, the businesses JL Audio supports fiercely.


----------



## aholland1198

One thing this unit will let you do is bypass the ANC which no processor has done yet. On the new Lexus cars, from what I have heard, there hasn't been anyone successful in bypassing this function manually. You can unplug the mics on most cars such as the accord but this is going to be an ongoing battle with oem gear. So kudos to JL for giving us a way around it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lizardking

If the unit allows the use of the factory volume control......that would certainly be a winner in my book.


----------



## MacLeod

Babs said:


> Yep.. My future car-buying habits would follow a certain decision path concerning audio:
> 
> Can the head unit and any/all crap OEM amp stuff come out, replaced by a slick-looking 2-din?
> 
> If yes "Party on Wayne! "
> Else is it M.O.S.T. with a compatible mObridge device to pull straight digital?
> If yes "Party on Garth! "
> Else "No joy.. Go look at a different car."


Pretty much been my criteria for buying my last few cars. Its why Ive had 2 Accords over the last 10 years. Its a pain but you can take out the factory CD player and put my beloved P99 in there and not have to worry about this crap. Sad it has to be that way.


----------



## subterFUSE

MacLeod said:


> Pretty much been my criteria for buying my last few cars. Its why Ive had 2 Accords over the last 10 years. Its a pain but you can take out the factory CD player and put my beloved P99 in there and not have to worry about this crap. Sad it has to be that way.



Yeah. But it isn't German. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MacLeod

subterFUSE said:


> Yeah. But it isn't German.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


True, but itll last for 300,000 miles. I love me some Honda.


----------



## Babs

subterFUSE said:


> Yeah. But it isn't German.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Stop! I've been looking at Deutsch autos way too damn much as it is lately. LOL I have this closet fetish for the X1 lately. I know. Don't tell anyone. 


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## subterFUSE

MacLeod said:


> True, but itll last for 300,000 miles. I love me some Honda.



As if driving Japanese wasn't punishment enough, you have to put up with it for 300,000 miles?  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## What?

lizardking said:


> If the unit allows the use of the factory volume control......that would certainly be a winner in my book.


You always COULD use the factory volume knob with the Cleansweep. However, if the EQ curve changes as the factory volume goes up/down, the correction would only be accurate at the volume used to set the Cleansweep. EVERY processor works exactly the same since none are doing real time EQ processing. 
Part of selecting a processor is using a scope and RTA to see what the factory system is doing to the signal and then deciding what you need. Do you need to sum? Is the factory curve relatively flat or like the rocky mountains? Does the curve change with volume? Etc. I rarely install the knob.


----------



## XSIV SPL

I'm interested enough to try one (fix 82, that is). I really like the fact that it can Toslink out. At worst, I go back to what was working before... At best, OEM integration just took a leap forward.


----------



## robhaynes

XSIV SPL said:


> I'm interested enough to try one (fix 82, that is). I really like the fact that it can Toslink out. At worst, I go back to what was working before... At best, OEM integration just took a leap forward.


It's a solid piece, I think you will like it. We have had a few dealers swap out competitors integration products on some more complex OEM systems and noticed a "night and day" difference in their words.


----------



## Onyx1136

So Rob, Manville told us previously that JL was also working on a processor to go along with the Fix. Any updates on that?


----------



## robhaynes

Onyx1136 said:


> So Rob, Manville told us previously that JL was also working on a processor to go along with the Fix. Any updates on that?


TwK is still in the works. Should ship next year. Hardware is essentially done, the computer interface (what the product really is all about) is in development. 

Hopefully we will have more to show in Vegas this January.


----------



## Babs

robhaynes said:


> TwK is still in the works. Should ship next year. Hardware is essentially done, the computer interface (what the product really is all about) is in development.
> 
> Hopefully we will have more to show in Vegas this January.


Be glad to do an NDA and beta test the software tool. 
I sure hope it's not just windows PC.


----------



## XSIV SPL

robhaynes said:


> It's a solid piece, I think you will like it. We have had a few dealers swap out competitors integration products on some more complex OEM systems and noticed a "night and day" difference in their words.


Rob, while I've got your attention, I have a question on the Fix 82...

My shop has a pre-release piece they requested with my car in mind, but...

Can the Fix 82 use the OEM HU output level for volume control while using the Toslink output? Or, must I use the optional volume knob? If it kills my ability to use steering wheel mounted volume controls, I'm suddenly losing interest. Please advise- thanks!


----------



## robhaynes

XSIV SPL said:


> Rob, while I've got your attention, I have a question on the Fix 82...
> 
> My shop has a pre-release piece they requested with my car in mind, but...
> 
> Can the Fix 82 use the OEM HU output level for volume control while using the Toslink output? Or, must I use the optional volume knob? If it kills my ability to use steering wheel mounted volume controls, I'm suddenly losing interest. Please advise- thanks!


As with the CleanSweep, you can always use the factory volume controls. You do risk not having a linear EQ curve if the factory EQ is volume dependent.

The optional DRC-100 knob controls the volume and provides a linear EQ ONLY on the FiX 82's analog outputs. The Digital output is not controlled by it since in most cases it is be most likely being sent to a processor with it's own MVC knob.

Hope this helps.


----------



## cbrandonb

Man... this is exciting.

When will we know the details of the TwK and the FiX 86? 

Brandon


----------



## robhaynes

cbrandonb said:


> Man... this is exciting.
> 
> When will we know the details of the TwK and the FiX 86?
> 
> Brandon


FiX 86 should be identical feature set wise to the FiX 82, except it will be six analog outputs (F,R,S) and no digital output.

TwK will have individual 10-band parametric EQ's for each channel output. Individual crossover and time delay for every channel as well. More details and the GUI should be available to show at the JL Audio suite in Vegas this January.


----------



## cbrandonb

Thanks, Rob! Really appreciate your reply. And looking forward to learning more about the units in January. That will probably be about the time I'm ready to buy, if all goes well. 

Brandon


----------



## bbfoto

robhaynes said:


> FiX 86 should be identical feature set wise to the FiX 82, except it will be six analog outputs (F,R,S) and no digital output.
> 
> TwK will have individual 10-band parametric EQ's for each channel output. Individual crossover and time delay for every channel as well. More details and the GUI should be available to show at the JL Audio suite in Vegas this January.


Regarding the TwK:

Of the 10 Bands of PEQ per Channel, can the user select or choose to assign/input whatever specific frequency they desire? IOW, for what would normally be the 160Hz band, can I type in 184Hz as the center frequency?

What is the range of the Q/width adjustment?

What crossover types and slopes will be included?

Maybe it's too early for this type of information but I thought I'd ask.


----------



## optimaprime

omnibus said:


> They told me when I asked clarification.
> 
> I asked them that question because if I used the radio's knob, the OEM deck would tone down the bass once the volume goes so high. I could easily hear it. That's when they told me I had to set the volume first, calibrate it and use the Cleansweep's knob.
> 
> Right or wrong, that's what they told me and was the only way I could bypass the deck unit's curve.


Hmmmm I use one right now and I don't use the knob. I use factory volume knob and works perfect. But install is bit unsual to.


----------



## bbfoto

omnibus said:


> They told me when I asked clarification.
> 
> I asked them that question because if I used the radio's knob, the OEM deck would tone down the bass once the volume goes so high. I could easily hear it. That's when they told me I had to set the volume first, calibrate it and use the Cleansweep's knob.
> 
> Right or wrong, that's what they told me and was the only way I could bypass the deck unit's curve.





optimaprime said:


> Hmmmm I use one right now and I don't use the knob. I use factory volume knob and works perfect. But install is bit unsual to.


Are you sure that your HU or OEM amp that you are pulling signal from has Volume-Dependent EQ?


----------



## robhaynes

bbfoto said:


> Regarding the TwK:
> 
> Of the 10 Bands of PEQ per Channel, can the user select or choose to assign/input whatever specific frequency they desire? IOW, for what would normally be the 160Hz band, can I type in 184Hz as the center frequency?
> 
> What is the range of the Q/width adjustment?
> 
> What crossover types and slopes will be included?
> 
> Maybe it's too early for this type of information but I thought I'd ask.


I forget off the top of my head, all of that info. Once I have it I will let you know.


----------



## robhaynes

bbfoto said:


> Are you sure that your HU or OEM amp that you are pulling signal from has Volume-Dependent EQ?


Yup. If you don't have volume-dependent equalization there is no issue using the factory volume controls. If you want a true linear EQ and there is volume-dependent equalization, the knob that came with the CleanSweep or the optional DRC-100 volume control knob for the FiX 82 should be used.


----------



## tommygjunior

My Fix 82 arrived the beginning of this week. I'm laying out my 'temporary' set up with everything obviously aside from the twK which will be jumping in the place of my run around arangement I'm stuck using until then. Hurry please. I'm beyond excited.


----------



## gstokes

slowsedan01 said:


> .. If you think about easy, simple, DSP's or integration processors there really aren't too many out there. Not everyone needs a PS8, 6to8, BitOne, MS8, et al...


I resemble that remark 

Fix 82 and 4 of these, all set..
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_575RFI...48065&awat=pla&awnw=g&awcr=47439290185&awdv=c


----------



## milburyl

gstokes said:


> I resemble that remark
> 
> Fix 82 and 4 of these, all set..
> Rockford Fosgate RFiF2SW 2-channel speaker output adapter (bare speaker wires to female RCAs) at Crutchfield.com


If your gonna use JL, may as well use these.

http://www.jlaudio.ca/car-audio-connection-systems-audio-connections-rca-to-speaker-wire


----------



## tommygjunior

Rob any chance of some updates on the TwK as an early christmas present? 

Also I'm have some issues with my Fix 82 and wasn't able to really get any help from the tech support line. 

I am taking the front mid, front tweet and the sub signals post amp on a 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee with the 'alpine' 9 speaker system into the fix 82. I did the calibration through Itunes downloaded from your website and plugged in via the usb wired into my headunit (factory set up). It completed the process fine(solid green ligths). However, on certain songs I will end up getting the red light on the DRC 100 and on the fix82 box itself saying clipping. It becomes extremely distorted. 

For reference my headunit reads to 35 on the volume control. I did the calibration at 29 with the rca's unplugged and I only play the music at 29 adjusting all volume control with the drc-100. I've also tried to turn down the radio volume from 29 to see, and it still shows clipping all the way down into the teens along with totally screwing with the flatness of the e.q.

I also tried to pull the front and rear signals preamp into the fix and it would not complete the calibration process at all. 

That being said it will give me the clip error(red lights) on radio, satellite radio and usb iphone music both itunes and spotify(my preferred way to listen giving me full control on the headunit of my itunes library). However, if I listen via bluetooth which gives me volume control on the phone itself and I turn it down just a couple clicks off loudest setting on the phone I can listen to anything I want, crystal clear with no clipping or distortion. However aside from want to have radio options to listen to I don't get full control of my music library in the headunit when listening via bluetooth so I would prefer to resolve this problem so I don't have to be picking up my phone to search for music. 
I've trouble shot every angle unless you think I'm missing something. 

I posted this public incase anyone else was having similar issues. I hope this is user error and I can get it worked out quickly as I'm excited to get the TwK as soon as it's available provided the bugs with my Fix are all worked out.


----------



## robhaynes

tommygjunior said:


> Rob any chance of some updates on the TwK as an early christmas present?
> 
> Also I'm have some issues with my Fix 82 and wasn't able to really get any help from the tech support line.
> 
> I am taking the front mid, front tweet and the sub signals post amp on a 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee with the 'alpine' 9 speaker system into the fix 82. I did the calibration through Itunes downloaded from your website and plugged in via the usb wired into my headunit (factory set up). It completed the process fine(solid green ligths). However, on certain songs I will end up getting the red light on the DRC 100 and on the fix82 box itself saying clipping. It becomes extremely distorted.
> 
> For reference my headunit reads to 35 on the volume control. I did the calibration at 29 with the rca's unplugged and I only play the music at 29 adjusting all volume control with the drc-100. I've also tried to turn down the radio volume from 29 to see, and it still shows clipping all the way down into the teens along with totally screwing with the flatness of the e.q.
> 
> I also tried to pull the front and rear signals preamp into the fix and it would not complete the calibration process at all.
> 
> That being said it will give me the clip error(red lights) on radio, satellite radio and usb iphone music both itunes and spotify(my preferred way to listen giving me full control on the headunit of my itunes library). However, if I listen via bluetooth which gives me volume control on the phone itself and I turn it down just a couple clicks off loudest setting on the phone I can listen to anything I want, crystal clear with no clipping or distortion. However aside from want to have radio options to listen to I don't get full control of my music library in the headunit when listening via bluetooth so I would prefer to resolve this problem so I don't have to be picking up my phone to search for music.
> I've trouble shot every angle unless you think I'm missing something.
> 
> I posted this public incase anyone else was having similar issues. I hope this is user error and I can get it worked out quickly as I'm excited to get the TwK as soon as it's available provided the bugs with my Fix are all worked out.


Tommy,

Did you get the email from tech support about this?


----------



## robhaynes

bbfoto said:


> Regarding the TwK:
> 
> Of the 10 Bands of PEQ per Channel, can the user select or choose to assign/input whatever specific frequency they desire? IOW, for what would normally be the 160Hz band, can I type in 184Hz as the center frequency?
> *Everything from the center frequency, Q, and boost/cut is adjustable in the "expert" project stage. *
> 
> What is the range of the Q/width adjustment?
> *0.25 up to 10.00*
> 
> What crossover types and slopes will be included?
> *12, 24 & 48 db/oct L-R & 6, 12, 18, 24, 36 & 48 db/oct BW*
> Maybe it's too early for this type of information but I thought I'd ask.


Since I have some answers.... 

Answers above in *BOLD*


----------



## cbrandonb

Man, can't wait to get full details on this unit! Thanks for telling us what you can, Rob!

Brandon


----------



## robhaynes

cbrandonb said:


> Man, can't wait to get full details on this unit! Thanks for telling us what you can, Rob!
> 
> Brandon


Not a problem.


----------



## bbfoto

robhaynes said:


> Since I have some answers....
> 
> Answers above in *BOLD*


Thanks, Rob. Good stuff so far.  Do you also know what the maximum delay time in milliseconds will be for each channel, and what the smallest T/A adjustment increments will be? 

The only other thing that I would hope for is 10 (or more) output channels.  

Thanks again!


----------



## XSIV SPL

So, I'm finally going to make a go at the Fix82 tomorrow. It will replace the Audio Control LC-6i.

I'm hoping it's the piece to fix the TCR within TCR (factory X-over points don't match my own) that I've been struggling to tune out. I'm also hoping it drops the noise floor significantly. I'm pretty sure these things will be immediately evident.

If it takes a few days before I get back with an update, that probably means I'm keeping it and working on a re-tune


----------



## robhaynes

bbfoto said:


> Thanks, Rob. Good stuff so far.  Do you also know what the maximum delay time in milliseconds will be for each channel, and what the smallest T/A adjustment increments will be?
> 
> The only other thing that I would hope for is 10 (or more) output channels.
> 
> Thanks again!


TwK 88 & TwK D8 have 8 analog outputs. But....you can utilize the digital SPDIF output and add another TwK (really there is no limit to how many you can daisy chain) if 8-channels isn't enough!


----------



## cbrandonb

You're killing me... can't wait to see the full release on these!

Brandon


----------



## bbfoto

robhaynes said:


> TwK 88 & TwK D8 have 8 analog outputs. But....you can utilize the digital SPDIF output and add another TwK (really there is no limit to how many you can daisy chain) if 8-channels isn't enough!


Rob, thanks for the quick reply. That is definitely a great advantage for the power users out there. However, daisy-chaining two units would obviously Double the cost, and complicate both the overall setup, wiring, and ease of tuning, in addition to the problem of having to get creative to find more space in some vehicles to accomodate the size of two units (though we have no idea of the size of these units yet).

And I realize that 8 channels is more than enough for the target market. BUT, for any semi-expensive piece of gear that I buy, Versatility and Adaptability is King!

What is the reasoning behind making two different Twk models? Is there a Significant Difference, mainly in cost, but also functionality? It seems like having two models would further confuse consumer's decision making, and again, limit versatility if you bought one model, then ended up needing the other model.. I could be wrong, but I believe that many people (target market) that might buy these units tend to change/update/buy/lease different vehicles quite often. And the feature set of one TwK version (if limited in certain functionality) may accommodate their current vehicle, but it may not guarantee full compatibility with their future vehicle choice. That overall, down-the-road cost does factor in to decision-making when considering a particular unit.

So in that regard, I would definitely prefer a single "all-in-one" TwK unit, even if it was a bit more expensive. Perhaps one of those versions also includes the "FiX" features. But again, I'm in the ErinH boot camp rather than your typical target market. 

Do you have any information to offer regarding my previous post about the Time Alignment specs?

Overall, I'm really interested to see what these units become and what they will offer in the end. The original Cleansweep products never interested me due to their limited feature set-to-cost ratio when compared to something like the RF 360.3. So if JL can bring these to market with an extremely versatile feauture set while also keeping them very competitively priced, I'm sure that you'll have a winner. There will be a few other new competing products coming to market soon by other manufacturers, so the options for all of us will be better than ever.


----------



## kobiejohn

"The optional DRC-100 knob controls the volume and provides a linear EQ ONLY on the FiX 82's analog outputs. The Digital output is not controlled by it since in most cases it is be most likely being sent to a processor with it's own MVC knob.

Hope this helps."

I think I saw a press release of new amps coming out, any chance they will accept the digital out from the Fix 82?


----------



## robhaynes

bbfoto said:


> Rob, thanks for the quick reply. That is definitely a great advantage for the power users out there. However, daisy-chaining two units would obviously Double the cost, and complicate both the overall setup, wiring, and ease of tuning, in addition to the problem of having to get creative to find more space in some vehicles to accomodate the size of two units (though we have no idea of the size of these units yet).
> 
> And I realize that 8 channels is more than enough for the target market. BUT, for any semi-expensive piece of gear that I buy, Versatility and Adaptability is King!
> 
> What is the reasoning behind making two different Twk models? Is there a Significant Difference, mainly in cost, but also functionality? It seems like having two models would further confuse consumer's decision making, and again, limit versatility if you bought one model, then ended up needing the other model.. I could be wrong, but I believe that many people (target market) that might buy these units tend to change/update/buy/lease different vehicles quite often. And the feature set of one TwK version (if limited in certain functionality) may accommodate their current vehicle, but it may not guarantee full compatibility with their future vehicle choice. That overall, down-the-road cost does factor in to decision-making when considering a particular unit.
> 
> So in that regard, I would definitely prefer a single "all-in-one" TwK unit, even if it was a bit more expensive. Perhaps one of those versions also includes the "FiX" features. But again, I'm in the ErinH boot camp rather than your typical target market.
> 
> Do you have any information to offer regarding my previous post about the Time Alignment specs?
> 
> Overall, I'm really interested to see what these units become and what they will offer in the end. The original Cleansweep products never interested me due to their limited feature set-to-cost ratio when compared to something like the RF 360.3. So if JL can bring these to market with an extremely versatile feauture set while also keeping them very competitively priced, I'm sure that you'll have a winner. There will be a few other new competing products coming to market soon by other manufacturers, so the options for all of us will be better than ever.


The difference between the TwK D8 and the TwK 88 is only on the input stage. The TwK 88 has eight (8) analog inputs, a digital TOSLINK and a digital coaxial input. The TwK D8 has only the two digital inputs and no analog inputs. This brings the price down a bit for the customer who is not in need of analog inputs. If you are using the SPDIF output of the FiX, the analog inputs probably wont be used, so why pay for them, right? 

The digital coaxial is a cool option on both units, if the OEM system uses a digital coax for signal (like the Hyundai Genesis), you can take the factory digital signal and run it straight into the TwK, no need for an integration device! 

The CleanSweep definitely was a misunderstood piece. It's lone purpose in life was to restore the factory signal into a flat response to work with. And because it was solely designed to fix the factory EQ it did a fantastic job. We chose the "modular" approach on FiX and TwK for a couple of reasons. One, if you only need a FiX or you only need a TwK, you pay for what you need and aren't wasting money for unused features. Additionally keeping them separate gives each DSP full horsepower to handle what we want it to handle. Keeping the FiX separate allows the DSP chip to handle the time correction, level matching, summing and equalization with room to play. Same thing on the TwK. As far as I know all of the processors on the market use the same EQ to correct the factory signal and make tuning adjustments. This may provide limitations to the ability to boost/cut the EQ if there is already a heavy correction being done on the OEM integration side. I like to think of it as an amphibious vehicle, yes it can drive on the road and float on the water, but will it be as good as a separate car or boat would? We firmly believe separate pieces will allow each device to do what we design it to do, with the best possible results and user experience.

I didn't see any questions about time alignment from you, what do you want to know?


----------



## robhaynes

kobiejohn said:


> "The optional DRC-100 knob controls the volume and provides a linear EQ ONLY on the FiX 82's analog outputs. The Digital output is not controlled by it since in most cases it is be most likely being sent to a processor with it's own MVC knob.
> 
> Hope this helps."
> 
> I think I saw a press release of new amps coming out, any chance they will accept the digital out from the Fix 82?


We will be showing new amps this week, but they won't have a digital input on them.


----------



## tommygjunior

robhaynes said:


> Tommy,
> 
> Did you get the email from tech support about this?


I did Rob. Thanks, it was a very quick response time and I'm hoping to finally find some time to try his suggestions. So how long until we get a time frame on the TwK??


----------



## Babs

I appreciate the idea of a DSP that only does digital input. Keeps it simple. Looking forward to finally seeing the Twk line up. 

I tell ya, JL is one of the few 12v companies with resources and ability to do this, as I saw they're releasing some really nifty nautical gear.. If JL got into the 2-din head unit business but with a super simple and clean optical out head unit. Made for talking to DSP's.. Give it CarPlay, make it do FLAC from USB, maybe even hi-rez, but no disk, no internal amp, just preamp and digital output and snappy quick UI. Basically radio tuner, media player, transport to feeding the Twk or other DSP's.. Oh snap! Take my money!

And the crowd says!.... 

Just dreaming out loud again. 


Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## IJCOBRA

robhaynes said:


> The difference between the TwK D8 and the TwK 88 is only on the input stage. The TwK 88 has eight (8) analog inputs, a digital TOSLINK and a digital coaxial input. The TwK D8 has only the two digital inputs and no analog inputs. This brings the price down a bit for the customer who is not in need of analog inputs. If you are using the SPDIF output of the FiX, the analog inputs probably wont be used, so why pay for them, right?
> 
> The digital coaxial is a cool option on both units, if the OEM system uses a digital coax for signal (like the Hyundai Genesis), you can take the factory digital signal and run it straight into the TwK, no need for an integration device!
> 
> The CleanSweep definitely was a misunderstood piece. It's lone purpose in life was to restore the factory signal into a flat response to work with. And because it was solely designed to fix the factory EQ it did a fantastic job. We chose the "modular" approach on FiX and TwK for a couple of reasons. One, if you only need a FiX or you only need a TwK, you pay for what you need and aren't wasting money for unused features. Additionally keeping them separate gives each DSP full horsepower to handle what we want it to handle. Keeping the FiX separate allows the DSP chip to handle the time correction, level matching, summing and equalization with room to play. Same thing on the TwK. As far as I know all of the processors on the market use the same EQ to correct the factory signal and make tuning adjustments. This may provide limitations to the ability to boost/cut the EQ if there is already a heavy correction being done on the OEM integration side. I like to think of it as an amphibious vehicle, yes it can drive on the road and float on the water, but will it be as good as a separate car or boat would? We firmly believe separate pieces will allow each device to do what we design it to do, with the best possible results and user experience.
> 
> I didn't see any questions about time alignment from you, what do you want to know?


Seems odd that the cheaper TWK would only include digital inputs. Last time I checked (earlier this year) most aftermarket headunits have NO digital output as it seems TOSLINK has been abandoned. Some have HDMI. RCA seems to remain the standard unfortunately. And most amps also have analog inputs only (including my HD 900/5s). Not sure if digital is the standard in OEM applications now or what. Seems to me the consumer would need RCA and skip digital in/outputs completely... But perhaps JL is planning their own headunit (and digital in amps?) as speculated...


----------



## cbrandonb

They're cheaper because there's less to them... they don't have to convert analog to digital for processing... skips a few steps that are expensive to get right.

Brandon


----------



## pocket5s

it was also explained that when the two units are used to together (fix and twk), which is likely to happen in most retailer installed cases, you'd use the digital feed.


----------



## cbrandonb

That, too.

Brandon


----------



## DDfusion

So it's like the JL W7 woofers that encourage you to buy the RIPS amps. 
I guess it worked before


----------



## bigjeep127

I'm excited about the digital only Twk. I'll feed it directly from an iPhone. It would be best if they'd build these processors with direct Bluetooth (AptX?) input, but a harness can be rigged up easily for a wired connection.


----------



## subterFUSE

Bluetooth is meh. Lossy Compressed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Babs

IJCOBRA said:


> Seems odd that the cheaper TWK would only include digital inputs. Last time I checked (earlier this year) most aftermarket headunits have NO digital output as it seems TOSLINK has been abandoned. Some have HDMI. RCA seems to remain the standard unfortunately. And most amps also have analog inputs only (including my HD 900/5s). Not sure if digital is the standard in OEM applications now or what. Seems to me the consumer would need RCA and skip digital in/outputs completely... But perhaps JL is planning their own headunit (and digital in amps?) as speculated...





cbrandonb said:


> They're cheaper because there's less to them... they don't have to convert analog to digital for processing... skips a few steps that are expensive to get right.
> 
> Brandon


Yep actually just a toslink to DSP chip so the required goodies would be much less. I think it's a great doggone idea as I deplore RCA's anyway before any/all processing is done. The faster we can get away from analog prior to finished processed signal ready for amps, the better, IMHO.



bigjeep127 said:


> I'm excited about the digital only Twk. I'll feed it directly from an iPhone. It would be best if they'd build these processors with direct Bluetooth (AptX?) input, but a harness can be rigged up easily for a wired connection.


There's a few out there that'll stream.. You want wifi though rather than bluetooth speaking from an opinion on bluetooth SQ.

As of yesterday's release at CES, appears Clarion has made us a head unit that'll absolutely rock with a Twk D8... 2-din Nav High-Rez with optical output. Break out the toslink cable runs gents.
NX706

Commander Riker says Hell yeahs!!









Jean Luc say well alrighty then!


----------



## rton20s

Babs said:


> As of yesterday's release at CES, appears Clarion has made us a head unit that'll absolutely rock with a Twk D8... 2-din Nav High-Rez with optical output. Break out the toslink cable runs gents.
> NX706
> 
> Commander Riker says Hell yeahs!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jean Luc say well alrighty then!












I like the idea of this unit, too. But until we see how the UI and touch screen function, I'm not holding my breath. It is Clarion after all. They aren't really the same company that brought us the DRZ9255.


----------



## Babs

rton20s said:


> I like the idea of this unit, too. But until we see how the UI and touch screen function, I'm not holding my breath. It is Clarion after all. They aren't really the same company that brought us the DRZ9255.


----------



## rton20s

Babs said:


>


----------



## evo9

Has Clarion develop the fine art of customer service with those new digital bits??


----------



## evo9

If you understand the language spoken >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjmcmRYt_kw


----------



## Mack7

Rob, will the Twk be able to tune different sources separately? That is, can you tune a Sirius channel one way to get it right, and then do regular FM, iPod, etc. the same way up to four or five sources? And if so, will it have a dashboard unit to select which tune you want?

Also, any idea when the TwK will be available and if its price will be about the same as the Fix, or significantly more (or less)?

Many thanks for all your helpful information


----------



## cbrandonb

I would also love to know when we'll have a release date or at least an official webpage. I'm getting antsy. 

Brandon


----------



## robhaynes

Mack7 said:


> Rob, will the Twk be able to tune different sources separately? That is, can you tune a Sirius channel one way to get it right, and then do regular FM, iPod, etc. the same way up to four or five sources? And if so, will it have a dashboard unit to select which tune you want?
> 
> Also, any idea when the TwK will be available and if its price will be about the same as the Fix, or significantly more (or less)?
> 
> Many thanks for all your helpful information


The TwK D8 and TwK 88 will allow up to 6 different presets for each project (one project can be written to the hardware at a time), so yes. You can make a SiriusXM preset, iPod preset etc.

The presets are very flexible and are not just limited to different EQ or time delay settings. You can have a completely different input/output structure through the GUI's input mixer. One preset can use the digital input for a FiX 82, and another preset can use the analog inputs for a different source unit or act as an aux input. Everything from the input/output routing, channels/zone levels & control, crossovers, equalizer, time delay etc are configurable to your liking. You can toggle through the presets via the included DRC-200 knob by pressing it in. Each preset is designated a color through the user interface. When you press the knob of the DRC-200 in, the preset will change and the built in LED will change color to the selected preset. 

We are finalizing the interface, the hardware is pretty much done. If all goes well March/April should be the release time. TwK 88 will have a MAP of $399.99 and the TwK D8 will have a MAP of $339.99. The FiX 82 and TwK D8 will come in as a pair at $639.99 (sold separately of course).

Hopefully we can show you guys the user interface soon, we received very positive feedback from our dealers in Las Vegas last week.


----------



## cbrandonb

Thanks, Rob! Those presets sound awesome and could be a huge help.

Brandon


----------



## Mack7

Rob, thank you SO much for the quick reply. That information about the presets is exactly what I was hoping to hear and convinces me that I need to wait for the TwK.

One quick follow-up question that will help in planning the installation. Do you have the rough dimensions of the unit that will have the preset selection knob and LED's (and possible volume control) on it? In effect, how much space will I need (LxWxD) for the new controls? By the way, the idea of having different colors for the presets strikes me as ingenious. Hats off to JL for that and for the Fix/TwK combination.


----------



## robhaynes

Mack7 said:


> Rob, thank you SO much for the quick reply. That information about the presets is exactly what I was hoping to hear and convinces me that I need to wait for the TwK.
> 
> One quick follow-up question that will help in planning the installation. Do you have the rough dimensions of the unit that will have the preset selection knob and LED's (and possible volume control) on it? In effect, how much space will I need (LxWxD) for the new controls? By the way, the idea of having different colors for the presets strikes me as ingenious. Hats off to JL for that and for the Fix/TwK combination.


DRC-200 is just a master control knob so it's rather small. The outer ring and middle knob can be configured in the GUI to control either master volume, subwoofer, different channels/zones (like the rear or towers on a boat), center channel etc. Of course each assignable zone control can be different in each of the presets. There is a six-foot extension on the LED so it can be mounted on the dash and be in plain site if the knob is being mounted on the center console.


----------



## Mack7

Many thanks again, Rob. You have cleared up all my questions (and, I suspect, the questions of others on this thread). We all look forward to meeting the TwK.


----------



## IJCOBRA

Will the TwK have an auto-tune feature like the MS-8 did? There are lots of DSPs which each allow us to change just about every variable, but capability is not the problem. Skill, practicality, and the voodoo of car audio is the problem. We need a working auto-tune.


----------



## ErinH

something I'm curious about... 

Linking multiple twk 88's. How do you connect them physically? Can you daisy chain a USB cable or will you have to run separate cables? Along the same lines: How does that work in the GUI? Do you need to switch interfaces, or is it all controlled in the same menu?


----------



## subterFUSE

ErinH said:


> something I'm curious about...
> 
> 
> 
> Linking multiple twk 88's. How do you connect them physically? Can you daisy chain a USB cable or will you have to run separate cables? Along the same lines: How does that work in the GUI? Do you need to switch interfaces, or is it all controlled in the same menu?



And how is latency handled? Do they share a common clock?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## pocket5s

ErinH said:


> something I'm curious about...
> 
> Linking multiple twk 88's. How do you connect them physically? Can you daisy chain a USB cable or will you have to run separate cables? Along the same lines: How does that work in the GUI? Do you need to switch interfaces, or is it all controlled in the same menu?


I thought that was answered in this thread but can't find it. I asked that question somewhere. I was told you have to connect to each individually.


----------



## robhaynes

IJCOBRA said:


> Will the TwK have an auto-tune feature like the MS-8 did? There are lots of DSPs which each allow us to change just about every variable, but capability is not the problem. Skill, practicality, and the voodoo of car audio is the problem. We need a working auto-tune.


No auto-tune.


ErinH said:


> something I'm curious about...
> 
> Linking multiple twk 88's. How do you connect them physically? Can you daisy chain a USB cable or will you have to run separate cables? Along the same lines: How does that work in the GUI? Do you need to switch interfaces, or is it all controlled in the same menu?





pocket5s said:


> I thought that was answered in this thread but can't find it. I asked that question somewhere. I was told you have to connect to each individually.


You can connect multiple TwK 88 or TwK D8's using the Toslink output and input. This will pass signal as well as any preset information stored on the TwK's. You will need to connect each TwK individually to your PC for tuning and set up.


----------



## Kevin K

Would be nice in doing the multi link if you could address them somehow so they wouldn't have to be connected individually. 
Easier said than done, I'm sure.


----------



## pocket5s

Kevin K said:


> Would be nice in doing the multi link if you could address them somehow so they wouldn't have to be connected individually.
> Easier said than done, I'm sure.


The easiest way (on paper) would be to daisy chain them via usb. however that would take more development time at the software/ui level in particular, for a use case that is probably very, very small.

I know of only one person that actually _needs_ this feature. 

having said that, yes it would be neat.


----------



## robhaynes

Kevin K said:


> Would be nice in doing the multi link if you could address them somehow so they wouldn't have to be connected individually.
> *Easier said than done, I'm sure.*


That would be an understatement.


----------



## subterFUSE

Not sure if this has been answered or not?

Is the optical output from the FiX variable or fixed level?


----------



## robhaynes

subterFUSE said:


> Not sure if this has been answered or not?
> 
> Is the optical output from the FiX variable or fixed level?


Optical is fixed, analog is variable with the optional DRC-100.


----------



## Babs

Friday Devil's advocate mode  ...

Since JL is dabbling with motorsport head units, I suggest JL consider a 1 and/or 2 din simple mechless head unit source controller for the Twk for those who can do an aftermarket head unit.

Simple simple simple.. A radio, USB/iDevice input media player. Hi-rez. Optical output for audio, control output for volume (processed at the DSP). Wouldn't even need a preamp.. Just a toslink output. I'd sign up right now for that with a Twk or two.


----------



## Gibberish

Hey robhaynes, is there an ETA on when the Fix 86 is coming?


----------



## pocket5s

Gibberish said:


> Hey robhaynes, is there an ETA on when the Fix 86 is coming?


I don't think there is a Fix 86, just the 82 and it is available now:
JL Audio FiX-82 - Processors


----------



## robhaynes

Gibberish said:


> Hey robhaynes, is there an ETA on when the Fix 86 is coming?


No hard date yet, but this spring. I think the hardware portion is done, just working on the software and all of that fun stuff 


pocket5s said:


> I don't think there is a Fix 86, just the 82 and it is available now:
> JL Audio FiX-82 - Processors


There will be a FiX 86 later on this year. It will have six analog outputs (Front, Rear and Sub) so you can retain the factory fader if needed. You will lose the digital output (it's two channel anyway, so if a fader was the issue, you wouldn't be using it anyways, right?) and it will only be able to sum up to a three-way front system since rear inputs need to be used now. With an optional DRC-200 knob you can use the main knob for master volume control and the outer ring for sub level control.


----------



## Gibberish

robhaynes said:


> No hard date yet, but this spring. I think the hardware portion is done, just working on the software and all of that fun stuff
> 
> There will be a FiX 86 later on this year. It will have six analog outputs (Front, Rear and Sub) so you can retain the factory fader if needed. You will lose the digital output (it's two channel anyway, so if a fader was the issue, you wouldn't be using it anyways, right?) and it will only be able to sum up to a three-way front system since rear inputs need to be used now. With an optional DRC-200 knob you can use the main knob for master volume control and the outer ring for sub level control.


Thanks Rob, keep us posted.


----------



## brumledb

Anyone reviews from someone who has used the Fix82?


----------



## tommygjunior

brumledb said:


> Anyone reviews from someone who has used the Fix82?


Honest review? I've been using it for about 4 months. It did everything I wanted it to do except calibrate with my usb for my ipod, (when calibrated with usb, played fine via Bluetooth but clipped when played through usb) which on a 2015 grand Cherokee is the only way to get the 8" uconnect display to show me playlists, etc. With the help of the shop who sold me the product, ABT electronics and them spending a solid hour or two with me even though I did the install myself, they figured out the solution and it wasn't user error or an error in wiring. I can help anyone who is also having a clipping issue after successfully completing a calibration, just pm me. Since then I have been nothing but happy with the fix. CANNOT wait for the twK and having already spoken to abt I'm hoping I'm first in line for the unit when shipped. I'll be going active with my fronts at the same time and just across the board I'm very stoked. JL makes a good product, every company has weakest links but the FIX and JL's products in general is not theirs.


----------



## doug97gxe

robhaynes said:


> Tommy,
> 
> Did you get the email from tech support about this?


Rob,

i was having issues with my Fix82 calibrating and i contacted Tech Support, they told me that i can't use the Fix82 just to add on a sub and suggested that i use the AudioControl LC2i. He suggested that the Fix82 cannot calibrate off a subwoofer signal.

I'm confused because i thought in my Fix82 documentation it gives instructions if you only want to use a Sub and also while i'm trying to calibrate the CD will send a high pitch signal first and i can see the lights on the input fully green, wouldn't that suggest that the Fix82 is seeing full range signals?

Any advice you can give to help will be great.

Thanks


----------



## robhaynes

doug97gxe said:


> Rob,
> 
> i was having issues with my Fix82 calibrating and i contacted Tech Support, they told me that i can't use the Fix82 just to add on a sub and suggested that i use the AudioControl LC2i. He suggested that the Fix82 cannot calibrate off a subwoofer signal.
> 
> I'm confused because i thought in my Fix82 documentation it gives instructions if you only want to use a Sub and also while i'm trying to calibrate the CD will send a high pitch signal first and i can see the lights on the input fully green, wouldn't that suggest that the Fix82 is seeing full range signals?
> 
> Any advice you can give to help will be great.
> 
> Thanks


The FiX 82 can be used for just a subwoofer, but it might be overkill. For the FiX 82 to properly calibrate it has to have a full range signal, even if you're just using it for a sub system. The first pair of green LED's you see are just verifying that there is signal on the inputs, it doesn't mean it's a full-range signal, just that there is "something" there.

The output LED's if green mean the unit properly calibrated, which means it sees a full-range signal and it was able to apply any time compensation, level match and sum (if needed) and applied it's equalization.

What is the calibration issue that you're having with it? Are the output LED's flashing red, and if so is it one, two, three or four flashes? There is an article here also that explains the calibration failures:
https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/211452118-FiX-Calibration-Failure-Troubleshooting

If you're using just a subwoofer, the FiX 82 might be overkill, and the LC2I is a fantastic option to add just a sub and help overcome any factory roll off that might be on the sub channel. 

Let me know if you have any other questions!


----------



## robhaynes

tommygjunior said:


> Honest review? I've been using it for about 4 months. It did everything I wanted it to do except calibrate with my usb for my ipod, (when calibrated with usb, played fine via Bluetooth but clipped when played through usb) which on a 2015 grand Cherokee is the only way to get the 8" uconnect display to show me playlists, etc. With the help of the shop who sold me the product, ABT electronics and them spending a solid hour or two with me even though I did the install myself, they figured out the solution and it wasn't user error or an error in wiring. I can help anyone who is also having a clipping issue after successfully completing a calibration, just pm me. Since then I have been nothing but happy with the fix. CANNOT wait for the twK and having already spoken to abt I'm hoping I'm first in line for the unit when shipped. I'll be going active with my fronts at the same time and just across the board I'm very stoked. JL makes a good product, every company has weakest links but the FIX and JL's products in general is not theirs.


Tommy,

Glad to hear you got things worked out. I did a training at ABT Monday night and we actually talked about you (all good, I promise  ). Send me a PM with what you guys did.


----------



## doug97gxe

robhaynes said:


> The FiX 82 can be used for just a subwoofer, but it might be overkill. For the FiX 82 to properly calibrate it has to have a full range signal, even if you're just using it for a sub system. The first pair of green LED's you see are just verifying that there is signal on the inputs, it doesn't mean it's a full-range signal, just that there is "something" there.
> 
> The output LED's if green mean the unit properly calibrated, which means it sees a full-range signal and it was able to apply any time compensation, level match and sum (if needed) and applied it's equalization.
> 
> What is the calibration issue that you're having with it? Are the output LED's flashing red, and if so is it one, two, three or four flashes? There is an article here also that explains the calibration failures:
> https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/211452118-FiX-Calibration-Failure-Troubleshooting
> 
> If you're using just a subwoofer, the FiX 82 might be overkill, and the LC2I is a fantastic option to add just a sub and help overcome any factory roll off that might be on the sub channel.
> 
> Let me know if you have any other questions!


unfortunately i already have the Fix82 .. but here is my issue



> My issue is when i use the calibration CD and i try to calibrate the Input is Green and then the Calibration lights will flash 4 red 4 times.
> If i increase the volume on the Input of the radio eventually the Input will start flashing Red, once i turn it down a little the unit still will not calibrate


----------



## brumledb

tommygjunior said:


> Honest review? I've been using it for about 4 months. It did everything I wanted it to do except calibrate with my usb for my ipod, (when calibrated with usb, played fine via Bluetooth but clipped when played through usb) which on a 2015 grand Cherokee is the only way to get the 8" uconnect display to show me playlists, etc. With the help of the shop who sold me the product, ABT electronics and them spending a solid hour or two with me even though I did the install myself, they figured out the solution and it wasn't user error or an error in wiring. I can help anyone who is also having a clipping issue after successfully completing a calibration, just pm me. Since then I have been nothing but happy with the fix. CANNOT wait for the twK and having already spoken to abt I'm hoping I'm first in line for the unit when shipped. I'll be going active with my fronts at the same time and just across the board I'm very stoked. JL makes a good product, every company has weakest links but the FIX and JL's products in general is not theirs.


Thanks for the review. I already ordered one and should be in today sometime. I will be using it between my OEM amp and Helix DSP.


----------



## Gibberish

doug97gxe said:


> unfortunately i already have the Fix82 .. but here is my issue


Would you want to sell it?


----------



## doug97gxe

Gibberish said:


> Would you want to sell it?



I don't want to take a hit on what I paid for it I'm going to try and connect it to a full range signal 


Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


----------



## robhaynes

doug97gxe said:


> unfortunately i already have the Fix82 .. but here is my issue


What volume level is your OEM source unit at when you're running the cal track?

You mentioned a high pitched signal from the CD, the tone should sound like a pipe organ. Have you tried downloading the cal track and playing it through USB, iPod or Bluetooth?


----------



## doug97gxe

robhaynes said:


> What volume level is your OEM source unit at when you're running the cal track?
> 
> You mentioned a high pitched signal from the CD, the tone should sound like a pipe organ. Have you tried downloading the cal track and playing it through USB, iPod or Bluetooth?


haven't tried USB as yet. Volume i can't tell because Audi doesn't give any form of volume indicator and the volume knob can rotate for days


----------



## doug97gxe

robhaynes said:


> What volume level is your OEM source unit at when you're running the cal track?
> 
> You mentioned a high pitched signal from the CD, the tone should sound like a pipe organ. Have you tried downloading the cal track and playing it through USB, iPod or Bluetooth?


calibration didn't happen with the file, looks like i'm going to have to tap into my full range signal.. i took at my factory amplifier connections didn't look too bad and its literally less than 6 inches where the Fix currently is.

Is there any negative implications of running the fix without it being calibrated?


----------



## subterFUSE

doug97gxe said:


> haven't tried USB as yet. Volume i can't tell because Audi doesn't give any form of volume indicator and the volume knob can rotate for days


The Audi A6/S6 Bose system has a digital volume display that goes from zero to a max of 34. It is very easy to find an exact volume level for setting a DSP input sensitivity.


----------



## doug97gxe

subterFUSE said:


> The Audi A6/S6 Bose system has a digital volume display that goes from zero to a max of 34. It is very easy to find an exact volume level for setting a DSP input sensitivity.


i found it about an hour ago .. think it was called entertainment suppression or somethign like that .. toyed with it a little bit to get the right volume where the input wouldn't clip .. it was about 3 notches off the middle .. still didn't calibrate but it does sound a whole lot better


----------



## doug97gxe

Finally tapped into a full range signal still wouldn't calibrate it just kept flashing trying to calibrate till the track ended.. Do I have to be plugged into the 1/2 .. Etc input to calibrate ?


Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


----------



## tommygjunior

doug97gxe said:


> Finally tapped into a full range signal still wouldn't calibrate it just kept flashing trying to calibrate till the track ended.. Do I have to be plugged into the 1/2 .. Etc input to calibrate ?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


Yes you have to plug in a signal in the 1 and 2 channel inputs on the fix, then use the 7 and 8 channel inputs for sub signal. If you only have 1 subwoofer output from the factory amp then splice it and use the same signal for both channels 7 and 8 on the FIX. It will not work without seeing an input from both sub channels.


----------



## doug97gxe

tommygjunior said:


> Yes you have to plug in a signal in the 1 and 2 channel inputs on the fix, then use the 7 and 8 channel inputs for sub signal. If you only have 1 subwoofer output from the factory amp then splice it and use the same signal for both channels 7 and 8 on the FIX. It will not work without seeing an input from both sub channels.



Thanks I will try this.. Appreciate your help.. Guy from JL tech suppose keeps telling me to go buy an Audio control 


Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


----------



## robhaynes

How exactly are you connecting the FiX 82's inputs? What bandwidths are going into the inputs? If you have full range without a sub signal you don't need and shouldn't connect a sub signal as that is just more processing and correcting the FiX 82 needs to do.

Sub signal is only required at inputs 7/8 because there is a LPF that takes out high frequency noise that tends to be common in OEM amplified systems. It's not a requirement for the FiX 82 to properly calibrate, it doesn't care how it gets 20-20K, it just needs to see it some how.


----------



## tommygjunior

robhaynes said:


> How exactly are you connecting the FiX 82's inputs? What bandwidths are going into the inputs? If you have full range without a sub signal you don't need and shouldn't connect a sub signal as that is just more processing and correcting the FiX 82 needs to do.
> 
> Sub signal is only required at inputs 7/8 because there is a LPF that takes out high frequency noise that tends to be common in OEM amplified systems. It's not a requirement for the FiX 82 to properly calibrate, it doesn't care how it gets 20-20K, it just needs to see it some how.


He's using the fix exclusively for an aftermarket amp/sub woofer. The vehicle has a factory subwoofer set up too. That was why I was recommending him take the sub signal as well because I was concerned the mid and high inputs from the factory amp could already be crossed over and it's not truly a full range especially considering he really only wants to use a sub signal.


----------



## doug97gxe

robhaynes said:


> How exactly are you connecting the FiX 82's inputs? What bandwidths are going into the inputs? If you have full range without a sub signal you don't need and shouldn't connect a sub signal as that is just more processing and correcting the FiX 82 needs to do.
> 
> Sub signal is only required at inputs 7/8 because there is a LPF that takes out high frequency noise that tends to be common in OEM amplified systems. It's not a requirement for the FiX 82 to properly calibrate, it doesn't care how it gets 20-20K, it just needs to see it some how.


I tapped into my Bang Olufsen Connectors after the amplifier

Front Right Tweeter/Midrange +	CH4 +	R22/R104	T32h	5	Red/Yellow	Shared with R22, R104, contains combined signal
Front Right Tweeter/Midrange -	CH4 -	R22/R104	T32h	19	Brown/Yellow	Shared with R22, R104, contains combined signal

Audison BitOne in a B8 S4 w/B&O? Full B&O makeover?

into the 7/8 connectors


----------



## doug97gxe

tommygjunior said:


> He's using the fix exclusively for an aftermarket amp/sub woofer. The vehicle has a factory subwoofer set up too. That was why I was recommending him take the sub signal as well because I was concerned the mid and high inputs from the factory amp could already be crossed over and it's not truly a full range especially considering he really only wants to use a sub signal.


I was using the sub signal and was told it wasn't full range and wouldn't calibrate.. so i tapped into a full range signal instead


----------



## tommygjunior

doug97gxe said:


> I tapped into my Bang Olufsen Connectors after the amplifier
> 
> Front Right Tweeter/Midrange +	CH4 +	R22/R104	T32h	5	Red/Yellow	Shared with R22, R104, contains combined signal
> Front Right Tweeter/Midrange -	CH4 -	R22/R104	T32h	19	Brown/Yellow	Shared with R22, R104, contains combined signal
> 
> Audison BitOne in a B8 S4 w/B&O? Full B&O makeover?
> 
> into the 7/8 connectors


First I would double check all polarities. It's a very simple box but wiring it correctly is imperative or it will fight you till the end.

then I would use this set up.

R103 - Front left mid-range loudspeaker- Channel 1 Fix
R20 - Front left treble loudspeaker- -------Channel 3 Fix
R21 - Front left bass loudspeaker----------Channel 5 Fix

R104 - Front right mid-range loudspeaker---Channel 2 Fix
R22 - Front right treble loudspeaker---------Channel 4 Fix
R23 - Front right bass loudspeaker-----------Channel 6 Fix

Then take R157 and splice it. Feed it into both Channel 7 and Channel 8.

This will give a FULL range to the RCA outs which you can run through an external eq or just straight to an amp with the correct HPF/LPF and slope set ups and it will work for anything you'd like to power through it.


----------



## robhaynes

If you in fact have a three-way active up front and a dedicated sub, Tommy's input above is spot on.

Do not try combing signals into the FiX 82. Run each channel and let the FiX 82 do the summing process properly.

Looking at your picture, what is the deal with the two distribution blocks going into the FiX 82 inputs?

I am pretty confident an input structure like what Tommy posted above will result in successful calibration.


----------



## doug97gxe

robhaynes said:


> If you in fact have a three-way active up front and a dedicated sub, Tommy's input above is spot on.
> 
> Do not try combing signals into the FiX 82. Run each channel and let the FiX 82 do the summing process properly.
> 
> Looking at your picture, what is the deal with the two distribution blocks going into the FiX 82 inputs?
> 
> I am pretty confident an input structure like what Tommy posted above will result in successful calibration.



It definitely looks good .. Now it's a matter or time to do it .. Tommy I appreciate the write up

Distribution block has an input from the factory amplifier

Is there any negative effects of me currently running the setup un calibrated before I tackle this splicing?


Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


----------



## robhaynes

doug97gxe said:


> It definitely looks good .. Now it's a matter or time to do it .. Tommy I appreciate the write up
> 
> Distribution block has an input from the factory amplifier
> 
> Is there any negative effects of me currently running the setup un calibrated before I tackle this splicing?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


Negative effects may include signal with no EQ control, incorrect levels (may be boosted or attenuated severely) or missing information. It all depends on what the FiX 82 was able to properly correct without a full-range signal.

Just so I understand correctly, you have signal from the B&O amp going to the distribution block, then to the FiX 82?? I would skip that, run separate inputs from the B&O amp to the designated FiX 82 inputs. 

Also, as Tommy mentioned above, it's highly recommended to use midrange on inputs 1/2 as input one has the turn-on circuit for the auto sensing turn-on feature. There is always midrange in everything we listen to and will keep the FiX 82 on when listening to a source such as AM, where there is little if any high or low frequency. That is of course if you're using the auto sensing turn-on method.


----------



## JVD240

doug97gxe said:


>


Ehhhh.... this doesn't look right. You're taking multiple amplified outputs and summing them into a distro-block?

You can't do that.

Each signal needs to be separate.


----------



## adrianp89

Lol... I think he is WAY over thinking this. This is a simple install.


----------



## doug97gxe

the727kid said:


> Lol... I think he is WAY over thinking this. This is a simple install.



It's a simple install till it doesn't calibrate .. I had a misunderstanding when I bought the product .. Totally my fault .. This is for replacing the whole system it's not designed for simple sub add on


Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


----------



## doug97gxe

JVD240 said:


> Ehhhh.... this doesn't look right. You're taking multiple amplified outputs and summing them into a distro-block?
> 
> 
> 
> You can't do that.
> 
> 
> 
> Each signal needs to be separate.



The instructions state you can bridge inputs for the sub input 


Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


----------



## adrianp89

Why wouldn't you just get a normal LOC for $15?


----------



## doug97gxe

the727kid said:


> Why wouldn't you just get a normal LOC for $15?



I have the $15 PAC and was running it.. But I misunderstood this product and how it works .. I figured this could be used with just a sub to clean up my signals 


Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


----------



## JVD240

doug97gxe said:


> The instructions state you can bridge inputs for the sub input
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


Aren't you taking amplified speaker outputs from the factory amp? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the setup. 

From what I can tell you're shorting two factory amplified signal outputs together. You can't just twist two speaker outputs together. Your distro block is accomplishing the same thing.


----------



## doug97gxe

JVD240 said:


> Aren't you taking amplified speaker outputs from the factory amp? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the setup.
> 
> From what I can tell you're shorting two factory amplified signal outputs together. You can't just twist two speaker outputs together. Your distro block is accomplishing the same thing.













Sent from my iPhone8s using Tapatalk


----------



## boricua69

I tested two of them, the second i tested came with a different box. I have to say that the JL Audio Fix 82 DSP needs to be Fix.


----------



## robhaynes

boricua69 said:


> I tested two of them, the second i tested came with a different box. I have to say that the JL Audio Fix 82 DSP needs to be Fix.


Care to explain? We did move to a smaller footprint box for packaging, so that would explain the different box. Did you have any issues with it?


----------



## LOST_llama

Rob,

With the TWK, would it be possible to use channel 7 as a mono sub out and channel 8 as a mono center or rear fill?

Thanks,

Brian


----------



## katodevin

Here's my results from an Lexus IS + a Fix82. Should I be concerned with the little peak at 2k?


----------



## robhaynes

LOST_llama said:


> Rob,
> 
> With the TWK, would it be possible to use channel 7 as a mono sub out and channel 8 as a mono center or rear fill?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Brian


Sure can!


----------



## robhaynes

katodevin said:


> Here's my results from an Lexus IS + a Fix82. Should I be concerned with the little peak at 2k?


Is that read out at the same volume you did the calibration at? I'm sure that car has volume dependent equalization and if the volume changed that could explain the boost and a not so flat response.

If not, I don't think it's the end of the world, have you tried re-calibrating it? Also is that the electrical response or acoustical response of the vehicle?


----------



## cbrandonb

Any idea when the TwK will be out?

Brandon


----------



## katodevin

robhaynes said:


> Is that read out at the same volume you did the calibration at? I'm sure that car has volume dependent equalization and if the volume changed that could explain the boost and a not so flat response.
> 
> If not, I don't think it's the end of the world, have you tried re-calibrating it? Also is that the electrical response or acoustical response of the vehicle?


Hi Rob - thanks so much for getting back to me.

Yes, that is the same volume I did calibration at. I've also verified that the factory's frequency response is not volume knob sensitive. Here's my thread with all of the individual channel measurements. http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...n/260825-stock-lexus-is350-rtaed-fixable.html

This is the electrical response (if that was acoustic response, I'd be jumping for joy). I agree that it probably isn't a deal breaker - I'll try re-calibrating after I get all my gear installed. I was trying to use the minimal amount of channels for summing, so, I used dash and doors - *Should I try adding the rears into the mix?*

Also, I couldn't get signal sense on/off to work. I did ensure that I was feeding them a midrange signal, tried both the doors and dash speakers. * Any tips on getting this to work? *


----------



## XSIV SPL

I hate to be a spoiler, but in my own system, I've tried 3 different Fix-82s... They were either very noisy or wouldn't calibrate at all... I was having flashbacks of the "clean sweep"...

I've removed them all, there are no more JL processors in my system now... and today is a good day.


----------



## katodevin

XSIV SPL said:


> I hate to be a spoiler, but in my own system, I've tried 3 different Fix-82s... They were either very noisy or wouldn't calibrate at all... I was having flashbacks of the "clean sweep"...
> 
> I've removed them all, there are no more JL processors in my system now... and today is a good day.


What are you using for signal summing now?


----------



## robhaynes

katodevin said:


> Hi Rob - thanks so much for getting back to me.
> 
> Yes, that is the same volume I did calibration at. I've also verified that the factory's frequency response is not volume knob sensitive. Here's my thread with all of the individual channel measurements. http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...n/260825-stock-lexus-is350-rtaed-fixable.html
> 
> This is the electrical response (if that was acoustic response, I'd be jumping for joy). I agree that it probably isn't a deal breaker - I'll try re-calibrating after I get all my gear installed. I was trying to use the minimal amount of channels for summing, so, I used dash and doors - *Should I try adding the rears into the mix?*
> 
> Also, I couldn't get signal sense on/off to work. I did ensure that I was feeding them a midrange signal, tried both the doors and dash speakers. * Any tips on getting this to work? *


If you have full-range from the front there is no need to use the rears. Ideally you should use as few inputs as possible to get 20-20k in.

For auto sensing to work jump the 12v battery over to 12v switched too. Switched is the turn on trigger, if you're not using a traditional remote or RAP wire and the REM option, jump battery to switched for signal sense or DC offset.


----------



## robhaynes

cbrandonb said:


> Any idea when the TwK will be out?
> 
> Brandon


Soon. We are pretty close to beta testing and there is alpha software out being tested and run through by the test group.


----------



## katodevin

robhaynes said:


> For auto sensing to work jump the 12v battery over to 12v switched too. Switched is the turn on trigger, if you're not using a traditional remote or RAP wire and the REM option, jump battery to switched for signal sense or DC offset.


AHHH, got it. I'll try that when I get home. Did I miss that in the manual? I thought I read it closely.


----------



## muzikmanwi

I am sorry if I missed it but the TwK price? Even a good guess?


----------



## princ3cmo

Hopefully this will help me get a flat signal out of the JBL Greenedge system in my Camry. 

I've been struggling with this forever and the JBL MS8 just won't do it.


----------



## robhaynes

muzikmanwi said:


> I am sorry if I missed it but the TwK price? Even a good guess?


TwK D8 will be $339.99 and TwK 88 will be $399.99.


----------



## muzikmanwi

Thanks a lot.


----------



## brumledb

Rob,

I have a question for you. I recently installed a Fix82. I haven't got to play around with it much but I am having an issue. The Fix82 is installed between my OEM amp and processor. The turn-on signal is a dedicated remote turn-on from my fuse panel. When I turn down the volume on my headunit so that it is very low, the Fix seems to lose the signal. If the volume is kept at this low level for a minute or so (I haven't timed it), the Fix causes the processor and amps to turn off. What happens then is that when the volume gets increased there is no volume initially until the processor and amps turn back on. Since there is no volume, the volume gets turned up higher and then all of a sudden the amps are on and the music is blaring.

Is there any workaround you know of for this?


----------



## t3sn4f2

brumledb said:


> Rob,
> 
> I have a question for you. I recently installed a Fix82. I haven't got to play around with it much but I am having an issue. The Fix82 is installed between my OEM amp and processor. The turn-on signal is a dedicated remote turn-on from my fuse panel. When I turn down the volume on my headunit so that it is very low, the Fix seems to lose the signal. If the volume is kept at this low level for a minute or so (I haven't timed it), the Fix causes the processor and amps to turn off. What happens then is that when the volume gets increased there is no volume initially until the processor and amps turn back on. Since there is no volume, the volume gets turned up higher and then all of a sudden the amps are on and the music is blaring.
> 
> Is there any workaround you know of for this?


Check that the "Turn-on Mode" switch on top of the unit is set to "Remote".


----------



## robhaynes

brumledb said:


> Rob,
> 
> I have a question for you. I recently installed a Fix82. I haven't got to play around with it much but I am having an issue. The Fix82 is installed between my OEM amp and processor. The turn-on signal is a dedicated remote turn-on from my fuse panel. When I turn down the volume on my headunit so that it is very low, the Fix seems to lose the signal. If the volume is kept at this low level for a minute or so (I haven't timed it), the Fix causes the processor and amps to turn off. What happens then is that when the volume gets increased there is no volume initially until the processor and amps turn back on. Since there is no volume, the volume gets turned up higher and then all of a sudden the amps are on and the music is blaring.
> 
> Is there any workaround you know of for this?





t3sn4f2 said:


> Check that the "Turn-on Mode" switch on top of the unit is set to "Remote".


What he said...

Sounds like the FiX is set for signal sensing instead of "Remote" for turn on.


----------



## brumledb

robhaynes said:


> What he said...
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like the FiX is set for signal sensing instead of "Remote" for turn on.



It is set to remote. The switch is all the way to the right.

Should the unit power up without any audio input, if connected via remote?Initially, I had only the 12v, ground, and remote wires connected with the Turn-on setting set to remote and the unit would not power on. Once I connected the audio input (and left everything else connected the same) the unit powered on properly and I was able to run calibration. 

After running the calibration and playing around with it for a little while is when I discovered it was shutting off if denied audio input. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## robhaynes

brumledb said:


> It is set to remote. The switch is all the way to the right.
> 
> Should the unit power up without any audio input, if connected via remote?Initially, I had only the 12v, ground, and remote wires connected with the Turn-on setting set to remote and the unit would not power on. Once I connected the audio input (and left everything else connected the same) the unit powered on properly and I was able to run calibration.
> 
> After running the calibration and playing around with it for a little while is when I discovered it was shutting off if denied audio input.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You have a dedicated remote wire into the "12v Switched" on the FiX plug? What bandwidth do you have on Inputs 1/2? Try running midrange into those inputs. What you are describing sounds like signal sensing on/off, midrange despite the volume should always keep the unit on.

Also, just to try everything, have you tried switching the turn-on mode to signal sense or DC offset to see what happens??


----------



## brumledb

robhaynes said:


> You have a dedicated remote wire into the "12v Switched" on the FiX plug? What bandwidth do you have on Inputs 1/2? Try running midrange into those inputs. What you are describing sounds like signal sensing on/off, midrange despite the volume should always keep the unit on.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, just to try everything, have you tried switching the turn-on mode to signal sense or DC offset to see what happens??



Yes, I have a dedicated remote wire into the 12v switched plug position and the turn-on switch is in the remote position.
Inputs 1/2 are receiving a midrange signal.

I am going to mess around with this a bit more and report back. I'll be sure to take notes and pics of the things I try.

But to clarify, if the Turn-on switch is in the remote position, is the audio signal able to affect turn-on/turn-off? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## robhaynes

brumledb said:


> Yes, I have a dedicated remote wire into the 12v switched plug position and the turn-on switch is in the remote position.
> Inputs 1/2 are receiving a midrange signal.
> 
> I am going to mess around with this a bit more and report back. I'll be sure to take notes and pics of the things I try.
> 
> But to clarify, if the Turn-on switch is in the remote position, is the audio signal able to affect turn-on/turn-off?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It shouldn't if not in Signal Sense or DC offset mode.

Make sure to report back to our Tech Support team so we can track it if it's a product issue and help with further troubleshooting [email protected]


----------



## muzikmanwi

I haven't played with a DSP yet. Still analog processors for EQ. What would your TwK 88 do for me that a miniDSP C-DSP 6x8 wouldn't?


----------



## jomito7

Rob, I'll be a beta tester if you need someone completely independent.

Questions: What PCM digital audio format will the TWK accept? 16bit/44.1kHz is obvious, but will it accept 24bit/192kHz audio? 

Thanks in Advance


----------



## Gibberish

Are we getting close to a Fix86 release soon?


----------



## robhaynes

muzikmanwi said:


> I haven't played with a DSP yet. Still analog processors for EQ. What would your TwK 88 do for me that a miniDSP C-DSP 6x8 wouldn't?


I'm not too familiar with the miniDSP 6x8 and I couldn't find too many specs on their website about the tuning aspects of it, but I can tell you all about the TwK! :laugh:


All tuning is heard real time, yes, real time  If you are dragging a center frequency all over the EQ you hear the changes as it's moving. This makes tuning so much easier.
TwK's have 10 bands of parametric equalization on all eight output channels (graphic EQ's in basic mode). Can link channels or tune individually. Parametric EQ's work really nice and make tuning a breeze.
6-48 dB per octave L-R or BW filters depending on mode of operation (Basic, Advanced, Expert. Again can link channels or adjust individually as well as have a level trim on each input.
Initial time delay based off of distance to desired listening point with later fine tuning adjustability. Can do delay on a group of channels or separately.
Input mixer that lets you control all input/output routing. You can even create center channels by combing L/R channels and do all sorts of crazy stuff.
We will have an amazing set up wizard at launch that will ask you your inputs and outputs (based off of everyday systems seen in install bays. There will be about 15 or so options.) Using the set up wizard means two clicks and your input and outputs are labeled, crossovers are set, and you're tuning right away. It's pretty awesome

Hope that helps, I'll see if I can get some screen caps to show the interface soon.


----------



## robhaynes

jomito7 said:


> Rob, I'll be a beta tester if you need someone completely independent.
> 
> Questions: What PCM digital audio format will the TWK accept? 16bit/44.1kHz is obvious, but will it accept 24bit/192kHz audio?
> 
> Thanks in Advance


It will but it will step it down to 24bit/48k.


----------



## robhaynes

Gibberish said:


> Are we getting close to a Fix86 release soon?


Hopefully. Hardware is essentially finished, I think there is some tweaking for the firmware that is still being worked on.

There may or may not be a BETA version in a car here....


----------



## pocket5s

You forgot to mention how much delay is available (hint, it is more than any other car dsp at the moment), or the eq db steps which are smaller than most I've seen. 

I won't say what those are in case they aren't finalized or are still 'secret' 

I do however wish there were more than 10 bands per channel.


----------



## robhaynes

pocket5s said:


> You forgot to mention how much delay is available (hint, it is more than any other car dsp at the moment), or the eq db steps which are smaller than most I've seen.
> 
> I won't say what those are in case they aren't finalized or are still 'secret'
> 
> I do however wish there were more than 10 bands per channel.


I just don't have all those specs memorized in my head :laugh:

One cool trick on the time delay and parametric EQ tuning is pressing the shift button and using the up/down arrows allows more precise adjustments. 

For example, a normal up/down arrow press on the EQ would be a 1/2 dB change in boost or cut. If you hold shift and then use the arrows it's a 1/10 db change in boost/cut.


----------



## pocket5s

21.something millisecond delay IIRC. and yeah, the 1/10th is damn nice to have for those uber tweakers in the world.


----------



## robhaynes

I will need to get a Windows lap top in front of me to confirm, but if I remember correctly using the CTRL button and arrows on the EQ provides finer adjustment on the Q as well.


----------



## pocket5s

robhaynes said:


> I will need to get a Windows lap top in front of me to confirm, but if I remember correctly using the CTRL button and arrows on the EQ provides finer adjustment on the Q as well.


it runs via parallels just fine  using shift it will do .05 adjustments on the Q. manually I can enter .01 adjustments, with gain adjustments as fine as .1db.


----------



## Kevin K

robhaynes said:


> I will need to get a Windows lap top in front of me to confirm, but if I remember correctly using the CTRL button and arrows on the EQ provides finer adjustment on the Q as well.


Shift and arrows will do Q.


----------



## robhaynes

pocket5s said:


> it runs via parallels just fine  using shift it will do .05 adjustments on the Q. manually I can enter .01 adjustments, with gain adjustments as fine as .1db.


Don't have it installed on my Mac. We have a couple of Lenovo's in the tech department we use on the road for training and to play around with in the office.


----------



## narvarr

Kevin K said:


> Shift and arrows will do Q.


You can also type in what you want as well. So any adjustment that you want to change, click on it, type it in and hit enter.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## Kevin K

narvarr said:


> You can also type in what you want as well. So any adjustment that you want to change, click on it, type it in and hit enter.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


Right, but when your in that moment, eyes closed, listening and tuning, it's nice to have fingers in home position and being able to tweak.


----------



## narvarr

Kevin K said:


> Right, but when your in that moment, eyes closed, listening and tuning, it's nice to have fingers in home position and being able to tweak.


Agreed. Being able to type it in just saves time when doing the initial setup.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## subterFUSE

Questions:


1. Can multiple TWK units be linked together?

2. If yes, is the connection analog or digital?

3. If yes, is the link pre or post processing?

3. If yes, will they share a common clock source to account for latency?


----------



## robhaynes

subterFUSE said:


> Questions:
> 
> 
> 1. Can multiple TWK units be linked together?
> Yes.
> 2. If yes, is the connection analog or digital?
> Digital. It will use the TOSLINK outputs/inputs
> 3. If yes, is the link pre or post processing?
> You will need to tune each TwK individually. The data passed along is a full range signal and any preset data as well as master volume control.
> 3. If yes, will they share a common clock source to account for latency?
> Not sure, I will have to look into that.


Answers above in red


----------



## rton20s

robhaynes said:


> Input mixer that lets you control all input/output routing. You can even create center channels by combing L/R channels and do all sorts of crazy stuff.


Can you clarify the capabilities of the mixer? Is this true center channel processing (Dolby, DTS, etc.) or just a simple L+R? There is a big difference. 

Also, any provision for processing surround rear channels? Even if it is something as simple as L-R in the mixer?

Thanks!


----------



## robhaynes

rton20s said:


> Can you clarify the capabilities of the mixer? Is this true center channel processing (Dolby, DTS, etc.) or just a simple L+R? There is a big difference.
> 
> Also, any provision for processing surround rear channels? Even if it is something as simple as L-R in the mixer?
> 
> Thanks!


No Dolby, DTS, you can derive a center channel from the L/R channels.

I'll find a screenshot of the mixer, but you can pretty much run any of the input channels to any output channels, and combine as many channels as you'd like to a set of outputs as well.


----------



## katodevin

robhaynes said:


> No Dolby, DTS, you can derive a center channel from the L/R channels.


When you say "derive" do you mean a simple mix of the L/R, or can you mix the mono overlap between the 2 for a true center?


----------



## rton20s

Sounds like a straight L+R which is pretty common on most processors. For most people looking to run a center channel, this probably won't be sufficient. 

And the lack of an L-R means it won't be capable of performing proper ambient rear fill strictly within the processor.


----------



## Phil Indeblanc

someone mentioned that it also has a strong noise floor when testing


----------



## bbfoto

I'm not sure if this was posted already, but here's a link to a YouTube video with a product feature overview for dealers of the TwK & FiX units. The lighting in the video is really bad, but the JL rep gives good info verbally. It starts out a little slow, but if you watch the entire video, it gives you a really good idea of its capabilities and its operation.

Thanks for making this video, Ricardo.


----------



## t0n33

bbfoto said:


> I'm not sure if this was posted already, but here's a link to a YouTube video with a product feature overview for dealers of the TwK & FiX units. The lighting in the video is really bad, but the JL rep gives good info verbally. It starts out a little slow, but if you watch the entire video, it gives you a really good idea of its capabilities and its operation.
> 
> Thanks for making this video, Ricardo.


thanks for sharing the video, I like his informative and practical presentation style. I think I watched a few hours of him presenting something else on YouTube a few weeks ago too...

needing to install both a TwK and an FiX for OEM integration seems less convenient than the c-dsp. the preset io configurations should save the pro installers some time.


----------



## robhaynes

rton20s said:


> Sounds like a straight L+R which is pretty common on most processors. For most people looking to run a center channel, this probably won't be sufficient.
> 
> And the lack of an L-R means it won't be capable of performing proper ambient rear fill strictly within the processor.


So about creating a center channel....

You do have the ability to due a blend of L-minus R and R-minus L. You can also do L-R & R-L on the rears if you desire.

I've spend a good amount of time playing with it this week, it's pretty awesome.


----------



## rton20s

robhaynes said:


> So about creating a center channel....
> 
> You do have the ability to due a blend of L-minus R and R-minus L. You can also do L-R & R-L on the rears if you desire.
> 
> I've spend a good amount of time playing with it this week, it's pretty awesome.


That is good to hear. While I still wouldn't try to use this for a center, it should be a nice option if you plan to do rear fill.


----------



## Phil Indeblanc

Having a discussion on another thread got me to asking....

I wonder if the EQ adjusts on the JL dsp's have a gap in the sound output as you adjust the EQ bands?


----------



## subterFUSE

Here's a question on the EQ...

So we know that there is a 10 band EQ per channel, and it can be graphic or parametric.

We also know that Channels can be linked and EQ bands adjusted together while maintaining relative spacing.

Both great features....


But what happens in this hypothetical scenario, when the EQ is in parametric mode and let's say:

CH1 Band 1 = 45 Hz with Q = 3
CH2 Band 1 = 65 Hz with Q = 6

Assuming the EQ link causes band 1 on both channels to adjust gain together, then these EQs would not track symmetrically because of different freq and Q settings.

I'm curious how this EQ linking might work when full parametric mode is enabled?


Another question on EQ...

Can channels in the processor be routed into each other to allow for more EQ bands? Let's say I wanted 20 bands of EQ for a driver, could I route CH1 to it and use 10 bands, and then route CH1 output to CH2 and use those 10 bands of EQ and then output to the amp?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## t0n33

subterFUSE said:


> Another question on EQ...
> 
> Can channels in the processor be routed into each other to allow for more EQ bands? Let's say I wanted 20 bands of EQ for a driver, could I route CH1 to it and use 10 bands, and then route CH1 output to CH2 and use those 10 bands of EQ and then output to the amp?


I had a similar idea thinking about rear fill and how to increase delay to 20ms on the c-dsp with a 15ms max. I would assume looping into itself would double the latency and you'd need to factor that in to other channels TA delay numbers. in my theory it could work fine if you're adjusting ta by ear...


----------



## bigguy

bbfoto said:


> I'm not sure if this was posted already, but here's a link to a YouTube video with a product feature overview for dealers of the TwK & FiX units. The lighting in the video is really bad, but the JL rep gives good info verbally. It starts out a little slow, but if you watch the entire video, it gives you a really good idea of its capabilities and its operation.
> 
> Thanks for making this video, Ricardo.


So in that video he mentioned that the FiX has a built in EQ. I have yet to see anyone mention messing around with that. Any one know what the capability so of it are?


----------



## DDfusion

Probably like the Clean sweep. Just a few presets


----------



## robhaynes

subterFUSE said:


> Here's a question on the EQ...
> 
> So we know that there is a 10 band EQ per channel, and it can be graphic or parametric.
> 
> We also know that Channels can be linked and EQ bands adjusted together while maintaining relative spacing.
> 
> Both great features....
> 
> 
> But what happens in this hypothetical scenario, when the EQ is in parametric mode and let's say:
> 
> CH1 Band 1 = 45 Hz with Q = 3
> CH2 Band 1 = 65 Hz with Q = 6
> 
> Assuming the EQ link causes band 1 on both channels to adjust gain together, then these EQs would not track symmetrically because of different freq and Q settings.
> 
> I'm curious how this EQ linking might work when full parametric mode is enabled?
> 
> 
> Another question on EQ...
> 
> Can channels in the processor be routed into each other to allow for more EQ bands? Let's say I wanted 20 bands of EQ for a driver, could I route CH1 to it and use 10 bands, and then route CH1 output to CH2 and use those 10 bands of EQ and then output to the amp?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


When linking EQ's together, you have the option to copy EQ1 to EQ2 or EQ2 to EQ1. If you want to adjust them separately you would not link or re-link them (if you wanted to fine tune after an initial L/R set up.)

No You can not route channels into another EQ bank. Input mixer pretty much lets you select an input, route it to an EQ and then on to an output.


----------



## robhaynes

Phil Indeblanc said:


> Having a discussion on another thread got me to asking....
> 
> I wonder if the EQ adjusts on the JL dsp's have a gap in the sound output as you adjust the EQ bands?


All real time tuning 

It's pretty impressive. Chasing the center, Q and boost/cut is all heard real time as well as changes to the crossover or time delay.


----------



## robhaynes

bigguy said:


> So in that video he mentioned that the FiX has a built in EQ. I have yet to see anyone mention messing around with that. Any one know what the capability so of it are?


There is software in development that when you plug your Windows based computer into the USB port of the FiX, reports real time what's on that device.

It will show you your input structure (i.e. if it's a 4-way system you would see the bandwidth of all four inputs), the final summed response, how much voltage adjustment was used for level matching and how much time compensation was used to correct any factory time delay on each channel. You can also electrically flip polarity to correct any polarity mistakes or to play with the staging in the vehicle, as well as calibrate from the computer without having to go to the device.

Since we had a little horsepower left on the FiX's DSP chip there will be a graphic 10-band EQ on each output channel.

Current FiX's will need their Firmware updated when the FiX-TüN software launches for compatibility.


----------



## msmith

subterFUSE said:


> But what happens in this hypothetical scenario, when the EQ is in parametric mode and let's say:
> 
> CH1 Band 1 = 45 Hz with Q = 3
> CH2 Band 1 = 65 Hz with Q = 6
> 
> Assuming the EQ link causes band 1 on both channels to adjust gain together, then these EQs would not track symmetrically because of different freq and Q settings.
> 
> I'm curious how this EQ linking might work when full parametric mode is enabled?


When you select multiple bands on the EQ, you can adjust the center frequency of all the selected bands up or down together... and you can adjust the boost/cut of all the selected bands together. You can also adjust "Q" up or down, maintaining the difference in Q between the selected bands. Adjustment range is limited by whichever band hits a hard limit first (gain, Freq, or Q)

You can even "grab" an EQ with your mouse/trackpad and drag them around together manually. 




> Another question on EQ...
> 
> Can channels in the processor be routed into each other to allow for more EQ bands? Let's say I wanted 20 bands of EQ for a driver, could I route CH1 to it and use 10 bands, and then route CH1 output to CH2 and use those 10 bands of EQ and then output to the amp?


If you need more than 10 bands of parametric EQ for a single driver, you need a different driver.

If you absolutely had to have more than 10 bands, you could run one of the outputs back into an input and get 20 bands of EQ, but it's not a recommended method.


----------



## gsdye

My current daily driver has a more complex system using a Alpine H800 and I love the flexibility and result. The new/next install is on a Cayman. Going in for an install in two weeks and the installer has suggested the Fix82 instead since the car is so loud and the engine is the star of the sound system. Saving money doesn't hurt also. Only started reading up on the product.

We are planning the system out now. The Cayman OEM is a 9 channel system (Centre, two dash tweeters, 4"/8" speakers in the doors and 2 x4" speakers at the back). No Bose and no Burmester.

From what I understand of the Fix82 now (video helped a lot) is to use the OEM amp for the centre channel and two rear channels. Sum the tweet/4"/8" channels with the Fix82, amplify with my JL 600/4 to new HAT speakers. My installer feels that with a flat signal the sound stage won't be that bad since the cabin is so small in the Cayman. Doubts there is any time delay since I don't have the BOSE/Burmester system.

I love the idea of a Twk add on to really tune the system properly if I'm not happy though. Modular. Is the Twk even available right now?


----------



## msmith

gsdye said:


> Is the Twk even available right now?


The TwK 88 is going out to beta testers this week. At least a month away from shipping in quantity, pending beta test results.


----------



## gsdye

msmith said:


> The TwK 88 is going out to beta testers this week. At least a month away from shipping in quantity, pending beta test results.


Thanks, I'll mention and have the installer plan to add the piece when available and IF needed. I have a feeling in a GT4, it won't matter. The cabin is loud.


----------



## robhaynes

Going to have some fun this weekend... Going active with my C5-650 coaxial and C5 imaging tweeters.


----------



## tommygjunior

robhaynes said:


> Going to have some fun this weekend... Going active with my C5-650 coaxial and C5 imaging tweeters.


THIS is what I've been waiting to do for like 7 months. lol. When will it hit the market? Soon? Also You may have mentioned this but will the TwK work with my MacBook pro?


----------



## pocket5s

tommygjunior said:


> THIS is what I've been waiting to do for like 7 months. lol. When will it hit the market? Soon? Also You may have mentioned this but will the TwK work with my MacBook pro?



The answer on when is like 3 posts up. 

It will work on a MacBook if you have parallels.


----------



## robhaynes

tommygjunior said:


> THIS is what I've been waiting to do for like 7 months. lol. When will it hit the market? Soon? Also You may have mentioned this but will the TwK work with my MacBook pro?





pocket5s said:


> The answer on when is like 3 posts up.
> 
> It will work on a MacBook if you have parallels.


As mentioned above, it will work with Parallels and Windows installed. I actually installed Parallels and Windows 10 yesterday and the TüN software is working great. Manville has had it installed on his MacBook Pro for a few weeks now with success.


----------



## jomito7

robhaynes said:


> As mentioned above, it will work with Parallels and Windows installed. I actually installed Parallels and Windows 10 yesterday and the TüN software is working great. Manville has had it installed on his MacBook Pro for a few weeks now with success.


Rob,

Are you guys going to have the TWK out for preorder? Or is this going to be like World Series tickets, where I have to sit at the computer and order right when it goes on sale to beat 1 Million Chinese people to get one? Very excited to buy.

Thanks in advance

Jomito7


----------



## robhaynes

jomito7 said:


> Rob,
> 
> Are you guys going to have the TWK out for preorder? Or is this going to be like World Series tickets, where I have to sit at the computer and order right when it goes on sale to beat 1 Million Chinese people to get one? Very excited to buy.
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Jomito7


I'm not on sales side of things, but it wouldn't be available to the public on the JL Audio website until it's in stock and shipping. I am sure our dealers will have pre-order abilities so they get it in stock as soon as they hit our shelves here in Florida.

I'm sure you can pre-order one through one of our authorized dealers.


----------



## tommygjunior

robhaynes said:


> I'm not on sales side of things, but it wouldn't be available to the public on the JL Audio website until it's in stock and shipping. I am sure our dealers will have pre-order abilities so they get it in stock as soon as they hit our shelves here in Florida.
> 
> I'm sure you can pre-order one through one of our authorized dealers.


That's what I did with my dealer.


----------



## robhaynes

For those at are interested here is the configuration for the TwK D8 going in my Civic this weekend. One of the nice features of the TwK is Simulation mode, I was able to create my entire project at my desk and will download it straight to the TwK once it's in my car on Sunday. 

I have a 2014 Honda Civic with the factory head unit and a FiX 82. I will be running an XD600/6v2 active to a pair of 6.5" C5 coaxial in my front doors and extra pair of C5 tweeters in my A-pillars. Using an XD1000/1v2 for either a 10W6v3 HO enclosure or one of our home subwoofers our engineers had an enclosure for the car built to test. 

Here is the system routing I set up in the TüN software. Going digital in from the FiX I am routing signal path for my active coaxial through EQ banks 1/2 and on to outputs A/B (tweeter) and C/D (mid range). Signal for the imaging tweeters runs into EQ 3/4 out of E/F outputs. Sub signal passes through EQ 5/6 and out G/H. 

I configured the outer ring of the DRC-200 for fading ability, but only have the imaging tweeters set to be adjusted. This will allow me to adjust as needed and keep a relative adjustment with the main volume control. 

Speaker distance is measure from a driver optimized location to each speaker in the car.









On the tune screen, my crossovers are set in the bottom left (HPF 4K 48db slope for tweeters) as a starting point. I will start by tuning L/R together then fine tune as needed, so all EQ's are linked (the orange icon above the EQ banks). Since EQ 1/2 is for my C5 coaxial I am doing all tuning through these EQ.









EQ 3/4 is specifically for my imaging tweeters, thus I have turned off all bands below 4k. If needed I can turn more bands on and adjust their center freq as needed.









Subs are EQ 5/6 and this all of the higher bands are turned off on the parametric EQ









This of course is all of the set up configuration. Once I get in the car I'll start to add additional delay as needed and make EQ, crossover adjustments to get an awesome sounding, driver optimized set up. Once I'm done I will probably flip the delay settings and do it again for a passenger optimized preset. 

Should be fun, I will keep you guys posted next week with the results!

All of this set up btw took only about 10 minutes tops (Input/Output routing, crossover, time delay distance, eq bands on/off).


----------



## Gibberish

This might be a dumb question, but once I do install the Fix to my car, will I lose the ability to use the treble, bass and mid eq from my headunit?


----------



## msmith

Gibberish said:


> This might be a dumb question, but once I do install the Fix to my car, will I lose the ability to use the treble, bass and mid eq from my headunit?


Not a dumb question at all. The good news is you won't lose the use of your tone controls. They will still work should you need to tweak the tonal balance.


----------



## DDfusion

FiX question. Will it match all the input voltages during cal? Like my Ford Sync. I think it puts out more voltage on the passenger side and that skews the MS-8 tuning. I can fix it with a slight balance shift


----------



## BigAl205

I noticed check boxes beside "additional delay" and "level trim". Does this give you the ability to link channels together and adjust them as a group?


----------



## msmith

DDfusion said:


> FiX question. Will it match all the input voltages during cal? Like my Ford Sync. I think it puts out more voltage on the passenger side and that skews the MS-8 tuning. I can fix it with a slight balance shift


Yes, the levels of all the input channels are matched for summing and also for Left/Right output.


----------



## msmith

BigAl205 said:


> I noticed check boxes beside "additional delay" and "level trim". Does this give you the ability to link channels together and adjust them as a group?


You have correctly identified the function of the little black check boxes in the delay section. You can select any number and combination of channels to adjust together, retaining the relative offset between them. You can also check the box at the top and select all of them if you want.

The Levels and Crossover panels also offer this functionality.


----------



## DDfusion

msmith said:


> Yes, the levels of all the input channels are matched for summing and also for Left/Right output.


Thanks. Eric got back with me a few hours ago. 
Seems like something that would help my balance issue. 
I just wonder if it would help enough to warrant the add on.


----------



## brumledb

robhaynes said:


> It shouldn't if not in Signal Sense or DC offset mode.
> 
> 
> 
> Make sure to report back to our Tech Support team so we can track it if it's a product issue and help with further troubleshooting [email protected]




It's been a while since we discussed this but I finally figured out what the issue is. The FIX isn't actually turning off, it just stops sending the remote signal to my DSP and amps when I turn the volume down low. 

Where this really becomes a pain is when I am running measurement sweeps. The unit will turn off between sweeps since there is no signal. Then when I do the next sweep, you don't hear but about half the sweep since everything had to come back online. So then I have to rerun that sweep. 

Is there anyway to adjust this setting? I would rather everything just stay on while the truck is sending a power signal. 

Thanks


----------



## msmith

brumledb said:


> It's been a while since we discussed this but I finally figured out what the issue is. The FIX isn't actually turning off, it just stops sending the remote signal to my DSP and amps when I turn the volume down low.
> 
> Where this really becomes a pain is when I am running measurement sweeps. The unit will turn off between sweeps since there is no signal. Then when I do the next sweep, you don't hear but about half the sweep since everything had to come back online. So then I have to rerun that sweep.
> 
> Is there anyway to adjust this setting? I would rather everything just stay on while the truck is sending a power signal.
> 
> Thanks


The FiX 82 offers three turn-on modes, selectable by a switch on the top of the unit. Section 5 of the Owner's Manual explains these in detail.

http://mediacdn.jlaudio.com/media/mfg/9013/media_document/live_1/FiX82MAN_ALT_020116.pdf?1454349173


----------



## brumledb

msmith said:


> The FiX 82 offers three turn-on modes, selectable by a switch on the top of the unit. Section 5 of the Owner's Manual explains these in detail.
> 
> 
> 
> http://mediacdn.jlaudio.com/media/mfg/9013/media_document/live_1/FiX82MAN_ALT_020116.pdf?1454349173




I have tried the different turn-on methods, but the unit isn't actually turning off. When I turn the volume very low and keep it there for about 45 seconds the light(s) go from green to amber and my amps turn off. Turn the volume back up, light goes from amber to green, and the amps come back on.

I actually called and spoke with a tech a while back and he made it seem as though the FIX is doing what it is supposed to do. If it is not receiving an audio signal for a certain amount of time, it stops sending the remote signal out so that everything isn't on for no reason. 

At least that was my understanding.


----------



## msmith

brumledb said:


> I have tried the different turn-on methods, but the unit isn't actually turning off. When I turn the volume very low and keep it there for about 45 seconds the light(s) go from green to amber and my amps turn off. Turn the volume back up, light goes from amber to green, and the amps come back on.
> 
> I actually called and spoke with a tech a while back and he made it seem as though the FIX is doing what it is supposed to do. If it is not receiving an audio signal for a certain amount of time, it stops sending the remote signal out so that everything isn't on for no reason.
> 
> At least that was my understanding.


If you set the switch on "Remote" it will turn on amps whenever +12V is applied to the FiX's "+12V Switched" power terminal.


----------



## brumledb

msmith said:


> If you set the switch on "Remote" it will turn on amps whenever +12V is applied to the FiX's "+12V Switched" power terminal.




That's the way I thought it would work as well but mine does not.


----------



## msmith

brumledb said:


> That's the way I thought it would work as well but mine does not.


Please contact our Tech Dept. We will help you figure it out.


----------



## juiceweazel

I haven't read every page, but I've read enough to make me want to see more. Is there pricing on this yet & will we be able to download and play with the software here? Let's face it, for most of us, it's the interface that's most important. I don't want to hunt through 3 sub-menus to get to what I need.


----------



## pocket5s

juiceweazel said:


> I haven't read every page, but I've read enough to make me want to see more. Is there pricing on this yet & will we be able to download and play with the software here? Let's face it, for most of us, it's the interface that's most important. I don't want to hunt through 3 sub-menus to get to what I need.


stated in post 241:



> TwK D8 will be $339.99 and TwK 88 will be $399.99.


----------



## juiceweazel

Duh, I just saw that & was going to edit. Thanks
Can we try the software before we buy?


----------



## msmith

juiceweazel said:


> Duh, I just saw that & was going to edit. Thanks
> Can we try the software before we buy?


Absolutely. Once we have a first release (1.0) version, we will activate a download link on the TwK product page on the JL Audio website. We encourage people to play with the interface before making a buying decision.


----------



## juiceweazel

msmith said:


> Absolutely. Once we have a first release (1.0) version, we will activate a download link on the TwK product page on the JL Audio website. We encourage people to play with the interface before making a buying decision.


Sounds great. Thanks for the quick response. Hopefully it will be ready soon. Come one beta testers!


----------



## msmith

juiceweazel said:


> Sounds great. Thanks for the quick response. Hopefully it will be ready soon. Come one beta testers!


The beta testers are doing a great job... they have identified several bugs and made some really great suggestions, some of which we are incorporating into the first release and a few others for future versions.


----------



## bilbo6209

msmith said:


> The beta testers are doing a great job... they have identified several bugs and made some really great suggestions, some of which we are incorporating into the first release and a few others for future versions.


Is there any option that JL would put out a 10 channel option? I am looking to do a 3 way front active, rear fills and sub this would be 9 channels  

I already know my car will benefit form a FIX, and going digital directly to the TWK would be a huge advantage. 

I would really rather save the $$ and not have to go to a Helix Pro in order to get what I want. Someone else suggested going passive on the mids and tweeters (this would simplify the set up and then only use 7 channels) but I would like to "do it right" if I can... but this is also my first tuned car so doing 3 way active might be too much too.

Being that the TWK is geared toward the middle crowd (not pro, but not happy with a 2 way passive set up without TA)... it would be really nice if the TWK offered an auto tune option... at least to get things close and then you could tweak the settings from there.


----------



## pocket5s

I'm going to guess that since you can daisy chain the procs, that answer will probably be a "no". and realistically, two TwKs is less expensive than a Helix Pro, so you could have 16 channels instead of 10


----------



## gsdye

also, it's REAR fill, any signal attenuated really low is all you need. You don't need TA or much processing if any.


----------



## pocket5s

gsdye said:


> also, it's REAR fill, any signal attenuated really low is all you need. You don't need TA or much processing if any.


There are many who would disagree with you about no TA needed


----------



## gsdye

pocket5s said:


> There are many who would disagree with you about no TA needed


I don't even bother with rear fill with a past car, but I do have passengers from time to time who want to hear a little bit so I give them a little.

In my latest car, it's a two seater, so it's really low priority,

I am awaiting the TwK D8 release to run a 3 way active. The Fix 82, amp and the speakers are all installed already. Wired the extra lines too.


----------



## pocket5s

gsdye said:


> I don't even bother with rear fill with a past car, but I do have passengers from time to time who want to hear a little bit so I give them a little.
> 
> In my latest car, it's a two seater, so it's really low priority,
> 
> I am awaiting the TwK D8 release to run a 3 way active. The Fix 82, amp and the speakers are all installed already. Wired the extra lines too.


what you described isn't rear fill, that's rear speakers


----------



## gsdye

pocket5s said:


> what you described isn't rear fill, that's rear speakers


I just don't care about anyone except myself. My car, my tunes.


----------



## rton20s

gsdye said:


> I just don't care about anyone except myself. My car, my tunes.


All the more reason for properly tuned ambient rear fill.


----------



## bilbo6209

rton20s said:


> All the more reason for properly tuned ambient rear fill.


Sorry for the noob question... I do want rear fill, and from what I have read it seems like about a 20ms delay, and kinda of like a center channel r-l or l-r would be the way to go... My question is this could I do rear mono? So just do a R-l or L-R and run that to both speakers and then only have to use 1 channel? or would I be better off doing R-L on one side and L-R on the other and using 2 DSP channels?


----------



## bbfoto

Just got home from out of town and see all the new JL goodies listed in the latest Crutchfield mailer.

Equalizers & Processors at Crutchfield.com

I'd also like a 10-Channel version, but as previously posted, two of these units is roughly the same cost as a Helix DSP Pro. It'd be a bit more work or extra steps to mount a 2nd unit and tune that processor separately just to dial in the ambient rear fill, but IME, once you have it dialed-in, it's pretty much "set-and-forget" if you incorporate a simple level control. Of course, you could also have several presets of "Rear Fill Modes" on just that DSP unit. It would be a quick & easy way to A/B Demo your setup with & without the rear fill. ...Hear the soundstage depth & room ambience instantly expand and contract. 

I still need to put together a good playlist of tracks for testing or A/B'ing this. Contributions are welcome! I will share my list as well. 

Looking good, gentlemen!


----------



## bbfoto

msmith said:


> The beta testers are doing a great job... they have identified several bugs and made some really great suggestions, some of which we are incorporating into the first release and a few others for future versions.


Manville, do you speak of future versions of hardware, or software, that will incorporate these suggestions/features?


----------



## msmith

bbfoto said:


> Manville, do you speak of future versions of hardware, or software, that will incorporate these suggestions/features?


I was referring to software and firmware for the existing device.


----------



## nrs207

msmith said:


> Not a dumb question at all. The good news is you won't lose the use of your tone controls. They will still work should you need to tweak the tonal balance.


I was wondering something similar. I'm coming from a car where I have an aftermarket HU I can adjust everything I want to on, but my next car makes that impossible. Considering the Fix 82 only has a left and right output, there must not be a way to adjust my sub level output on the fly with the DRC-100 or anything. What would I need to do that? I suppose the worst case scenario, taking from your answer above, is that I adjust the bass overall to every channel and not just on my sub on the fly?

I'm not really in the market to break the bank too much, so at $300, the Fix is about what I'm looking to spend on processing, since the amp, speakers, and sub I'm planning on are really racking up the price.

For a little more info, I'll be using a Lexus CT200h stock head unit and need something to get a good signal into a 5 channel amp. The Fix was recommended, but like I said I'm a noob and I love doing research. Thanks for the help.


----------



## Syncher

Some amps come with a remote level control, for example: RF R600X5 
I'm not endorsing that particular model, just pointing out the possibilties.


----------



## robhaynes

nrs207 said:


> I was wondering something similar. I'm coming from a car where I have an aftermarket HU I can adjust everything I want to on, but my next car makes that impossible. Considering the Fix 82 only has a left and right output, there must not be a way to adjust my sub level output on the fly with the DRC-100 or anything. What would I need to do that? I suppose the worst case scenario, taking from your answer above, is that I adjust the bass overall to every channel and not just on my sub on the fly?
> 
> I'm not really in the market to break the bank too much, so at $300, the Fix is about what I'm looking to spend on processing, since the amp, speakers, and sub I'm planning on are really racking up the price.
> 
> For a little more info, I'll be using a Lexus CT200h stock head unit and need something to get a good signal into a 5 channel amp. The Fix was recommended, but like I said I'm a noob and I love doing research. Thanks for the help.


Use a control knob for the subwoofer. Most amps (including 5-channels) will accept an optional knob that mimics the sub control an aftermarket head unit would have. If you were to use our 5-channel amps, the HD-RLC would work on the HD900/5, XD700/5v2, XD1000/5v2 and the RBC-1 will work on the upcoming RD900/5


----------



## gsdye

I know most OEM does some sort of processing but on base models with no branded DSP (Harmon, Bose, Burmeister, etc), I question how much need the Fix82 was doing. 

Currently, my installer cannot source a DRC-100 and find the gain output too high on the Fix82. Creating noise actually. Very odd. He wants the DRC to dial it back. We have the Fix82 set to bypass now in wait for the TwK D8. We don't prefer the analogue line out of the Fix82. Probably don't need the DRC once the Twk D8 is installed.

So in my situation with a base audio system with no DSP (using a line out from the OEM deck, not high level signal after the factory amp), i think the Fix 82 is a fancy high quality line driver


----------



## msmith

nrs207 said:


> I was wondering something similar. I'm coming from a car where I have an aftermarket HU I can adjust everything I want to on, but my next car makes that impossible. Considering the Fix 82 only has a left and right output, there must not be a way to adjust my sub level output on the fly with the DRC-100 or anything. What would I need to do that? I suppose the worst case scenario, taking from your answer above, is that I adjust the bass overall to every channel and not just on my sub on the fly?


Most subwoofer amps and system amps have a sub level control option. All ours do. Just install the little knob up front and there you have it.


----------



## msmith

> Currently, my installer cannot source a DRC-100 and find the gain output too high on the Fix82. Creating noise actually. Very odd. He wants the DRC to dial it back. We have the Fix82 set to bypass now in wait for the TwK D8. We don't prefer the analogue line out of the Fix82. Probably don't need the DRC once the Twk D8 is installed.


Have your installer call our tech support. You are describing a calibration issue we have seen with some systems. It can be overcome with a little effort and you shouldn't need the DRC-100. 




gsdye said:


> I know most OEM does some sort of processing but on base models with no branded DSP (Harmon, Bose, Burmeister, etc), I question how much need the Fix82 was doing.
> 
> So in my situation with a base audio system with no DSP (using a line out from the OEM deck, not high level signal after the factory amp), i think the Fix 82 is a fancy high quality line driver


Nowadays, almost all factory systems apply some equalization, even in the base audio systems. An easy way to verify this in your system is to put an RTA on the FiX outputs and compare the response with EQ engaged and defeated.


----------



## gsdye

msmith said:


> Have your installer call our tech support. You are describing a calibration issue we have seen with some systems. It can be overcome with a little effort and you shouldn't need the DRC-100.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nowadays, almost all factory systems apply some equalization, even in the base audio systems. An easy way to verify this in your system is to put an RTA on the FiX outputs and compare the response with EQ engaged and defeated.



thanks...forwarded to installer. He also believed the OEM deck provides some EQ that needs to be cleaned up. He did say the sound was better out of the Fix82.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

I have a quick wiring question. On the power/remote plug there is a "Valet In" wire, what does it do?


----------



## robhaynes

LumbermanSVO said:


> I have a quick wiring question. On the power/remote plug there is a "Valet In" wire, what does it do?


On the FiX 82 & 86 its attenuates the outputs by 15 dB when the valet input sees ground (install a rocker switch in the car and hide it). There may be a way to change it's operation in the future.... 

On the TwK DSP's it will activate an extra preset, again when it see's ground. Imagine the potential of a preset that switches automatically when your convertible top opens or someone sits in the passenger seat that has an airbag sensor built in it....

Of course you could install a switch in the car to manually activate it as well.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

robhaynes said:


> On the FiX 82 & 86 its attenuates the outputs by 15 dB when the valet input sees ground (install a rocker switch in the car and hide it). There may be a way to change it's operation in the future....
> 
> On the TwK DSP's it will activate an extra preset, again when it see's ground. Imagine the potential of a preset that switches automatically when your convertible top opens or someone sits in the passenger seat that has an airbag sensor built in it....
> 
> Of course you could install a switch in the car to manually activate it as well.


I was really hoping for an answer like that!


----------



## JVD240

That really is a fantastic little addition!

I did a system for a friend. He says every time he retrieves his truck from dealer service the system is wide open.

It's similar to what tuners have been doing with ECUs on cars as well. Preventing others from joy riding your car. 

That's for you to do!


----------



## bilbo6209

robhaynes said:


> On the FiX 82 & 86 its attenuates the outputs by 15 dB when the valet input sees ground (install a rocker switch in the car and hide it). There may be a way to change it's operation in the future....
> 
> On the TwK DSP's it will activate an extra preset, again when it see's ground. Imagine the potential of a preset that switches automatically when your convertible top opens or someone sits in the passenger seat that has an airbag sensor built in it....
> 
> Of course you could install a switch in the car to manually activate it as well.


So am I reading that correctly? The twk will automatically, when wired correctly, activate a different preset when the passenger airbag is turned on? So I could have a preset that is tuned for the driver seat, but when my fiancee is in the car, and the passenger airbag is active, the twk would automatically switch to a different preset that is tuned to be more pleasing to both passenger and driver? 

And if I have have the fix I could install a Valet switch to limit the output of the system so that valet/service department etc dont hammer on the system? 

Now all it needs is 10 output channels on the twk so I can run 3 way fronts, rear fills, a sub, and possibly a front center if I decide to and it is golden!


----------



## PUREAUDIO

Subd


----------



## robhaynes

bilbo6209 said:


> So am I reading that correctly? The twk will automatically, when wired correctly, activate a different preset when the passenger airbag is turned on? So I could have a preset that is tuned for the driver seat, but when my fiancee is in the car, and the passenger airbag is active, the twk would automatically switch to a different preset that is tuned to be more pleasing to both passenger and driver?
> 
> And if I have have the fix I could install a Valet switch to limit the output of the system so that valet/service department etc dont hammer on the system?
> 
> Now all it needs is 10 output channels on the twk so I can run 3 way fronts, rear fills, a sub, and possibly a front center if I decide to and it is golden!


Pretty much 

If you can tap into the passenger seat sensor, and make the Valet in on the TwK see ground, it activates a new preset (as long as ground is detected at Valet).

For the FiX (or the TwK) a rocker switch can also be installed to keep it in valet. FiX is auto attenuation, TwK could be an attenuated output as well if you create the preset to do so, or if you are creative, you can create a center or passenger optimized preset as long as someone is in the seat. Pretty cool, huh? 

Disclaimer: Be careful of course and know what wires you are tapping into if you're going to be creative.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

To me it makes sense to setup a speed activated output from my Holley HP EFI so when I'm over X-speed it switches to a different tune.


----------



## bilbo6209

Hey Rob, 
It looks like there are 2 versions of the Twk, one the digital only input that is cheaper, and one with analog and digital inputs... Twk d8 is digital and twk 88 is analog and digital inputs. 

Can you verify what inputs will be on the final version of the twk d8? Early on in this thread you said the d8 will have both a coax and toslink digital input, but the images on Crutchfield only show a toslink, the questions below were written assuming the Twk digitally will only have the toslink input. 

I need 9 maybe 10 outputs in my upcoming system and am also looking at adding in a CarPC... So I have a couple questions 
1. If I went with the twk88 it has 8 rca, plus 1 optical, and one coax digital inputs.... Are the digital inputs seperate? So could I take output from a Fix and go to the optical input, and also take coax out from my carpc and go to the coax digital input? 

2. Is the digi out on the twk tuned at all, or is it just a straight pass through? I think this was answered before... Basically I was wondering if I could use the twk output to feed a minidsp 2x4 HD and save $150 vs buying a 2nd twk for 2 channels.


----------



## msmith

bilbo6209 said:


> Hey Rob,
> It looks like there are 2 versions of the Twk, one the digital only input that is cheaper, and one with analog and digital inputs... Twk d8 is digital and twk 88 is analog and digital inputs.
> 
> Can you verify what inputs will be on the final version of the twk d8? Early on in this thread you said the d8 will have both a coax and toslink digital input, but the images on Crutchfield only show a toslink, the questions below were written assuming the Twk digitally will only have the toslink input.
> 
> I need 9 maybe 10 outputs in my upcoming system and am also looking at adding in a CarPC... So I have a couple questions
> 1. If I went with the twk88 it has 8 rca, plus 1 optical, and one coax digital inputs.... Are the digital inputs seperate? So could I take output from a Fix and go to the optical input, and also take coax out from my carpc and go to the coax digital input?
> 
> 2. Is the digi out on the twk tuned at all, or is it just a straight pass through? I think this was answered before... Basically I was wondering if I could use the twk output to feed a minidsp 2x4 HD and save $150 vs buying a 2nd twk for 2 channels.


1) The coax and digital inputs are not separate. You can choose one, or the other. You can run a combination of analog and digital inputs, however. You can set up one preset with a digital input, and another preset with analog inputs, for example.

2) The Digital output on the Twk is a pass-through. You can select which input channels it receives its feed from.


----------



## bilbo6209

bigjeep127 said:


> I'm excited about the digital only Twk. I'll feed it directly from an iPhone. It would be best if they'd build these processors with direct Bluetooth (AptX?) input, but a harness can be rigged up easily for a wired connection.





msmith said:


> 1) The coax and digital inputs are not separate. You can choose one, or the other. You can run a combination of analog and digital inputs, however. You can set up one preset with a digital input, and another preset with analog inputs, for example.
> 
> 2) The Digital output on the Twk is a pass-through. You can select which input channels it receives its feed from.


Thank you msmith


----------



## ognib

Guys-

I'm new here and new to all this so please play nice.. I installed the Fix-82 in my F150 that has the Sony '700w' system in it. Holy Homer what a difference it made! I also replaced speakers and added a small amp. I can't change the HU because of Climate Control, steering wheel functions, global warming, etc. 
-Yes, it is installed after the factory amps so I lost absolutely no factory function
- Yes, I lost fader capability (non-issue..it really sounds good)
-JL said it was OK to hook up pillar tweeters and front door speakers together and let the Fix and crossovers do their job. It works.
- JL said that subwoofer needed to be fed from Fix so I got split RCA cables and the sub came to life
That being said, what would the Twk add to the quality of the audio? If I have read everything that I understand (a little) and what I don't understand (a lot) correctly, it pretty much just lets me hyper-tune what I have? Sell this thing to the layman while he still has audio-lust...


----------



## pocket5s

Pretty sure The fix doesn't have crossovers. That isn't what it is for. It only corrects the factory signal so it can be used as a clean signal. 

The twk has all the tuning capabilities. Crossovers, eq, time alignment, etc. and would go after the fix.


----------



## t3sn4f2

bilbo6209 said:


> Hey Rob,
> It looks like there are 2 versions of the Twk, one the digital only input that is cheaper, and one with analog and digital inputs... Twk d8 is digital and twk 88 is analog and digital inputs.
> 
> Can you verify what inputs will be on the final version of the twk d8? Early on in this thread you said the d8 will have both a coax and toslink digital input, but the images on Crutchfield only show a toslink, the questions below were written assuming the Twk digitally will only have the toslink input.
> 
> I need 9 maybe 10 outputs in my upcoming system and am also looking at adding in a CarPC... So I have a couple questions
> 1. If I went with the twk88 it has 8 rca, plus 1 optical, and one coax digital inputs.... Are the digital inputs seperate? So could I take output from a Fix and go to the optical input, and also take coax out from my carpc and go to the coax digital input?
> 
> 2. Is the digi out on the twk tuned at all, or is it just a straight pass through? I think this was answered before... Basically I was wondering if I could use the twk output to feed a minidsp 2x4 HD and save $150 vs buying a 2nd twk for 2 channels.


Audio Authority 1177A-1 Digital Audio Switch / Digital Audio Switcher

And a ground isolated (not only chassis isolated) DC to DC converter.


----------



## bilbo6209

t3sn4f2 said:


> Audio Authority 1177A-1 Digital Audio Switch / Digital Audio Switcher
> 
> And a ground isolated (not only chassis isolated) DC to DC converter.


Not a bad option, but now by the time I'm getting 2 DSPs to handle 9 or 10 channels, the digital switch, power supply etc I'm getting very close in price to a Helix Pro... granted there are other differences and the JL is geared at my experience level but having to tune 2 DSPs set up everything else I could just as well learn the Helix... If the TWK had 10 outputs I would not have an issue doing what I need to in order to set up the car PC, but with only 8 outputs and needing a 2nd DSP... 

Can both the digital and analog outputs on the fix be used at the same time?


----------



## t3sn4f2

bilbo6209 said:


> Not a bad option, but now by the time I'm getting 2 DSPs to handle 9 or 10 channels, the digital switch, power supply etc I'm getting very close in price to a Helix Pro... granted there are other differences and the JL is geared at my experience level but having to tune 2 DSPs set up everything else I could just as well learn the Helix... If the TWK had 10 outputs I would not have an issue doing what I need to in order to set up the car PC, but with only 8 outputs and needing a 2nd DSP...
> 
> *Can both the digital and analog outputs on the fix be used at the same time?*


I don't know for sure, but you probably can since the optical output isn't something that has a sensor telling all the circuitry upstream that it is being used. It's just a flashing LED essentially.

Oh, there are also tiny manual optical switches that go for cheap. You just turn the dial and it moves a light transmitting rail from on input to the other. Naturally no auto switching ion that option.


----------



## msmith

bilbo6209 said:


> Not a bad option, but now by the time I'm getting 2 DSPs to handle 9 or 10 channels, the digital switch, power supply etc I'm getting very close in price to a Helix Pro... granted there are other differences and the JL is geared at my experience level but having to tune 2 DSPs set up everything else I could just as well learn the Helix... If the TWK had 10 outputs I would not have an issue doing what I need to in order to set up the car PC, but with only 8 outputs and needing a 2nd DSP...
> 
> Can both the digital and analog outputs on the fix be used at the same time?


Yes. selecting either of the Digital Inputs replaces analog inputs 1 & 2, but you can still use analog inputs 3-8 at the same time. Every preset also has its own input configuration, so you could have the digital inputs on Preset 1 and analog inputs only on Preset 2.

If you need ten channels, you can run two TwK's... and get 16 channels.


----------



## msmith

pocket5s said:


> Pretty sure The fix doesn't have crossovers. That isn't what it is for. It only corrects the factory signal so it can be used as a clean signal.
> 
> The twk has all the tuning capabilities. Crossovers, eq, time alignment, etc. and would go after the fix.


Mostly correct. The FiX 82 is intended to undo crossovers, eq, time alignment to get you a flat, full range signal. The FiX 86 will do the same for a four-channel, plus subwoofer factory signal set, giving you front, rear and non-fading (subwoofer) outputs, all of which are full range and flat and time-aligned. The FiX 86 does have some specialized crossover features (accessible via PC) on its outputs but they are very basic and only intended to facilitate use with amps that have basic analog processing. Both FiX processors will very soon have an output EQ feature (10-band graphic), accessible only with a PC. 

For any real tuning duties, the TwK is your tool.


----------



## drop1

Any future plans for android tuning control? An app with full control would be heavenly.


----------



## bilbo6209

One more question for the experts. 

I read elsewhere that the Twk is designed for l and r 2 way setup, can it be used for R and L 3 way? 

I have been running my car with my fader tuned to the front and have been happy with the sound (other than the fatiguing tweeters) , so for now I think the Twk will work even though it is only 8 channels. 

I know Msmith said you can not use the 2 digital inputs as 2 seperate channels, has this been confirmed?


----------



## LumbermanSVO

So, I just preordered the Twk D8 on Crutchfield...


----------



## msmith

bilbo6209 said:


> One more question for the experts.
> 
> I read elsewhere that the Twk is designed for l and r 2 way setup, can it be used for R and L 3 way?


Sure. You can do 4-way, too. The 8-channels can be assigned any way you want.




> I have been running my car with my fader tuned to the front and have been happy with the sound (other than the fatiguing tweeters) , so for now I think the Twk will work even though it is only 8 channels.
> 
> I know Msmith said you can not use the 2 digital inputs as 2 seperate channels, has this been confirmed?


Yes, digital inputs are either/or.


----------



## msmith

drop1 said:


> Any future plans for android tuning control? An app with full control would be heavenly.


You never know what the future might bring, but for now it's PC only.


----------



## jomito7

msmith said:


> You never know what the future might bring, but for now it's PC only.


I completely agree with this. Also, external wifi or Bluetooth control would make this unit set itself apart from everything else on the market. Changing presets on the fly and doing adjustments on the fly with a smart phone would absolutely be sensational.


----------



## juiceweazel

jomito7 said:


> I completely agree with this. Also, external wifi or Bluetooth control would make this unit set itself apart from everything else on the market. Changing presets on the fly and doing adjustments on the fly with a smart phone would absolutely be sensational.


Bingo! 100% agree. I wouldn't think this would be all that hard to do either.


----------



## pocket5s

A couple units have Bluetooth already. 

Making adjustments on the fly isn't really what any of these dsp's are designed for. If by "on the fly" you mean driving. That's what presets are for. The exception being maybe bass, which several can including the jl with the included remote. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drop1

Without having to read though 36 pages is there a confirmed or even approx release date yet?


----------



## t3sn4f2

~soon


----------



## pocket5s

Iirc I saw a pic on Instagram of one of the jl trainers doing dealer training on the twk. The beta test phase is about 6 weeks in or so and i imagine they will be wrapping that up quickly. 

One tester has it in a fresh install and was at a competition last weekend. Not that that in itself means a ton, but it is in "real world" use. 

While I have no official notice, I'd be surprised if it was more than a couple weeks away. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bilbo6209

msmith said:


> Yes, digital inputs are either/or.


Well slightly different info from JL Audio on Facebook...

" Yes to an extent. You can have inputs 1-2 be either Analog, Digital TOSLINK or Digital Coaxial. You can create two presets that would allow one to be the optical on inputs 1-2, and a second that would allow coaxial be inputs 1-2. "

So assuming the JL Rep on Facebook knows their stuff, you can hook up 2 digital input devices, you would just need to use 2 presets to switch between them. 

Now the big question.... Earlier in this thread it was stated the D8 would have Optical and Coax digital inputs BUT the images I have found online (including the Crutchfield pre-order page) show the D8 ONLY coming with the optical input... Do we know how the final production units will be set up?

Funny thing is Crutchfield shows the twk-88 as having BOTH coax and optical digital inputs.


----------



## drop1

They need to hurry up. I've got money burning a hole in my pockey.


----------



## narvarr

Funny thing is Crutchfield shows the twk-88 as having BOTH coax and optical digital inputs.[/QUOTE said:


> Yes, the TwK88 does have both TOSLINK and Coax input.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## bilbo6209

narvarr said:


> Yes, the TwK88 does have both TOSLINK and Coax input.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


Lol yes that was my quote, on Crutchfield they show the twk-88 as having 8 analog toslink and coax... Crutchfield shows th twk-d8 as ONLY having a toslink, but per Rob 


robhaynes said:


> (snip) The TwK 88 has eight (8) analog inputs, a digital TOSLINK and a digital coaxial input. The TwK D8 has only the two digital inputs and no analog inputs. (snip)


This is what I am trying to confirm... Does the twk-d8 have toslink and coax  or just the toslink as shown on Crutchfield


----------



## pocket5s

Yes it does. Visually confirmed 

From mine:










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MoparMike

I'm considering a Fix82 for my 2015 Durango with the UConnect 8.4 and 10 speaker stereo and I have a couple of questions. Removing any factory eq, time alingment, etc. from the signal before sending it to the processor is very appealing. What have been other's experiences with that model when used with Chrysler's UConnect electonics?

There is also a limitation with the processor that I have (PPI DEQ.8) in that it only accepts 4 channels of high level input. To get a full range signal if using the speaker level outputs on the stock amp only the front door speaker wires would be used (tweeters and midrange/midbass.) That means that audio signals from things like the handsfree phone (Center channel) and parking sensors (C Pillars) would be left out. The Fix82 could be fed more inputs but it looks like I would have to choose between using the center or the C pillar speakers since channels 7-8 are dedicated to a subwoofer. Am I correct in interpreting that? 

Would there be any other problems with handsfree phone calls if the audio output portion of that system was passing through the Fix unit, or any other processing for that matter?


----------



## bilbo6209

pocket5s said:


> Yes it does. Visually confirmed
> 
> From mine:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thank you but

That's a twk 88 not a d8, the d8 doesn't include the rca inputs.


----------



## juiceweazel

msmith said:


> You never know what the future might bring, but for now it's PC only.


I'm really shocked iPads aren't in the mix here. Tablets are really becoming the norm.


----------



## robhaynes

bilbo6209 said:


> Lol yes that was my quote, on Crutchfield they show the twk-88 as having 8 analog toslink and coax... Crutchfield shows th twk-d8 as ONLY having a toslink, but per Rob
> 
> 
> This is what I am trying to confirm... Does the twk-d8 have toslink and coax  or just the toslink as shown on Crutchfield


To make it all clear since their might have been some misinformation on my part a while back about the D8...:blush:

TwK 88: 8-channels of analog inputs, 2-channel digital TOSLINK, 2-channel digital coaxial

TwK D8: 2-channel digital TOSLINK *only*

There ya go! Sorry if there was any confusion.


----------



## ErinH

bilbo6209 said:


> Lol yes that was my quote, on Crutchfield they show the twk-88 as having 8 analog toslink and coax... Crutchfield shows th twk-d8 as ONLY having a toslink, but per Rob
> 
> 
> This is what I am trying to confirm... Does the twk-d8 have toslink and coax  or just the toslink as shown on Crutchfield


the d8 has only the toslink input:



ErinH said:


> Small update...
> 
> Some of the 'Team' JL folks have gotten the new Twk DSP's for beta testing. Though, I can't really give information on the GUI/tuning features, I can give a small rundown (more info can be obtained from the thread here).
> 
> These come in two types: analog+digital input version (Twk-88) and a digital only input version (Twk-D8). The latter is the one I'm testing out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [snip]...[/snip]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But for now, here's a few pictures of the D8...


----------



## robhaynes

TwK D8









TwK 88


----------



## Babs

Don'tcha wish there were more toslink output head units and at least any coax digital output head units?


----------



## juiceweazel

Babs said:


> Don'tcha wish there were more toslink output head units and at least any coax digital output head units?


I just don't understand why the industry hasn't added the option for digital data from the head unit to the amp. If 1 starts the other will follow & eventually everyone will be digital.
I remember going from RCA to optical on my home system years ago & the difference was night & day.


----------



## Babs

juiceweazel said:


> I just don't understand why the industry hasn't added the option for digital data from the head unit to the amp. If 1 starts the other will follow & eventually everyone will be digital.
> I remember going from RCA to optical on my home system years ago & the difference was night & day.


It's an understanding of the industry.. 

Making that switch involves whole board redesign, then sourcing etc etc. Plus the mindset of cost/benefit, since many/most new cars don't even utilize the old 1-din or 2-din slots, with heavily customized and increasingly integrated audio. 

Thus a product like the Bit Play HD for example proposes an outboard player alternative, I suppose. Or us weirdo's into car audio find alternate means such as carPC's or iPad dash customization etc, or buy an old beater with a 1 or 2-din. 

The head unit market, which used to be a primary part of car audio, I imagine is now a small niche segment of the overall car audio market, going into legacy cars that actually allow an aftermarket head unit swap to be feasible. I give head units themselves maybe 10 more years as the format stands right now.. It's car-maker driven. The best we can hope for is more OEM systems like M.O.S.T. in cars like Benz and Audi which allow tapping into the digital signal to feed the outboard DSP, or the aftermarket industry will simply evolve to work around the integrated OEM.. Thus, the JL Fix!


----------



## juiceweazel

I can understand that. I like having options but I guess I'm still just very behind the times, especially since I was out of car audio for the past 8 years & I'm just getting back into it. We never had DSPs. It was done via 32 band slide EQ's. Time alignment wasn't even mentioned. At almost 40, I'm starting to show my age...


----------



## Babs

juiceweazel said:


> I can understand that. I like having options but I guess I'm still just very behind the times, especially since I was out of car audio for the past 8 years & I'm just getting back into it. We never had DSPs. It was done via 32 band slide EQ's. Time alignment wasn't even mentioned. At almost 40, I'm starting to show my age...



I'll trade ya. You're a young buck. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bilbo6209

robhaynes said:


> To make it all clear since their might have been some misinformation on my part a while back about the D8...:blush:
> 
> TwK 88: 8-channels of analog inputs, 2-channel digital TOSLINK, 2-channel digital coaxial
> 
> TwK D8: 2-channel digital TOSLINK *only*
> 
> There ya go! Sorry if there was any confusion.


Thank you Rob, so even if I can hook up 2 digital devices I still need the Twk 88  

How do you switch between presets? I know you can use the Valet switch on the twk to auto switch to a 2nd preset, can you store and access a 3rd preset somehow? 

I see the remote you showed in your pictures Rob, and from what I have read it sounds like the center knob can be clicked and the click function can be set via the software... Would this be the only option?


----------



## Kazuhiro

robhaynes said:


> TwK's have 10 bands of parametric equalization on all eight output channels (graphic EQ's in basic mode). Can link channels or tune individually. Parametric EQ's work really nice and make tuning a breeze.
> 6-48 dB per octave L-R or BW filters depending on mode of operation (Basic, Advanced, Expert. Again can link channels or adjust individually as well as have a level trim on each input.
> Initial time delay based off of distance to desired listening point with later fine tuning adjustability. Can do delay on a group of channels or separately.
> Input mixer that lets you control all input/output routing. You can even create center channels by combing L/R channels and do all sorts of crazy stuff.



Is the 10 band parametric completely independent per channel? 10 bands per channel?
Also, are the crossovers completely independent per channel as well? So I could run pair of tweets channel 1&2, pair of midranges channels 3&4, midbass 5&6, subwoofer on channel 7 and a centre on channel 8?

Also regarding the combining of channels, will it support a genuine nand center channel? and far fetched; differential rear fill?


----------



## robhaynes

bilbo6209 said:


> Thank you Rob, so even if I can hook up 2 digital devices I still need the Twk 88
> 
> How do you switch between presets? I know you can use the Valet switch on the twk to auto switch to a 2nd preset, can you store and access a 3rd preset somehow?
> 
> I see the remote you showed in your pictures Rob, and from what I have read it sounds like the center knob can be clicked and the click function can be set via the software... Would this be the only option?


You can create up to 10 presets in the TüN software (11 if you count the valet) and can write six of those 10 to the TwK hardware. Pressing in the center knob on the DRC-200 will toggle the presets. Presets are color coded and an included LED will illuminate to identify the currently selected preset.


----------



## robhaynes

Kazuhiro said:


> Is the 10 band parametric completely independent per channel? 10 bands per channel?
> Also, are the crossovers completely independent per channel as well? So I could run pair of tweets channel 1&2, pair of midranges channels 3&4, midbass 5&6, subwoofer on channel 7 and a centre on channel 8?
> 
> Also regarding the combining of channels, will it support a genuine nand center channel? and far fetched; differential rear fill?


10 Bands per channel on the Graphic & Parametric (80 bands total) for equalization.

Crossovers are completely independent, so you can definitely create the scenario you mentioned up above. 

You can blend L/R to create a signal and have a left minus right or right minus left configuration. You can also create rear fill and flip the polarity on one of the sides if desired.


----------



## bilbo6209

robhaynes said:


> You can create up to 10 presets in the TüN software (11 if you count the valet) and can write six of those 10 to the TwK hardware. Pressing in the center knob on the DRC-200 will toggle the presets. Presets are color coded and an included LED will illuminate to identify the currently selected preset.


Thank you again Rob! i have read the LED was color coded for the presets, and I had read the center button on the DRC-200 was able to be set to different functions, but I hadn't read it could be set to change the presets 

Looking forward to the official release!


----------



## pocket5s

one small word of caution, don't put the LED high up on the dash. It is REALLY bright at night 

In this pic you can see it next to the hazard lights button above the head unit:


daytime is no big deal, but at night, wow lol. I inquired about having a means of adjusting that and JL said it was something they are looking at for down the road.


----------



## gsdye

How long do you think the beta testing will still be?


----------



## jowens500

pocket5s said:


> one small word of caution, don't put the LED high up on the dash. It is REALLY bright at night
> 
> In this pic you can see it next to the hazard lights button above the head unit:
> 
> 
> daytime is no big deal, but at night, wow lol. I inquired about having a means of adjusting that and JL said it was something they are looking at for down the road.




Agreed. If I had known how bright they are, I would have put Howard's in a different place.....


----------



## Babs

Maybe a little smoke film like they use on bike taillights?


----------



## msmith

We are working on a revision of the LED brightness. We agree it's too bright in some applications.


----------



## KillerBox

I had a TV one time that had a distracting LED and I used White-Out on it.

White-Out would dull the LED somewhat but, you could still see it and it cleans off easy.


----------



## pocket5s

I do have to say, I thought the led idea and simple dual knob remote is a wonderful idea, especially with it being included. 

Just look at all the problems people have with other dsp remotes. Some are cool with their little screens and all that, but once that fanciness wears off you really just need a preset switcher and maybe a master volume control / sub volume. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## robhaynes

More operational basics of the TüN software and the TwK's features can be found now in the JL Audio Help Center.

Eventually there will be videos for each article showing how to operate the various features of the TüN interface.


----------



## Kazuhiro

robhaynes said:


> 10 Bands per channel on the Graphic & Parametric (80 bands total) for equalization.
> 
> Crossovers are completely independent, so you can definitely create the scenario you mentioned up above.
> 
> You can blend L/R to create a signal and have a left minus right or right minus left configuration. You can also create rear fill and flip the polarity on one of the sides if desired.


Awesome stuff. No need for dolby pro logic II


----------



## rton20s

Kazuhiro said:


> Awesome stuff. No need for dolby pro logic II


That depends on what your intended us of PLII might be. I don't see the JL TwK processors as an alternative to true center channel processing. But for rear fill? Sure.


----------



## msmith

The TüN software is now available for download (Free)... feel free to test drive it.

JL Audio Â» Info Â» TüN Software - Free Download


----------



## Kevin K

The TwK is a very nice dsp, sounds good, easy to work with and the remote simplicity makes installation easy for a number of vehicles where remotes with other dsp's and mounting them could become a task.

The led is a tad bright.


----------



## msmith

Kevin K said:


> The TwK is a very nice dsp, sounds good, easy to work with and the remote simplicity makes installation easy for a number of vehicles where remotes with other dsp's and mounting them could become a task.
> 
> The led is a tad bright.


And we're working on that LED thing.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

I downloaded TüN and played with it a bit. It was pretty easy to figure out in expert mode. 

I like the back/forward buttons, I wish my Holley ECU had that feature!


----------



## msmith

LumbermanSVO said:


> I downloaded TüN and played with it a bit. It was pretty easy to figure out in expert mode.
> 
> I like the back/forward buttons, I wish my Holley ECU had that feature!


:thumbsup:

I wish a lot of things had that feature! :laugh:


----------



## PUREAUDIO

Can these be used with a Mac???


----------



## LumbermanSVO

At the moment the software is Windows only.


----------



## PUREAUDIO

LumbermanSVO said:


> At the moment the software is Windows only.


Thank you


----------



## msmith

You can run the TüN software on a Mac using emulation software. I run Parallels with Windows 10 on my Macbook Pro. TüN software runs like a champ.


----------



## msmith

The TwK product pages are now live on the JL website. 

http://www.jlaudio.com/car-audio-processors-system-tuning


----------



## PUREAUDIO

Thanks for the clarification i will have to look into that. Looking forward to this new product.


----------



## mirkinator

msmith said:


> The TwK product pages are now live on the JL website.
> 
> http://www.jlaudio.com/car-audio-processors-system-tuning




Does this mean that these are shipping? The site does say "item is available" but I would have expected to hear something here, unless that was it. Chrutchfield is still showing these as a pre-order (for $30 less).


----------



## msmith

They are available for purchase. Lots are on their way to dealers, including Crutchfield.


----------



## mirkinator

msmith said:


> They are available for purchase. Lots are on their way to dealers, including Crutchfield.


Thanks for the confirmation. It's good to see these are out there.

I like what I seen with the software. It works fine with Parallels 10, Windows 7 on OSX 10.11.


----------



## Babs

So far the reviews from an SQ standpoint are extremely good. 

One question, which may have been answered already maybe more than once sorry..

As the JL amps (the better ones, maybe all I dunno) have differential-balanced inputs, is this also the type of output from the Twk outputs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mirkinator

Babs said:


> So far the reviews from an SQ standpoint are extremely good.
> 
> One question, which may have been answered already maybe more than once sorry..
> 
> As the JL amps (the better ones, maybe all I dunno) have differential-balanced inputs, is this also the type of output from the Twk outputs?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




Their site says that the inputs on the twk-88 are balanced but the outputs are unbalanced.


----------



## msmith

Correct. The outputs are unbalanced. This is the preferred architecture to minimize noise: unbalanced outputs / differential-balanced inputs.


----------



## msmith

Both the TwK 88 and D8 are now available. You can test drive the TüN software that controls them for free. Download at JL Audio: Car Stereo, Speakers, Subs, Amps, Home Theater

We also have full product information up on the web page. Car Audio - Processors - System Tuning


----------



## bbfoto

Received an email on July 5th stating that the TwK88 is now in stock at Crutchfield. ;-)


----------



## mirkinator

robhaynes said:


> So about creating a center channel....
> 
> *You do have the ability to due a blend of L-minus R and R-minus L. You can also do L-R & R-L on the rears if you desire.*
> 
> I've spend a good amount of time playing with it this week, it's pretty awesome.


How do you accomplish Left Minus Right in the TuN software? I'm running a simulation in expert mode and I don't see a way to do this.


----------



## robhaynes

mirkinator said:


> How do you accomplish Left Minus Right in the TuN software? I'm running a simulation in expert mode and I don't see a way to do this.


On the mixer panel where it has the "To Equalizer" drop down menus, you need to select the EQ that the signal is being sent to. In the image below I created a L-R derived center to EQ bank 3. Select EQ 3 in the "To Equalizer" drop down, and that should unlock your Polarity switches to do left-minus-right or right-minus-left for your center. If doing rear fill, you can select your left or right channel (pick an EQ bank) and flip the polarity.


----------



## subterFUSE

What the max delay available per channel?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pocket5s

over 21ms


----------



## mirkinator

robhaynes said:


> On the mixer panel where it has the "To Equalizer" drop down menus, you need to select the EQ that the signal is being sent to. In the image below I created a L-R derived center to EQ bank 3. Select EQ 3 in the "To Equalizer" drop down, and that should unlock your Polarity switches to do left-minus-right or right-minus-left for your center. If doing rear fill, you can select your left or right channel (pick an EQ bank) and flip the polarity.


Does this look right for rear fill?


----------



## subterFUSE

Question on rear fill...

Do you need to have L-R on the left side, and R-L on the right side?
Or is it ok to just do mono rear fill and use L-R signal for both speakers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pocket5s

If possible do L-r and r-l. If not then do L-r and wire one of the two speakers in reverse polarity, so that it is as diffuse as possible


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ErinH

subterFUSE said:


> Question on rear fill...
> 
> Do you need to have L-R on the left side, and R-L on the right side?
> Or is it ok to just do mono rear fill and use L-R signal for both speakers?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I recommend L-R and R-L.


----------



## subterFUSE

pocket5s said:


> If possible do L-r and r-l. If not then do L-r and wire one of the two speakers in reverse polarity, so that it is as diffuse as possible


Brilliant in its simplicity. :laugh:


----------



## pocket5s

subterFUSE said:


> Brilliant in its simplicity. :laugh:


the reverse polarity bit is somethign I learned in Mark E's class. Helpful if you only have one channel to dedicate to rear fill, but not quite as good as two channels.


----------



## Wrecker1

pocket5s said:


> the reverse polarity bit is somethign I learned in Mark E's class. Helpful if you only have one channel to dedicate to rear fill, but not quite as good as two channels.


How would I get some information about those classes? I was trying to look in to that kind of stuff after the Aggieland Competition, couldn't stick around on day two. 

Sent from my Century 312 and a ditch with Tapatalk.


----------



## pocket5s

His email is meldridge at mblsound dot com


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wrecker1

Thank you, sir. 

Sent from my Century 312 and a ditch with Tapatalk.


----------



## Drop11

For the those of you that have picked up and started tuning with this unit.

Is the p eq fully variable? Any quirks pop up yet? Is the tuning done in real time or does the unit mute when adjustments are applied?


----------



## msmith

Drop11 said:


> For the those of you that have picked up and started tuning with this unit.
> 
> Is the p eq fully variable? Any quirks pop up yet? Is the tuning done in real time or does the unit mute when adjustments are applied?


The PEQ is fully variable and operates in real time (very responsive). Most tuning functions result in real time audible results. Only a few of them will mute to protect the audio system (slope changes and some crossover freq. changes).


----------



## msmith

Yup, that looks right... you can also adjust the degree of opposite channel subtraction from each of the rear channels by reducing the level of the reversed opposite channel. 



mirkinator said:


> Does this look right for rear fill?


----------



## gsdye

I am so tempted to order from the US since I am down there next week. but I really want to support my local Canadian shop. Any update when Canadian distributors will have stock? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Drop11

That's great news. So many mute when applying settings. 

Being able to sweep the frequencies with a parametric is one of the most valuable tools there is in the audio world. Nothing works better for finding troubled spots by ear.


----------



## msmith

gsdye said:


> I am so tempted to order from the US since I am down there next week. but I really want to support my local Canadian shop. Any update when Canadian distributors will have stock?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Best thing to do is to contact Gemsen Distribution:

Contact Us | Gem-Sen


----------



## msmith

Drop11 said:


> That's great news. So many mute when applying settings.
> 
> Being able to sweep the frequencies with a parametric is one of the most valuable tools there is in the audio world. Nothing works better for finding troubled spots by ear.


I agree 1000%, and the TwK does it flawlessly, even when you sweep very quickly. You can grab an EQ handle and move it vertically and laterally to adjust gain and center freq. simultaneously. You can even grab multiple EQ handles and adjust multiple bands together. It's pretty slick.


----------



## ErinH

I'll ditto on what Manville has said. 

Very responsive tuning. And good adjustability on the parametric.


----------



## Drop11

ErinH said:


> I'll ditto on what Manville has said.
> 
> Very responsive tuning. And good adjustability on the parametric.


Not that I would, but could I for instance use all 10 bands between say 30 and 80hz? 

If needed could I do a wide cut at day 300hz then a narrow cut on 300 as well? 

I'm just looking for any possibility of limitations.


----------



## mirkinator

msmith said:


> Yup, that looks right... you can also adjust the degree of opposite channel subtraction from each of the rear channels by reducing the level of the reversed opposite channel.




Thank you for the confirmation. 

Adjusting the levels of opposite channel is interesting. Would It be a stretch to assume that this could be used to variably adjust subwoofer phase?


----------



## Kevin K

I've been impressed while tuning with the TwK and the Fe sounds better than it ever has.


----------



## ErinH

Drop11 said:


> Not that I would, but could I for instance use all 10 bands between say 30 and 80hz?
> 
> If needed could I do a wide cut at day 300hz then a narrow cut on 300 as well?
> 
> I'm just looking for any possibility of limitations.


Download the software and take it for a spin. That should answer all your questions. 

Here's the link:
JL Audio Â» Info Â» TüN Software - Free Download


----------



## Drop11

Can't. Don't have a computer currently.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

Mine will be delivered on Monday, I'll be home next Friday, the Bronco goes in the shop for an engine rebuild next Saturday :-(


----------



## Drop11

LumbermanSVO said:


> Mine will be delivered on Monday, I'll be home next Friday, the Bronco goes in the shop for an engine rebuild next Saturday :-(


I just put a new motor I'm my truck. That 7 grand I really wanted to put into the stereo/install.


----------



## quality_sound

I just started farting around with it, and without looking at the manual or read files it's confusing as hell. I'm sure it'll get better with more use, but right out of the box, there are easier processors to use. That's not an indictment of the TwK, just an observation.


----------



## msmith

Read a few of the help files. Once you figure out a few basics, it's pretty nice to use.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

Drop11 said:


> I just put a new motor I'm my truck. That 7 grand I really wanted to put into the stereo/install.


My engine work won't cost that much, but it's still gonna hurt. I'd love to have the shop do it while I'm traveling, but It's not an easy car to drive(by todays standards) and I don't want to have a friend pick it up. I'd rebuild it myself, but I think the HOA would notice if I did that in the street. It's amazing that I've gotten away with the EFI swap and replacing the entire exhaust.



quality_sound said:


> I just started farting around with it, and without looking at the manual or read files it's confusing as hell. I'm sure it'll get better with more use, but right out of the box, there are easier processors to use. That's not an indictment of the TwK, just an observation.


I have only worked with the PPI DEQ.8, a ridiculously simple DSP, and i didn't take too much longer to figure out the TwK.


----------



## robhaynes

quality_sound said:


> I just started farting around with it, and without looking at the manual or read files it's confusing as hell. I'm sure it'll get better with more use, but right out of the box, there are easier processors to use. That's not an indictment of the TwK, just an observation.


Out of curiosity, what did you find confusing about it?


----------



## quality_sound

robhaynes said:


> Out of curiosity, what did you find confusing about it?




Hey Rob,

The input to output routing and the talk of which eq. The routing part isn't too bad once you figure out that it's a basic electrical flow, but then you have to decide which eq it has to go to doesn't make sense. Why are there multiple eq's? Is an eq the eq for each output? If it IS an eq for each output, why isn't each eq automatically assigned to that output? It's just confusing, especially since it's labeled "to equalizer". I haven't spent too much time playing with it, but I'm also trying to figure out why the crossovers aren't tied to each channel as well. 
I'm sure there are good reasons for all of that, but it feels like it was designed and labeled by an engineer. It also looks like it was inspired by a signal flow path, but the eq part being "out of" that path minds throws it off, visually. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pocket5s

On the eq you are used to thinking how every other dsp is set up. In the twk an eq can span outputs. If you look at their preconfigured setups they did just that (unless they changed that from the beta). They had say a 3 way active plus sub setup using two eq's instead of 7. Why on earth anyone would do that is beyond me as it is a waste of resources but that's how it can be used. 

I admit I haven't looked at it recently but I didn't think the crossover setup was confusing at all. All displayed at a glance in one section. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Drop11

From the way you guys are talking if I wanted to use eq per channel on my 2 ways and a sub I could create a master eq and run everything through it as well?
I'm really hoping to be able to do eq per channel and a master eq. Even if the master eq has to come first I don't mind.


----------



## robhaynes

Drop11 said:


> From the way you guys are talking if I wanted to use eq per channel on my 2 ways and a sub I could create a master eq and run everything through it as well?
> I'm really hoping to be able to do eq per channel and a master eq. Even if the master eq has to come first I don't mind.


If active, you can run your active 2-ways and sub through up to six EQ banks or four EQ banks if using passive crossovers (in your scenario) or as little as two EQ banks. There are not individual EQ's that you can then run through a "Master" EQ. Technically, if you had inputs and outputs free you could send signal out from the TwK into free inputs and use that for master EQ, but it's not recommended.


----------



## msmith

pocket5s said:


> On the eq you are used to thinking how every other dsp is set up. In the twk an eq can span outputs. If you look at their preconfigured setups they did just that (unless they changed that from the beta). They had say a 3 way active plus sub setup using two eq's instead of 7. Why on earth anyone would do that is beyond me as it is a waste of resources but that's how it can be used.
> 
> I admit I haven't looked at it recently but I didn't think the crossover setup was confusing at all. All displayed at a glance in one section.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You can run one EQ per output if you want, but in many cases it is better to tune midbass/mid/tweeter channels with a single EQ. The TwK gives you that option... to route one EQ output to multiple output channels. This is not a waste of resources... a 10-band parametric is more than sufficient to tune a full-range speaker system.

But, if you prefer, and don't mind tuning one eq per output channel, you can set it up that way, too. Your choice.


----------



## msmith

quality_sound said:


> Hey Rob,
> 
> The input to output routing and the talk of which eq. The routing part isn't too bad once you figure out that it's a basic electrical flow, but then you have to decide which eq it has to go to doesn't make sense. Why are there multiple eq's? Is an eq the eq for each output? If it IS an eq for each output, why isn't each eq automatically assigned to that output? It's just confusing, especially since it's labeled "to equalizer". I haven't spent too much time playing with it, but I'm also trying to figure out why the crossovers aren't tied to each channel as well.
> I'm sure there are good reasons for all of that, but it feels like it was designed and labeled by an engineer. It also looks like it was inspired by a signal flow path, but the eq part being "out of" that path minds throws it off, visually.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The crossovers are assigned per output channel, so is polarity, delay and level trim. The EQs are assignable in the TwK... you can run one per channel if you want, or you can run fewer EQs to multiple channels. We have some short articles available in our help center that explain the interface in detail. 


https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/sections/203952227-TwK-System-Tuning-Processors


----------



## Drop11

Thanks. I plan to start using a eq per left/ right channel on my components and keep the passive crossovers for now them one more eq on the sub channels.
If that doesn't do it for me ill go full active with an eq per channel.
What I was hoping to do was do per speaker eq, eq that to as close to perfectly flat as possible them contour with a master eq. 
I'm used to mixing music this way but to do this I'd need to leave a good bit of headroom on each channel. I'll just shoot for a target curve like usual.


----------



## Drop11

I picked my twk up today and the jl site won't let me download the software. It just keeps resetting the fields. 
Not fun.


----------



## msmith

Let me check into that download issue...

Ok, I just tried it and it downloaded fine for me. If you still have problems, I sent you a PM with a Dropbox link to the software.


----------



## msmith

Drop11 said:


> Thanks. I plan to start using a eq per left/ right channel on my components and keep the passive crossovers for now them one more eq on the sub channels.
> If that doesn't do it for me ill go full active with an eq per channel.
> What I was hoping to do was do per speaker eq, eq that to as close to perfectly flat as possible them contour with a master eq.
> I'm used to mixing music this way but to do this I'd need to leave a good bit of headroom on each channel. I'll just shoot for a target curve like usual.


You can assign the EQ zones any way you want, but you can't run one EQ into another one, so the Master EQ/Channel EQ idea won't work. That being said, I think you will find that a 10 band parametric will be more than sufficient to cover a full-range system. You can even run the same EQ to the main and the sub channels, if you want, and it will work just fine. You should have enough bands to iron out small issues in each speaker section and still contour the overall response to your target curve. Since you're familiar with recording, you probably know that Mastering engineers generally don't use more than a couple of parametric bands for contouring. Maybe three. The most popular mastering EQ of all time is a 4-band parametric. (Orban 622)


----------



## quality_sound

You can't eq each channel then apply global eq? You guys should add that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Drop11

msmith said:


> Let me check into that download issue...
> 
> Ok, I just tried it and it downloaded fine for me. If you still have problems, I sent you a PM with a Dropbox link to the software.


Thanks. I can dl it to my phone but not my computer. I just bought temail computer last night so it may be something on my end but REW installed fine.


----------



## sqnut

msmith said:


> Since you're familiar with recording, you probably know that Mastering engineers generally don't use more than a couple of parametric bands for contouring. Maybe three. The most popular mastering EQ of all time is a 4-band parametric. (Orban 622)


The room the recording is made in, is much less reverbrant and hostile than a car. From a tuning standpoint, independent L&R eq lets you balance L&R, but after one needs to link L&R and tweak the combined response. Personally I prefer a 31 band GEQ to 10 bands of PEQ, paint with a finer brush .


----------



## Drop11

The file is msi. My computer doesn't recognize is much less let me download it.


----------



## thehatedguy

You aren't implying that a graphic eq with fixed center frequencies and widths is the "finer" brush.




sqnut said:


> The room the recording is made in, is much less reverbrant and hostile than a car. From a tuning standpoint, independent L&R eq lets you balance L&R, but after one needs to link L&R and tweak the combined response. Personally I prefer a 31 band GEQ to 10 bands of PEQ, paint with a finer brush .


----------



## pocket5s

msmith said:


> a 10-band parametric is more than sufficient to tune a full-range speaker system.



Sure, for a home system 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sqnut

thehatedguy said:


> You aren't implying that a graphic eq with fixed center frequencies and widths is the "finer" brush.


If I need to raise 500hz by 2 db and cut 630 by 5 db, how would I do that on a single PEQ band? Also I was talking about 10 bands vs 31 bands. Yes I think GEQ is a finer brush.


----------



## pocket5s

And what if your problem is 520gz and not 500? What if you have a narrow peak at 650hz? 

Your using geq and a big hammer to fix what you can't pinpoint. That's why a peq is a finer brush. You can target an exact frequency if needed. It could take one peq band to fix what takes 2 or more geq bands to fix. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tommys

A word of caution on the EQ correction guys..

The more you EQ the signal and the sharper/narrower your filter Qs are, the greater the distortion you can cause to the audio. Less is more. You don't want to end up with a ringing phasey mess. Additionally, the higher in frequency you go, the broader your corrections should be. 
And for anyone who doesn't know this already, where big frequency dips/nulls occur as a result of boundary interference / phase cancellation from the vehicle, try not to boost these much, as you are largely just dumping more power into a particular freq for it to cancel out. 

Carry on


----------



## msmith

The mastering engineer doesn't eq the room response. He/she eq's the recording, but regardless, if you prefer a 30 band graphic over a 10 band parametric, it shouldn't be because of precision. A 10 band peq is superior in terms of precision/resolution.


----------



## msmith

Drop11 said:


> The file is msi. My computer doesn't recognize is much less let me download it.


That may be an issue with your computer. Check Microsoft support for issues with MSI files not installing.


----------



## msmith

sqnut said:


> If I need to raise 500hz by 2 db and cut 630 by 5 db, how would I do that on a single PEQ band? Also I was talking about 10 bands vs 31 bands. Yes I think GEQ is a finer brush.


You would need two bands to do an adjacent boost/cut (see 1st image)



But if you need a broad cut, for example, you can do it with one PEQ band, where a GEQ would need multiple bands to be used. For example, how many 1/3 octave GEQ bands would be required to do what these 3 PEQ bands are doing?



And, a GEQ would not be able to accomplish the response curve these 3 parametric bands are creating. 



Add to the above that in some cases, you have 10 bands of EQ on a channel with a limited bandwidth (where many GEQ bands would be "wasted"), and the scenarios where you "run out of EQ" become almost zero. I will finish with an example of all 10 bands of PEQ being applied to generate a very complex response.


----------



## msmith

sqnut said:


> Personally I prefer a 31 band GEQ to 10 bands of PEQ, paint with a finer brush .


You prefer 30 fine brushes, whereas I prefer a selection of fully adjustable brush widths, from very wide to ultra-fine, as I need them. If the task is to paint a wall, I win. If the task is to paint something finer than your brush would allow, I win. If the task is somewhere in between, I still win.


----------



## Weigel21

Perhaps I just need to download the software and play around with it, but "I thought" I read at one time in here that one could use 10-bands of PEQ per channel, was that correct? 

If such is true, and again, I just "thought" I read such some time back, then if one were running a 4-way setup, they effectively have 10-bands of EQ for the sub stage, 10-bands for the mid-bass, 10-bands for the mid-range, and 10-bands for the highs. That's more than enough, if I'm correct on what I think I read. And the L/R channels can be EQ'd independently. 

That EASILY outperforms a 31-band GEQ in my book.


----------



## msmith

Weigel21 said:


> Perhaps I just need to download the software and play around with it, but "I thought" I read at one time in here that one could use 10-bands of PEQ per channel, was that correct?


That is correct. There are eight 10 band PEQ's, and you can assign one to each Output channel if you want. You can also connect multiple outputs to one EQ bank. For example, you could have a tweeter channel, a mid channel and a midbass channel feeding from one 10-band PEQ, so you can EQ them as a whole, and then assign a separate EQ to the subwoofer channel, and another one to the rear channel... it's up to you how you configure the EQ's.



> If such is true, and again, I just "thought" I read such some time back, then if one were running a 4-way setup, they effectively have 10-bands of EQ for the sub stage, 10-bands for the mid-bass, 10-bands for the mid-range, and 10-bands for the highs. That's more than enough, if I'm correct on what I think I read. And the L/R channels can be EQ'd independently.
> 
> That EASILY outperforms a 31-band GEQ in my book.


Yes, it would. Not even close. :thumbsup:

If you look at a mid-bass channel running from 80 Hz to 320 Hz, for example, a 31 band GEQ would give you only 9 fixed EQ bands in that passband. At least 20 bands would be rendered unnecessary. You probably wouldn't need more than three PEQ bands to dial in that passband, but if things are weird, you would have up to 10 with the TwK.


----------



## Weigel21

Awesome. 

I actually just downloaded it to try out.


----------



## Weigel21

So I just opened the program and it tells me an update is already available, so what's changed in the days since the program was created?

And for a first time user of ANY advanced processor, this looks a little intimidating, but I guess it's just a "connect the dots" game. LOL

Man, I can see myself doing some serious damage with this, guess it's time to learn a bit more.


----------



## msmith

Weigel21 said:


> So I just opened the program and it tells me an update is already available, so what's changed in the days since the program was created?
> 
> And for a first time user of ANY advanced processor, this looks a little intimidating, but I guess it's just a "connect the dots" game. LOL
> 
> Man, I can see myself doing some serious damage with this, guess it's time to learn a bit more.


It is connect the dots, for the most part, and there is a setup tool that simplifies matters when you select "new project". Read through the Overview document that is included with the Download. Also look at a few of the short articles on our support site if you run into any problems. Once you get it, it's super slick to use.

https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/sections/203952227-TwK-System-Tuning-Processors


----------



## Drop11

msmith said:


> Weigel21 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps I just need to download the software and play around with it, but "I thought" I read at one time in here that one could use 10-bands of PEQ per channel, was that correct?
> 
> 
> 
> That is correct. There are eight 10 band PEQ's, and you can assign one to each Output channel if you want. You can also connect multiple outputs to one EQ bank. For example, you could have a tweeter channel, a mid channel and a midbass channel feeding from one 10-band PEQ, so you can EQ them as a whole, and then assign a separate EQ to the subwoofer channel, and another one to the rear channel... it's up to you how you configure the EQ's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If such is true, and again, I just "thought" I read such some time back, then if one were running a 4-way setup, they effectively have 10-bands of EQ for the sub stage, 10-bands for the mid-bass, 10-bands for the mid-range, and 10-bands for the highs. That's more than enough, if I'm correct on what I think I read. And the L/R channels can be EQ'd independently.
> 
> That EASILY outperforms a 31-band GEQ in my book.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it would. Not even close.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you look at a mid-bass channel running from 80 Hz to 320 Hz, for example, a 31 band GEQ would give you only 9 fixed EQ bands in that passband. At least 20 bands would be rendered unnecessary. You probably wouldn't need more than three PEQ bands to dial in that passband, but if things are weird, you would have up to 10 with the TwK.
Click to expand...

If you guys find a way to assign 2 eqs per channel I will give someone a bj!

10 bands is more than enough for a full active system but those of us running passive 2ways may feel the need for a little more depending on how anal we want to get.

Also, I got TUN installed thanks to the drop box link you sent me. I still wish you guys would build an app with full control though.

I must admit being able to tune my truck from inside the house is nice. I don't even have the twk installed yet but the initial tune is ready to go.


----------



## ca90ss

Would it not be possible to make it so you could apply as many bands of eq as you want to each channel up to the total of 80?


----------



## msmith

ca90ss said:


> Would it not be possible to make it so you could apply as many bands of eq as you want to each channel up to the total of 80?


Not within the current signal path that is hard-coded into the DSP. It would require an all-new architecture. I seriously don't think you would ever need that many PEQ bands on one EQ. Not sure what you guys are trying to fix.


----------



## Weigel21

msmith said:


> Not sure what you guys are trying to fix.


Everything. :laugh:


----------



## msmith

Drop11 said:


> If you guys find a way to assign 2 eqs per channel I will give someone a bj!
> 
> 10 bands is more than enough for a full active system but those of us running passive 2ways may feel the need for a little more depending on how anal we want to get.


Umm... thanks for the offer, but... :laugh:

10 bands is enough for any situation I've ever encountered. I run the following setup in my vehicle: Front L/R woofer/mid and tweeter channels, plus a center channel, sub and rears.). For the front L/R woofers and tweeters, I am running a shared EQ and I am only using four bands out of the ten available. I have six left for getting really obsessive if I ever feel like it. The sub has its own EQ channel, the center has its own, and the rears have their own. Here's the EQ for the L/R front speakers:





> Also, I got TUN installed thanks to the drop box link you sent me. I still wish you guys would build an app with full control though.
> 
> I must admit being able to tune my truck from inside the house is nice. I don't even have the twk installed yet but the initial tune is ready to go.


You mean a phone or tablet app? Yes, that would be cool. Maybe in the future.


----------



## msmith

Weigel21 said:


> Everything. :laugh:


You shouldn't try to fix everything... Some issues are inaudible (narrow dips, for example) and trying to fix them can create negative effects on sound quality. Get the basics right: crossovers, levels, polarity, delay... then use EQ to stomp out any annoying peaks, do a little contouring of the bass and treble regions to season it nicely and then leave it the hell alone and enjoy the system.


----------



## LumbermanSVO

msmith said:


> ... and then leave it the hell alone and enjoy the system.


Most people here can't do that!


----------



## Weigel21

Ya, I hear you, I'm not the one that was wanting the ability to use 80-bands of EQ on one channel or divided among multiple channels as I see fit. 

I'll admit, I would "think" 10-bands isn't enough for some coaxial applications, but for those running an active setup, 10-bands per driver should be plenty.


----------



## subterFUSE

You could always loop an output back into an input and get more EQ and delay that way. You have to deal with latency, but it's theoretically possible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ca90ss

msmith said:


> Not within the current signal path that is hard-coded into the DSP. It would require an all-new architecture. I seriously don't think you would ever need that many PEQ bands on one EQ. Not sure what you guys are trying to fix.


Mostly just curiosity. I could see it being useful though, for example if you only use 5 bands on your subs it would be nice to have the option of using the 5 unused bands elsewhere if necessary.


----------



## Drop11

subterFUSE said:


> You could always loop an output back into an input and get more EQ and delay that way. You have to deal with latency, but it's theoretically possible.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


As much as I used to do this crap with fx proccessors I never even thought about it. 

I only need 3 outputs and 1 pair of inputs. That's a lot of looping back I could do.


----------



## Drop11

I'm digging this thing but I do have a question.

With the output level set at zero I really have to crank my amps gains up to get the output my radio had. 

Will it hurt anything to turn these up to plus 12 and turn my amps gains down? 

Also this little thing gets a little hot. I'm assuming this is normal?


----------



## msmith

Drop11 said:


> I'm digging this thing but I do have a question.
> 
> With the output level set at zero I really have to crank my amps gains up to get the output my radio had.
> 
> Will it hurt anything to turn these up to plus 12 and turn my amps gains down?
> 
> Also this little thing gets a little hot. I'm assuming this is normal?


There are multiple points where you can adjust gain on the TwK. 

IN THE SETUP TAB: If you click the little "hamburger" icon in the inputs section, you will get an Input sensitivity setting for each analog input, with a level meter. The default sensitivity is 1.0V. It can be adjusted from 250 mV (louder) to 7.1V (quieter). Just make sure the meters stay out of the red (with a full scale sine wave). In most cases, the default sensitivity is correct, by the way.

Next, you have a Pre-EQ level trim in the Input Mixer section. In most cases, it's best to leave that one alone. 

IN THE TUNE TAB:
Here, you have a "Level Trim" before the crossovers, and another at the "Outputs". The pre-crossover level trim is trim only (only attenuates). The Output level trim is +12 to -12 dB. It is perfectly safe to crank it all the way to +12, as long as the output level meters stay out of the red zone.

As for the unit getting warm, yes this is normal... The DSP is crunching a lot of numbers and is not unlike a computer processor. It does generate some heat.


----------



## msmith

We're going to do a little tutorial video on using PEQ. There seems to be a lot of confusion about it, mainly because people try to use it like a graphic EQ, throwing lots of bands at any given response issue. The correct approach is different and, once you get it, quite simple.

Here is a help desk article that covers the basics, for now. https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/219121887-TwK-Parametric-Equalization-


----------



## Drop11

Thanks again for your response and help.
I actually had to raise the input voltage to match my radio to make it stop clipping. No big deal. 

I do get the no signal lights occasionally even though it's clearly playing but no clipping get indicators.


----------



## msmith

Drop11 said:


> Thanks again for your response and help.
> I actually had to raise the input voltage to match my radio to make it stop clipping. No big deal.
> 
> I do get the no signal lights occasionally even though it's clearly playing but no clipping get indicators.


You can use the input and output level meters in the TuN interface to see if anything is clipping while you adjust levels. It will also sound really bad if something clips.


----------



## sqnut

msmith said:


> You would need two bands to do an adjacent boost/cut (see 1st image)
> 
> 
> 
> But if you need a broad cut, for example, you can do it with one PEQ band, where a GEQ would need multiple bands to be used. For example, how many 1/3 octave GEQ bands would be required to do what these 3 PEQ bands are doing?
> 
> 
> 
> And, a GEQ would not be able to accomplish the response curve these 3 parametric bands are creating.
> 
> 
> 
> Add to the above that in some cases, you have 10 bands of EQ on a channel with a limited bandwidth (where many GEQ bands would be "wasted"), and the scenarios where you "run out of EQ" become almost zero. I will finish with an example of all 10 bands of PEQ being applied to generate a very complex response.


I guess it's down to how we use the eq, if all we want is to cut the peaks, balance L/R and dial in a base curve then yes, the PEQ will get you there faster and use fewer bands. 

I run my mid-bass in a 2 way setup and I'm running it from 50 hz-2.5 khz or roughly about six octaves. With a PEQ it would take about 4-5 bands to balance L/R and get the desired curve and I have 5 bands for fine tuning. The same thing on my Bit10 GEQ takes about 18-20 bands and a bit longer to dial in. 

For 90% of folks, tuning to their house curve is probably enough, the sound is what it is and good enough for them. But for me a house curve is just a starting point and this is when one starts to really listen and then fine tune, need to bring more clarity to vocals, raise 500 a bit (combining L&R), need to cut the honking a bit, cuts at 630 & 800 and so on. 

Now my 31 bands at 1/3 oct come in handy and offer a finer resolution (painting with a finer brush) than the 5 spare PEQ bands spread over 6 octaves. With the GEQ I can also devote 10 bands to eq the stop band for better acoustic roll off and hence phase coherence.


----------



## Babs

The name of the game is getting your measured response to match what you want it to look like (house curve, flat, etc) with as few EQ adjustments as possible.. That's what's cool about a fully parametric EQ.

On what to do for EQ.. If you become proficient in measuring your acoustic response and comparing it to a curve you select/adjust in Room EQ Wizard, (look up "house curve"), you can have the software predict the necessary filters to bring your response to the curve. There are some significantly good threads on that as a whole topic in here. Sorry don't have the links handy on it.

I always point folks learning to tune to Kyle's great videos as well. They really got me off the starting block. Sorry Manville, he's rockin' a Helix. Way before the Twk was even in the works I think.  But it's a great primer on a free tool (Room EQ Wizard).

Kyle's Tuning Instruction


----------



## optimaprime

Kyles videos are aweosme should be sticky around here . If it's my my bad


----------



## sqnut

Babs said:


> The name of the game is getting your measured response to match what you want it to look like (house curve, flat, etc) with as few EQ adjustments as possible.. That's what's cool about a fully parametric EQ.
> 
> On what to do for EQ.. If you become proficient in measuring your acoustic response and comparing it to a curve you select/adjust in Room EQ Wizard, (look up "house curve"), you can have the software predict the necessary filters to bring your response to the curve. There are some significantly good threads on that as a whole topic in here. Sorry don't have the links handy on it.
> 
> I always point folks learning to tune to Kyle's great videos as well. They really got me off the starting block. Sorry Manville, he's rockin' a Helix. Way before the Twk was even in the works I think.  But it's a great primer on a free tool (Room EQ Wizard).
> 
> Kyle's Tuning Instruction


Beyond a point it's not about how it measures but how it sounds. There is no curve that is plug and play, a decent curve will get you in the ballpark, but if you want your car to sound like a real 2ch in a room, you have to get intuitive with your eq and use it based on what you're hearing.


----------



## Drop11

I agree. A graphic is handy for going in aND taking a db off here and there. 1 and 8kHz come to mind. Maybe addo a db at 5khz.

These small changes make a difference. Not that you can't do it with Peq but a 31 band graphic is super easy and most importantly can be done on the fly in a lot of cases.

I'm thinking about grabbing a p99 just for this and doing the main tuning with the twk, fine tuning with the p99


----------



## msmith

sqnut said:


> Beyond a point it's not about how it measures but how it sounds. There is no curve that is plug and play, a decent curve will get you in the ballpark, but if you want your car to sound like a real 2ch in a room, you have to get intuitive with your eq and use it based on what you're hearing.


Given the same target response, I prefer using fewer bands of parametric than many more bands of graphic EQ to achieve it. Fewer bands have fewer interactions between filters, fewer phase shifts, and they will likely sound better. 

If the goal is to simulate great 2 channel audio in a room, I would choose a PEQ every time and I wouldn't need more than 10 bands to tune a full range response for great sound. Just my $0.02 based on my experiences.


----------



## pocket5s

msmith said:


> Given the same target response, I prefer using fewer bands of parametric than many more bands of graphic EQ to achieve it. Fewer bands have fewer interactions between filters, fewer phase shifts, and they will likely sound better.
> 
> If the goal is to simulate great 2 channel audio in a room, I would choose a PEQ every time and I wouldn't need more than 10 bands to tune a full range response for great sound. Just my $0.02 based on my experiences.


from a purely tonality perspective I would completely agree with this. Where some of us run out of the 10 bands is in final tweaking, mostly in centering up frequencies to really tighten the image. 

so after basic tonal shaping and such, it's those little 1db (sometimes as little a half db) shifts here and there, listening to 1/3rd octave band limited pink noise (usually). For example, say in general everything lines us, but 630hz is a tad left. That's one band. 800hz needs a touch right so there's another, 1.2k needs a touch to the left, and so forth. We can easily go through 5 or 6 bands just on that alone. They are very small changes, but do consume the available bands.

My current comp setup uses a Rane, and I have a full left peq and a full right peq which I use just for that purpose, then individual driver eq's for fixing what the car is doing to fr and my target curve. Granted, no car dsp does that as far as I am aware of, but one guy has simulated that by using 2 outputs from a helix pro (10 channels) and looped them back to accomplish the same thing.

Some may see that as silly, but when you are trying to get all you can out of it, and yes get as many of those scoresheet points as you can, it adds up


----------



## caraudiopimps

pocket5s said:


> from a purely tonality perspective I would completely agree with this. Where some of us run out of the 10 bands is in final tweaking, mostly in centering up frequencies to really tighten the image.
> 
> so after basic tonal shaping and such, it's those little 1db (sometimes as little a half db) shifts here and there, listening to 1/3rd octave band limited pink noise (usually). For example, say in general everything lines us, but 630hz is a tad left. That's one band. 800hz needs a touch right so there's another, 1.2k needs a touch to the left, and so forth. We can easily go through 5 or 6 bands just on that alone. They are very small changes, but do consume the available bands.
> 
> My current comp setup uses a Rane, and I have a full left peq and a full right peq which I use just for that purpose, then individual driver eq's for fixing what the car is doing to fr and my target curve. Granted, no car dsp does that as far as I am aware of, but one guy has simulated that by using 2 outputs from a helix pro (10 channels) and looped them back to accomplish the same thing.
> 
> Some may see that as silly, but when you are trying to get all you can out of it, and yes get as many of those scoresheet points as you can, it adds up


THIS is why I chose the PS8 over the JL.
Take a look at the new software, specifically the paremetric/graphic eq integration, afaik, no other dsp does what the ps8 does, it's still not quite at the level of the range peq setup you have, but it's getting closer.


----------



## msmith

Drop11 said:


> I agree. A graphic is handy for going in aND taking a db off here and there. 1 and 8kHz come to mind. Maybe addo a db at 5khz.
> 
> These small changes make a difference. Not that you can't do it with Peq but a 31 band graphic is super easy and most importantly can be done on the fly in a lot of cases.
> 
> I'm thinking about grabbing a p99 just for this and doing the main tuning with the twk, fine tuning with the p99


You can zero in on a narrow band anomaly much more accurately with the PEQ. A 1/3 OCTAVE EQ has a filter Q of 4.31 on each band. The Q on the TwK's parametric EQ goes all the way up to 10.0, which is equivalent to what a 1/7th octave graphic EQ would have. 

Here are some graphic examples of the Q range of the TwK's PEQ bands, with translation into octave bandwidths for comparison to graphic EQ resolution.


----------



## msmith

caraudiopimps said:


> THIS is why I chose the PS8 over the JL.


I'm sure the Arc PS8 is a really fine piece of gear, but remember that you are comparing a $1000 dsp to a $400 dsp.


----------



## subterFUSE

pocket5s said:


> My current comp setup uses a Rane, and I have a full left peq and a full right peq which I use just for that purpose, then individual driver eq's for fixing what the car is doing to fr and my target curve. Granted, no car dsp does that as far as I am aware of, but one guy has simulated that by using 2 outputs from a helix pro (10 channels) and looped them back to accomplish the same thing.
> 
> Some may see that as silly, but when you are trying to get all you can out of it, and yes get as many of those scoresheet points as you can, it adds up


What you are describing is called Input EQ vs. Output EQ. Most pro-audio DSPs have separate EQ, Gain, Polarity and XOver banks for both the Input side and Output side. 


The Helix Pro has parametric Input EQ as of a few software updates ago, although it only works on the analog inputs.


----------



## pocket5s

subterFUSE said:


> What you are describing is called Input EQ vs. Output EQ. Most pro-audio DSPs have separate EQ, Gain, Polarity and XOver banks for both the Input side and Output side.
> 
> 
> The Helix Pro has parametric Input EQ as of a few software updates ago, although it only works on the analog inputs.




That's one way to accomplish it, yes. The rane doesn't have input eq per se, but it doesn't need really need to given the amount of eq power on tap. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## caraudiopimps

msmith said:


> I'm sure the Arc PS8 is a really fine piece of gear, but remember that you are comparing a $1000 dsp to a $400 dsp.


Well not really, if you compare the fix + twk, which would be the jl equivalent of the ps8, the prices are a lot closer.


----------



## Drop11

Just realized I could use a low pass on my tweeters at 20khz to roll them off. Pretty slick.


----------



## pocket5s

caraudiopimps said:


> Well not really, if you compare the fix + twk, which would be the jl equivalent of the ps8, the prices are a lot closer.




The ps8 doesn't do anything like what the fix does. Might want to research that one a bit. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## halfkrack

Hey guys going back to the Fix82..... There is a video on youtube showing a brief demo of the fix & the twk (by Steve Turrisi I think), and there is mention of the fix having a basic graphical eq capability when connected to a laptop via USB. Anyone able to confirm this?? At least it would be something to do after installing the Fix while saving up to buy the twk lol.


----------



## robhaynes

halfkrack said:


> Hey guys going back to the Fix82..... There is a video on youtube showing a brief demo of the fix & the twk (by Steve Turrisi I think), and there is mention of the fix having a basic graphical eq capability when connected to a laptop via USB. Anyone able to confirm this?? At least it would be something to do after installing the Fix while saving up to buy the twk lol.


TüN software for the FiX is in development. Once completed you will have 10-band graphic eq's for the outputs as well as being able to view what the FiX corrected.


----------



## MoparMike

robhaynes said:


> TüN software for the FiX is in development. Once completed you will have 10-band graphic eq's for the outputs as well as being able to view what the FiX corrected.




Is there an ETA when this software will be available? I was wondering about what functions the USB port on the Fix will have, firmware updates were one assumption. What about the talk regarding changes to the brightness of the status LED on the DRC-100? Could that be adjusted through the software as well? 

I am going to use mine for the first time over the weekend and am curious what I could expect down the road. The options to dim the LED could certainly affect where I decide to mount it also. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## robhaynes

MoparMike said:


> Is there an ETA when this software will be available? I was wondering about what functions the USB port on the Fix will have, firmware updates were one assumption. What about the talk regarding changes to the brightness of the status LED on the DRC-100? Could that be adjusted through the software as well?
> 
> I am going to use mine for the first time over the weekend and am curious what I could expect down the road. The options to dim the LED could certainly affect where I decide to mount it also.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No ETA on software (that I know of). It's in development, I've seen the renderings and it looks awesome. 

We are working on options to dim the LED's on the DRC-100 or DRC-200. Software and hardware options are being looked at. If needed, just wear sunglasses if the LED is anywhere near...

:laugh:


----------



## MoparMike

robhaynes said:


> No ETA on software (that I know of). It's in development, I've seen the renderings and it looks awesome.
> 
> We are working on options to dim the LED's on the DRC-100 or DRC-200. Software and hardware options are being looked at. If needed, just wear sunglasses if the LED is anywhere near...
> 
> :laugh:


So.....










 :laugh:


----------



## robhaynes

MoparMike said:


> So.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :laugh:


Not for too long hopefully lol.

As I said, we know the LED is too bright and are working on a fix (no pun intended) for it.


----------



## Drop11

Today I got a promt to download the new run software for the twk. What are the changes? Everything for me is working great so unless it's added features I'm not real worried about it.


----------



## robhaynes

Drop11 said:


> Today I got a promt to download the new run software for the twk. What are the changes? Everything for me is working great so unless it's added features I'm not real worried about it.


Interesting....

I checked with our engineering team and we have not released any new updates for software or firmware. Are you running on software .979? You can confirm by clicking on the sprocket icon in the bottom left corner. What TuN software does it say? 

If you can plug your computer into your TwK, what Firmware version is displayed?

If you have a TwK 88 your firmware should be 0119 and if you have a D8 you should have 0110 for Firmware.

Software (TüN) and Firmware (what tells the TwK how to interact) are two different things. If you have old firmware on the TwK, you could get a pop-up notifying you. If so, you can update it without effecting TüN.


----------



## johnbooth3

I think the issue is with the release and pre-release versions. I downloaded the pre-release when it became available, via this thread. Shortly after that, I kept getting a newer version is available, but when I go and download it, it had the same named version of .979. When I opened the previous version, and selected the gear today, it showed .978. I then downloaded the version the software directs me to and installed it. It comes up with .979 now. Hope this helps.


----------



## robhaynes

johnbooth3 said:


> I think the issue is with the release and pre-release versions. I downloaded the pre-release when it became available, via this thread. Shortly after that, I kept getting a newer version is available, but when I go and download it, it had the same named version of .979. When I opened the previous version, and selected the gear today, it showed .978. I then downloaded the version the software directs me to and installed it. It comes up with .979 now. Hope this helps.


Thanks for the info.

Are you talking about the link that Manville posted a few pages back that takes you to the official TüN download page?


----------



## johnbooth3

Also, are there any plans to add Phase controls? 

I really like this unit. I am considering it over the Arc PS8 due to the parametric EQ controls. (I already have the Arc PS8) The Arc only does 0/180. The Helix DSP Pro, also a consideration, does 11.5 degree increments, depending on the output setup. The shear amount of EQ's on the Helix are impressive, but not needed. I do see why you would want more EQ's but 10 per output is plenty for most applications. I work in teh Pro AV industry and when I use 5 parametrics, I start to question what I can do to not add more. I think the max I have ever used was around 10 and that speaker (full range) needed a lot of help.


----------



## robhaynes

johnbooth3 said:


> Also, are there any plans to add Phase controls?
> 
> I really like this unit. I am considering it over the Arc PS8 due to the parametric EQ controls. (I already have the Arc PS8) The Arc only does 0/180. The Helix DSP Pro, also a consideration, does 11.5 degree increments, depending on the output setup. The shear amount of EQ's on the Helix are impressive, but not needed. I do see why you would want more EQ's but 10 per output is plenty for most applications. I work in teh Pro AV industry and when I use 5 parametrics, I start to question what I can do to not add more. I think the max I have ever used was around 10 and that speaker (full range) needed a lot of help.


For now, not that I'm aware of outside of the Polarity switches on the Set Up tab. Those should move to the Tune tab hopefully on the next revision of TüN.


----------



## johnbooth3

robhaynes said:


> Thanks for the info.
> 
> Are you talking about the link that Manville posted a few pages back that takes you to the official TüN download page?


Yes, That is correct. Although the file name version says .979 it shows as .978 in the gear. The update via the software, gives you a the correct .979 after installing.


----------



## MoparMike

Copied and pasted a little bit of a post from my build thread reading my experience with the Fix82 after a week's time in my car:
_
I would really like to get an RTA on the 2 channel outputs on the Fix processor to see what the curve looks like before and after calibration. Per the instructions, calibration was done at 75% of the radio's volume range with a flat EQ and the surround sound setting turned off. Full volume on the UConnect is 38 and the DRC-100's status light doesn't detect clipping until 32 but I'm finding that 28-30 is the sweet spot. Once the volume on the UConnect is set then the DRC is used for volume control. The bass heavy sound from the factory tuning is still there though and the bass setting on the UConnect's EQ had to be set to -5 to keep the woofers from sounding muddy. Positive takeaways on the Fix are that I've had no errors over several calibrations and the noise floor is low, although not completely silent._


----------



## bbfoto

MoparMike said:


> Copied and pasted a little bit of a post from my build thread reading my experience with the Fix82 after a week's time in my car:
> _
> I would really like to get an RTA on the 2 channel outputs on the Fix processor to see what the curve looks like before and after calibration. Per the instructions, calibration was done at 75% of the radio's volume range with a flat EQ and the surround sound setting turned off. Full volume on the UConnect is 38 and the DRC-100's status light doesn't detect clipping until 32 but I'm finding that 28-30 is the sweet spot. Once the volume on the UConnect is set then the DRC is used for volume control. The bass heavy sound from the factory tuning is still there though and the bass setting on the UConnect's EQ had to be set to -5 to keep the woofers from sounding muddy. Positive takeaways on the Fix are that I've had no errors over several calibrations and the noise floor is low, although not completely silent._


Thanks for posting this information. It's always really helpful to read first-hand experience from someone actually using a product.

I'm just going to play devil's advocate for a moment here. I have no stock or vested interest in JL Audio or it's products, and am not implying that the Fix is not the source of your slight noise floor. However, is it possible that either or both your main processor and/or your amplifiers and gain staging are contributing to the final noise floor? It's just something to explore if you haven't already.

I also find it strange that you still have to dial back the bass setting on the UConnnect EQ.  Have you spoken to Rob, Manville, or someone else at JL about this? It doesn't seem right. It sounds as if the Fix is working out for you overall, but I'd still explore the issues above a bit more until I was completely satisfied. Good luck.


----------



## MoparMike

bbfoto said:


> Thanks for posting this information. It's always really helpful to read first-hand experience from someone actually using a product.
> 
> I'm just going to play devil's advocate for a moment here. I have no stock or vested interest in JL Audio or it's products, and am not implying that the Fix is not the source of your slight noise floor. However, is it possible that either or both your main processor and/or your amplifiers and gain staging are contributing to the final noise floor? It's just something to explore if you haven't already.
> 
> I also find it strange that you still have to dial back the bass setting on the UConnnect EQ.  Have you spoken to Rob, Manville, or someone else at JL about this? It doesn't seem right. It sounds as if the Fix is working out for you overall, but I'd still explore the issues above a bit more until I was completely satisfied. Good luck.


That's why I decided to post it here as well. Hearing any feedback from the JL guys would be good too if they have advice on things to try, lookout for, etc.

Over the last week I have been running my components on passive crossovers while waiting on a replacement amp. During that week the gain setting had the tweeters hissing while no audio was being played. I confirmed this once they were wired for active processing. With the gains for those channels at a more appropriate level, that hissing almost completely went away. There is more work to do on setting levels both on the amps and the processor so things could improve further. If they do, I'll post accordingly.

Regarding the bass setting, it is a known issue for other Durango owners, and probably other Dodge/Jeep models as well, that the system is very bass heavy and in order to keep muddiness out of the front woofers it helps to dial back both the bass and mid-range in the EQ. Before starting this build I hooked up an RTA to the factory amp and the curve showed how bad it was. Based on what the Fix was designed to do I was curious what the result would be. Since I don't have my own RTA, I am waiting to use a friend's and will get some pictures of the signal coming out of the Fix when its processing is both in use and bypassed. This is another area that further tuning on the PPI processor could assist but it was very noticeable that just like before, dialing back the settings on the UConnect's EQ had the same results on the quality of mid-bass and mid-range as it did when the stereo was still stock. Hopefully the JL guys will have something to add here as well.


----------



## JSM-FA5

I've read this entire thread. (I hate reading threads like this and other peoples logs, but I also love it  haha) I may have over looked this, but does this eliminate the bass cut at higher volumes from the factory head unit?


----------



## msmith

JSM-FA5 said:


> I've read this entire thread. (I hate reading threads like this and other peoples logs, but I also love it  haha) I may have over looked this, but does this eliminate the bass cut at higher volumes from the factory head unit?


The FiX does not correct for volume dependent effects because it has no ability to detect the factory volume control setting. If you want to avoid volume dependent effects entirely, you can connect the optional wired controller, set the factory volume at 3/4 and leave it there and use the controller's knob for master volume. 

That being said, in most cases you can use the factory volume and set up your gain structure so that you don't use the factory volume range where the bass gets cut. A bass boost at lower volumes is not necessarily a bad thing, so we leave that alone. Most people run the FiX, use the factory volume and are quite satisfied.


----------



## msmith

The FiX 86, four-channel OEM Integration DSP is now available. 

This DSP allows for the factory fader functionality to remain intact. It differs from the FiX 82 in that it can accept 4.1 channel inputs (four channels, plus sub) and outputs 4.1 ch analog signals. The front input section can sum two left and two right inputs, plus the OEM subwoofer signal and the rear section has a pair of inputs that sum with the OEM factory signal.

Unlike the FiX 82, this unit does not have a digital output.

More info here: FiX-86 - Car Audio - Processors - OEM Integration

And here: https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/sections/202375818-FiX-OEM-Integration-Processors


----------



## jode1967

has the led brightness issue been dealt with yet?


----------



## msmith

jode1967 said:


> has the led brightness issue been dealt with yet?


We are working on it. There is no simple way to dim the existing LED without affecting the color mixing required for the preset identification, so we are evaluating alternative, lower brightness RGB LEDs.


----------



## mirkinator

msmith said:


> We are working on it. There is no simple way to dim the existing LED without affecting the color mixing required for the preset identification, so we are evaluating alternative, lower brightness RGB LEDs.




https://www.rustoleum.com/product-catalog/consumer-brands/auto/specialty-paints/lens-tint


----------



## gsdye

I was supposed to have my system complete this week but it hit some unexpected issues. 

Front stage is hybrid audio L1/L4/L6. I had the L6 lying around so didn't bother buying the L8

Amp. JL HD 600/4: for the 4"/6"
2nd amp: JL rd400/4 (tweeters and rear) 

Processors were the new JL FiX82 and TwK D8. This is where issues developed. There was noise and feedback. We rewired, checked ground over and over and it wouldn't go away. We tried multiple units also. The main issue was the FiX and the TwK amplified it. The installer had the older JL Cleansweep and the noise disappeared so we isolated it to the FiX. Because I had the D8 version of the TwK I couldn't go with this set up. Need the TwK 88. 

I wasn't thrilled going with the RD400/4 amp as it now won't fit under the seat with the other gear and had to be mounted behind the passenger seat. I had wanted the MX280/4 which is way smaller but since this amp powers the tweeters Installer wanted "better quality". 

I have been living with a system using the FiX 82 and just the HD600/4 amp (no rear speakers) for months now and got used to it. The noise was not apparent too much as we dialled down the gains. The Hybrid speakers broke in nicely and gave me a great sound but not perfect imaging (no DSP). 

My installer is fed up with the JL for now (wasting hours trying to get rid of the noise) and yanked the TwK and FiX out. I am running active and using the crossovers on the amps and the hybrid passive for the tweeter to cross over higher than the amps (~5000hz) since the L4 mid drivers are best run full range in this set up. The tweeter has opened up going active and feeding it way better/more power but the tuning actually is not as good as before with the FiX. 

I now have to make a decision to use the JL TwK 88 and ditch the FiX. This is the best value (one less thing to buy). Or run the older Cleansweep with the TwK 88. The last option is to spend even more and go with an audison bit one or other DSP. I have an alpine dsp in my daily car and love it but not the extra controller. I really like the JL's clean install solution with nothing more than a volume dial controller. 

In the end this is a Porsche and it is all about the engine and sound. Especially since my Cayman is the gt4. I just like tunes and I am not good enough of a driver to notice the extra 30lbs I put into the electronics.


----------



## subterFUSE

Can you do mobridge?

That would be a much better solution than a FiX, even if the FiX was noise-free for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## gsdye

subterFUSE said:


> Can you do mobridge?
> 
> That would be a much better solution than a FiX, even if the FiX was noise-free for you.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




I don't have the Bose nor Burmester so the deck is unbalanced outputs. Easier to upgrade. I think I will try the TwK88. More than 1/2 the price of the Bit/alpine/helix. The installer did like the JL dsp software. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## subterFUSE

What year and model of Porsche?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## gsdye

2016 Cayman gt4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bgill80

I am loving my fix and twk together. My only real major issue is after unlinking a pair of eq's EX. 1-2 they can't be relinked keeping them relative with each other. When relinking it ask to copy EQ1 to EQ2 or vice versa.


----------



## subterFUSE

bgill80 said:


> I am loving my fix and twk together. My only real major issue is after unlinking a pair of eq's EX. 1-2 they can't be relinked keeping them relative with each other. When relinking it ask to copy EQ1 to EQ2 or vice versa.



Yup, I had noticed that when I was playing with the software.
Major fail, IMO. Hopefully they fix that in an update at some point.

Or, if they added EQ bands to the inputs you would not need to link output EQ bands in relative mode. Just do your tonality adjustments on the input side like a pro-audio DSP.


----------



## Mahapederdon

I'm getting mine Monday. Pretty excited. Been reading this thread and playing with the software. Seems very well put together.


----------



## msmith

subterFUSE said:


> Yup, I had noticed that when I was playing with the software.
> Major fail, IMO. Hopefully they fix that in an update at some point.
> 
> Or, if they added EQ bands to the inputs you would not need to link output EQ bands in relative mode. Just do your tonality adjustments on the input side like a pro-audio DSP.


With a parametric EQ, retaining linking left-right on asymmetrically tuned EQ's becomes very confusing and difficult to program. That's why it won't allow it.


----------



## subterFUSE

msmith said:


> With a parametric EQ, retaining linking left-right on asymmetrically tuned EQ's becomes very confusing and difficult to program. That's why it won't allow it.


Yes, that is true. This is why it's nice to have an input EQ that it separate from the output EQ. That way you can adjust the overall system without messing up the parametric settings that were used to balance the drivers.

Or, as an alternative, it's why having more than 10 bands of EQ per driver is helpful. You can leave some bands in standard GEQ positions and use some parametrically. This way you can still use relative linking to adjust tonality without messing up the balance between drivers.


----------



## pocket5s

msmith said:


> With a parametric EQ, retaining linking left-right on asymmetrically tuned EQ's becomes very confusing and difficult to program. That's why it won't allow it.


If I was that software developer that would be a verbal "uh... that might be difficult" and a mental "this guy is out of his f*#[email protected] mind..."


----------



## Pariah Zero

pocket5s said:


> If I was that software developer that would be a verbal "uh... that might be difficult" and a mental "this guy is out of his f*#[email protected] mind..."



Yeah. I don't know if any technical expert doesn't face this problem at least once a day. It's more frequent than that if you're not on vacation.

An illustrative video:






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pocket5s

in well over a decade of doing software, I can confirm those thoughts happen quite a lot


----------



## bgill80

any plans for Tun softwear for a mac?


----------



## Mahapederdon

Is it a bad idea to use a line driver after the twk 88. Mine has pretty low output and I gotta crank my Gains pretty high. I have the input set at 1 v and was pretty sure my pioneer avh7800bt would put more than that. At a 0db test track it doesn't clip the input and or output. I cranked the outputs to 10 dB and still not clipping on the output and the gains are better, but is there a better way. My question is line driver keep the gains way up or mess with the input by lowered it to less than 1 v.


----------



## Mahapederdon

bgill80 said:


> any plans for Tun softwear for a mac?


I think on Jl's faq it said windows only. It mentioned running an emulator on the Mac I think.
https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us


----------



## t3sn4f2

Mahapederdon said:


> Is it a bad idea to use a line driver after the twk 88. Mine has pretty low output and I gotta crank my Gains pretty high. I have the input set at 1 v and was pretty sure my pioneer avh7800bt would put more than that. At a 0db test track it doesn't clip the input and or output. I cranked the outputs to 10 dB and still not clipping on the output and the gains are better, but is there a better way. My question is line driver keep the gains way up or mess with the input by lowered it to less than 1 v.


Sounds like you need a line driver before the Twk.


----------



## Mahapederdon

t3sn4f2 said:


> Sounds like you need a line driver before the Twk.


I'm able to get full output from the twk, I just don't think it's enough. If I use a line driver before I'll still only get the max out that I'm already getting, right? I'm gonna just use it for awhile and maybe I'll forget about my Gaines having to be 3/4 the way up. It's not noisy but I was thinking it would sound better that way. Thanks for the input.


----------



## bigguy2010

Does anyone have experience with interfacing the FiX with a Ford Sony system? I have a 2012 F-150 FX4 with the sync, nav and the Sony setup. From my searching around it appears that I need to use the Speaker outputs that run to the speakers to get signal for the processor analog inputs. Here's my concern, the Sony outputs are center, front tweets, front mids, rears and sub. What do I need to tie into to get the proper signal? The outputs from the factory radio to the Sony amp won't work from what I've read. I'm looking for high, mid and low to run to my amps for tweets, mids and a sub. Any advice would be awesome! I posted here so I didn't have to start a new thread, thanks guys!


----------



## Mahapederdon

I've not used that piece but what I think you would do is send all signals into it speaker level and combine all the left channels and then the right channels. Keep the sub and center separate. Then youll have full range left, right, center, and sub to play with. Just setup the outputs according to what you have.


----------



## pocket5s

bigguy2010 said:


> Does anyone have experience with interfacing the FiX with a Ford Sony system? I have a 2012 F-150 FX4 with the sync, nav and the Sony setup. From my searching around it appears that I need to use the Speaker outputs that run to the speakers to get signal for the processor analog inputs. Here's my concern, the Sony outputs are center, front tweets, front mids, rears and sub. What do I need to tie into to get the proper signal? The outputs from the factory radio to the Sony amp won't work from what I've read. I'm looking for high, mid and low to run to my amps for tweets, mids and a sub. Any advice would be awesome! I posted here so I didn't have to start a new thread, thanks guys!


feed all the left, right and sub into the FiX. You can leave out the center unless you want to use it. That should use up 7 of the 8 input channels on the FiX (front tweeters and mids, single pair of rears plus sub). The FiX will correct all the crossovers, time alignment, and oem eq that the oem amp applied.


----------



## bigguy2010

pocket5s said:


> feed all the left, right and sub into the FiX. You can leave out the center unless you want to use it. That should use up 7 of the 8 input channels on the FiX (front tweeters and mids, single pair of rears plus sub). The FiX will correct all the crossovers, time alignment, and oem eq that the oem amp applied.


I agree with you but I can't seem to find a solid answer on this. I've read that the sub signal is nasty and clips at very low volumes so guys say NOT to use it. This wasn't in regards to the FiX so idk if that still holds true here? I've read that the front mids may be full range, if so I wouldn't need the front tweets. I have no means of verifying this, any pointers? The center is for sync and nav voice so that will remain connected to the Sony amp to retain factory function. I'm assuming a phone call will go through the front doors? I watched the 40 minute demo on YouTube from a JL guy and he reviewed an interesting aspect, you can turn off the correction for phone calls and that'll help with the sub side of things, just so it's not so bass heavy from what I recall. I bought the TwK-88 so I'm getting excited lol


----------



## MoparMike

bigguy2010 said:


> I agree with you but I can't seem to find a solid answer on this. I've read that the sub signal is nasty and clips at very low volumes so guys say NOT to use it. This wasn't in regards to the FiX so idk if that still holds true here? I've read that the front mids may be full range, if so I wouldn't need the front tweets. I have no means of verifying this, any pointers? The center is for sync and nav voice so that will remain connected to the Sony amp to retain factory function. I'm assuming a phone call will go through the front doors? I watched the 40 minute demo on YouTube from a JL guy and he reviewed an interesting aspect, you can turn off the correction for phone calls and that'll help with the sub side of things, just so it's not so bass heavy from what I recall. I bought the TwK-88 so I'm getting excited lol


I'll say that the sub signal in my Dodge UConnect is how you describe the Ford's so I am not using it as an input on my Fix82. Only using front door speakers (6x9 and tweeter) to get a full range input. I verified that by tapping into the wiring harness at the stock amp and testing with an RTA prior to wiring it up. You'd need to do the same to test for yourself as to what the stock wiring is outputting. Regarding phone calls, the DRC-100 volume knob can activate a hands-free mode where it enables a HPF to cut low frequencies so you don't have someone's voice coming out of your subs. It does improve call quality IMO.


----------



## strohw

Do what he says. Run inputs straight to the DSP on channels you want to see the range on. Send the output to the input of your computer. Run pink noise on those channels and measure in REW. You'll see what kind of response you're getting. Make sure you're using a computer with a decent sound card.


----------



## bgill80

When will we see an update that alows us to access the EQ in the Fix???


----------



## robhaynes

bigguy2010 said:


> Does anyone have experience with interfacing the FiX with a Ford Sony system? I have a 2012 F-150 FX4 with the sync, nav and the Sony setup. From my searching around it appears that I need to use the Speaker outputs that run to the speakers to get signal for the processor analog inputs. Here's my concern, the Sony outputs are center, front tweets, front mids, rears and sub. What do I need to tie into to get the proper signal? The outputs from the factory radio to the Sony amp won't work from what I've read. I'm looking for high, mid and low to run to my amps for tweets, mids and a sub. Any advice would be awesome! I posted here so I didn't have to start a new thread, thanks guys!


For the FiX to properly calibrate we recommend as FEW inputs as possible to get a full-range signal. Most of the Ford Sony systems have horrendous clipping on the sub channel at rather low levels. 

The front doors (mid & tweet) typically are full-range and would be all you need to run into the FiX™. Measure it obviously to confirm, but if you don't have to, don't bother with the sub output form the Sony amplifier.


----------



## robhaynes

bgill80 said:


> When will we see an update that alows us to access the EQ in the Fix???


Soon.


----------



## robhaynes

Mahapederdon said:


> I'm able to get full output from the twk, I just don't think it's enough. If I use a line driver before I'll still only get the max out that I'm already getting, right? I'm gonna just use it for awhile and maybe I'll forget about my Gaines having to be 3/4 the way up. It's not noisy but I was thinking it would sound better that way. Thanks for the input.


Did you try increasing the Input Sensitivity on the analog inputs? I would play with the Input Sensitivity until the VUE meters are just below the red clipping indicators.


----------



## Phil Indeblanc

If you get over 2volts out from the DSP, and you are feeding into a amp like the HD600 or such, you will need to run High volt settings on the amp. 
This setting introduces noise, whine. I'm not having this issue with other amps.


----------



## gsdye

Phil Indeblanc said:


> If you get over 2volts out from the DSP, and you are feeding into a amp like the HD600 or such, you will need to run High volt settings on the amp.
> This setting introduces noise, whine. I'm not having this issue with other amps.




Maybe that is the issue I had with a twk82 and fixD8. I use a hd600 amp. 

We tried 3 different fix82. Very frustrating. 

Currently both fix/twk Yanked. Just running amps and waiting for a twk 88. May run that alone. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Phil Indeblanc

I have been having trouble with this amp for some time now, and almost ready to yank it and get rid of it and replace with a PDX, as I tried the PDX with no issues, as well as 2 other amps. JL amp has some limitation on the volts in and once you switch to the High volt it introduces a lot of noise floor type whine, constant.


----------



## raine2jz

Just got my TWK-88, lots of stuff to learn now... newb question - my Kenwood head unit has a preout level of 5V... but in the TuN software the closest choices in the "Input Pevel" dropdown menu are 4.0V and 5.6V. I was told to keep it at 1.0V, so I'm not sure which way to go on this. Any ideas?


----------



## Phil Indeblanc

Why does JL have such volt issues and restrictions?

But I would check your volts out from the HU regardless of claim. Pioneer claims 4V, but its more like 2.7volts checking at 1000Hz.


----------



## raine2jz

Phil Indeblanc said:


> Why does JL have such volt issues and restrictions?
> 
> But I would check your volts out from the HU regardless of claim. Pioneer claims 4V, but its more like 2.7volts checking at 1000Hz.


Awhile back out of curiosity I took a voltmeter to the RCA outputs on the head unit, with the volume maxed out at "35" the voltage measured was 3.96V. I didn't note if that was AC or DC (I think it was AC), I just wrote down "3.96V at max" in my jumbled stack of notes. Minus the part that Kenwood says "5V"... does this sound right?


----------



## Phil Indeblanc

Maybe for max, but you might want to limit your output from the headunit for maximum before CLIPPING. this way you have clean output going out. I think it is key. You can cheeck this with a couple different tools. Even the DSP may have one built in when setting it up for summing channels. But I think an oscilloscope will be more accurate.


----------



## Mahapederdon

robhaynes said:


> Did you try increasing the Input Sensitivity on the analog inputs? I would play with the Input Sensitivity until the VUE meters are just below the red clipping indicators.


I have, it didnt seem to change much. ive got my levels better by summing front and rear on the input side


----------



## raine2jz

Phil Indeblanc said:


> Maybe for max, but you might want to limit your output from the headunit for maximum before CLIPPING. this way you have clean output going out. I think it is key. You can cheeck this with a couple different tools. Even the DSP may have one built in when setting it up for summing channels. But I think an oscilloscope will be more accurate.


I didn't set the gains on my amps based on this "max" measurement... All I did was put a voltmeter on it to see what it's giving at max volume, out of curiousity. That's not the issue here - what I'm just trying to understand/get an explanation for is how to use the dropdown for input voltage in the TuN software.


----------



## Phil Indeblanc

You didn't understand what you read.
I mention testing your output from the HeadUnit for clipping. Nothing to do with amp.


----------



## raine2jz

Phil Indeblanc said:


> You didn't understand what you read.
> I mention testing your output from the HeadUnit for clipping. Nothing to do with amp.


I understood what you said... my "amp gain" comment was just on the side.

Anyhow, still waiting for anyone to shed more light on how to use the dropdown for input voltage in the TuN software.


----------



## robhaynes

raine2jz said:


> I understood what you said... my "amp gain" comment was just on the side.
> 
> Anyhow, still waiting for anyone to shed more light on how to use the dropdown for input voltage in the TuN software.


What is your output trim at? Default, the outputs are attenuated 12 dB (0 = -12 db). Boost everything to +12dB take a listen and cut any other channels if needed with the trim.


----------



## msmith

Phil Indeblanc said:


> Why does JL have such volt issues and restrictions?
> 
> But I would check your volts out from the HU regardless of claim. Pioneer claims 4V, but its more like 2.7volts checking at 1000Hz.


Not sure what you mean.

In the Input menu, the TwK has input sensitivity adjustments to allow it to be used with a wide range of source levels. You should set these at the highest sensitivity (lowest number) that will not clip the inputs of the TwK. You want to avoid clipping the input of any DSP as this will lead to poor audio quality.

You then have the ability to adjust the level at various stages in the DSP chain. At the mixer outputs and the EQ outputs you can attenuate levels (usually you will leave these at 0 dB). 

Then, at each output you have -12 to +12 dB of level adjustment. If you want maximum clean output from the TwK, set the Output levels to +12 dB and trim down any channels that are too loud to achieve the right channel balance. This will give you the full 4V output level assuming a 0 dB input signal.


----------



## raine2jz

msmith said:


> Not sure what you mean.
> 
> In the Input menu, the TwK has input sensitivity adjustments to allow it to be used with a wide range of source levels. You should set these at the highest sensitivity (lowest number) that will not clip the inputs of the TwK. You want to avoid clipping the input of any DSP as this will lead to poor audio quality.
> 
> You then have the ability to adjust the level at various stages in the DSP chain. At the mixer outputs and the EQ outputs you can attenuate levels (usually you will leave these at 0 dB).
> 
> Then, at each output you have -12 to +12 dB of level adjustment. If you want maximum clean output from the TwK, set the Output levels to +12 dB and trim down any channels that are too loud to achieve the right channel balance. This will give you the full 4V output level assuming a 0 dB input signal.


^this... thank you, this actually answers my question perfectly! (Might want to add this info in the TuN user manual, or the online FAQ).

much appreciated


----------



## bigguy2010

Is there a way to change the size of the TuN GUI? I'm running it in virtual box on my Mac and when it opens, it's larger than the Windows background, even when VB is in full screen mode. I can only grab TuN by the top and left edge.... So frustrated lol

EDIT: FIXED MY OWN ISSUE. If there's anyone else doing this on a mac with VB, you have to put it in full screen mode for the resolution to be high enough to gain access to the entire GUI. I tried this once and it didn't work, backed out to scaled mode and back into full screen, boom! 

Running VB on a Mac to run this TuN software is a solution I'm sure many guys don't know about. If you guys need help, I can lay it out on a new thread.


----------



## raine2jz

bigguy2010 said:


> Is there a way to change the size of the TuN GUI? I'm running it in virtual box on my Mac and when it opens, it's larger than the Windows background, even when VB is in full screen mode. I can only grab TuN by the top and left edge.... So frustrated lol
> 
> EDIT: FIXED MY OWN ISSUE. If there's anyone else doing this on a mac with VB, you have to put it in full screen mode for the resolution to be high enough to gain access to the entire GUI. I tried this once and it didn't work, backed out to scaled mode and back into full screen, boom!
> 
> Running VB on a Mac to run this TuN software is a solution I'm sure many guys don't know about. If you guys need help, I can lay it out on a new thread.


Been using TuN with VirtualBox too, I missed your last post or I would have told you the same.. although with me, I run Windows 10 in VB in full screen right off the bat, with the taskbar set to "hide"; and when I fire up TuN it fits perfectly, height-wise. Note that this is on a 5 year old Macbook Air 11" which only has a 1366 by 768 native resolution, and the best part of it is I can just swipe back and forth between TuN (on Win10) to REW (on MacOS) at the same time


----------



## josby

Can the FiX processors handle a center input? I searched the manuals and this thread and don't see it mentioned, so I'm guessing no, but figured I'd ask just in case. 

My car's navi and hands-free sounds come through the center channel only and I don't want to lose them. Leaving the center speaker as it is isn't an option, because even with its "DTS Neural" surround option disabled, music still comes through the center channel, so it would be out of sync with the FiX-processed left and rights.

I'm assuming the center audio is the sum of L+R, so I'm thinking it could be added back in to both left and right, but so far have not been able to find a summing DSP that can do this. I tried JBL MS-8 but it treats all mono channels as subwoofer input, applying a 200 Hz low pass filter to them before adding them to left and right, which makes the navi voice very quiet and sound like a person speaking under water.


----------



## bgill80

update on Fix software ?


----------



## bubba_p

bgill80 said:


> update on Fix software ?


Second this question. About to take possession of one. Update?


----------



## msmith

bubba_p said:


> Second this question. About to take possession of one. Update?


We are almost there with the update release, guys. We we expect it to happen in the next couple of weeks. You will need to perform a firmware update on the FiX (connect PC via USB, press button, load update, cycle power), then recalibrate the FiX and then you can connect via USB, launch the new version of TüN software and play with all the fun new toys. 

Thanks for your patience.


----------



## Mahapederdon

I may of missed this, but is this update gonna change anything in the twk 88? Just curious I love mine but new stuff is cool.


----------



## bgill80

msmith said:


> We are almost there with the update release, guys. We we expect it to happen in the next couple of weeks. You will need to perform a firmware update on the FiX (connect PC via USB, press button, load update, cycle power), then recalibrate the FiX and then you can connect via USB, launch the new version of TüN software and play with all the fun new toys.
> 
> Thanks for your patience.


How will we know when its released?


----------



## MacLeod

msmith said:


> We are almost there with the update release, guys. We we expect it to happen in the next couple of weeks. You will need to perform a firmware update on the FiX (connect PC via USB, press button, load update, cycle power), then recalibrate the FiX and then you can connect via USB, launch the new version of TüN software and play with all the fun new toys.
> 
> Thanks for your patience.


That is great! Will there be any changes to the UI? As in being able to change the size of the window and having larger, more small laptop screen friendly buttons kinda like the Helix software?


----------



## bigguy2010

msmith said:


> We are almost there with the update release, guys. We we expect it to happen in the next couple of weeks. You will need to perform a firmware update on the FiX (connect PC via USB, press button, load update, cycle power), then recalibrate the FiX and then you can connect via USB, launch the new version of TüN software and play with all the fun new toys.
> 
> Thanks for your patience.


So I'm understanding all this correctly, it's just an update for the FiX and a version of TuN for the FiX? Nothing new for the TwK, right or did I miss something lol


----------



## msmith

bigguy2010 said:


> So I'm understanding all this correctly, it's just an update for the FiX and a version of TuN for the FiX? Nothing new for the TwK, right or did I miss something lol


The TuN interface for the TwK has also been updated.
• Fully variable window sizing to fit your computer screen. 
• Larger EQ display windows
• Drag and select multiple EQ bands for adjustment
• Simplified Distance, Delay and Polarity controls are now located in the “Tune” tab. 
• Level Controls now display the control position as a percentage of maximum setting. 
• Lots of small interface improvements, bug fixes and stability enhancements for your enjoyment.

We will release it this week. Tomorrow (3/7/2017) is likely.


----------



## MoparMike

Looking forward to checking out the updates in the software. Both for the TWK and the Fix.


----------



## MacLeod

msmith said:


> The TuN interface for the TwK has also been updated.
> • Fully variable window sizing to fit your computer screen.
> • Larger EQ display windows
> • Drag and select multiple EQ bands for adjustment
> • Simplified Distance, Delay and Polarity controls are now located in the “Tune” tab.
> • Level Controls now display the control position as a percentage of maximum setting.
> • Lots of small interface improvements, bug fixes and stability enhancements for your enjoyment.
> 
> We will release it this week. Tomorrow (3/7/2017) is likely.


That is great news! Can't wait to try it out. The TwK is a superb DSP, just needed a little more user friendly UI.


----------



## msmith

Update on the update.... looks like it has been pushed back to next week (Monday or Tuesday). A couple of last minute tweaks were needed.

Sorry for the delay.


----------



## bbfoto

msmith said:


> Update on the update.... looks like it has been pushed back to next week (Monday or Tuesday). A couple of last minute tweaks were needed.
> 
> Sorry for the delay.


No worries. Would rather have it right than "Buggy". Thanks for the Update on the Update!


----------



## claydo

I've got a twk d8, so far I really like it. I'm in for updates!


----------



## HOIRiIZON

Just curious what you have for your system and how big of a difference was adding the Twk? I'm shopping for a DSP and it's confusing. Seems there's pro's and con's to all of them out there.


----------



## claydo

HOIRiIZON said:


> Just curious what you have for your system and how big of a difference was adding the Twk? I'm shopping for a DSP and it's confusing. Seems there's pro's and con's to all of them out there.



Not much of a difference, was tuning with the p99, now the twk. The twk is definitely more flexible in its adjustments, and has a lot more eq power.......even if I'm not using it. I got the d8 to go behind an apl1, just for t/a, and crossovers. It's quiet, the software is intuitive, so I see it as a solid unit.


----------



## HOIRiIZON

claydo said:


> Not much of a difference, was tuning with the p99, now the twk. The twk is definitely more flexible in its adjustments, and has a lot more eq power.......even if I'm not using it. I got the d8 to go behind an apl1, just for t/a, and crossovers. It's quiet, the software is intuitive, so I see it as a solid unit.



Thank you sir, I wish more people responded like you on here, this site would be so much better. I only heard one vehicle with the Fix and Twk but it was a proto type it sounded good but nothing special. But it's good to get other people's opinions. I actually ended up going with the Audison Bit HD, the reasoning is the best installer in Westen Canada will be doing the Installation. I love Mosconi as well but the shops that carry the Aero Space I feel are no where near the expertise as the shop I'm going to.


----------



## MoparMike

I'm using a Fix 82/TWK D8 combo and so far I'm loving them. Like Clay said, they are small, quiet and the software is intuitive. So far I am quite pleased.


----------



## HOIRiIZON

MoparMike said:


> I'm using a Fix 82/TWK D8 combo and so far I'm loving them. Like Clay said, they are small, quiet and the software is intuitive. So far I am quite pleased.


Nice!!


----------



## rton20s

HOIRiIZON said:


> Thank you sir, I wish more people responded like you on here, this site would be so much better. I only saw one house built with a Husky framing hammer but it was a proto type it looked good but nothing special. But it's good to get other people's opinions. I actually ended up going with the Vaughan, the reasoning is the best framer in Westen Canada will be doing the framing. I love Estwing as well but the shops that carry the AL-Pro Forged Aluminum Hammer I feel are no where near the expertise as the framer I'm going to.


Maybe this will help you understand where some of us are coming from (read through the modified quoted text). DSPs are tools. The best tool in incapable hands are of zero additional value when compared to some of the cheapest options on the market. However, some of the cheapest tools in the most capable hands can produce extraordinary results. And some "framers" learn to get by using a "hammer" known to have the grip fail or the head fly off because they like other products from that brand, or they get killer deals on them.


----------



## SkizeR

I've used the twk a few times now. It's a great unit that fills a nice gap in price points of the lower priced units like the mini, and higher priced units like the helix. I haven't found anything exactly wrong with them, but I will say I'm not a fan of the software

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## claydo

Nick, I've seen a few folks claiming they don't like the software.......I think it's pretty polished, what is it exactly ya don't like? Is it just that you're used to the helix, and prefer it, or is there a specific quibble that bugs you?

I have to admit price was a big driver in my choice, specifically the price of the d8 unit.....if ya dont need the 8 channel analog inouts, it's nice to not have to pay for em....lol. I took a chance on the unit being of good quality on jl's reputation, or my experience with their product anyways. Whouda thunk jl would be a strong choice for those on a budget, lol, certainly doesent hold with their past mo.......


----------



## rton20s

claydo said:


> Nick, I've seen a few folks claiming they don't like the software.......I think it's pretty polished, what is it exactly ya don't like? Is it just that you're used to the helix, and prefer it, or is there a specific quibble that bugs you?
> 
> I have to admit price was a big driver in my choice, specifically the price of the d8 unit.....if ya dont need the 8 channel analog inouts, it's nice to not have to pay for em....lol.


Nick is just a software snob. And that is ok.  Others can live with what may be considered less polished/intuitive software if the capability and/or price point are there.


----------



## SkizeR

No bugs that I noticed. I just don't think it's an "intuitive" and quick/easy software. Also, i guess I am used to the helix, but I have experience with almost every processor on the market. The software on this is one of my least favorite. Still better than the mosconi, and alpine f1 and h800. But hey, at least it has a good set of features and works

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## claydo

Lmao.....software snob! That's hilarious!


----------



## SkizeR

claydo said:


> Lmao.....software snob! That's hilarious!


Lol, I guess. Just my experience and opinion 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## claydo

SkizeR said:


> No bugs that I noticed. I just don't think it's an "intuitive" and quick/easy software. Also, i guess I am used to the helix, but I have experience with almost every processor on the market. The software on this is one of my least favorite. Still better than the mosconi, and alpine f1 and h800. But hey, at least it has a good set of features and works
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


That's fair, the helix interface is highly polished fo sho......maybe these upcoming updates will get it closer to a level you prefer.....maybe not. It's certainly not horrible, lol.


----------



## rton20s

SkizeR said:


> Lol, I guess. Just my experience and opinion
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## msmith

TüN 2.0 is now available for free download. 

Feel free to test drive it in Demo mode. You can simulate any of our DSPs connected to the software.

jlaudio.com/tun


----------



## msmith

SkizeR said:


> No bugs that I noticed. I just don't think it's an "intuitive" and quick/easy software. Also, i guess I am used to the helix, but I have experience with almost every processor on the market. The software on this is one of my least favorite. Still better than the mosconi, and alpine f1 and h800. But hey, at least it has a good set of features and works
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


If you are used to the Helix (or Audison) interface, then I can surely understand that the TüN interface feels different and less intuitive. Work with it a bit, read the support documentation to learn the ins and outs of the interface and you will see that it all makes sense and it's pretty easy to work with... especially now with 2.0.

This overview document is a really good place to start: https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/224207528-TüN-Software-Overview

Best regards,

Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc.


----------



## SkizeR

msmith said:


> If you are used to the Helix (or Audison) interface, then I can surely understand that the TüN interface feels different and less intuitive. Work with it a bit, read the support documentation to learn the ins and outs of the interface and you will see that it all makes sense and it's pretty easy to work with... especially now with 2.0.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Manville Smith
> JL Audio, Inc.


Maybe I wasn't using the new software. I've been helping the local JL rep tune his car, which is where I used it last this past weekend. It really is a great unit though. I feel like you guys looked at the dsp market and filled the gap perfectly. Also, do you know how to do the differential rear fill on it? I was told it is possible

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## bgill80

process for updating fix?


----------



## bbfoto

msmith said:


> If you are used to the Helix (or Audison) interface, then I can surely understand that the TüN interface feels different and less intuitive. Work with it a bit, read the support documentation to learn the ins and outs of the interface and you will see that it all makes sense and it's pretty easy to work with... especially now with 2.0.
> 
> This overview document is a really good place to start: https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/224207528-TüN-Software-Overview
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Manville Smith
> JL Audio, Inc.




Just going off of the Features List shown below from the TuN software page...


*When used with a TwK™ DSP, TüN™ software controls the following features:

• Three available Project Levels: Basic, Advanced and Expert
• Preset Management: create and manage up to ten presets within each project, plus a Valet preset.
• Input and Output Channel labeling: alphanumeric entry allows you to name every input and output, for easy reference.
• Input Sensitivity for analog inputs (TwK™ 88 only): set your analog input levels for minimum noise and maximum clean level.
• Input Routing and Mixing: gives you full control over polarity and relative level, allowing for the creation of specialized channels, such as center channels and ambient rear channels.
• Larger EQ Displays: eight EQ banks can be operated as eight 10-band graphic EQs or as eight incredibly powerful 10-band, fully parametric EQs, which can be flexibly assigned to multiple output channels or to a single output channel
• High Pass and Low Pass Filters: precisely control the bandwidth for each of the output channels with a choice of 6, 12, 18, 24 or 48 dB/octave slopes.
• Simplified Distance, Delay and Polarity controls: these simple-to-use tools help compensate for speaker distance and improve crossover performance and/or imaging and staging.
• DRC Setup: configures the included wired controller, just the way you want it.
• Signal Levels: allow you to fine tune the relative level of all channels in 0.5 dB increments.*




*...will it be possible in the future to have finer resolution of the Signal Level adjustability, e.g. 0.25dB increments?*



Thanks!

BB


----------



## msmith

The FiX firmware updates should be available in the next day or two. Hopefully tomorrow.


----------



## bgill80

I was able to download the zip file.
Fix82_V0112.zip


----------



## Mahapederdon

HOIRiIZON said:


> Just curious what you have for your system and how big of a difference was adding the Twk? I'm shopping for a DSP and it's confusing. Seems there's pro's and con's to all of them out there.


If you have an aftermarket deck then the twk 88 is about all you'll ever need. I havnt used many others but the software is so well written and laid out that it's a breeze. Jl is usually very pricey but this thing is an amazing deal. It may be missing something but I think it could always be added by a firmware/software update. The hardware is solid.


----------



## HOIRiIZON

Mahapederdon said:


> If you have an aftermarket deck then the twk 88 is about all you'll ever need. I havnt used many others but the software is so well written and laid out that it's a breeze. Jl is usually very pricey but this thing is an amazing deal. It may be missing something but I think it could always be added by a firmware/software update. The hardware is solid.


I was listening to three vehicles today that had them installed and I have to say all three sounded really good. But JL products here price wise are through the roof. Retail in Canadian dollars around 650 for Fix and Twk $650 so together around $1300.


----------



## Mahapederdon

HOIRiIZON said:


> together around $1300.


I guess if you need both then that's getting up there in price.


----------



## bbfoto

I know that it wouldn't make sense for them, but I wish that JL also sold a Single Unit with the FiX and TwK combined (for ease of mounting, space, & wiring complexity) at a slightly reduced price compared to buying each individually.


----------



## HOIRiIZON

bbfoto said:


> I know that it wouldn't make sense for them, but I wish that JL also sold a Single Unit with the FiX and TwK combined (for ease of mounting, space, & wiring complexity) at a slightly reduced price compared to buying each individually.


I agree 100%


----------



## msmith

Here is a link to the instructions and download links for performing the firmware upgrade on the FiX 82 and FiX 86, so they can talk to the new TüN 2.0 interface software.

https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/236090448

Have fun!


----------



## msmith

SkizeR said:


> Maybe I wasn't using the new software. I've been helping the local JL rep tune his car, which is where I used it last this past weekend. It really is a great unit though. I feel like you guys looked at the dsp market and filled the gap perfectly. Also, do you know how to do the differential rear fill on it? I was told it is possible
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


Thanks for the kind words! You can use the input mixer to create "Left minus Right" and "Right Minus Left" ambient channels that work really well for rear speakers.

For the left rear channel output, apply the left input and then add the right input with its polarity reversed.

For the right rear channel output, apply the right input and then add the left input with its polarity reversed.

The mixer setup looks something like this. The mixer controls are displaying the feed to EQ 3 and 4, which are routed to the rear channels.


----------



## msmith

bbfoto said:


> *...will it be possible in the future to have finer resolution of the Signal Level adjustability, e.g. 0.25dB increments?*
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> BB


Since you posted it in red, I escalated your request to the top of the list. You will be thrilled to know that, by holding down the "Shift" key while clicking with the mouse in TüN 2.0, you can make incremental adjustments of 0.1 dB. You can also type in any value within the allowable range, with 0.1 dB resolution. 

Hope that helps. 

Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc.


----------



## SkizeR

msmith said:


> Thanks for the kind words! You can use the input mixer to create "Left minus Right" and "Right Minus Left" ambient channels that work really well for rear speakers.
> 
> For the left rear channel output, apply the left input and then add the right input with its polarity reversed.
> 
> For the right rear channel output, apply the right input and then add the left input with its polarity reversed.
> 
> The mixer setup looks something like this. The mixer controls are displaying the feed to EQ 3 and 4, which are routed to the rear channels.


im not really seeing any way to reverse the polarity of a signal in the router.


----------



## msmith

SkizeR said:


> im not really seeing any way to reverse the polarity of a signal in the router.


----------



## SkizeR

msmith said:


>


ohhhhh i see. thank you


----------



## rton20s

SkizeR said:


> im not really seeing any way to reverse the polarity of a signal in the router.












Try not looking down your nose at the software next time. Maybe you'll see it. :laugh:


----------



## SkizeR

rton20s said:


> Try not looking down your nose at the software next time. Maybe you'll see it. :laugh:


hey, i have one working eye. give me a break :laugh:


----------



## claydo

Lmao.

Good info on the rear fill Nick, glad you asked. Now if I wasn't out of channels, I might give it a go......


----------



## bbfoto

msmith said:


> Since you posted it in red, I escalated your request to the top of the list. You will be thrilled to know that, by holding down the "Shift" key while clicking with the mouse in TüN 2.0, you can make incremental adjustments of 0.1 dB. You can also type in any value within the allowable range, with 0.1 dB resolution.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Manville Smith
> JL Audio, Inc.



LOL, THANKS, Manville! :blush:

In that case, I think it might actually be a good idea to list that fact (0.1dB Resolution) in the "Feature List" on the *TüN* web page that you linked to, instead of "0.5dB". 

Thanks as well for the Rear Fill "How-To". The TwK software makes it pretty straightforward. Though I do agree with Clay about running out of channels at that point. And I'd prefer to not have to add a second DSP unit to cover that.

Was there any change in the Maximum available Signal Delay time for each channel with the new software and/or firmware update???


----------



## msmith

bbfoto said:


> LOL, THANKS, Manville! :blush:
> 
> In that case, I think it might actually be a good idea to list that fact (0.1dB Resolution) in the "Feature List" on the *TüN* web page that you linked to, instead of "0.5dB".


I'll make a note of that, even though you didn't type it in red. Thanks. 



> Thanks as well for the Rear Fill "How-To". The TwK software makes it pretty straightforward. Though I do agree with Clay about running out of channels at that point. And I'd prefer to not have to add a second DSP unit to cover that.


Not sure what you mean by running out of channels? If you have outputs dedicated to rear speakers, you can do this anytime you want, really. You just need to assign specific EQ's to these channels in the router.



> Was there any change in the Maximum available Signal Delay time for each channel with the new software and/or firmware update???


Max delay remains unchanged at 21.3 mS

Best regards,

Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc.


----------



## SkizeR

msmith said:


> Not sure what you mean by running out of channels? If you have outputs dedicated to rear speakers, you can do this anytime you want, really. You just need to assign specific EQ's to these channels in the router.


i think hes saying he has a 3 way plus sub and doesnt have any channels left to do rears


----------



## subterFUSE

SkizeR said:


> i think hes saying he has a 3 way plus sub and doesnt have any channels left to do rears




One option is to run 1 DSP channel for the rears. Set it L-R differential mix. Then you Wire one of the rear speakers reverse polarity. You'll have R-L.

Only downside is not having independent delay on the rears but I doubt that's critically important.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MacLeod

Very nice upgrade. I really like being able to scale the UI like this and all the controls and buttons are larger and easier to use on a small laptop touchscreen. I'd still like to see them a little larger but that's just nitpicky, they're perfectly usable on 2.0.

I don't know if anybody is taking requests but the one I would have is to be able to lock the EQ controls to either up/down or left/right. I'm using the touch pad on my laptop to control it and it's just about impossible to adjust the level without moving the frequency too. Sometimes even when I just move the cursor up there to click one of the levels it scoots over and then I have to go to the text box for that band and manually put it back because I can never put it back where I had it with the cursor (I'm OCD and it has to be on exactly 4,000 Hz. 4012 Hz would drive me insane). Having the option where the levels would only respond up/down or left/right would make laptop tuning a lot easier. 

Other than that, 2.0 is very well done.


----------



## msmith

MacLeod said:


> Very nice upgrade. I really like being able to scale the UI like this and all the controls and buttons are larger and easier to use on a small laptop touchscreen. I'd still like to see them a little larger but that's just nitpicky, they're perfectly usable on 2.0.
> 
> I don't know if anybody is taking requests but the one I would have is to be able to lock the EQ controls to either up/down or left/right. I'm using the touch pad on my laptop to control it and it's just about impossible to adjust the level without moving the frequency too. Sometimes even when I just move the cursor up there to click one of the levels it scoots over and then I have to go to the text box for that band and manually put it back because I can never put it back where I had it with the cursor (I'm OCD and it has to be on exactly 4,000 Hz. 4012 Hz would drive me insane). Having the option where the levels would only respond up/down or left/right would make laptop tuning a lot easier.
> 
> Other than that, 2.0 is very well done.


Thanks, mcleod!

You can use the arrow keys to move up or down, instead of the trackpad/mouse... that helps sometimes. Holding down shift while doing that results in smaller steps, too. Hope that helps a bit.


----------



## MacLeod

msmith said:


> Thanks, mcleod!
> 
> You can use the arrow keys to move up or down, instead of the trackpad/mouse... that helps sometimes. Holding down shift while doing that results in smaller steps, too. Hope that helps a bit.


Yeah I discovered the shift function too which is very helpful. I use the arrows for adjusting levels but the thing I was talking about was like when switching between bands during tuning cause I'm bouncing around a lot. There's no quick keyboard shortcut to switch between the bands especially if I've been adjusting the crossover or something and want to jump back up and adjust one of the bands. Touching the screen or using the touchpad a lot of times makes the band move up or down in frequency. Like I said, not a big deal, just a little convenience tweak I'd like to see added.


----------



## sqnut

MacLeod said:


> Yeah I discovered the shift function too which is very helpful. I use the arrows for adjusting levels but the thing I was talking about was like when switching between bands during tuning cause I'm bouncing around a lot. There's no quick keyboard shortcut to switch between the bands especially if I've been adjusting the crossover or something and want to jump back up and adjust one of the bands. Touching the screen or using the touchpad a lot of times makes the band move up or down in frequency. Like I said, not a big deal, just a little convenience tweak I'd like to see added.


Hi Aaron,

Just wanted your input on eq with 31 bands per channel vs 8 parametric per channel as on the JL units.

Thanks

Arun


----------



## SkizeR

sqnut said:


> Hi Aaron,
> 
> Just wanted your input on eq with 31 bands per channel vs 8 parametric per channel as on the JL units.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Arun


10 on the JL. id take the 10 parametric. 31 graphic is never really 31 graphic unless your running a driver from 20-20k.. i cross my two way mids from 90-2.5k. that would be 16 graphic bands. yeah its more than 10, but theyre not flexible and cant do nearly as much as the 10 full parametric bands


----------



## sqnut

SkizeR said:


> 10 on the JL. id take the 10 parametric. 31 graphic is never really 31 graphic unless your running a driver from 20-20k.. i cross my two way mids from 90-2.5k. that would be 16 graphic bands. yeah its more than 10, but theyre not flexible and cant do nearly as much as the 10 full parametric bands


31 geq is 31 geq as long as you're eq both the pass and stop band, even if it means cutting a stop band filter by 12 db. Next, in my tune 500hz is cut about 1-1.5 db while 600 & 800 are cut 4-6 db, then 1 khz is cut only 2.5 db but 1.25 is cut 4-5db, on and on, I figure I'd soon run out of the 10 bands, I haven't tried tuning with 8-10 PEQ / driver, so I don't know for sure. My experience with PEQ is limited to a couple of tune ups with the 360.3.

But what I'm really asking is the difference in the tuning process in geq vs peq, specially if one is used to geq. While tuning based on what one is hearing say I feel the need for a cut at 2 and say 2.5, with a geq I just go there and do it. Now with a PEQ, I find one band is fixed at 1 and the next at say 3, just seems like lot more jiggling to get what one wants. That's what I'm asking about. 

It seems like a lot of the new processors are doing away with the 31 band / channel and going to 8-10 bands peq. I don't mean to drag this thread OT.


----------



## MoparMike

Updated the firmware last night on the Fix82 and played around with the Tun connectivity. I did run into a few issues with calibration that hadn't been there before the firmware update. On several attempts it would show a low signal error or a compensation error. I did find that the low signal error was an issue until I went in to the Tun software and disabled unused input channels for the Fix. I was able to get it to calibrate more consistently once those were turned off. The other thing that I am finding is that the higher frequencies are attenuated in comparison to where they were before.


----------



## msmith

MacLeod said:


> Yeah I discovered the shift function too which is very helpful. I use the arrows for adjusting levels but the thing I was talking about was like when switching between bands during tuning cause I'm bouncing around a lot. There's no quick keyboard shortcut to switch between the bands especially if I've been adjusting the crossover or something and want to jump back up and adjust one of the bands. Touching the screen or using the touchpad a lot of times makes the band move up or down in frequency. Like I said, not a big deal, just a little convenience tweak I'd like to see added.


I see... I will put that into the suggestion box for the next version. Appreciate the feedback!


----------



## msmith

MoparMike said:


> Updated the firmware last night on the Fix82 and played around with the Tun connectivity. I did run into a few issues with calibration that hadn't been there before the firmware update. On several attempts it would show a low signal error or a compensation error. I did find that the low signal error was an issue until I went in to the Tun software and disabled unused input channels for the Fix. I was able to get it to calibrate more consistently once those were turned off. The other thing that I am finding is that the higher frequencies are attenuated in comparison to where they were before.


Are your factory tone controls set the same as they were for prior calibrations? 

You also have to make sure you restart the cal track every time you run a calibration. If you run it in the middle of the track, it will fail every time. It needs to see the beginning.

Not sure why muting inputs would have affected anything.

If you need further assistance, please contact our tech dept at [email protected] or via phone at 888-JLAUDIO


----------



## MacLeod

sqnut said:


> Hi Aaron,
> 
> Just wanted your input on eq with 31 bands per channel vs 8 parametric per channel as on the JL units.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Arun


Honestly I prefer 31 band graphic. Mostly I guess because that's what I spent 10 years tuning with and feel comfortable with. The 10 band PEQ per channel is far superior technically since you can move around and shape the curve a lot better. 

So I guess if you haven't spent a decade working on a 31 band, 10 band PEQ per channel like he TwK is the way to go.


----------



## msmith

sqnut said:


> 31 geq is 31 geq as long as you're eq both the pass and stop band, even if it means cutting a stop band filter by 12 db. Next, in my tune 500hz is cut about 1-1.5 db while 600 & 800 are cut 4-6 db, then 1 khz is cut only 2.5 db but 1.25 is cut 4-5db, on and on, I figure I'd soon run out of the 10 bands, I haven't tried tuning with 8-10 PEQ / driver, so I don't know for sure. My experience with PEQ is limited to a couple of tune ups with the 360.3.
> 
> But what I'm really asking is the difference in the tuning process in geq vs peq, specially if one is used to geq. While tuning based on what one is hearing say I feel the need for a cut at 2 and say 2.5, with a geq I just go there and do it. Now with a PEQ, I find one band is fixed at 1 and the next at say 3, just seems like lot more jiggling to get what one wants. That's what I'm asking about.
> 
> It seems like a lot of the new processors are doing away with the 31 band / channel and going to 8-10 bands peq. I don't mean to drag this thread OT.


The process for tuning with a parametric is different. A graphic is like a box of crayons with lots of individual colors. A parametric is like oil paints that allow you to blend and create more complex colors and tones. 

When tuning with a parametric, focus on broad (wide) problem areas first. Then apply narrower bands to address smaller problems. You will see that the bands interact with each other, allowing you to achieve almost any transfer function, with fewer filters. For example you can take one band and make a cut at 1000 Hz with a wide Q, and then use a second band at 1200 Hz with a narrow "Q" to take part of that broad cut and bring it back up, creating a complex response correction, (which would require 15 bands of 1/3 octave EQ to create). This still leaves 8 bands for correcting other things, including in the stopband, if that's your thing.










Here, 8 bands were used to create a complex eq curve, including stop-band cuts (assuming this is a mid). We still have 2 bands left unused.


----------



## MoparMike

msmith said:


> Are your factory tone controls set the same as they were for prior calibrations?
> 
> You also have to make sure you restart the cal track every time you run a calibration. If you run it in the middle of the track, it will fail every time. It needs to see the beginning.
> 
> Not sure why muting inputs would have affected anything.


Yes, tone controls are the same as was the volume level. 28 out of 38.

I do run the calibration track from the beginning each time. 

Not sure about the input muting either, I just decided to try it after seeing several failed attempts. The calibration worked after that on 3 out of 4 attempts. Here is a picture of the graphs from an earlier calibration. Maybe it could help.


----------



## msmith

MoparMike said:


> Yes, tone controls are the same as was the volume level. 28 out of 38.
> 
> I do run the calibration track from the beginning each time.
> 
> Not sure about the input muting either, I just decided to try it after seeing several failed attempts. The calibration worked after that on 3 out of 4 attempts. Here is a picture of the graphs from an earlier calibration. Maybe it could help.



Those Chrysler systems can be tough. Looks like the result is plus or minus 3dB up to about 15kHz. You can probably goose the output EQ at 16kHZ a hair and get it a little flatter. Does it sound dull?

The guys in our tech dept. may have some further advice. They deal with these all the time.


----------



## MoparMike

msmith said:


> Those Chrysler systems can be tough. Looks like the result is plus or minus 3dB up to about 15kHz. You can probably goose the output EQ at 16kHZ a hair and get it a little flatter. Does it sound dull?
> 
> The guys in our tech dept. may have some further advice. They deal with these all the time.


It does sound dull. Certainly in comparison to how it sounded before the firmware update and subsequent calibrations through Tun. 

I was thinking I might call the tech line to run by what I have done and the results.


----------



## msmith

MoparMike said:


> It does sound dull. Certainly in comparison to how it sounded before the firmware update and subsequent calibrations through Tun.
> 
> I was thinking I might call the tech line to run by what I have done and the results.


Good plan. thanks.


----------



## sqnut

MacLeod said:


> Honestly I prefer 31 band graphic. Mostly I guess because that's what I spent 10 years tuning with and feel comfortable with. The 10 band PEQ per channel is far superior technically since you can move around and shape the curve a lot better.
> 
> So I guess if you haven't spent a decade working on a 31 band, 10 band PEQ per channel like he TwK is the way to go.


I know right? Old habits die hard. I totally get the power of a PEQ, it's just that the damn ears and brain are too used to listening, thinking and wanting to tune at 1/3 oct. But I'm sure over time one would get instinctive the PEQ as well, it's just another process. Are you going to compete this year?


----------



## bbfoto

Manville, that was a great explanation and example of how PEQ is different and more powerful than GEQ, and how to properly implement it. :thumbsup: I definitely would have struggled to put it in so few words and so eloquently. Thanks.

I actually learned how to best use PEQ through DAW recording & mixing tutorials on YouTube, on the various Recording & Mixing Forums, and the DAW manufacturer's web sites such as AVID Pro Tools, Presonus Studio One Pro, and all of the various PEQ "Plug-in" manufactures, such as WAVES Audio, Sonic State, Algorithmics, Universal Audio, iZotope, Fabfilter, etc.

So guys, search for "DAW PEQ Plug-in" with any of the manufacturers listed above and you will find some excellent tutorials and possibly learn some cool tricks that you might not have thought of otherwise.


----------



## robhaynes

MoparMike said:


> Yes, tone controls are the same as was the volume level. 28 out of 38.
> 
> I do run the calibration track from the beginning each time.
> 
> Not sure about the input muting either, I just decided to try it after seeing several failed attempts. The calibration worked after that on 3 out of 4 attempts. Here is a picture of the graphs from an earlier calibration. Maybe it could help.


Hey Mike, are you using the FiX-LSA-4 load sensing adaptor? A lot of the Chrysler amps will become extremely unstable when a low impedance load (like the factory speakers) are disconnected. This leads to high frequency noise, distortion and other issues.


----------



## MoparMike

robhaynes said:


> Hey Mike, are you using the FiX-LSA-4 load sensing adaptor? A lot of the Chrysler amps will become extremely unstable when a low impedance load (like the factory speakers) are disconnected. This leads to high frequency noise, distortion and other issues.


Rob, yes I am using the Fix-LSA-4 adapter. I have tried connecting mid range signals to channels 1/2 and tweeters to channels 3/4. I've tried reversing them. Even using channels 5/6 as an alternate to see what might have an effect on the low signal strength error. So far, the only thing that I have found is that it is more successful when the unused input channels are turned off in Tun. 

Also, it's important to note that up until the firmware update and the Tun connectivity, I have had zero issues using or calibrating the Fix 82 with the Uconnect when wired through the load sensing adapters. I think I may have just found a gremlin last night, haha. I appreciate both Manville's and your chiming in here.


----------



## sqnut

msmith said:


> The process for tuning with a parametric is different. A graphic is like a box of crayons with lots of individual colors. A parametric is like oil paints that allow you to blend and create more complex colors and tones.
> 
> When tuning with a parametric, focus on broad (wide) problem areas first. Then apply narrower bands to address smaller problems. You will see that the bands interact with each other, allowing you to achieve almost any transfer function, with fewer filters. For example you can take one band and make a cut at 1000 Hz with a wide Q, and then use a second band at 1200 Hz with a narrow "Q" to take part of that broad cut and bring it back up, creating a complex response correction, (which would require 15 bands of 1/3 octave EQ to create). This still leaves 8 bands for correcting other things, including in the stopband, if that's your thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here, 8 bands were used to create a complex eq curve, including stop-band cuts (assuming this is a mid). We still have 2 bands left unused.


Thank you for the explanation, I have some basic experience with the peq on the 360.3 units, which were cool because it gave 31 bands per channel and each could be selected as GEQ or PEQ. Its just that once one spends 10 years with a geq, the ears and the brain hear and think in those terms, so one hears the sound one instinctively knows that 1.25 and 4 khz need to be cut to clear up the grainy chaffy sound. I'm sure it's just a question of spending time with the PEQ to get instinctive with it as well.


----------



## msmith

Here is another example that shows the advantage of a PEQ. Let's say you start tuning a system and you attack three narrow response peaks with three PEQ bands (bands 4, 6 and 7) in this example. 










Then, you decide you want to play with a broad tonal adjustment that pulls down a wide frequency range, so we set band 5 for a wide Q, with a center at 600 Hz and pull down by -4dB.










That move would have required not only adjusting lots of 1/3 octave GEQ bands, but it would have changed the sliders that were taking care of the three peaks I had already tamed. With the parametric, I can effect a wide tonal change with an additional band, without disturbing the filters that tame the peaks. I could choose to cut only by -2dB, for example, like this:










Doing what I just did here with a GEQ would be tedious and annoying. With a PEQ it's super-easy.


----------



## msmith

Many people also think that PEQ's are less precise than GEQ's because they have fewer bands. Therefore, the assumption is that they can't get in and pinpoint an issue and correct it. This is actually quite the opposite.

Try to create these transfer functions with a 1/3 octave GEQ:, both the complex and the simple are impossible to do this smoothly with a 1/3 octave GEQ.


----------



## bbfoto

subterFUSE said:


> One option is to run 1 DSP channel for the rears. Set it L-R differential mix. Then you Wire one of the rear speakers reverse polarity. You'll have R-L.
> 
> Only downside is not having independent delay on the rears but I doubt that's critically important.


Funny, this is pretty much how I did it with the old 8 Channel Sony XDP-4000x processor (along with a very small & simple ART pro audio analog mixer/summing box). I just used one of the 4000X's outputs for my sub and the other for rear fill, and added a simple capacitor 1st order HPF ("bass blocker") to limit the bandwidth. Rear Fill speakers are simple & cheap *Pioneer TS-A878* 3.5" 2-way coaxials. And you're right, having independent delay on the rears isn't critically important for most setups. This particular setup is in an old '93 extended length AWD Aerostar van that was my main Drum Kit & Photo Shoot/Equipment hauler + Camping vehicle back in the day. The rear fill speakers are mounted far L&R just under the rear window in the hatch door, so the path-length differences were very minimal to my listening position. Later I added a second XDP-4000X to the chain to get more delay and more flexibility with XO and EQ. The 4000X is fairly limited on the Filter Frequency range of each of the High/Mid/Low/Sub output channel pairs.

Modern processors (and Software) have come a long way.  Would still like to have those extra channels on the TwK, tho', because otherwise it's shaping up to be really slick!


----------



## msmith

bbfoto said:


> Would still like to have those extra channels on the TwK, tho', because otherwise it's shaping up to be really slick!


I hear you, but keep in mind the TwK is moderately priced. You can add a second one, a TwK D8, connected via optical to keep things clean, and have 16 channels for less than a lot of other 8-channel processors out there. The only downside is you can only talk to one at a time with the PC and you have to toggle presets independently for each one.


----------



## voiceCoil63

I'm a newcomer here, having only recently discovered this site while researching DSPs. I've had a TwK 88 installed for about 5 weeks now, and I love it so far.

After wading through this entire thread, I thought I'd finally chime in:

1. I agree with a few of the earlier posts suggesting that the TwK hits a nice sweet spot in the market. For my needs anyway, it's kind of a Goldilocks DSP -- not too much, not too little, but just about right. A great value. I could certainly put another pair of output channels to good use, but I'm not complaining. I can't really comment on the FIX, as I don't have a need for one.

2. I'm very impressed/pleased to see the level of involvement by the JL support staff on this forum. Perhaps that's the norm around here. As I said, I'm new so I don't know. Regardless, it's great to see. Kudos to the team at JL!

3. The ability to download the TüN software and test drive it prior to buying was a major part of my buying decision. Very helpful.

4. I see several others are also using the TüN software on a Mac. I can add that it works perfectly using VMWare Fusion (Windows 7) on a Mid-2010 MacBook Pro running Mavericks. I've not encountered a single software issue or glitch -- this too was a major part of my buying decision since I don't do Windows.

5. Yes, the LED is way too bright. And I would also add that several of the colors are difficult to distinguish from one another. I wonder if a small, 7-segment LED displaying a single-digit Preset number wouldn't be more useful. More difficult to mount perhaps, but definitely more useful.

6. When loading a saved Project from disk, the Valet Preset is always disabled -- even if it was enabled when the Project was saved. It's driving me nuts because I nearly always forget to re-enable it before saving the Project to the TwK, and I wind up driving around without it. Normally this wouldn't be such a big deal, but I'm currently in the process of tuning everything and I use the Valet Preset as a "Flat" reference setting, so I switch it on/off quite a lot.

7. I thought six Presets would be plenty, but I was wrong. The more the merrier! Maybe a two-digit 7-segment LED display would be in order... 

8. It would be very helpful to allow the duplication of one EQ bank to another without first having to delete the destination EQ bank and it's associated Mixer/Router connections. Perhaps displaying an "Overwrite?" confirmation dialog first.

9. The same with Presets -- it would be *even more* helpful to be able to duplicate one Preset directly to another, overwriting the destination Preset's Setup & Tune configurations without overwriting it's name, Preset number, and LED color.


My apologies for the long-winded first post.


----------



## subterFUSE

Testing out the new Tun software now.

The setup of inputs and outputs is very simple. I like how I can type in any name I want for the inputs and outputs. The wiring diagram is also very easy to follow.

I found how to do a differential mix of Left - Right signals for a rear output.

Now I am playing with the parametric EQ. What I have not figured out is how to link EQ channels together to adjust them in relative mode. For example, let's say that I have done EQ to my left tweeter and then to my right tweeter to get them to be equal in level across their playable range. Now I want to make a tonality adjustment without losing my relative levels between the left and right side. How do I make this adjustment in Tun?

I can foresee one possible difficulty in this because when a parametric EQ is set up, the numbered EQ bands are no longer necessarily symmetrical. i.e. you might make band 1 on EQ1 to be 2450 Hz with -2dB gain and 2.3Q, while on EQ2 band 1 might be 3200 Hz with -3 dB gain and Q of 1.6. So if you linked those EQs together and moved band 1, the result of joint movement on the EQ would yield much different response shaping to the sound.

That topic aside, I'm still not seeing how to link the EQ bands and adjust together. How is this done in Tun?


I guess one method would be to put a FiX in front of the TWK, and use the FiX as an input EQ. You could then tune your system perfectly flat in the TWK, apply crossovers and delay, and then you could switch over to the FiX and EQ the overall system response there without messing up the relative EQ balance you did in the TWK. This would be much like a pro audio DSP, which has full processing on the input stage and output stage.


----------



## subterFUSE

sqnut said:


> But what I'm really asking is the difference in the tuning process in geq vs peq, specially if one is used to geq. While tuning based on what one is hearing say I feel the need for a cut at 2 and say 2.5, with a geq I just go there and do it. Now with a PEQ, I find one band is fixed at 1 and the next at say 3, just seems like lot more jiggling to get what one wants. That's what I'm asking about.
> 
> It seems like a lot of the new processors are doing away with the 31 band / channel and going to 8-10 bands peq. I don't mean to drag this thread OT.


Yes, this is one of the issues with PEQ. If you customize your PEQ bands per output, then they are no longer symmetrical with the other outputs. Now you can't exactly do a relative linking of those outputs and do a overall tonality adjustment while keeping the left/right balance the same.

Pro Audio DSPs have a solution for this. It's to have separate EQ, Crossovers, Delay and Gain on each input and then another set of those on each output. That way you can use the output EQ to fix speaker issues, and then the input EQ gets used to tune the room, or apply your tonality to taste. Since the inputs can feed multiple outputs, anything you do to an EQ on an input will automatically get applied equally to all outputs sharing that input.

I'm hopeful that future generations of car audio DSPs begin to look more like pro audio by offering input EQ and crossovers, delay and gains. Some are getting there. The FiX for example, does most of that. Not sure if it has crossovers or not? Definitely has EQ, gains and delay.
The Helix Pro has input delay, gain and EQ but not crossovers.


----------



## voiceCoil63

subterFUSE said:


> Now I am playing with the parametric EQ. What I have not figured out is how to link EQ channels together to adjust them in relative mode. For example, let's say that I have done EQ to my left tweeter and then to my right tweeter to get them to be equal in level across their playable range. Now I want to make a tonality adjustment without losing my relative levels between the left and right side. How do I make this adjustment in Tun?


I don't think you can; not like that anyway. As best I can tell, EQ bank linking is limited to adjacent odd/even banks (1-2, 3-4, 5-6 & 7-8). Furthermore when the link is enabled, you must copy one to the other which completely overwrites the destination EQ bank. No relative linking/adjustment is possible. They're either linked & cloned (and therefore identical) or not linked at all.


----------



## msmith

subterFUSE said:


> Now I am playing with the parametric EQ. What I have not figured out is how to link EQ channels together to adjust them in relative mode. For example, let's say that I have done EQ to my left tweeter and then to my right tweeter to get them to be equal in level across their playable range. Now I want to make a tonality adjustment without losing my relative levels between the left and right side. How do I make this adjustment in Tun?
> 
> I can foresee one possible difficulty in this because when a parametric EQ is set up, the numbered EQ bands are no longer necessarily symmetrical. i.e. you might make band 1 on EQ1 to be 2450 Hz with -2dB gain and 2.3Q, while on EQ2 band 1 might be 3200 Hz with -3 dB gain and Q of 1.6. So if you linked those EQs together and moved band 1, the result of joint movement on the EQ would yield much different response shaping to the sound.
> 
> That topic aside, I'm still not seeing how to link the EQ bands and adjust together. How is this done in Tun?


Your analysis is spot-on, correct. Because left and right EQ's might be set completely differently, we can't provide a mechanism to adjust bands on two separately tuned EQ's together. Of course, if you choose to link EQ's L-R, then you adjust all their bands together, but you can't go back and forth.



> I guess one method would be to put a FiX in front of the TWK, and use the FiX as an input EQ. You could then tune your system perfectly flat in the TWK, apply crossovers and delay, and then you could switch over to the FiX and EQ the overall system response there without messing up the relative EQ balance you did in the TWK. This would be much like a pro audio DSP, which has full processing on the input stage and output stage.


Yes, something like that will be quite possible in the not-too-distant future. 

Thanks for the feedback! Glad you're having fun playing around with TüN 2.0!


----------



## pocket5s

After having used the Twk a lot for 7 or 8 months now, there are two features that I think would be really, really helpful and both concern being connected to the dsp.

First, allowing the use of the remote volume knob. Using the slider is tedius. I use the volume a lot when listening to various tracks while connected and it is much more natural and precise to turn the knob. Not to mention I like to listen with my eyes closed which makes using the knob easier as well. 

Second is faster preset switching. It is fast enough when not connected, but takes several seconds when connected. I routinely A/B presets for myself and at times with another person and that wait period is a distraction during listening. 

I still wish it had about 5 more bands of eq, especially for a 2-way setup. I know Manville, you've said before if you need more than 10 you need new speakers  My counter is my speakers are fine, it's the environment they are in that sucks  

With all that said, I like the interface and I've never had a connectivity problem or any other glitch.


----------



## voiceCoil63

I'm a newcomer here, having only recently discovered this site while researching DSPs. I've had a TwK 88 installed for about 5 weeks now, and I love it so far (there's a build thread over on the SS Forums, for those that are interested).

After wading through this entire thread, I thought I'd finally chime in:

1. I agree with a few of the earlier posts suggesting that the TwK hits a very nice sweet spot in the market. For my needs anyway, it's kind of a Goldilocks DSP -- not too much, not too little, but just about right. A great value. I could certainly put another pair of output channels to good use, but I'm not complaining. I can't really comment on the FIX, as I don't have a need for one.

2. I'm very impressed/pleased to see the level of involvement by the JL support staff on this forum. Perhaps that's the norm around here. As I said, I'm new here so I don't know. Regardless, it's great to see. Kudos to the team at JL!

3. The ability to download the TüN software and test drive it prior to buying was a major part of my buying decision. Very helpful.

4. I see several others are also using the TüN software on a Mac. I can add that it works perfectly using VMWare Fusion (Windows 7) on a Mid-2010 MacBook Pro running Mavericks. I've not encountered a single software issue or glitch -- this too was a major part of my buying decision since I don't do Windows.

5. Yes, the LED is way too bright. And I would also add that several of the colors are difficult to distinguish from one another. I wonder if a small, 7-segment LED displaying a single-digit Preset number wouldn't be more useful. More difficult to mount perhaps, but definitely more useful.

6. When loading a saved Project from disk, the Valet Preset is always disabled -- even if it was enabled when the Project was saved. It's driving me nuts because I nearly always forget to re-enable it before saving the Project to the TwK, and I wind up driving around without it. Normally this wouldn't be such a big deal, but I'm currently in the process of tuning everything and I use the Valet Preset as a "Flat" reference setting, so I switch it on/off quite a lot.

7. Initially, I figured six Presets would be plenty, but I was wrong. The more the merrier! Maybe a *two-digit* 7-segment LED display would be in order... 

8. It would be very helpful to allow the duplication of one EQ bank to another without first having to delete the destination EQ bank and it's associated Mixer/Router connections. Perhaps displaying an "Overwrite?" confirmation dialog first.

9. The same with Presets -- it would be very handy to be able to duplicate one Preset directly to another, overwriting the destination Preset's Setup & Tune configurations without overwriting it's name, Preset number, and LED color.


I still have quite a ways to go before I'll be satisfied with my new setup, but it's getting there. This is my first exposure to using a DSP, and already I can't imagine putting together a system without one. I'm having a grand old time experimenting and learning as I go.

My apologies for the long-winded post.


----------



## msmith

voiceCoil63 said:


> I'm a newcomer here, having only recently discovered this site while researching DSPs. I've had a TwK 88 installed for about 5 weeks now, and I love it so far (there's a build thread over on the SS Forums, for those that are interested).
> 
> After wading through this entire thread, I thought I'd finally chime in:


Thank you, voiceCoil63... that is some great feedback. I will share it with the dev team. Many of the items you have mentioned are already on our "to do" list for future versions of TüN. We are already working on 3.0 (software projects never end).


----------



## msmith

pocket5s said:


> After having used the Twk a lot for 7 or 8 months now, there are two features that I think would be really, really helpful and both concern being connected to the dsp.
> 
> First, allowing the use of the remote volume knob. Using the slider is tedius. I use the volume a lot when listening to various tracks while connected and it is much more natural and precise to turn the knob. Not to mention I like to listen with my eyes closed which makes using the knob easier as well.
> 
> Second is faster preset switching. It is fast enough when not connected, but takes several seconds when connected. I routinely A/B presets for myself and at times with another person and that wait period is a distraction during listening.
> 
> I still wish it had about 5 more bands of eq, especially for a 2-way setup. I know Manville, you've said before if you need more than 10 you need new speakers  My counter is my speakers are fine, it's the environment they are in that sucks
> 
> With all that said, I like the interface and I've never had a connectivity problem or any other glitch.


Thanks for the detailed comments, Pocket5s... I will pass these along to the dev team. We are listening.


----------



## voiceCoil63

msmith said:


> Thank you, voiceCoil63... that is some great feedback. I will share it with the dev team. Many of the items you have mentioned are already on our "to do" list for future versions of TüN.


Great to hear! I may be short on time, and I may be short on money. But I'm *never* short on opinions. I'm sure I'll have a few more suggestions in the future. 



msmith said:


> We are already working on 3.0 (software projects never end).


That's a fact!


----------



## subterFUSE

msmith said:


> Your analysis is spot-on, correct. Because left and right EQ's might be set completely differently, we can't provide a mechanism to adjust bands on two separately tuned EQ's together. Of course, if you choose to link EQ's L-R, then you adjust all their bands together, but you can't go back and forth.


Yes, and this is not an isolated issue to one brand of DSP over another. It's inherent in the nature of para EQ and the customization of each band.

I have the same issue on my Helix. However, since the Helix does offer 30 bands of EQ you can decide which bands to leave graphic and which to be para. By doing this, you potentially leave yourself the option of still having relative EQ linking between channels to tune overall tonality while maintaining the left/right balance for imaging.

However, even that is a kludge. The better solution is to have full processing on the inputs AND outputs, just like a pro audio DSP. I'm hoping that future generations of car audio processors begin to implement this because it truly makes the tuning workflow easier and more intuitive.





> Yes, something like that will be quite possible in the not-too-distant future.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback! Glad you're having fun playing around with TüN 2.0!



In all honesty, I think you're offering this already by combining the FiX with the TWK. The Fix does input processing, and the TWK does output. I think since the FiX is now user-controllable for the EQ, it could be used as the input side processing like a pro audio DSP.


----------



## MacLeod

pocket5s said:


> I still wish it had about 5 more bands of eq, especially for a 2-way setup. I know Manville, you've said before if you need more than 10 you need new speakers  My counter is my speakers are fine, it's the environment they are in that sucks
> 
> With all that said, I like the interface and I've never had a connectivity problem or any other glitch.


I thought a few more bands would be needed as well as I'm a long time 31 band GEQ user but I realize now that 10 band PEQ per channel is MORE than enough. If you're running mids and tweets off the same channel then you would need to do a little more work getting things set but if you bi-amped and ran the mids and tweets of independent channels, you can use one 10 band PEQ per driver. That is more than enough to get things dialed in. 

And I love the, "if you need more than 5 bands of EQ, you need new speakers" line. LOL! I'm gonna steal that one.


----------



## pocket5s

MacLeod said:


> I thought a few more bands would be needed as well as I'm a long time 31 band GEQ user but I realize now that 10 band PEQ per channel is MORE than enough. If you're running mids and tweets off the same channel then you would need to do a little more work getting things set but if you bi-amped and ran the mids and tweets of independent channels, you can use one 10 band PEQ per driver. That is more than enough to get things dialed in.
> 
> 
> 
> And I love the, "if you need more than 5 bands of EQ, you need new speakers" line. LOL! I'm gonna steal that one.




He said 10 actually, a few pages back. And I disagree with you. 

I can do it with 10, but it is very limiting for any further fine tweaking. A previous poster hit it on the head with what he termed input eq. Where you get individual drivers set up then use "other" eq for over all tonality adjustments. 

Right now I use 8&9 bands for my mids. Yes less than 10, and thankfully it works well, but I have no leeway to change anything else. Granted I compete so I try to squeeze out every little bit I can where the average consumer wouldn't care too. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## msmith

pocket5s said:


> He said 10 actually, a few pages back. And I disagree with you.
> 
> I can do it with 10, but it is very limiting for any further fine tweaking. A previous poster hit it on the head with what he termed input eq. Where you get individual drivers set up then use "other" eq for over all tonality adjustments.
> 
> Right now I use 8&9 bands for my mids. Yes less than 10, and thankfully it works well, but I have no leeway to change anything else. Granted I compete so I try to squeeze out every little bit I can where the average consumer wouldn't care too.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I would be interested in seeing the PEQ settings for your mids. Can you send me the project file via e-mail? [email protected] jlaudio dot com

Thanks!


----------



## subterFUSE

I'm looking at the FiX software now, and it definitely can be used as input EQ for a system that's paired up with a TWK.

This is very, very cool. While JL Audio most likely intended the FiX to be an OEM integration piece, I can actually see some benefit to using it with a TWK even when you have an aftermarket head unit like the Sony GS9.

Basically, you feed the analog outputs from the GS9 into the FiX. Then you route the FiX to the TWK.

Go in and tune the TWK first. Aim for a perfectly flat tune. Do EQ to flat on each driver. Apply crossovers. Time align by ear.

At this point, you'll have a balanced setup but your tonality won't be great because flat EQ in a car is meh. But your crossovers will be dialed in, and not only that but when your system response is flat then that means your acoustic crossover results actually match the electronic filter settings in the DSP. So if you wanted a LR24 crossover at 400Hz you literally just enter that setting in the DSP and since your EQ is flat you will actually get 400Hz LR24 in reality.

Now go to the FiX. Use the EQ there to shape your system response any way you want. If you like a big tilt to your curve, go for it. I just tested it out and was able to get about 30 dB of tilt from the subwoofer regions to the upper range. That's plenty of tilt for just about any tonality curve you want. And, best part, since you are adjusting the EQ on the input side you won't be harming your left/right balance, imaging or crossovers on the TWK. Any changes you make will be applied equally to any drivers sharing that input.

About the only way this could be better would be a little more parametric control on the FiX. Maybe a shelf filter setting for the upper and lower extremes. And a larger range of choices for the high pass and low pass settings. i.e. have a 20 or 25Hz high pass available as a global subsonic filter that won't cause phase inconsistencies like it does when you put a high pass on a subwoofer output on a DSP.


----------



## bgill80

Can I take a preset for a saved project I.E preset 2 from project1 and load it into preset3 in project7?


----------



## msmith

Unfortunately, you can't copy/paste presets between different projects. You can duplicate presets within a project, and you can duplicate project files as a whole.


----------



## chithead

Just ordered a TwK D8 to mate up with the FiX 82, and can't wait to try all this out!


----------



## Hillbilly SQ

I'm getting the same strange cuts as Mike is when calibrating my Fix with the tone on a flash drive. It doesn't show up on rta though. Just a smooth downward taper starting at about 6k that can be easily shaped when I do my tonality curve. This is with 1/12 resolution and I zoom in tight so I can see the cabin-induced train wreck easier.


----------



## MoparMike

Hillbilly SQ said:


> I'm getting the same strange cuts as Mike is when calibrating my Fix with the tone on a flash drive. It doesn't show up on rta though. Just a smooth downward taper starting at about 6k that can be easily shaped when I do my tonality curve. This is with 1/12 resolution and I zoom in tight so I can see the cabin-induced train wreck easier.


I ripped the calibration track in Wav lossless on a SD card at first. Then downloaded the track from JL's site (also Wav) and tried it on both a SD card and USB thumb drive. Both had the same results with those visible cuts ~10k. I've made adjustments to the levels on the TWK outputs and compensated for audible differences between the initial Fix settings and those after the firmware update and re-calibration. All seems to be better now.


----------



## msmith

We are doing a bunch of testing right now to try and find the anomaly in the calibration process when using cal tracks encoded in different formats. We know that the straight WAV file on the CD is the most reliable and we are pretty sure that it's a bad idea to use an MP3 or AAC (iTunes) version of the track for calibration. We will have more information soon.


----------



## MoparMike

msmith said:


> We are doing a bunch of testing right now to try and find the anomaly in the calibration process when using cal tracks encoded in different formats. We know that the straight WAV file on the CD is the most reliable and we are pretty sure that it's a bad idea to use an MP3 or AAC (iTunes) version of the track for calibration. We will have more information soon.


After talking with your tech department they mentioned that they were doing further testing regarding file formats and different media inputs. They made a follow up call with additional advice for me after a week of trying to replicate what I was seeing. I appreciate that level of service, you don't see it from every company. Thanks for the updates here as well.


----------



## bbfoto

Manville, is Mark Eldridge involved at all with the software development and/or providing your team with any input/suggestions?


----------



## vactor

would be cool to tune using android ... do people still own laptops anymore?


----------



## subterFUSE

vactor said:


> would be cool to tune using android ... do people still own laptops anymore?




What's Android?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## msmith

bbfoto said:


> Manville, is Mark Eldridge involved at all with the software development and/or providing your team with any input/suggestions?


No, he was not on the dev team. He was a beta tester, though.


----------



## Babs

subterFUSE said:


> What's Android?


It's that operating system for gamblers.. You buy the device, and then roll the dice as to whether it's going to work or not without absolutely infuriating lags or bugs because each device has it's own customized OS. Some devices even come with spontaneous fire bonus feature. It used to be open source then the carriers ruined it.


----------



## claydo

Lol Scott, but in reality it's the only operating system for a phone, if ya require large capacity storage.......


----------



## vactor

after reading this whole thread, playing with the demo software, i think i will be getting a twk and a jl xd800 for a simple but very workable high end install. seems like a perfect solution for a 3 way front system with a single sub.


----------



## bilbo6209

Just to verify... I think I am seeing this in the software but wanted to make sure I wasnt missing something 

I am going to be using a FIX 82 and a TWK 88 for my build... I know the TWK 88 had both a coax digital input and an optical digital input... can you use both of them, or are you limited to just using one or the other?

Also is there any difference in bit rate accepted etc between the optical and coax digital inputs? I know on some systems typically the coax input has better bit rate support.


----------



## robhaynes

bilbo6209 said:


> Just to verify... I think I am seeing this in the software but wanted to make sure I wasnt missing something
> 
> I am going to be using a FIX 82 and a TWK 88 for my build... I know the TWK 88 had both a coax digital input and an optical digital input... can you use both of them, or are you limited to just using one or the other?
> 
> Also is there any difference in bit rate accepted etc between the optical and coax digital inputs? I know on some systems typically the coax input has better bit rate support.


You can use both the Optical and Analog inputs on the TwK 88. However only one of the two (Analog or Optical) can be assigned to inputs 1/2.

If using a FiX 82 I would recommend inputs 1/2 being Optical and then in other presets you can use analog inputs 3-8 as needed and disable the Toslink input.


----------



## bilbo6209

robhaynes said:


> You can use both the Optical and Analog inputs on the TwK 88. However only one of the two (Analog or Optical) can be assigned to inputs 1/2.
> 
> If using a FiX 82 I would recommend inputs 1/2 being Optical and then in other presets you can use analog inputs 3-8 as needed and disable the Toslink input.


I am also hooking up a Raspberry pi via digital (HiFiBerry Digi+ card) so I was really hoping to be able to use digital coming from the FIX _and_ digital coming form the Raspberry Pi.


----------



## msmith

bilbo6209 said:


> Just to verify... I think I am seeing this in the software but wanted to make sure I wasnt missing something
> 
> I am going to be using a FIX 82 and a TWK 88 for my build... I know the TWK 88 had both a coax digital input and an optical digital input... can you use both of them, or are you limited to just using one or the other?


You can only use one for the whole project (all presets). In the Input Setup menu (click the little icon next to the word "INPUTS"), you will see a selector for Inputs 1/2: Analog, Optical or Coaxial. 

You can run additional analog inputs on inputs 3-8, but you can't switch between the coaxial, optical or analog inputs on inputs 1/2. You have to pick only one.



> Also is there any difference in bit rate accepted etc between the optical and coax digital inputs? I know on some systems typically the coax input has better bit rate support.


No, in the TwK 88, both are capable of 24 bit/96 kHz max.

Best regards,

Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc.


----------



## msmith

bilbo6209 said:


> I am also hooking up a Raspberry pi via digital (HiFiBerry Digi+ card) so I was really hoping to be able to use digital coming from the FIX _and_ digital coming form the Raspberry Pi.


You would need an external digital input switcher to select between the sources... or a D/A on one of them so you can go into one of the analog inputs. Then you can mix them, and switch them on/off via TwK presets.


----------



## bilbo6209

msmith said:


> You would need an external digital input switcher to select between the sources... or a D/A on one of them so you can go into one of the analog inputs. Then you can mix them, and switch them on/off via TwK presets.


Darn it, that's what I thought in the software but I was hoping there was a super secret method for enabling both  

Ok I'll go analog from the fix to the tweak and digital from the R-pi to the twk being that I will be using it the most. 

Is there any difference between the 2 digital inputs? I seem to remember some other DSPs accepting higher bit rates on one digital input over the other (I think it is normally higher on the coax vs optical)


----------



## msmith

bilbo6209 said:


> Darn it, that's what I thought in the software but I was hoping there was a super secret method for enabling both
> 
> Ok I'll go analog from the fix to the tweak and digital from the R-pi to the twk being that I will be using it the most.
> 
> Is there any difference between the 2 digital inputs? I seem to remember some other DSPs accepting higher bit rates on one digital input over the other (I think it is normally higher on the coax vs optical)


Both digital inputs are the same. Up to 24/96


----------



## scotsman

i changed out the speakers in my 4runner and while the sound is better it still wasn't what I was looking for. After googling I've found that the 4runner factory headunit has some factory eq to protect the speakers. I have a Jl 900/5 amp on the way and think I need to get a fix-86 to flatten the eq, or would I be able to get by with a fix-82? I will use the amp on the component fronts and the co-ax rears, with a sub going in hopefully once the bm mkv is available.


----------



## pocket5s

scotsman said:


> i changed out the speakers in my 4runner and while the sound is better it still wasn't what I was looking for. After googling I've found that the 4runner factory headunit has some factory eq to protect the speakers. I have a Jl 900/5 amp on the way and think I need to get a fix-86 to flatten the eq, or would I be able to get by with a fix-82? I will use the amp on the component fronts and the co-ax rears, with a sub going in hopefully once the bm mkv is available.


the fix 82 has 2 outputs while the fix 86 has 6 outputs. They do the same thing with regards to correction, so it just depends on how many outputs you want. Many will use a fix82 in conjunction with say the TwK (or other dsp), so they only need the 2 outputs for example. If you aren't going to use a dsp, then you may want the 6 outputs


----------



## ryansi

need help with my twk 88.. had it installed and did the tuning through the laptop.. when the twk is plugged into the laptop everything is fine.. when i unplug the laptop it will try to cycle through the presets on its on and eventually the the led indicator on the drc 200 will turn off completely.... called tech support they had me hard reset by unplugging the usb cable and holding the preset button on the twk itself for 25 seconds then starting a new project from scratch because they said the project may be corrupted... but it is still doing the same thing... if anyone has any clue as to what is going on and can help me that would be awesome.. thank you


----------



## claydo

ryansi said:


> need help with my twk 88.. had it installed and did the tuning through the laptop.. when the twk is plugged into the laptop everything is fine.. when i unplug the laptop it will try to cycle through the presets on its on and eventually the the led indicator on the drc 200 will turn off completely.... called tech support they had me hard reset by unplugging the usb cable and holding the preset button on the twk itself for 25 seconds then starting a new project from scratch because they said the project may be corrupted... but it is still doing the same thing... if anyone has any clue as to what is going on and can help me that would be awesome.. thank you



When you hook to the laptop via usb and open the software the drc is disabled......when you disconnect or close the software the drc is active.....sounds to me the problem lies with the drc controller. Did you damage the wiring or connector during installation? If not maybe you just have a faulty drc.....


----------



## ryansi

Thanks for the reply I do not believe the wiring is damaged.. I was just playing with it before when I first started my car I had nothing at all same when I plugged it into the laptop it wouldn't pick up the twk... after turning the car on and off a few times it started to work so I played with the settings took the button on the drc apart put it back together then drove for 5 minutes so far no problems... I'm about to go on a longer drive to test it out more see if the problem has been corrected


----------



## ryansi

Ok so it's definitely not the drc 200... my twk started switching presets on it's own again so I tried to unplug the drc and it was still doing it... I'm almost thinko8ng it could be the preset button on the hardware itself is jammed, or faulty firmware on twk possibly, does anyone know if there is a way to update the firmware on the twk 88? The last possible thing I'm thinking it could be is because it does not run through a fix 82 or fix 86 first... because it is running off a factory head unit but I was told it will work anyways without it.... like I said when the laptop is plugged in it works perfectly so I was thinking faulty hardware... probably have to send it in for warranty service


----------



## Unsecured_WiFi

I have a question for anyone using a twk88. I have had mine not turn on a couple of times and it seemed like it was just passing audio with no filtering. After that it turns on now but the lights stay amber and i have more hiss coming from the speakers. if i unplug the rca's i dont have the hiss anymore so it came from the twk after its goof up. Does anyone have any other troubleshooting tips or should i try for a rma?


----------



## scotsman

I just installed my Fix86 and the inputs flash red every 5 seconds or so, which I believe means input clipping? Is that ok, or is there something I should change?


----------



## msmith

If you need technical assistance, give the JL AUDIO Tech Dept a shout.

888-JLAUDIO or [email protected]


----------



## bilbo6209

MSmith,

Is there a place we can post suggested changes/improvements to the JL Processors?

I am in the process of upgrading my car, and will be getting a newer car with a MOST audio network... I will be using some form of MOBridge to convert the MOST signal to either 1. Digital (most likely toslink, but could be coax) OR 2. Analog... I am also running a Digital Audio player that outputs digital via either Coax or Toslink... It seems a waste to have to pay extra for a MoBridge that takes Digital, converts it to Analog, feed that to a DSP that will in turn convert it back to digital, tweak it, and then convert it back to analog.... It would make a ton more sense to be able to have the different Presets in the TWK be able to point to either Digital Coax OR Digital Toslink, not all or none like it currently is 

I know I could have a separate switch to switch between 2 digital inputs and feed 1 output to the TWK, but I am trying to keep things simple and not have to have a 2nd device I have to touch anytime I want to switch input devices. 

I know in the TUN software you can choose what digital input you want, but then ALL presets are locked to that digital input and you cant have a mix of Coax and Toslink.

I already have a current gen Fix 82 and Twk88 but if this would require an update to hardware I would be willing to re-buy a newer version of the TWK to get this functionality.


----------



## Mahapederdon

Unsecured_WiFi said:


> I have a question for anyone using a twk88. I have had mine not turn on a couple of times and it seemed like it was just passing audio with no filtering. After that it turns on now but the lights stay amber and i have more hiss coming from the speakers. if i unplug the rca's i dont have the hiss anymore so it came from the twk after its goof up. Does anyone have any other troubleshooting tips or should i try for a rma?


Mine seemed to do that randomly and the knob didn't work at that point either. I think it was the rj45 connection pulling tight and losing connection. Gave it some slack and havnt had that issue for more than 2 months. Hope this helps.


----------



## msmith

bilbo6209 said:


> MSmith,
> 
> Is there a place we can post suggested changes/improvements to the JL Processors?
> 
> I am in the process of upgrading my car, and will be getting a newer car with a MOST audio network... I will be using some form of MOBridge to convert the MOST signal to either 1. Digital (most likely toslink, but could be coax) OR 2. Analog... I am also running a Digital Audio player that outputs digital via either Coax or Toslink... It seems a waste to have to pay extra for a MoBridge that takes Digital, converts it to Analog, feed that to a DSP that will in turn convert it back to digital, tweak it, and then convert it back to analog.... It would make a ton more sense to be able to have the different Presets in the TWK be able to point to either Digital Coax OR Digital Toslink, not all or none like it currently is
> 
> I know I could have a separate switch to switch between 2 digital inputs and feed 1 output to the TWK, but I am trying to keep things simple and not have to have a 2nd device I have to touch anytime I want to switch input devices.
> 
> I know in the TUN software you can choose what digital input you want, but then ALL presets are locked to that digital input and you cant have a mix of Coax and Toslink.
> 
> I already have a current gen Fix 82 and Twk88 but if this would require an update to hardware I would be willing to re-buy a newer version of the TWK to get this functionality.


I am afraid that this is a limitation of the hardware, not the software. In a future product, we will look into offering multiple, switchable, digital input buses. 

Best regards,

Manville Smith
JL AUDIO, Inc.


----------



## TxHouse

I've been messing with the tune 2.0 software using the fix 86 demo and I don't see it but thought I would ask. Is the Fix 86 active capable or would I have to get the twk to do that?


----------



## pocket5s

TxHouse said:


> I've been messing with the tune 2.0 software using the fix 86 demo and I don't see it but thought I would ask. Is the Fix 86 active capable or would I have to get the twk to do that?


The FiX is only mean to correct an OEM signal. The new updates allow you some eq options on top of that. That is all it is meant to do. So yes, you'd need the TwK for further processing.


----------



## josby

Is there any plan to add the ability to handle a center channel input to the FiX?


----------



## MWood

Are there any plans to add the ability to copy EQ settings across different channels? I have 1 (left front) and 2 (right front) linked, but it would be nice to copy the settings for 1/2 to 7 (rear fill).


----------



## MWood

It would be nice to have a section to add notes about different drivers such as their frequency response, rms ratings, and so on. I know there is a notes section under your presets, but it tends to get filled up quickly. Maybe something on the tune screen where you can hover over your outputs and see information about each driver. It would be helpful during those times when you don't the ability to look up then info on your drivers or subwoofer port tuning and you don't have it memorized.


----------



## robhaynes

MWood said:


> Are there any plans to add the ability to copy EQ settings across different channels? I have 1 (left front) and 2 (right front) linked, but it would be nice to copy the settings for 1/2 to 7 (rear fill).


If you are looking to have multiple, identical EQ's you can route multiple outputs from a pair of EQ's in the router panel on the SETUP tab.

i.e. You can have outputs A, B, G & H for example all route out of EQ banks 1 & 2 or all of the output channels if you wanted.


----------



## AccordUno

Rob & Manville, 

I only got one thing about the twk88, if it would not clear the parametric eq settings when going to the graphical eq, that would be nice. 

that's all I got..


----------



## robhaynes

AccordUno said:


> Rob & Manville,
> 
> I only got one thing about the twk88, if it would not clear the parametric eq settings when going to the graphical eq, that would be nice.
> 
> that's all I got..


The graphic EQ's center frequencies and "Q" are pre-defined and thus wouldn't be able to track any changes made in the Parametric operation.

You do keep graphic EQ adjustments when moving up to parametric, though!


----------



## Ntm95

Having had a twk for a while now, I find myself needing more filters. Always one short :laugh:. Seriously, it's a problem.
And that led on the remote, its borderline dangerous at night. I'd recommend that Jl starts dipping those.


----------



## robhaynes

Ntm95 said:


> Having had a twk for a while now, I find myself needing more filters. Always one short :laugh:. Seriously, it's a problem.
> And that led on the remote, its borderline dangerous at night. I'd recommend that Jl starts dipping those.


Are you talking about EQ bands?

If so 10-bands of Parametric per output is way more than enough to handle just about any audio system if using the "Q" properly.

Would you mind attaching your TwK Project so I can take a look at it?


----------



## pocket5s

robhaynes said:


> Are you talking about EQ bands?
> 
> If so 10-bands of Parametric per output is way more than enough to handle just about any audio system if using the "Q" properly.
> 
> Would you mind attaching your TwK Project so I can take a look at it?


Completely disagree, especially for a two way setup. In more than one setup I've found myself wanting 12-13. 15+ would be ideal. It's my single biggest wish list item for this DSP. 

Sure, if all you want is for it to look nice on an rta, you can get by with 10 fairly easy. start fine tuning and tweaking, you'll eat those up in a big hurry.


----------



## Ntm95

robhaynes said:


> Are you talking about EQ bands?
> 
> If so 10-bands of Parametric per output is way more than enough to handle just about any audio system if using the "Q" properly.
> 
> Would you mind attaching your TwK Project so I can take a look at it?


Yes, eq bands.
I am using rew to give suggestions on "q" and then playing around from there.

It is in an f150.
Focal f3's, bass in the door, mid in the sail and tweet in the pillar.
And a pair of jl 10tw3's under the back seat.


----------



## sqnut

MWood said:


> Are there any plans to add the ability to copy EQ settings across different channels? I have 1 (left front) and 2 (right front) linked, but it would be nice to copy the settings for 1/2 to 7 (rear fill).


No two channels will have the same response, hence eq for each channel will be different.


----------



## essdub07

Has anyone converted the FIX calibration track to FLAC or ALAC and had good results?


----------



## msmith

essdub07 said:


> Has anyone converted the FIX calibration track to FLAC or ALAC and had good results?


FLAC or ALAC may work fine, but to be sure you should use a WAV file. Definitely do not use AAC or MP3 files.


----------



## claydo

I've been enjoying my twk d8 for a while now.......but, something in the software really gets on my nerves. It's not a make or break type issue, just an annoyance really.....when tuning and muting channels, occasionally channels will un-mute on my setup, while still showing muted on the screen. I have to un-mute the icons, then mute again to return to tuning my individual channels. Not sure this has been brought up or not, but has anyone else run into this?


----------



## Doubledeckersoulwrecker!

I have had the same muting happen to me. It's a rare occasion, but when it happens, it happens around every 20 min. I thought it had to do with my older laptop


----------



## Got-Four-Eights

MY fix 82 is having issues.. input lights stay RED will not go green when calibrating which takes 4 or 5 tries to make it work. Will not power on via signal. It acts like the input signal isnt' strong enough yet it plays music fine when I use remote turn on option. The signal seems VERY boosted.. I had to bring my amp gains to almost zero. Something seems really off with it. The person I got it from did the latest firmware so it works with the TUN software. Is there a way to reset the whole thing back to defaults? What could be causing my problem? I don't get why it wont power on via signal when those same inputs will power on my JL RD amps. They JL RD amps show zero clipping indicator when I use those inputs. They are RCA but tapped into hte factory speaker wire so its actually high level over RCA. I had to make an RCA adapter to go into the Fix 82 so I can just plug hte RCA cables in. Sound travels through it.. but it won't calibrate correctly and the inputs NEVER go green just RED the whole time. HELP! lol﻿


----------



## essdub07

I have a twk88, if I use channels 3 and 4 as aux input for my ipod touch which input sensitivity should I use?


----------



## msmith

essdub07 said:


> I have a twk88, if I use channels 3 and 4 as aux input for my ipod touch which input sensitivity should I use?


1.0V should be about right, but check the signal meters in the Input Menu and adjust as needed.


----------



## t3sn4f2

msmith said:


> 1.0V should be about right, but check the signal meters in the Input Menu and adjust as needed.


Hey Manville, hope you and JL came out of the storm unscathed.


----------



## essdub07

msmith said:


> 1.0V should be about right, but check the signal meters in the Input Menu and adjust as needed.


Thanks Manville. SQ is so much better when connected directly to the twk just wish I could control my ipod from the headunit.




josby said:


> Is there any plan to add the ability to handle a center channel input to the FiX?


Josby did you ever figure this out?


----------



## mps2220

First comment from any passenger that enters my car. "WTF is that bright light"

Following only for LED dimming information, all other aspects are 100% perfect.

Brandon


----------



## What?

I have painted the LED with VHT tail light blackout spray on some installs. Now I just put the LED under the dash and point it at the floor. You can see the glow on the floor and see what mode it is in.


----------



## Doubledeckersoulwrecker!

Anyone else using the digital coax input?
I ask because I've used a couple different devices on this input, along with different digital coax cables, different flac files (one's I've ripped and those bought from Hdtracks) and the Twk shows clipping on the input by going into the red. On some newer (loudness war) recordings the preset LED will flash red every once in a while.


----------

