# SQ and Sanctioned Organizations



## BurntCircuits (Apr 22, 2007)

No disrespect to any competitors for their hard work & accomplishments but I thought the mandate of any sanctioned organization was to support the industry & grow the sport.

Clearly that is not the case when only 18 of 48 competitors scored higher at a World Finals event compared to a stock car at your local GM dealership.

I reckon with the addition of an MS-8 or similar DSP device, maybe a true subwoofer, and an hour of tuning, the Cadillac would have won 3/4 of MECA's classes.

I am baffled why any retailer would host a show if the sanctioned organization were promoting the vehicle manufacture.


----------



## winegamd (Mar 3, 2010)

This must have been an extremely biased judge. I have heard Cadillacs and they dont sound that great. In fact I think my current set up with just a 9887 and Tang Band Ceramic tweeters and a little tuning added to the stock system probably sounds better.


----------



## Horsemanwill (Jun 1, 2008)

alot of that is also how GM took the actual statements given to them from the judges and used it to their advantage.


----------



## ALL4SQ (Mar 28, 2009)

That's funny. Wish I could justify the cost of a new Cadillac CSV. If i could I would be driving one.


----------



## jkrob21 (Mar 27, 2009)

Wow what a show! Next year MECA will debut the OEM classes. Why buy car audio and enhance your listening experience when you can just buy a GM.:worried:


----------



## sqcomp (Sep 21, 2009)

Whoa! BurntCircuits! Are you kidding me?

Perhaps I'm a little biased towards mom and pop shops...

But I don't see how those scores represent reality. As was mentioned by winegamd, I've heard plenty of Bose systems, in caddys even. There is truth to the phrase, Bose blows. Also...anyone care to tell us who the judges were? I seem to remember reading an article about how it was something close to...oh, wait! The MECA finals judges? Where's Church Lady when we need her? How 'bout some more cowbell for MECA!

Regardless of how GM spins it, this graphic representation is ALL on Steve Stern and his band of merry men. We've seen the inconsistencies of his judges. You'll see them all over the posts about the finals. Going from an 80 score to mysteriously having 60's and low 70's...Oh but don't worry. We're going to score you more critically during finals. Yeah, okay. Like your ears are any different at finals? Then to add insult to injury some who have a good bit more into their vehicles than a "mid range system" are being scored lower than an OEM Caddy. This is in itself a big black eye to all whose systems somehow sound worse than a Bose factory system. But wait! What about wonder boy? He seems to get consistent scoring all the time. Those of you in the league know who I'm talking about. Are the judges star struck? Or did our "almost favorite" pay the league enough? Maybe it's a combination of both. What about paying for placement results in competitions? I've read accounts of some members being given points for events they weren't even attending. Please...deny it. 

Good work Stern. Not only are you alienating paying members with inconsistent judging, but you're also sabotaging your regular (non star status members) with lower than OEM verdicts of mid range system excellence.

I can say this as someone who WANTED to join MECA and has a DIY planned system that is more than mid range. Am I afraid to join MECA because of the OEM issue? Not in the least. I have heard Bose systems. They couldn't hold a candle to mine. I AM afraid of what took down IASCA a few notches so many years ago. It seems MECA is following VERY quickly in those footsteps. Inconsistency and favoritism. MECA seems to be taking the extra step of selling out to the OEM manufacturers as well.

Have some fuel for your fire. Don't be surprised if you get a little toasty in your blissful world.

...Maybe I'm a little angry if your judges gave me a 76.5 at any competition they're telling me my ride sucks OEM Bose style. GRRRRR!


----------



## winegamd (Mar 3, 2010)

There is just no way an OEM vehicle manufacturer would develop an audio system that would perform as well as an aftermarket. They have to make too many compromises to placement, weight, and cost to make it an affordable option. I have never heard a factory system with proper staging, they never have a balanced sound, and the sound deadening is atrocious even in a caddy. There is just no way that scoring chart is believable. Like it has been stated before if all of what I said were available in an OEM system there would be no aftermarket, and obviously that is not the case.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

winegamd said:


> There is just no way an OEM vehicle manufacturer would develop an audio system that would perform as well as an aftermarket. They have to make too many compromises to placement, weight, and cost to make it an affordable option. I have never heard a factory system with proper staging, they never have a balanced sound, and the sound deadening is atrocious even in a caddy. There is just no way that scoring chart is believable. Like it has been stated before if all of what I said were available in an OEM system there would be no aftermarket, and obviously that is not the case.


Are you sure about that? After all, the engineers who developed the vehicle could theoretically do more with it than your typical mom and pop shop because the engineers HAVE all the data. Think Acura and Lexus with their active noise canceling setups OR think Volvo with their prototype line driver array and 62 speaker setup.

Sadly, it's hard to find a mom an pop shop locally that has something as simple as a RTA. Heck, most of them use pre-fabricated everything with speakers that drop into the factory locations with little to no modifications. 

Getting back to OEM setups, the major compromise for the factory sound system is cost. I am sure that would change if more individuals were willing to pay more but the bottom line is that the automaker thinks about their bottom line.


----------



## David_Edwards (Nov 12, 2008)

ChrisB said:


> Are you sure about that? After all, the engineers who developed the vehicle could theoretically do more with it than your typical mom and pop shop because the engineers HAVE all the data. Think Acura and Lexus with their active noise canceling setups OR think Volvo with their prototype line driver array and 62 speaker setup.




yeah...62 speakers in a car scream SQ to me


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

David_Edwards said:


> yeah...62 speakers in a car scream SQ to me


You're just jealous because Eldridge is going to run that vehicle in OEM class and beat everybody.:laugh:


----------



## David_Edwards (Nov 12, 2008)

ChrisB said:


> You're just jealous because Eldridge is going to run that vehicle in OEM class and beat everybody.:laugh:



yep...you got me there Chris


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

I'd bet money that the factory system with 62 speakers smokes most after market boosted treble, and dumb level of bass setups that make up 90% of all after market systems.

My unimpressive stock Boston setup in my Magnum probably sounds better than many ****ty after market setups. Not louder, but tonally better.


----------



## David_Edwards (Nov 12, 2008)

The people/cars listed are FAAAAAR from "****ty aftermarket set ups"


----------



## SomeGuy748 (Feb 24, 2010)

ChrisB said:


> Are you sure about that? After all, the engineers who developed the vehicle could theoretically do more with it than your typical mom and pop shop because the engineers HAVE all the data. Think Acura and Lexus with their active noise canceling setups OR think Volvo with their prototype line driver array and 62 speaker setup.
> 
> Sadly, it's hard to find a mom an pop shop locally that has something as simple as a RTA. Heck, most of them use pre-fabricated everything with speakers that drop into the factory locations with little to no modifications.
> 
> Getting back to OEM setups, the major compromise for the factory sound system is cost. I am sure that would change if more individuals were willing to pay more but the bottom line is that the automaker thinks about their bottom line.


Cost?? Have you looked at the speakers car makers use? They are crap and people are paying a premium for them. The car makers are already ripping people off with these systems and more and more people know it. That's why they don't want to pay more. Nobody likes getting ripped off. I have yet to see one of these "Premium" OEM systems that couldn't be upgraded with a simple speaker change. The price that car dealers charge for replacement OEM crap is completely mind blowing. It's no wonder people don't trust them.

As for shops having an RTA, what do they need one for? 99% of people that go into a car stereo store regardless of it being a big box or mom and pop don't like how a system sounds that has been tuned with an RTA. Yes, they will agree that is sounds good, but turn them loose with it and I can guarantee you they will boost the bass and treble and screw up the RTA work. Look, I'm not against shops having an RTA, but you have to remember that what you read here on this forum is not what is really happening on a retail level and most shops that do have RTA's find that they collect dust more than business.


----------



## sqcomp (Sep 21, 2009)

^He he...who is this guy? 

What he's saying is true. I'd imagine that out of someguy's client roster there may be one person who seriously needs or wants to use the RTA. I wonder who that is? 

The basis for the statement still stands. Who the heck is anyone seriously supporting MECA when all they do is coddle OEM sack for money? That's all stern did when he gave the caddy a 76.5 score. Now all I have to do is get a rental car and roll into a couple local shows with it and make finals. Then go to world add a processor and rape everyone else who has ever put real time into achieving great sound.

Sorry...MECA isn't about good sound or the competitor. It's about Stene Stern lining his pockets, scruples be damned.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Do you actually know Steve Stern? I'm sure lining his pockets is the last thing he is doing by running MECA.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

sqcomp said:


> Sorry...MECA isn't about good sound or the competitor. It's about Stene Stern lining his pockets, scruples be damned.


That is a rediculous statement and completely WRONG!!!


----------



## sqcomp (Sep 21, 2009)

Okay...Is it rediculous? Am I wrong? Well, throw something my way to support your statement. Disprove my claims.

Tell me how his judges are competely objective and unbiased in scoring? 

Tell me about the league (and therefore Steve Stern's) business practices of trying to drag manufacturers into the leauge? 

Tell me how ONE Mark Eldridge (who I used to look up to as an icon of the competitive audio world) seems to get very VERY similar scoring each time he goes into the lanes...whereas EVERYONE else varies wildly, especially at finals?

How much did MECA charge to "judge" the OEM vehicles? You're going to tell me that by directly gutting our own aftermarket competitors with a 76.5 score on that Caddy, this is a good thing? You DO realize that the OEM manufacturers can now say that the Caddy/Bose system is MECA Certified right? Forever associating MECA with CRAP sound! 

Tell me what I'm saying is wrong. Look at your scores from all the shows, tell me there is in any way some consistancy. 

Maybe I should start crying over the phone to good ol' Sternie...maybe he'll take pity on me and tell his judges to WRITE IN A SCORE because I cannot be there at an event! 

The sad thing is, I'm not even in the league! I wonder how much more ammo I would have if I was! Talk about dirty laundry and skeletons in the closets. Do you SERIOUSLY think that MECA is worth your time?

I call a spade a spade. MECA's inability to create a properly trained core of judges is quickly becoming legendary. The league's practices for "courting" business are in the least ham-fisted if not completely unprofessional. This business of "judging" the OEM systems? That leads to a close eye being paid to the judges who actually performed that paid service.

I SO wanted to be able to join that league. I just can't bring myself to spend one cent on a league that is so obviously biased.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

You are basing this off of one judge?

I've judged MECA events and was within a point of the other judge(s). He has probably the best and most consistent judges in the hobby. And the fact MECA uses 3 judges prevents one judge from completely skewing results.

Maybe Mark's car is just that good? Maybe everyone else is messing with stuff between the last show and Finals, and their tweaks aren't always in a positive manner in regards to judging. Maybe Mark has some electronic means to assure his car always sounds the best track to track?

Have you heard the systems in question? Heaven forbid they might actually sound good. Hard to fathom that a multibillion dollar company could produce something that could sound good. I've heard competition cars that didn't sound as good as some factory systems.

And you do know MECA uses one disk to judge with right? It is possible for something to sound good/great on that one disk but not sound so hot on something else. 

What about Steve refinancing his house to keep MECA going?

Or how about STFU before you know all of the facts and not come off as some whiny bitchass punk?


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

I was there in finals. Loose RCA(Dumbass on my part) but i'llbe back next year. My car "might sound a LITTLE better than the caddy stock system. In the end I love the support the origination and the people surrounding it.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

sqcomp said:


> Okay...Is it rediculous? Am I wrong? Well, throw something my way to support your statement. Disprove my claims.
> 
> Tell me how his judges are competely objective and unbiased in scoring?They use a standardized score sheet and disk to keep the playing field level, but you'd know this if you actually competed
> 
> ...


....


----------



## garysummers (Oct 25, 2010)

This is my rookie year in MECA. I am an individual competitor, No "Team This or Team That, and I won the California Finals and the World Finals in the MODEX Class. I drove 4000 miles from Ca. to Tenn. to compete (2000 each way). Think I wasn't concerned about bias and favoritism. What I found was a great bunch of people with a passion for car audio, just like me. Is there room for improvement in judging and rules, absolutely. You will find that with every organization of this kind. I know people who compete in very high end Dog shows and they too say there is need for improvement in those organizations with regards to judging consistency and rules.
In all your posting you gave not one constructive idea of how to improve car audio competition. You should try to run a competing organization like MECA and see how difficult it would be. 

As far as Mark's car is concerned my friend, IT IS THAT GOOD!!! You should have the pleasure to hear it someday! I had the chance to hear it at the CES in 2009 and I am sure Mark has greatly improved it since then.

As the poster before said, Why not join MECA, compete, and be a constructive part of making car audio competition better and not just complain from your keyboard. Do you think Steve Sterns doesn't read this forum? It is a place where we can all work to make improvements. If you have concerns, then make them known in a constructive way, directly to the organization leaders if need be.

Thanks for reading!!

Gary


----------



## garysummers (Oct 25, 2010)

One last thing!!!

With respect to the judging and scoring concerns at the World Finals. My scores as follows:

86.75 (no perfect scores)
84.0 ( 1 perfect score)
79.5 (4 perfect scores)
So all of you people with your spreadsheets need to think deeper.

The following is a posting by Scott Buwalda on the subject. Of all the posts it was the most constructive and to the point. Yes it may have been difficult for a lot of competitors, judges and leaders to hear but it is absolutely correct. Everybody should read this post from all organizations. If comments like this are taken seriously by all, car audio competition will improve for the better. I do differ on one small point with Scott with respect to the use of a high quality home audio system as a reference. While experiencing live musical performances is imperative to developing a trained, discerning ear, the use of a high end reproduction system will guide us with respect to the playback of individual recordings.
Here is Scott's post for those who have not read it.


Two things kind of disgust me about this discussion, thus far:

1. Take the time to learn what the judge likes and have a preset specifically for him.
2. The 20-50% swing in points between judges is OK, as long as the judge is consistently low or high.

1. Why should I take the time to learn the judge's idiosyncrasies? Why should I take the time to try and figure out what his reference is, or what he’s “looking” for to be highlighted or extenuated in the music? Why should I try to determine if he’s a “home audio guy” or a “pro sound guy?” Why should I get close to him, interview him, and determine what his idiosyncrasies are? Why should I go to his house, hang out, and listen to his “reference system?” Why should I ask him to sit in my car and ask him what he’d LIKE TO HEAR? I SHOULDN’T AND I WON’T. Cars should be tuned for a tonal and spectral reference; if you don’t have a tonal and spectral reference, go get one (and P.S. it’s not your buddy’s car, not your home audio system, and not your earbuds – its real life, unamplified music – go to a high school concert some time and sit in the front row, like I did last night, and hear what a trombone sounds like, what a snare drum pulled tight at 85 PSI sounds like, what a pair of 18” Zildjian crash cymbals sound like). One judge shouldn’t need 6 or 9 dB more midbass than another judge to make him happy. The damn rear view mirror SHOULD NOT SHAKE for a foot tap on a wooden stage. That’s complete and total crap, and it’s disgusting. I have won five IASCA Expert-Division SQ championships, and I have NEVER specifically tuned for one judge or another. I tune for tonal accuracy and spectral balance, and ensure that phase is coherent for good soundstage and image definition and placement.

2. It’s OK if the judge is consistent? That’s complete crap too. If the rulebook says that center image is worth 5 points, and the judge gives the best car of the day at the event – with a defined, dialed center image – a 2, then it becomes a 2 point category, and perhaps much less weighted than other categories where the judge might be scoring on a higher plateau. CARS ARE NOT JUDGED AGAINST EACH OTHER, THEY ARE JUDGED AGAINST THE RULE BOOK REFERENCE. If a judge is purposely scoring low and/or not in accordance with the mandated rule break-down in any given sanctioning organizations score sheet, then he shouldn’t judge. If the rulebook says a deep, focused, properly-placed center image should get a 5 out of 5 score, then he MUST get a 5 out of 5. MUST! Not a 2 out of 5. Saying a judge was “scoring consistently low” is complete crap. What should be said, instead is “the judge was intent on re-writing the rule book." Judges that score on their own scoring tier are doing a gross disservice to their paying clientele, and are basically RE-WRITING THE SCORE SHEET AND RE-WRITING THE RULE BOOK based upon their own weighting of the various judged sub-sections on the score sheet. Simple as that.

Thank you Scott and thank you all for listening to my thoughts

Gary


----------



## sqcomp (Sep 21, 2009)

Complain from the keyboard. Wow! Good point. 

I'm not going to waste my time with MECA however. I now have no wonder why Stern brow beats manufacturers to join the league. His mortgage is riding on it. That's pretty eFn stupid on his part. Desparation is a bad smell.

I'm working IASCA, not MECA sorry to dissapoint. I can see a sinking ship and wholly work to not be on board. Besides, a lot of you probably don't like the tell it straight type. I'm afraid I'd be a lot like that. 

I've also got plenty to bring to the table as a rookie comptetitor. There are several around this forum that can vouche for that. I'm more than willing to bet that there are better sounding vehicles than ME's out there. I've got one in mind right now. My respect for him is gone not because of the performance of his vehicle but rather the poor showing of respect and scruples in IASCA last year. 

You boys aren't going to get the chance at me in MECA. You can keep the RMS Titanic of sound off organizations. 

Solutions? Stop supporting OEM manufacturers and work to improve the aftermarket. That OEM judging is COMPLETELY selling out. When I hear about the judges flailing wildly on the scoring when some have NOT changed the systems...it leads this man away. Since YOU'RE the competitors in that league...you solve it. You know it's there.

I'll also second what is apparently a quote from garysummers last post. I can't exactly tell where the quote begins or ends...it is regarding being true to the music NOT the judges. I've heard several people telling me about having to change a tune to match a judge's likes and dislikes. That is wrong on SO many levels.

Have MECA. It's all yours.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

sqcomp said:


> Complain from the keyboard. Wow! Good point.
> 
> I'm not going to waste my time with MECA however. I now have no wonder why Stern brow beats manufacturers to join the league. His mortgage is riding on it. That's pretty eFn stupid on his part. Desparation is a bad smell.
> 
> ...


um...How many IASCA shows are there in the US in the past 5 years?
How many USACi shows?

now how many MECA shows?

I'm terrible at math, but just by looking at the screen--MECA dwarfs IASCA and USACi combined in the number of shows.

Which really does not follow your thought process that MECA is a sinking ship and is not growing.

MECA is the ONLY Sound Off organization which has grown in the past 5 years.

so you compete in IASCA? Really? what IASCA Events did u or do you plan to compete? b/c right now there are few and far between events scheduled.

YES, IASCA is in the process of making a comeback and a larger presence in the US, but it has to make up alot of ground to even come close to what MECA is doing.


and How is evaluating OEM stock system selling out? You do know that MECA offers a stock class?
MECA was able to do something that IASCA and USACi only talked about doing for years and that was to get access and support from the OEM industry--last I checked it was a CAR audio competition.


and If you have so much to bring to the table as a "rookie" competitor, why not step up into the bigger classes like amatuer or even Pro. Its apparent from your vast knowledge and experience that you should be judged with a full score sheets and should be very competitive against all the current and past names in IASCA.
Secondly, If you have so much to bring to the table--how exactly do you qualify for Rookie status in IASCA? or are you only competing in rookie bc you think it would be easier for you to win?


----------



## SomeGuy748 (Feb 24, 2010)

Regardless of anyone’s opinion of MECA, I simply have a hard time believing that so few cars at a finals event scored better than a factory Bose system. I have yet to hear any Bose system that really sounded all that good. I’ve been out of the competition scene for a long time so this kind of result leads me to believe that the level of SQ competition must have dropped off in the last 10+ years.

Judging will always be an issue, there’s just no way around it because you can’t have “fair” judging without a rule book but who wants to build a car audio system to satisfy some “rule” book. This is what ultimately got me out of competing. I’ve stayed in car audio but building my car to sound like some book says it should just doesn’t work for me. Hey, I’m all for car audio competition as I think it’s a great, creative and positive hobby and I enjoy helping people that want to compete. Heck I’ve thought about getting back in just for the experience of it, but I don’t want to get all hung up on trying to satisfy someone else. It’s my car and I want it to sound my way and this may not be the “correct” way to everyone else.

I think the biggest problem with MECA showing this kind of result is that it is potentially damaging to aftermarket car audio as a whole. If GM decided to start advertising this result it wouldn’t be long before Toyota and Honda followed right along. Weren’t they the other two manufacturers that were judged? Could be wrong on that, but it doesn’t really matter. The reality is they just don’t sound that good or the cars competing in MECA don’t sound that good and I have a hard time believing the competitors cars are the weak link. Bose blows. It’s that simple. Bose is a genius marketing tool and has been used by car manufacturers for years to up sell customers but we all know that given the option at the point of purchasing a new car, we would take a $3k allowance to spend on aftermarket car audio than pay that same $3k for the factory Bose package.


----------



## sqcomp (Sep 21, 2009)

Next year you'll see the IASCA events. The sponsored events certainly won't be with MECA seeing as the business ethics of the owner are questionable at best. No, I will not expand upon that, Stern knows...nuff said.

Evaluating an OEM system isn't the issue...giving a crappy BOSE system a 76.5 score that could on any given day have a higher score than most on that little list you see above AT FINALS is the point. I'd be more than willing to bet that most of those systems that scored lower than the OEM caddy sound better. I know mine does. I'd also be willing to bet that GM approached IASCA and USACi. Stern just jumped on the swing first.

Go ahead and quote me as to where I ever said MECA isn't growing. You can't. 

I unfortunately cannot compete in the MECA stock class. I've built out my a-pillars and use more than 16 bands of EQ. Street or modex may have been more my range. I could re-do my whole three way setup but...naw. It sounds juuuust fine right now. I could stand to have a few minutes with an RTA to dial in that summed setting for the lanes.

The problem with your evaluation of my "experience" is that you don't know. Why compete as a rookie? Because I can. Do I have a leg up? Probably. I'll be in SQc and SQi. I won't hide in shame when someone looks at my install. It is clean and done by my hands. I didn't buy my install. I don't work in the industry directly so I can be a rookie. I don't want to spend the money to go master or ultimate. Pro is probably the highest I'd go...for now. 

The bottom line is stated above, "the mandate of any sanctioned organization was to support the industry & grow the sport. Clearly that is not the case when only 18 of 48 competitors scored higher at a World Finals event compared to a stock car at your local GM dealership." -This is a very sad state. Either 30 competitors' vehicle are complete garbage OR that caddy is not really at a 76.5. Either way, MECA's representation is not right.

Just to mention this... someguy748 knows my setup a little bit. It's definately better than a Bose caddy.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

sqcomp said:


> Next year you'll see the IASCA events. The sponsored events certainly won't be with MECA seeing as the business ethics of the owner are questionable at best. No, I will not expand upon that, Stern knows...nuff said.
> 
> Evaluating an OEM system isn't the issue...giving a crappy BOSE system a 76.5 score that could on any given day have a higher score than most on that little list you see above AT FINALS is the point. I'd be more than willing to bet that most of those systems that scored lower than the OEM caddy sound better. I know mine does. I'd also be willing to bet that GM approached IASCA and USACi. Stern just jumped on the swing first.
> 
> ...


....


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

ChrisB said:


> Are you sure about that? After all, the engineers who developed the vehicle could theoretically do more with it than your typical mom and pop shop because the engineers HAVE all the data. Think Acura and Lexus with their active noise canceling setups OR think Volvo with their prototype line driver array and 62 speaker setup.
> 
> Sadly, it's hard to find a mom an pop shop locally that has something as simple as a RTA. Heck, most of them use pre-fabricated everything with speakers that drop into the factory locations with little to no modifications.
> 
> Getting back to OEM setups, the major compromise for the factory sound system is cost. I am sure that would change if more individuals were willing to pay more but the bottom line is that the automaker thinks about their bottom line.



That's an Audi Q7, not a Volvo.


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

quality_sound said:


> That's an Audi Q7, not a Volvo.


Yeah, I meant to correct that then the forum went down... I was thinking of Volvo Dynaudio when I typed that. Whoops!:blush:

Speaking of factory sound, my wife just purchased a 2011 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 Grand Touring with the Infinity "premium" sound system. It isn't bad for a factory setup and it is much better than the "premium" sound system that came with her 2006 Mazda Tribute and my 2006 Mustang's Shaker 500 setup. I doubt it would win any awards in MECA or IASCA and it wouldn't have enough bass or color matched panels for USACi sound quality judges.

As for now, her vehicle is staying stock, even though I have some Genesis components to put in the Genesis Coupe.:laugh:


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Fact is you are just a little ***** who can't back up any statements with facts.

Working with IASCA? Let me take a guess at what amps and speakers you have.. 

Say you can see a sinking ship? You must own a submarine cause IASCA has come and gone...sitting next to the Titanic.

Keep on having your strings worked by a puppet master.




sqcomp said:


> Complain from the keyboard. Wow! Good point.
> 
> I'm not going to waste my time with MECA however. I now have no wonder why Stern brow beats manufacturers to join the league. His mortgage is riding on it. That's pretty eFn stupid on his part. Desparation is a bad smell.
> 
> ...


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Gary I like Scott...but his not tuning cars to suit a certain judge, is well, a bit wrong. His white 240 had motorized kick panels and computerized presets based on height and stuff.


----------



## garysummers (Oct 25, 2010)

I have not seen Scott's car nor spoken to him about it, but my guess is that the motorized kicks and the presets for height were to adjust the position of the "Sweet Spot" in the vehicle to suit the ear position of the individual listener not to cater to a "listeners(judges) personal tastes". I know in my car I have several seat settings with respect to front/back position, height, and seat back tilt to accommodate different sized individuals. When I have Eric Holdaway(6'4") listen to my car the seat position is different then when my wife(5'0") listens.
Even using "Timed Spacial Averaging" as I do in tuning my car, there is still an evident "sweet spot". This is true for any audio reproduction system, some can produce a bigger sweet spot than others but none the less it exsists. I still stand by the integrity and intent of Scott's original post.

Gary


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

Jason, I see that you are trying to make a connection between motorized kick panels that were used in a car of mine eight years ago with my argument about setting a tonal and spectral balance curve for each judge. Not that I owe you any explanation because it’s clear you have an agenda, but motorized kick panels and re-tuning one’s car for tonal and spectral balance for a specific judge are mutually exclusive. The motorized kick panels were an install gadget, that once set, were moved once for one judge during their four years of use. Once. They remained on their base setting for 99% of the shows they were competed in. They were used far more often during demonstrations as a learning tool to those curious how stage width and depth cues can change by making angle adjustments. You were likely one of these people. 

The motorized kick panels were retired in 2002. I won one championship with them installed. I have since won four expert championships without them. I have won all five championships having not touched the EQ, T/A, intensity, or phase EVER, NOT ONCE, for any judge. You seem to have ignored the fact that my entire argument was for tonal and spectral balance adjustment for individual judges, and had nothing to do with staging. Please take a moment and re-read my post. The only time the kicks were used was to show in demonstration mode.

Back on subject. I don’t see the correlation between adjusting a speaker a few degrees, and doing what is proposed to get a good score for certain judges. I am hearing that you need to have a virtual database of judge feedback, to keep spreadsheets and old score sheets handy, to interview judges for what they like and what they’re “looking for”, as well as to see if you can pinpoint their musical reference. It seems you need to have the judge sit in your car and tell you what tonal and spectral curve they are looking for, what frequencies they want extenuated, and what spectral cues they require for good scores. I recall even a mention of going to the judge’s house and moonlighting with him to understand what he’s looking for, listening to his “reference” system, etc. That’s a world different than moving some kick panel speakers a few degrees, my friend, no matter how badly you’d like to throw me into your mud pit with you. Its total crap that you need to have pre-loaded tonal curves for each judge, and you KNOW I am right.

I have an easy quiz for you. Jason Winslow goes to a super high-end home audio store today in Charlotte, NC and asks to listen to the store’s finest pair of speakers. The salesman asks two questions: 

1.	What type of music do you like, or want to hear?
2.	And where will you be sitting, or would like to sit? 

You tell them “Metallica or Pantera”, and that you’ll be sitting in the front row of chairs, slightly off-center. The salesman will then load up the Master of Puppets album, and then might toe one or both of the speakers into to your location to try and get you into a sweet spot. Does the salesman now:

1.	Let you listen to and enjoy the music, and evaluate the speakers? Or
2.	Break out his laptop and connect a DSP device to the system, and grab a pad and a pen and begin interviewing you for what you’d like to hear? 

If it’s #2, we have much work to do, my friend. 

There is no way a salesman can, nor will sit at a laptop tuning a DSP device for you for two or three hours before he’s ready for you to hear his fancy speakers. It simply doesn’t happen. Claiming that we should have tonal and spectral balance settings for each judge is as ludicrous as asking a hi-end home audio salesman to sit there and tune their speakers for each and every customer that walks in the door. The reference is the reference; there is no changing the reference. 

Is there a difference in relationship between car audio competitors and judges, and a hi-end salesman and clients? No, not at all. Trying to defend it further is dimmunizing your credibility.


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

Well put. The end.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Me have an agenda? Not in the slightest. But if you think that I have an agenda, it would be a proverbial case of the pot calling the kettle black after what has gone down since MECA Finals. But I digress about that point.

The point that people were trying to make is that you are at a competition. To win the competition you are at trying to maximize all aspects of earning points. If having a preset for one judge is allowed in a certain organization, then whether you personally agree with it or not isn't important. It is about winning and doing what it takes to win.

Whether the motorized kickpanels were used or worked as intended for sound judging doesn't matter. What matters is you did this to maximize your potential points earning either in sound where it could have been of some use, or in install judging by selling the judge on the theory of why you did it. Either way you built something to maximize your scoring potential. One of the reasons had to have been for pure BS for the other to get the points.

You have done things to get points. The Altima and the use of "exotic materials" was used to sell the install. Again maximizing scoring potential. Lets us not forget pushing your car back and forth the the hook by the radio face plate. It's not sound, but it is scoring potential to win the competition.

Then the blue now black car. I know for a FACT that you have had work done to the DEQX and Denon to allow for the precise thing you are saying you shouldn't do. The DEQX is able to instantly change presets. Each preset can have XO, EQ, and TA changes. You can control these changes via the headunit's volume control. Volume up, one preset. Volume down, another preset. How do I know this? I was offered the same mods to my Rane and Denon from the people who did the work on your processor and deck.

But the whole changing preset thing isn't a beef you should be having with me. You should be taking this up with your direct and long time competitor Mark Elridge. His 4 Runner and more than likely his new car has had a SMPTE machine in it for over a decade. Not only can he change a preset, he can manipulate settings in real time during play back. Is it right? I dunno. Is it smart? Hell yes. Have other people tried to do the same? You being on Team DLS might have heard about Jamie Edmunson trying to do the same in his car. As long as there isn't a rule against it, then there is nothing wrong with it from a competition stand point.

And as far as the analogy of going to a highend home blah blah. Yeah it happens. Ask our friend in Austin who tuned the system in his house and how long it took CAT to tune it. Tuning a super high end system happens all of the time. You drop some serious coin on a serious system, then it WILL get setup for your room. And it will take hours and days to do so. Do you think recording studios just drop some speakers in and say, "Hell, that looks good enough?" No. Those systems are tuned. Those rooms are tuned. Tuned to whatever benchmark...it isn't relevant. The point is they are tuned.

And you have me confused with the "moonlighting at a judge's house." I know two other judges in the area- Bryan Wilkinson and Ron Buffington. Ron was an active competitor who was helping me with my install in 2003 or 2004. I wouldn't call his home system then a "reference" system since by then I had my own home system that I used as my reference. Then there is Bryan. I haven't been to his house since probably 2001, maybe 2002- he and Dana hadn't had their child yet. He was helping me with some things as he was doing with Eric Fitzgerald. He helped me put together a system and gave me some pointers. But that system NEVER made it to a show. So I don't know what the f.ck you are talking about or alluding to with that comment, but it is about on the same level of BS as the rest of your post.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

In my eyes it is no different than having separate settings for RTA, SPL, and SQ.

You play the game by the rules, and if you are serious, you play to win. To do otherwise is a waste of time.


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

thehatedguy said:


> after what has gone down since MECA Finals.


What has gone down after the MECA Finals? 

Scott


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

It really went out the window when RF introduced the Symmetry EPX2 and it had global presets. You could change things based on volume level.

Then Pioneer came a long and made a good digital car audio piece. And I want to think the ODR could do global presets as well. I know of Team Pioneer guys back in the day sitting behind their cars with the system plugged into computers "monitoring" things.

But all of this stuff was being done with analog equipment. The PJ Autosound guys had "creative" solutions back in the day too.



cajunner said:


> I agree.
> 
> if creating a preset for a particular judge is going to earn points, then that's what has to be done. Not what could be done, not what should be done, but must be done along with everything else.
> 
> ...


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I'm sure you've heard the same stuff that I've heard. Lot of things circulating centered around your team. The rumor mill is churning...whether true or not, I dunno. Perception is unfortunately reality sometimes. 



Scott Buwalda said:


> What has gone down after the MECA Finals?
> 
> Scott


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

Yeah well, if it didn't come out of my mouth, it's false. One fella in particular (name witheld to protect the guilty) has been running his mouth to any number of people, who have in turn come back to me and told me what's being said. I didn't go to the USACi Finals this year - does that mean I boycotted the USACi Finals too? If you'd like, I can spell out EVERY person from Team Hybrids and what they were doing the weekend of the Finals so that we can put this to bed once and for all.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I know you weren't at ESN...I was wanting to see that Infinity.

Like I said the rumor mill is a churning. I know timing is everything. 30 seconds too late and you could be pregnant. Well not you...but you know.


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

Dude, you'd be surprised at some of the rumors that have made it back to me. Just before I was to release the blue car in 2006, rumor had it that it was powered by a 12 HP John Deer lawnmower motor - just enough to get it on and off the trailer, and the speakers were behind the headlights. 

Rumors are just that - rumors. If I didn't say it, or it didn't come out of the mouth of one of the core Team Hybrids guys (Marsh, Edwards, Grape, Pleasant, Becker, Roberts, Sketoe, Ott, Juaristi, etc.), it's likely false.


----------



## garysummers (Oct 25, 2010)

Based on your description of how car audio competition "really" works, I should have never won the finals or any event I ever entered. I never know who the judges are going to be before an event. I also never use the judging disk in tuning my car as I believe there exists far better audio recordings to evaluate my system. So tuning for a particular judge or a set of program material to achieve a properly aligned reference system is pointless. If what you say is true, and I am not saying it is not, it does not speak well for the fairness and professionalism of all car audio competition.


----------



## audiguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Hey, SQCOMP, for some reason, I am reminded of the Abraham Lincoln quote, "better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." And he said that before the internet where millions more would hear you.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Car audio competitions are a game (such as life). You play the game with one outcome in mind, to win. Generally those who win at the games being played are the experienced players. How the experience is gained is not important to playing the game.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> Mic states how he knows how one judge likes his tune, and it doesn't matter if it was through trial and error or if cheat sheets get passed behind the building or at the hotel a few hours before the event.
> 
> it's not common knowledge, yet some have it, and some unfortunately, tune for a reference.
> 
> ...



Not sure why my name was brought into this at all, but i'll bite and respond.

I'm not sure how judge "preference" isnt common knowledge. Anyone who competes in PA has the same judge more often than not. Anyone who has had him judge their car before and actually taken time to talk to him afterwards would gain the same amount of insight.
Most judges leave feedback or notes on the score sheets, one of the very 1st things I learned when I started this a decade ago was to talk to Judges and find out what the comments actually mean. 
B/c If he/she is hearing something else than I am hearing, then there is a breakdown somewhere. More often than not, its been with my lack of knowledge and understanding, so I want to find out what they heard so I can make improvements.
I'm still learning today and I love learning, but the only way to learn is really to ask questions. 

what cracks me up, but also really upsets me are all these keyboard commandos who want to ***** and complaint about judging that have never once ever bothered to ask the Judge about theirs scores or what a comment meant. This whole Holier than Thou attitude..."I know my car sounds good, so he/she doesnt know wtf they are talking about bc they didnt agree".

and even funnier is when people get a very specific comments like " 6.3-8k are hot" and they are in denial about it and never bother to even check.
and instead just say, well I like it that way I think thats what makes my car sound great....

So yeh its great in theory to talk about how Tonal accuracy is tonal accuracy, there is only one solution and one only...But thats pretty much theory. Its like Art, I could ask a handful of people to paint me a picture of a house and get a ton of different interpretations and results , but all end up in some way or another being distinguishable as a house.

and for the record, I used the same tune for every judge and for single and double seat as well.
and in the past 10 years I can only ever making any changes a few times and that was bc I knew one judged wanted alot of midbass, so a boost at 80 and 100 usually helped pacify this particular judge.

In the End is a competition.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

lets chalk this up to I got lucky and Gary is the F'in man. I think it would have been a bigger surprise if Gary didnt win and someone who his knowledge and experience is a real asset to car audio competition. I only wish he lived in this coast not that one.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> very magnanimous, Mic10is.
> 
> unfortunately the question of what you did to get lucky, and what Gary did to trounce the competition, is really the currency of competition and no amount of second guessing will remove the possibility that you knew what the outlier judge needed to hear, and Gary understood acoustic coverage patterns better than anyone on that particular day.
> 
> ...


How about look at it from the other side. There is one judge who I have only been judged by 3 times in my entire 2 years in MECA. only once has he ever made any comments on my score sheet and the comment was " volume 26 is NICE " Tried to have a conversation with the guy and ask what he heard and didnt get much info. I think it amounted to " it sounded pretty good"
Majority of other people in the organization get judged by him very frequently, so they can tune for him bc that is what they know. 
So now who has the advantage--thats again why there are 3 judges in MECA, something no other organization really has ever done.

You tune for what you know.

So to me that person is the major variable and was my lowest score Finals. Ironically he was my highest score last year, the 1st time he ever judged my car. and I know for a fact he was a major variable for several other cars as well and has been for years. I also know he was also double digital points off other judges on some other cars as well.

all this ******** conspiracy stuff about an out-lier judge out to get people and screw over people is exactly that-complete and total ********.

as far as Steve Stern re mortgaging his house to keep MECA going. Wheres the conspiracy in that? The Guy loves car audio and the people involved in MECA. He doesnt do this bc he is making a ton of money, bc in fact he isnt making much of anything--he does it bc its something he's passionate about.
His daytime job is as a studio musician, which pays the bills, at least most of them
How being passionate about something makes things a major conspiracy is beyond me, but Im sure anyone who wants to look in from the outside can make up anything they want to stir the pot.

BTW for the record and you can put whatever spin on this you want the outlier judge has been voted best SQ judge 5 out of the last 10 years since MECA started. Voting is done by the members.

also um..last I checked it was a competition--not sure why that keeps getting left out. Do football,basketball and soccer teams go out and play games without reviewing game footage from the other team?
That would be pretty stupid to just walk out and hope for the best bc you think youve got all your bases covered.


and Yes I would agree Gary has a huge advantage over alot of people bc of his job and knowledge. Mark Elderidge has a huge advantage over most people bc of his knowledge and ability to directly apply it.
Buwalda has his own speaker company, he can build his speakers based on whatever parameters he wants for his specific application unlike everyone else who has to make the speaker basically work in their environment.
Actually anyone who works for a manufacturer has an "unfair" advantage.

so, should they be penalized for having that knowledge or should everyone else suck it up and work on gaining their own knowledge and step up their own game so they can compete.

2nd sucks, Ive been there many times...but Ive learned a helluva lot more from losing than I ever did from winning anything


----------



## Catman (Mar 18, 2008)

IMO until SQ competitions are judged by blindfolded judges they are going to be a 'joke'. The judges would have no info about the systems or the cars. They would be lead to the vehicles, sat down and auditioned the system. Also using 2 judges per car at different times would add to the credibility. Competitions are more about 'show cars' than actual SQ.

>^..^<


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

Catman said:


> IMO until SQ competitions are judged by blindfolded judges they are going to be a 'joke'. The judges would have no info about the systems or the cars. They would be lead to the vehicles, sat down and auditioned the system. Also using 2 judges per car at different times would add to the credibility. Competitions are more about 'show cars' than actual SQ.
> 
> >^..^<


Yeh youve obviously been to alot of shows in the past 10 years.
nothing screams "show car" like trunk liner....:laugh:

btw how would a blindfolded judge change tracks? write down scores? change volume? turn the car on and off, system on and off during noise testing?

Yeh, stay out of the thread if you dont have a clue next time


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> interesting information, and not something I would have guessed by the number of people who posted in this thread about this year's Finals.
> 
> I basically take issue with the conspiracy charge, I said "smoke and mirrors" and I didn't mean it in the way you're insinuating.
> 
> ...


none of my comments were specifically directed at or toward you specifically, I just quoted to make sure I covered everything I felt may need addressed.

For anyone who wants to complain about a judge or judging in general I encourage them all to take Joe Zelano's advice and sign up for Judge training and judge some events yourself. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.
It isnt as easy as everything says and thinks it is. And it really is one of those things that you have to do it to know what its like.

and there is a reason why every single organization has always had problems finding and keeping good judges--bc regardless of how good a job they do, how much time they spend helping others, putting on shows--someone is always unhappy and bitches and bitches and bitches. Its a very thankless job.

Oh and No judge that I know ever looks over the install before judging it. Its a pretty simple process.
Judge shows up, grabs score sheets off the dash or windshield (Wherever the competitor puts it), says OK.
Competitor shows them how to work the radio, if there is any special controls to use as far as ergonomic controls. what the best seating position typically is, as far as head position or whatever. shuts the door and either sits around and waits or goes back to hangin with friends.

I dont have any special way for people to sit in my car, so i just tell them to sit and enjoy. and hopefully they do. If not, hopefully i can find out what didnt sound right...

at the end of the day this is actually suppose to be fun.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

I love the time after SQ finals are over. I definately plan to sponsor a tampon booth at next year's event.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

This is nothing compared to what goes on after the SPL finals.


----------



## garysummers (Oct 25, 2010)

"why did the winner win based on his own reference, when everybody else is trying to make the official test disc sound good"


Just to set the record straight I am not tuning to “My Own Reference”, I am tuning to “The Reference”, which is what anyone tuning and aligning any audio system should do. Let me explain!
You are sitting in front of a 96-piece orchestra, 6 feet behind the conductor. The orchestra is arranged in half circle and you sit right in the middle. I hope you can visualize! As the orchestra plays and you watch you get a visual picture of that orchestra playing accompanied by the sound of the music. Now close your eyes!
What you are left with is a sonic image of the orchestra! A perfect “Sound” picture in your mind of that orchestra. How do we get this? The sonic data being received by our brain via our ears with respect to Time, Amplitude, and Frequency are decoded by our brain to give the sonic image we call “LIVE”
Let us now for the sake of discussion say we are able to record that sonic data perfectly onto a CD, which is the goal of every recording engineer, to capture the “LIVE” performance. 
Now play that disc on your car audio system. If the data reproduced by the system with regards to Time, Amplitude, and Frequency are not identical to that which your brain received while you sat in front of the orchestra, your brain will NEVER decode that “LIVE” sonic image. If your system in any way alters that data that is DISTORTION. We often think of distortion only in terms of clipping of the waveform. Any altering of the data is distortion.
As you design, build and tune a reference audio system whether it is Studio, Home, Car, the goal is for the reproduction system to be “INVISABLE” to the original data or music. Is it possible to build the perfect system that will not alter that data at all. NO! There will always be influences with in the system itself or the environment the system resides in that will affect that data. But the closer you get to “Perfect” the more of that “LIVE” experience you will realize. This theory does not only apply to live recordings. All recordings have this sonic data, some more natural than others. 
How do we know when our system is moving closer to “PERFECT”. That is where EAR TRAINING comes in play. Scott Buwalda spoke of it in his post, which I re-posted earlier. I have been mixing sound for the last 30 years. In the studio just about every day listening to all kinds of sounds from music, spoken voice, to natural sounds. Many times experiencing those sounds in there original form, that is at the point of recording and hearing them “LIVE”. Now I have something to reference because I was there when it was recorded. The analogy I made earlier about the 96-piece orchestra was actually a true story. We were about to begin the sound mixing for the Pixar film “Finding Nemo”, for which I was going to mix dialog and music. I had the opportunity to attend the recording session at Sony Pictures scoring facility. I was able to sit directly behind Composer Thomas Newman as he conducted the orchestra experiencing it “LIVE”. I then went into the control room for the subsequent playback. It was amazing to me the difference I heard. Yes it was very, very close, but even with a multi-million dollar control room, I could still hear the difference. It was not the “LIVE” sound that I had just heard.
So the reference that I tune to is the “Theoretical Reference”. One which reproduces the data being played with respect to Time, Amplitude, and Frequency as accurately as possible as to realize that which the artist had intended and to see before me the sonic image the artist saw at the time of recording and or mixing.
I know this is a long post but I hope it clears up the misconception that I tune to some reference of my own. After all it is about the “MUSIC” not the system!


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> if it's any consolation, I am more interested in competing as a result of this thread than I was before.
> 
> I'm a "prove it" kind of guy, and if I say that there's bias involved, then I want to see it first hand. I don't like the way this thread progressed because it doesn't ever answer the simple questions.
> 
> ...


....


----------



## nirschl (Apr 30, 2009)

garysummers said:


> "why did the winner win based on his own reference, when everybody else is trying to make the official test disc sound good"
> 
> 
> Just to set the record straight I am not tuning to “My Own Reference”, I am tuning to “The Reference”, which is what anyone tuning and aligning any audio system should do. Let me explain!
> ...


Very well said! I am a professional orchestral musician by trade and nothing says "LIVE" like sitting right in the middle of it on a daily basis. 

Cheers


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

garysummers said:


> I am tuning to “The Reference”


Thank you Gary for that. "The reference" is the easiest thing to lose - let's be perfectly honest. I have lost my reference dozens of times in the past decade, and I am surrounded daily by music as a music lover, critical listener, tuner, competitor, speaker designer, and professional performing and studio musician. Some might think that making your life out of music and musical reproduction that you'll never lose your reference. Not true. I too sat six feet behind, and twelve feet to the right of the conductor two weeks ago (although it wasn't Thomas Newman's orchestra, it was the local high school band), and let me tell you, sitting a mere few feet from the first chair trombones will shake you up, and wake you up. The visceral impact and purity of the tonal signature sent chills up and down my spine. Sitting slightly off-center to the band in a relatively small room (with respect to the size of the band), I was able to hear the music interlayered and the layers falling in and out of phase. I was also reminded of what true live amplitude is. There’s simply no reproducing +/- 35 dB on playback. I sat with a big silly grin on my face the entire time. Music still does that to me after all these years, and that's why I have such a love affair with it. I have learned in my many years that you need to challenge, recalibrate, and continually update that database of sounds in your brain. And this comes back full circle to my original post.

Scott


----------



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

A few things that I am going to add... 

1.Bringing in Sterns past is lame and a true shapshot of your character which from what I am getting from your posts is next to 10 day old dog ****.. He did this unselfishly to provide a platform for people to compete.. and let it be known he's not a businessmen nor marketing professional. MECA isn't a gold mine nor money maker.. Steve isn't taking trips to Fiji from the profits, he does it because he loves it. 
2. MECA, right,wrong or indifferent is the only comp that has been consistently growing in numbers and most importantly getting new blood and even more important actually having more then a few shows that you can attend
3. USACI and IASCA has been steadily declining in both shows and members
4. The reason for going to multiple shows and competing against a variety of cars is that it gives you a true idea of how your car really stacks up
5. Just because you have aftermarket equipment and aftermarket install and tuned it does not mean your car sounds good.. I have sat in enough really bad cars to quantify this. 
6. You can take 1 car and then have Mark Eldridge, Scott Buwalda, Matt Roberts and Steve Head each make their own tune and each will have their own unique sound. This is the beauty of not just car audio but audio in general is that everybody's tastes are different. I am tired of the live performance reference as I have gone to hundreds of concerts and none have sounded as good as my home system.. 
7. Heaven forbid that somebody doesn't like your system and tells you about it, nobody and I mean nobody from Mark to Scott etc has the perfect system.. are they exceptional yes..but there has yet to be the end all definitive reference and chances are there never will be


----------



## dkh (Apr 2, 2008)

the other hated guy said:


> A few things that I am going to add...
> 
> I am tired of the live performance reference as I have gone to hundreds of concerts and none have sounded as good as my home system..


So, you're telling me that you home system can play a drum kit like - NO BETTER - than a real drum kit?

Please tell me you're NOT a judge?  Otherwise, that totally explains how a stock car from any manufacturer can sound better than 70% of the specifically competition built cars.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

The problem is if you tune to a certain CD, then chances are everything else will not sound as good as that one disk...I know that is the case for the IASCA disk.

But people overcome that by having an IASCA preset and something that sounds good on another preset.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

I'm with having a reference point too. Being able to hear the difference and having a point ahead of where you are, keeps you moving forward. I also use my 2ch at home. But if I could, I'd rather make it 'live sound'. However, for that I'd have to have constant exposure to live sound up close to make it into a stable reference. I guess only a few are lucky enough. There is no medium that with record and reproduce the dynamic range that Scott mentioned. Your ears should pick the difference very easily.

I have never competed. There are no organised events here. I actually stumbled into the hobby thanks to my somewhat oc needs. :blush: Along the way I was lucky to find a mentor who helped channelise the oc bit. He competes, wins and is a consistent top end finisher in MECA. Having come only a small way, I can appreciate the level you'll are at. 

True sq competitions would be about guys bringing different reference sounds to the table, to be judged by others who have their own distinct points. Since most competitors accept meca results as fair, they must be so. This also means that all these reference sounds are really close to each other yet individually different. It also means that while different people may come with different references, they will be objective enough to accept one that may be different and better. Mindsets are a killer in this hobby. 

The only way this process would succeed was if it were driven by pure passion, like already mentioned.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> a little convoluted at the end, sqnut
> 
> the test disc is filled with several "reference sounds" but if the judge hasn't had the opportunity to listen to those discs on an optimized home or professional studio reference, then he's judging for his own subjective interpretation of what he should be hearing.
> 
> ...


your interpretation is partially correct, but the part that you are missing is that the judge works as a Pro Audio engineer, has worked in a studio, works with live bands--his reference is live music, He has experience recording music etc...very similar but not on as grand a scale as Gary.
My point and others all along that this judge's "preference" is that what he hearing from a system has to sound REAL. Track 29, the Dynamic Test, which is a full drum kit, has to sound like a real drum kit. Each drum and cymbal has to be placed where they should be.

As Scott mentioned, there is a visceral feeling of hearing something Live. You can feel live music. Sitting next to a drummer goes to town on a solo and has a tightly tuned snare will make u wince. Same with cymbals. 

So My car is tuned to sound a real as possible, which it works out is what "most" judges are listening for. 


I also attend as many live performances as possible. goto Music stores and listen to people play instruments, HS football games to listen to the marching band etc...
The night before being judged, My wife and I attended the Grand Ole Opry which is an awesome venue. We paid alot of attention to how various instruments sound. Specifically the attack , snap and crispness of a snare drum. Then the attack and decay and brightness of cymbal crashes etc...
We made many mental notes and I had to retweak some things the next morning bc I had overdid it in some areas. Even when I was judged, There was still too much brightness in the crispness and snap of the snare drum. that frequency area can bleed into some other areas and I knew it but just ran out of time balancing everything.
Only one judged made any notes about an issue I knew was there....


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

The only problem with using Live Sound as a reference is that live sound generally is NOT stereophonic reproduction of music compared to what everyone is trying to achieve in the automobile to please the competition judges.

Yep, I went there... discuss!


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> now this is very interesting.
> 
> so what you are saying, is that Gary Summers is in a place of employ where this judge would reverentially look up to him, as he would certainly be aligned along those terms considering the enormity of his reputation, Grammy's and major motion picture soundtrack credits.
> 
> ...



sorta

except noone on the east coast had any idea who Gary Summers was and unfortunately noone took him very seriously...:laugh:

It wasnt until after Finals that people looked him up and realized what all he's done and accomplished.

He's an extremely humble and unassuming guy.

Thankfully I'm not in his class, So I never bothered to check into it either


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

Really. This ridiculous. It's a competition.


----------



## garysummers (Oct 25, 2010)

I don't presume to have any better hearing, tools or experience than anybody else. The purpose of my post was to explain what a reference sound system should strive to do, that is to reproduce the music as accurately as possible. My experience and accolades do not better equip me to achieve this than the next guy. Also if you read my post, the criteria I described applies to all recordings, live, studio, synthesized or what ever. 

Gary


----------



## ChrisB (Jul 3, 2008)

tintbox said:


> Really. This ridiculous. It's a competition.


Bingo. I don't compete and I tune for what I like. Maybe it's right, maybe it's wrong but if someone doesn't like it, they are more than welcome to replace my gear at their own time and expense.


----------



## garysummers (Oct 25, 2010)

My presence at the MECA finals had no greater significance than any other competitor there. My car was judged fairly and in accordance with the MECA rules by the sanctioned judges.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

garysummers said:


> My presence at the MECA finals had no greater significance than any other competitor there. My car was judged fairly and in accordance with the MECA rules by the sanctioned judges.


Hopefully we'll see you back out on this coast next year.
If you can make it out for Elite Summer Nationals, that would be awesome.


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

thehatedguy said:


> This is nothing compared to what goes on after the SPL finals.


Or *at* the SPL finals. I was only there one day and was amazed at the shenanigans that were taking place over there.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

When you say to reproduce live sound...are you talking about tonal qualities only? Cause there aren't many cars today that can rock out at 120 dB full range.


----------



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

thehatedguy said:


> When you say to reproduce live sound...are you talking about tonal qualities only? Cause there aren't many cars today that can rock out at 120 dB full range.


bingo.. and the same with home.. for god sakes guys.. who in their right minds would want to listen to a live drum set for anything over a minute in a 20x17 room or much less in a room the size of the car... and there has only been 1 car that I have ever sat in EVER that has come close if not damn close and that's mark's 4 runner at 04 finals.. 

I understand the visceral impact and tone to produce a live sound, but IMO so what.. it's like having a 1300hp dyno queen.. 

the bottom line is, does your system provide an emotional connection? and if the answer is no then you have work to do... 

just my .02


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

the other hated guy said:


> the bottom line is, does your system provide an emotional connection? and if the answer is no then you have work to do...


this


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Cause if we are after the "truth" then that means all aspects of the truth. Visceral impact is part of the truth...and no 3 or 4 inch midrange is going to get anywhere near the kind of output and provide the dynamics capable of that (before anyone gets in an up roar, yeah, I have 3s in my car). It's going to take large midranges (or horns) with lots of power to make the impact in your face like someone is beating a snare drum next to you.

So the pursuit of the truth is fine and great...but you have to be pursuing all aspects of it, not just bits and pieces of it to be considered the "truth."


----------



## Horsemanwill (Jun 1, 2008)

HORNS ROCK


----------



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

the bottom line is this..

you guys are tuning the perception of a live performance and nothing more.. that's it..

if you put a trumpeter in the passenger seat and had him play like he would in a jazz club, it would be so unbearable that you'd probably want to punch him in the face... and that's just 1 instrument let alone a full live band..

this is the dichotomy of audio and always will be until the end of time..


----------



## ncv6coupe (Oct 25, 2009)

thehatedguy said:


> Cause *if we are after the "truth" then that means all aspects of the truth. Visceral impact is part of the truth*...and *no 3 or 4 inch midrange is going to get anywhere near the kind of output and provide the dynamics capable of that* (before anyone gets in an up roar, yeah, I have 3s in my car). *It's going to take large midranges (or horns) with lots of power to make the impact in your face like someone is beating a snare drum next to you*.
> 
> *So the pursuit of the truth is fine and great...but you have to be pursuing all aspects of it, not just bits and pieces of it to be considered the "truth.*"


I like it when you talk like this, its almost as if everyone is scared to say such comments. This makes me not seem like a jack when i keep starting threads aimed at getting high spl and keeping sound quality and staging in this day and age. I'm almost ready to swing down your way also. I'll keep you posted dude


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I mean it's something that I knew and accepted when I did the install for this car...I wouldn't be getting realistic SPL levels out of the drivers I am using. Coming from my last install that had horns, 8" midranges, and 8" midbasses that could do 120 dB fullrange on music...well, it's a bit not as loud now. But it's a compromise that I knew going into the whole thing.

I'll be in Charlotte tues/thursday/friday/saturday this coming week...downtown Morehead Street area.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

cajunner said:


> Not that he has to do that, but the point I'm illustrating goes back to when I said I'd take Mic10is' tune over bikinpunk's, because it appeared as though Mic10is was working with the knowledge of a judge's listening habits, and bikinpunk was going by his reference. Now, I'm not so sure, because bikinpunk might have a few things in his own system that could have been better done, and taking his reference into account, it might have been system limitations that did him in more than the judge's subjective score differences.


You, my friend, assume way too much. 

One thing you missed out on was all the judges' scores. I scored higher than mic from 2 judges. One judge scored him higher.
mic:
78,78.5, 85.5
Vinny,John,Chris

Me: 
82.5, 80.5, 70.5
Vinny, John, Chris

Who's right? You tell me. 
Does that mean anything? Nope, other than you missed some things. Mic's overall score was indeed better than mine. 

As far as limitations... the only real limiting factor is the car itself. At this point, I've pretty much exhausted all potential for growth. Hence the rebuild a month before finals. 

Just sayin'.


----------



## 8675309 (Jan 8, 2007)

I agree! 



bikinpunk said:


> You, my friend, assume way too much.
> 
> One thing you missed out on was all the judges' scores. I scored higher than mic from 2 judges. One judge scored him higher.
> mic:
> ...


----------



## 8675309 (Jan 8, 2007)

I can say that at SBN I had a 9 point dif between one SQ judge and another. And depending on the show I have seen individuals that scored in the low 80's at SBN score in the mid 90's at another show. Not sure why this is.




cajunner said:


> so if I understand you, you're saying that Mic10is picked the better install vehicle, and that's why he was able to please one judge to the tune of 15 points difference?
> 
> hard to decipher what it means, as you're just one example of several who had weird point differences between the 3 judges.
> 
> ...


----------



## 8675309 (Jan 8, 2007)

I should mention that I dont think that favortism was a bad word to use. I should say I dont understand how one person can score an 83 at one show and a 94 at another? 




cajunner said:


> okay that helps!
> 
> see, just looking at this particular competition, anyone just becoming aware of the sound-off logistical parts, would have a problem if they had no other vantage points to consider.
> 
> ...


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

cajunner said:


> so if I understand you, you're saying that Mic10is picked the better install vehicle, and that's why he was able to please one judge to the tune of 15 points difference?


not by any stretch of the imagination.
I personally don't know mic's install so I can't say with any degree of certainty that his car has a better baseline or that mine does. He's not even in my class; he's in the master class. 


I'm not going to play guessing games as to who/what/why/how. I don't believe in conspiracies. I just look at the numbers. That's all one needs to draw a conclusion. 

I only posted the above to keep your assumptions in check. You can do what you want with the information.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

bikinpunk said:


> not by any stretch of the imagination.
> I personally don't know mic's install so I can't say with any degree of certainty that his car has a better baseline or that mine does. He's not even in my class; he's in the master class.
> 
> 
> ...


Extreme sir...i'm in Extreme class...not Master. I also competed in SQ2 where I got 3rd behind a Master Car and a modified car w a combined score of 161.25 which if divided between the 2 judges would equal out to 80.62


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

So does a 10 point spread between two judges mean the same as the winner being declared on a 0.2 points difference? :thinking:

At the end of the day, we're talking about something highly subjective. Even within the broad guidelines of what constitues SQ, there is a lot of room for play and personal interpretation. Competitions are meant to objectivise this subjective topic. Again, I'm not talking about the top 100 competitors, rather those consistently finish top 2-3. Maybe 10-12 guys. These guys would have sound fairly close to each other yet each sound would be unique. Each with its own strengths and weakness. 

Heck we don't even hear at the same 'level' everyday. As an oc tweaker, there are days when I'll tweak for half an hour and wander around in circles then there are other days when everyting falls into place in 10 mts. 

So is the points skew a bias towards or against a competitor, is it a bad 'hearing' day, is it the bias of the judges reference or whatever......the key fact is that when judging something subjective, to expect 100% fairness is a bit of an oxymoron. Heck life probably has a lower 'fairness' quotient. 

I agree with thehatedguy, that its about the emotional connect. Is my car sound better than my 2ch at home? No. But its fairly close. I kinda accept the limitations that I'm working with. But still, the impact from the decay of a single piano note is very special and tells me that the tuning is ok (for what I know and hear). I also agree that its the sum total that counts, staging, imaging, tonality, balance and impact. Balance to my mind is the key to everything.


----------



## truckerfte (Jul 30, 2010)

Forgive me for my cave-mannish ways of thinking. After I've read through this thread, I have learned quite a bit I think. I see a lot of mention of points of reference. I see a lot of talk of tuning for a particular situation. I got my hopes up when someone mentioned a visceral feel of a particular instrument. I understand that this a competition. I am beginning to see that everyone is chasing an unobtainable magic standard. I get that part. 

What I don't see is fun. What I don't see is people relating to the "source material" on a personal level. 

Take away the score sheets, the judging lanes, the apparent politics, and the gamemanship. What about the music? How does it make you FEEL? 

Here is how a caveman judges a system. 

Monday morning, the commute to a job you hate with a passion. You didn't get any this weekend. Pop in AC/DC. Crank it to "11". If you aren't in triple digit speeds with a big-ass grin on your face by the end of the first track, the system sucks. Totality, frequency response, staging and imaging be dammed. 

Isn't that what car audio is REALLY about?


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

Baseball is supposed to be about having fun with your friends, screwing around, and ending up with that same ****-eaten grin on your face but there are still professional leagues for it. This is no different.


----------



## truckerfte (Jul 30, 2010)

...Because there are no commercial interests in PROFESSIONAL basketball, right?


While I admit a winning car might generate some income for the tuner/shop, exactly how much did these guys make this year competing in competitions? I don't think its a good analogy. But then again. Then again, last show I saw was the 95 finals in dallas. Have things changed that much? Lol. Back in the days it was a bunch of teens in a parking lot on a friday night trying to get the attention of that well-endowed blonde with a reputation for having...ahem...talent


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

The commercial interests are beside the point. The point is like ANYTHING that started out as something fun there is always going to a certain demographic that wants to take things to the extreme and see who is "the best." Even all the way down to things like chess and Scrabble. And I can guarantee you there are not commercial interests in competitive chess or Scrabble.


----------



## truckerfte (Jul 30, 2010)

i think the commercial, or alleged commercial interests, are exactly the point of this thread....


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Mic10is said:


> Extreme sir...i'm in Extreme class...not Master.


my bad. 
different topic, but what is exactly the difference b/t the two?



cajunner said:


> That is like saying (to me, ...) the car is now the limiting factor, which is what you said, basically.


I said that verbatim. Not essentially. That's exactly what I said. 



cajunner said:


> What that means to me, is *in your opinion*, a new car will open up new avenues that could possibly allow you to score higher than this car allows.


The point I was trying to make is that it's a car. At the end of the day, everyone is limited by the fact that it's a car. 



cajunner said:


> but your score does not allow you to win the entire competition?


correct. there's a best of show, I believe, though.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

bikinpunk said:


> my bad.
> different topic, but what is exactly the difference b/t the two?



One BIG Difference--Mark Elderidge is in Master


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> okay, different classes, now we're in a zone of perturbatin' again...
> 
> but your comment, was that you have brought your vehicle to the brink, there's not much else to do that can be done, while staying in your class, that would afford the higher scores in competition. That is like saying (to me, ...) the car is now the limiting factor, which is what you said, basically.
> 
> ...


every organization has separate classes and each one designates how they are divided. IASCA is done on industry affiliation altho this may be changing somewhat moving forward. MECA is based vehicle/system modifications.

Basic goal is simple, win your class.

There is a Highest overall SQ score in MECA and at MECA Finals they have the Culbertson Cup which is the highest overall SQ score.

But still at the end of the day the goal is to win your class--if you happen to be highest SQ score of the day i'm sure thats a bonus. I dont know anyone who realistically has winning Best SQ as their intent. Winning your own class can be hard enough.



as far as this looming questions of why cars receive one score one day, supposedly make no change and receive a different score another day.
Things change-environment, temperature, humidity. All these can affect sound.
People change--hearing changes on a day to day basis and changes as the day goes on.

Thats why at all big shows w/ separate judging days, classes are judged together on a single day.

I am sure everyone has had days of tuning when You tune and think you've finally got it, wake up the next day and think WTF was I thinking.
But it hasnt changed. your car didnt turn itself on in the middle of the night and start pushing buttons to **** with you.

also, alot of people wont admit to button pushing. reality is, people make changes too. If you goto one show, get your score sheet and make one change-youve made a change.
But every show, You always hear someone ***** about they didnt make any changes..........well except this.......

at one show I judged I had a kid upset bc quite frankly his vehicle did not sound great and had some major technical issues. He kept sayin well I didnt change any of my settings blah blah blah.
then someone said, didnt you change the radio out like 2 days ago....
"uh yeh, but I didnt think it would make that big of a difference"


----------



## SomeGuy748 (Feb 24, 2010)

truckerfte said:


> Forgive me for my cave-mannish ways of thinking. After I've read through this thread, I have learned quite a bit I think. I see a lot of mention of points of reference. I see a lot of talk of tuning for a particular situation. I got my hopes up when someone mentioned a visceral feel of a particular instrument. I understand that this a competition. I am beginning to see that everyone is chasing an unobtainable magic standard. I get that part.
> 
> What I don't see is fun. What I don't see is people relating to the "source material" on a personal level.
> 
> ...


This is the basic point I was trying to make earlier and I completely agree but on a competition level this idea would never work and a lot of people on this forum get enjoyment out of the challenge of trying to acheive the "perfect sound" that has been defined by a book. This doesn't make them or you right or wrong, it's just a good example of the many different ways that people like to listen to music. For me, and it sounds like you truckerfte, car audio is about how my car stereo makes me feel when I listen to it regardless of how it is "supposed" to sound. For others, it's the challenge of that "perfect sound" that drives them and gives them enjoyment. 

The original point of this thread was that Cadillac may have built a car with a factory Bose system that sounds better than a lot of competition level systems. Do you believe this is true? Anyone? Has anyone heard this car? I personally do not believe it. I'm not saying that this cars audio system doesn't sound good, but I'm confident that many of the other cars on that score sheet from the beginning of this thread sound better and I bet the owners of those systems would agree.


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

I've heard it and its good (the cadillac). Do I prefer it over my current system, no, but it makes you wonder if all of the time, money, and effort put into your system was worth it...

But hey, if I wasn't doing this I would just be spending money and time somewhere else.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

truckerfte said:


> ...Because there are no commercial interests in PROFESSIONAL basketball, right?
> 
> 
> While I admit a winning car might generate some income for the tuner/shop, exactly how much did these guys make this year competing in competitions? I don't think its a good analogy. But then again. Then again, last show I saw was the 95 finals in dallas. Have things changed that much? Lol. Back in the days it was a bunch of teens in a parking lot on a friday night trying to get the attention of that well-endowed blonde with a reputation for having...ahem...talent


Must you flame? 

Look its not about the money, it's about the sound. Perhaps that's why it retains a fair degree of fairness. Yes, I'm sure there are teenagers (probably more in spl tho), but chances are the top 20 guys will all be a bit older. Its about having the best sound. You've got to be in the ballpark to understand whats going on. I'd bet that 98% of the folks on any given forum aren't in the park. 

Based on this forum active membership that means about 150 people who know the sound. Just seems a bit high. 

reverse flame ........jk.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

SomeGuy748 said:


> The original point of this thread was that Cadillac may have built a car with a factory Bose system that sounds better than a lot of competition level systems. Do you believe this is true? Anyone? Has anyone heard this car? I personally do not believe it. I'm not saying that this cars audio system doesn't sound good, but I'm confident that many of the other cars on that score sheet from the beginning of this thread sound better and I bet the owners of those systems would agree.


Two things here. 

Ten dollar 4" paper cones, with a cheap sub powered by a 'meh' amp with a default dsp setting from the hu, can be made to sound good. Speaker placement has to be right and the default dsp has to be decided by someone who knows the sound.

The caddy is supposed to be a stock setup. I'm sure everyone (judges included) carry a broad ref point for stock set ups. They hear the caddy and that reference is shattered. The caddy gets 4 extra points all round. This can happen very easily. 

The caddy beat 30 of the 48 competitors. Maybe a chunk of the 30 didn't take the sound off seriously enough.....we all know what a stock sounds like...not saying thats what happened, but its possible I guess.


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

Cajunner,

I have heard some EXCELLENT cars at comps. I am NOT saying the Caddie is the end all be all, but it will DEFINITELY open your eyes as to what a stock system can sound like. VERY few of the people on this forum are going to exceed its capabilities when judged against the competition criteria. You may be one of those few. I think that I am one of those few. I know several members on here that I would put in the "few" category. THE POINT IS THE DAMN CAR SOUNDS VERY GOOD WITHOUT ANY MODS OR THE HEADACHES ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE MODS.


----------



## sqcomp (Sep 21, 2009)

^That goes to say again, most of the people at MECA finals has systems that sounded worse than an OEM Caddy system.

The insinuations of that MECA approved score are broad and based on judges who according to some, even on this thread, change their minds about systems that haven't been altered from one show to another. IDC who the judges are, how well you respect them, or how badly the organization wants to work, that's just eFd up.


----------



## PaulD (Nov 16, 2006)

I don't really want to read thru 5 pages but the judge in question likes to listen to music at a MUCH louder ref level (read 20+ dB) than the other judges. I can assure you every car sounds different at 90 dB then it does at 110 dB or more.


----------



## ncv6coupe (Oct 25, 2009)

^^^ yep yep about the frequency linearity part and room interaction at higher volume.


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

Hi all,

After reading this thread I have to ask the question..... Did this Caddy get judged JUST like the other cars at the show. Meaning the three judging sheets divided by 3? If not the score is bogus. PLEASE...... I have done multi judge shows for YEARS. I could have won most if I could throw out every score but the one that LOVED the damm car. 

So before you guys get really tight panties ask that little question "Was it judged JUST like the other 48"...........

Markey Dietrich

Since 1995 Competitor (6 time World Champ), judge and general pain in the ass


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Do you people REALLY think you have access to the same resources as a multi-billion dollar company?

Because a car company hasn't done it yet has never meant they couldn't do it. Maybe they got tired of competing with the aftermarket and decided they wanted or needed the money in house.

Because it hasn't been done before doesn't equate to can't do it.

And some egos need to be checked too.

Really, this whole thread comes down to getting your ego busted a few notches. Suck it up. Maybe your car really isn't as good as you want to believe it is.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

cajunner said:


> we have TrueRTA, that can give a thin slice at 1024 bands of analyzer, and we have the Behringer products for cost-effective thin slice control.


Yea, VERY few people still don't know how to use it effectively. I still am learning after a solid 2 years of use. It's not as simple as starting at a graph and fine tuning an EQ. 
If it were, everyone would simply tune to the same rta curve and have the best systems out there.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

When you would sell and make as many of these things that a car company is buying, I'm sure you could get the price down to a good level. I mean the MS-8 didn't come from the aftermarket...it's origins is in OEM systems. I remember back in 03 or 04 seeing Andy tuning the JBL cars using this badassed processor that was a hacked DSP out of a Land Rover. 

Even IF you had access to the equipment the OEMs have, would you know more about how to use it than a team of Ph.Ds? Let me answer that for you. If you could, you would have a Ph.D and doing it, not here on a DIY forum talking smack. So what you have a RTA...my son's IPhone has a RTA. Do you have a TEF-20 or SysAriel? There is a big difference in measuring equipment, the data it provides, and how to interpret the data. 

Really it comes down to an ego check. Maybe you don't want to believe 1+4=5, but that doesn't change the fact that it does. Maybe this car using this disk could do as well as many cars in the lanes. Believing you have the 2nd coming to audio sitting in your driveway doesn't mean it is REALLY that good. Check your egos...that's where the problem is stemming from.


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

God.....

Four years ago I sat in Andy's car at SBN. I realize it didn't have "stock" speakers in it and he admited as much. But the pre production MS-8 made that car do things my car didn't. 

Instead of bitchin about how some OEM car smoked 30 vehicles, ***** to the power to be that allowed this car to be judged in the first place. I always thought IASCA, MECA and USAC promoted AFTERMARKET equipment not OEM. 

owell

Markey Dietrich


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I just pulled up the meca site to see the hubbub about the caddy test and found this under the 'Open Letter':



Steve Stern from MECA site said:


> Our Finals last weekend had all the makings of an exceptional event with 140 vehicles. Thanks to our sponsors who helped create at great atmosphere for our 2010 Finalists. We did have issues in the lanes, unprecedented in MECA's history. There's been a lot of chatter about these issues, so, briefly, please allow me to cover the bases on them.
> ...
> 
> In the Sound Quality League sound quality contest, we had an issue with 1 Judge's scores that diverged from the other 2 Judges on several vehicles. All 3 SQ Judges are experienced Finals Judges, and have been involved with Finals for several years. They are the most experienced, involved, and unbiased Judges we could possibly have handling the tough assignment to evaluate 48 vehicles' sound systems in 2 days. I have no explanation as to why the scores differed on those vehicles with that particular Judge. He and I have talked about it, and I am convinced he scored what he heard, as he always has. At this time, I promise our Sound Quality League contestants that we are going to shake up the SQL Judge Team for future Finals. Our club will be on the look-out for the best people, with the best ears and scoring abilities, to take responsibility for these tough assignments. I will be doing more individualized Judge training as I work in the 20+ states that will have MECA events in 2011. I've always stressed that having the best people, trained to be the best Judges, would be necessary to establish a standard of excellence for our contests. I rededicate myself to that purpose every year, and I do so, with more conviction than ever, for 2011.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

The game is played at around 90 dB using one disk and judged track to track for specific content. It might do really well on this one track under these conditions, but that does not mean it will fair very well outside of the conditions. 

I guess what a lot of you people are failing to grasp is how the game is really played. 

And then egos get hurt when what they believe is different than the reality set forth by the game's rules.




cajunner said:


> the first part.
> 
> the Synthesis, JBL's commercial app, Harman owns. Synthesis licenses the Harmon Kardon bought Logic7 surround information technology, which means that this technology is a whore that has been around, it's not new and it's definitely not that special.
> 
> ...


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Why the push on the judging thing? Did the judge not leave you specific comments on what he thought was the problem areas in your car?



bikinpunk said:


> I just pulled up the meca site to see the hubbub about the caddy test and found this under the 'Open Letter':


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

cajunner said:


> I don't need to compete with car companies for my hobby, but if they put a system on the cheap that is damn hard to best with my own high dollar equipment, I might just put my screwdriver and jigsaw back in the closet and forget about sites like this for my enjoyment, and spend more time drinking fine wine for my hobby..


If you go back and check meca scores over the last 2-3 years, you'll find that apart from a couple of classes, not more than 30-40% of competitors in any class are above 76.5 points anyways. 

For the caddy, I'll go back to what I said earlier. Its down to speaker placement and a default dsp programmed by someone who knows tuning really well. I believe you can't measure your way to great sound. You have to hear your way there. Along the way you need every possible tuning tool that will help you in countering the environment you're in. It's very simple really, we just over complicate it. 

It's not that you can't beat the caddy, just that most folks aren't at that level. The top sq scores are around the 90 mark. Thats like 14 points above the caddy. Quite sure that 14 points is a huge difference. But not everyone is around the 90 mark.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner, Have you ever heard the Chesky UDD? Do you even own a Chesky UDD? Have you ever competed or even been to a MECA show? If you dont own the disk, havent been judged or been to a show I would ask that you get one and go to one or enter before you assume anything else. Each track offers liner notes before the track to you to listen for so you can compare yourself to the "reference points". Until then you are simply speculating and stirring a pot of stew that is cold and almost empty. Finals is over, the season is done and its in the past. Its time to move onto next year and start to get ready for the 2011 season and start to game plan, thats right game plan. Its a competition and there are games ppl play all season long to get a leg up on the COMPETITION. If ppl dont like how they were scored they know who to contact and how to contact them to file complaints with the R&E commitee. Otherwise this is all mute...


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> Why the push on the judging thing? Did the judge not leave you specific comments on what he thought was the problem areas in your car?


because 
1) that's what this thread is based on
2) same judge judged the caddy


you need to quit trippin' on why I post things. everyone here has some sort of crazy conspiracy idea.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I'm not tripping on anything, other than you complaining about judging when you made a ton of rookie mistakes and looking to blame someone other than yourself.


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

thehatedguy said:


> you made a ton of rookie mistakes



Only according to one judge out of three.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

wtf are you talking about man? 

this thread is based on judging and the caddy. Right?....
I went to see what the info was on the caddy and saw that the same judge who everyone was dissing judged the caddy as well. I saw that Stern had also posted something about the judging. I found that interesting enough to share.
Did I come and say "oh, look, Stern said I should've gotten first?". **** no. For all I know, the same judge hit the guys in front of me just as hard.
I'm not looking to blame anyone. wtf did I ever say I was unhappy about coming in third against Cook and Summers? Not once.
Hell, I even agreed with you and the other hated guy a page or so back. Chill out, dude.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

If there was nothing about the Caddy, then why post anything other than to stir the pot after the comments you've made?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

dude, the link:
zenner judged the caddy
zenner judged at finals


I thought the bit _Stern_ wrote was interesting. The common bond is the link between the two.
People are acting as if there was a conspiracy to judge the caddy higher. I don't. 
In fact, I'd like to know how Zenner scored the caddy himself. That info would be good to see. Might even stop some of the witchcraft ideas brewing.

That's it. Nothing more. Nothing less. I'm not trying to make any conspiracy. I've only added facts to this thread. That's it. 
And with that, I'll stop adding because I can see that my intentions are being misconstrued due to my discussion about finals judging in the other thread. time for me to check out. 

later,
Erin


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

How about rookie mistake number one-

Rebuilding your car right before Finals. This is the golden no-no as you have no tune time. Anyone who has competed for any length of time will tell you NOT to do this. And I speak from experience too...not a lot of good will result in it.

Then how about-

Putting your amps under your seat so that the seat cushion could push an RCA cable out. And it also makes it hard to get to the amps in case you have problems. Serviceability is key, especially in competition.

And-

Not being around your car when it's time to be judged. You could have had a problem before hand but you will never know since you weren't there to hear about it.

Then-

Not listening to the judge's remarks on the score sheet. Most judges leave detailed comments about the car. And to blow those comments off because you don't agree with them is self sabotaging. 



imjustjason said:


> Only according to one judge out of three.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> look, I don't have a problem with this judge that likes his notoriety for giving weird scores.
> 
> 
> I don't have a problem with Cadillac entering a car on behalf of Bose's marketing dept.
> ...


Now your just being an ass. 

Who at finals that is a "professional" got beat by a stock system?

How did the playing field move? If it did then it moved for ALL the competitors not just a few of them.

The cars were judged by 3 judges, all of which judged sq at finals.... There goes your conspiracy.

I dont know too many kids who want to be cool and drive a new Caddy at the ripe old age of 16-18. There goes that conspiracy.

If you know what you are doing you can install a world class system in a matter of 4 days. Thats not an inordinate amount of time. The components dont need to cost "Thousands of dollars" as you say and if you can tune the car you're in even better shape. 

I would suggest you take some of the time and effort you have put into this thread and invest it in your car and the build of your audio system, bring it out to a show and see if you are good enough to beat the OEM stereo's....

Thats all...


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

thehatedguy said:


> How about rookie mistake number one-
> 
> Rebuilding your car right before Finals. This is the golden no-no as you have no tune time. Anyone who has competed for any length of time will tell you NOT to do this. And I speak from experience too...not a lot of good will result in it.
> 
> ...



I have no dog in this fight, but I have to say something. 

Why has this turned into a slam session on Erin for you? I would consider Erin a friend and was there at the show with him when he won third place in his class He was pleased with coming in third behind two professionals. One a known great installer and the other a professional in the movie sound business. Not bad for a single effort "rookie" from Alabama. I didn't hear him then nor anywhere on this forum state that he feels he should have been higher. He was happy with what he had. All I have seen is that he is trying to get an understanding of why the point swing was so great when it's supposed to be judged by the same reference. That's it... no hidden agenda... no mission to destroy any judges credibility, he just wants to understand. Which is I believe your "then" point.

It just seems like you have it out for Erin for some reason.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

The point is to prove that, a stock setup with inexpensive gear and some fixed dsp can be made to beat 2/3 of the competitors. Any idea how many speakers the caddy had?

From this side, the good news is that the best players will still beat computers at chess. The bad news is that only a third of the players fall in that bracket. 

This hobby teaches you many things. One of them is to always think that you're actually a bit behind where you really are. This while all your senses are screaming and telling you that you're way ahead. It keeps you moving ahead.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

The Caddy has a 10 Speaker 5.1 setup in it iirc, thats what the car that I rented had in it several weeks ago and it was a DTS mid level.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Getting 6 speakers to shape up right would have taken some serious work. Btw, has Bose finally learned to cut the sub lower than 200hz?


----------



## Horsemanwill (Jun 1, 2008)

correct me if i'm wrong wasn't the cars that had that report done in Aug?


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

How do you figure I am "slamming" him? By presenting the other side of the story? No one ever said he didn't do good in a tough class.

Maybe the keys to the supposed points swing lies in some of the mistakes made.

Mistakes happen. You know how many times you see someone get judged with the wrong preset? It happens. I know it happens because I've done it.



imjustjason said:


> I have no dog in this fight, but I have to say something.
> 
> Why has this turned into a slam session on Erin for you? I would consider Erin a friend and was there at the show with him when he won third place in his class He was pleased with coming in third behind two professionals. One a known great installer and the other a professional in the movie sound business. Not bad for a single effort "rookie" from Alabama. I didn't hear him then nor anywhere on this forum state that he feels he should have been higher. He was happy with what he had. All I have seen is that he is trying to get an understanding of why the point swing was so great when it's supposed to be judged by the same reference. That's it... no hidden agenda... no mission to destroy any judges credibility, he just wants to understand. Which is I believe your "then" point.
> 
> It just seems like you have it out for Erin for some reason.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> lllolll


uh Chefhows car is one that doesnt have thousands put into it. Amps are entry level amps. all 3 amps were used and under $1000
H-Audio Trinities which were on sale through forum
Stock Volvo Dynaudio Midbass
IDQ12 picked up used.
Alpine H701 processor picked up from forum used for about $250.
So maybe stretching things to reach the $2000 mark in equipment costs.
uses all stock locations except for sub.
wiring is all basically lampcord speaker wire, and welding cable for main power wire.

Build time was 1 week. 

8th highest SQ score at Finals. 3rd in his class.


Adam Axline who won Mod Street. 
Alpine 9861 Head unit from Ebay $300
Used H701 for $300.
Some Coax and mids in doors which were well under $400 for all 
I forget what kinda sub, but its just a carpeted box and amps are screwed to the floor.


I could actually go down the list and find all kinds of examples for guys who havent spent thousands who do extremely well.

Back in 2003 I built my Eclipse using all Mid to entry level product with ID CX 5.25 in Kicks with Tweeter Coax mounted. Vifa PL7 which were on sale for like $19 at Partsexpress
4 ID10s...ID not IDQ.
(2)US Amps 4300x
Alpine head unit and H700
2nd at IASCA Finals in Pro Street 1-600 and only bc I had floor noise inherent to the H700 using analog inputs.


----------



## ncv6coupe (Oct 25, 2009)

chefhow, how would you say the caddy sounded compared to your setup? I have a caddy dealer about 3 miles from my house I'm gonna listen to one when I get a chance maybe even go for a test drive feel that 500 horses


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> lllolll


Now your just being an ass. How So?

Everybody there who had an entry was someone who had to have won somewhere else, or it wouldn't be called FINALS, would it? Correct me if I'm wrong, please do.

*I'm not even close to a professional. I have no affiliation to any manufacturer other than I run their product and they let me on their team. I get help from seasoned vets that are on the same team. That is my benefit. VERY few ppl that compete are professionals if there is even any such thing. We dont win money we win trophies. To be a professional you would get paid and I sure as hell dont get paid. In order to get to Finals you need to amass 40 points over the course of the season, if you entered 6 2x shows and took 2nd at EVERYONE you would be sitting at 48 points and qualified. You dont have to win anything you have to get points.*

That's what I'm saying, it moved for everybody in the whole sport! You can't justifiably spend 19 weekends of putting together a custom panel, rebuilt deck, deadened, foamed, alcantara covered, carbon fiber invested, tech flexed, super dyneema crafted system without some yahoo in a seer-sucker suit, driving his Blose into the lot and wasting me? And wasting you? Whoever was there, wasn't an amateur, or else they'd have been laughed out of the lot, but Cadillac says "let me in, I'm fly"?
*Your missing the point, the Caddy isnt competing, and if it did and beat 2/3 of the cars at a show everyone would have to go home and really step up the game. Whose to say that Bose doesnt have an MS8/Bit1/H701/MiniDSP type processor that they have intalled in the 5.1 setups for optimum SQ in their cars? They might have but just didnt tell anyone, maybe that's why they had it judged, to see how well it did and how it measured up to the competition before they unveil it to the public and charge even more money for the next upgrade... *

I don't care about who judged, the fact is this Caddy is good, and it's good at "sound quality" levels. I'm not beefing about that. I'm not caring how good the judges were, I'm caring that the aftermarket took a big one from behind because the sound-off competition as a sport, now is inclusive of stock systems, that can best aftermarket systems. That's a big hammer knockin' nails if you think the sound-off circuit is on it's last leg..
*The entire complaint that started this was the fact that the one judge wasnt fair. Then the OEM thing gets brought up and all 3 judges who did the cars for GM were SQ judges at Finals. 
Where is there an OEM class in competition? There has always been a "stock" class, read the rules and you would understand what it is.*

It's not the Caddy, it's the BLOSE! It's the system, and you know it's got to be less than 2 years before you'll see it as an option in a Chevy, come on...
*And if Chevy puts them in the cars then oh well. Do you expect a company like Bose, Infiinity, JBL, Nakamichi.... to sit back and let the money walk away when there is tons of it to be made in the OEM world, especially the "upgraded" end of OEM. Face it, there will always be OEM and there will always be aftermarket. The problem has been with brick and mortars not being able to make money in sales of equipment with the internet not installation of it.*

If you know what you are doing you can install a world class system in a matter of 4 days. Thats not an inordinate amount of time. The components dont need to cost "Thousands of dollars" as you say and if you can tune the car you're in even better shape. For my own amusement, please find me one competitor at finals that doesn't have thousands into their car install. Just one, that's all I need. And then ask them how long they took to put it together, start to finish. You find me this "four day winner" and I'll let this whole thread go...
*MINE. I spent the entire season experimenting with amplifiers and processors and speaker positions, until I found a combo that worked. The week after Pa states, over the course of 2 Saturdays and 2 Sundays my car was built, tuned and finished for Finals. 4 9 hour days, that's it and it was as top 10 car overall, 3rd in Street. As for the equipment my car is outfitted with factory mids in the doors, entry level speakers in the factory dash locations, entry level i Series amps from ID and my headunit and processor are an old Alpine DVA9860 and H701. Less than $2000 TOTAL with all the wires and accesories installed, and done in 4 days. *

I don't want to compete with OEM systems! I have hard enough time justifying the cost of these new processors and swank speaker systems, calibration mics and set up discs, what the hell..

*You need to learn what DiY means then. The point of this whole site was to use VALUE PRODUCTS and GET THE MOST FROM THEM.* 

Thats all...

*Exactly, been nice talking to you. 

/Thread...*


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Mic10is said:


> I could actually go down the list and find all kinds of examples for guys who havent spent thousands who do extremely well.


Aaron Thomas, 2006-09. About a 2K setup.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

ncv6coupe said:


> chefhow, how would you say the caddy sounded compared to your setup? I have a caddy dealer about 3 miles from my house I'm gonna listen to one when I get a chance maybe even go for a test drive feel that 500 horses


It sounded recorded and "movie theater like" which is what most ppl want out of their cars. Where mine has a live studio or concert feel(you know what I mean Roy ) the Caddy has an at home on your couch feel. But it drove beautifully!!! The DTS was a beast on the highway, has some real get up and goooooooooo


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

I've read the posts on this topic and commented on this in another topic-but can I ask how the Caddy was scored on installation? I'm in the UK and don't compete so am not overly familiar with any associations rules-however it seems strange that: either no points were awarded to anyone for installation OR they gave GM points for installation on a factory system OR GM got no points for install and everyone else did? I just don't see how you can compete in an unmodified car for those reasons alone. Akin to rocking up to a custom car show in a stock car and winning the "best in show" prize!

I know "installation points" are awarded for UK/Euro EMMA comps are they not used in MECA?


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

The Baron Groog said:


> I've read the posts on this topic and commented on this in another topic-but can I ask how the Caddy was scored on installation? I'm in the UK and don't compete so am not overly familiar with any associations rules-however it seems strange that: either no points were awarded to anyone for installation OR they gave GM points for installation on a factory system OR GM got no points for install and everyone else did? I just don't see how you can compete in an unmodified car for those reasons alone. Akin to rocking up to a custom car show in a stock car and winning the "best in show" prize!
> 
> I know "installation points" are awarded for UK/Euro EMMA comps are they not used in MECA?


meca install and sq are separate
iasca will b the same way.

someone shouldnt win an SQ contest bc their car looks better


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

You lied.......

*For my own amusement, please find me one competitor at finals that doesn't have thousands into their car install. Just one, that's all I need. And then ask them how long they took to put it together, start to finish. You find me this "four day winner" and I'll let this whole thread go...*


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

Ah, cool


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

cajunner said:


> My point, is that the aftermarket can't beat OEM anymore with any reasonable expectation of superiority.
> 
> That sort of sucks, either they start judging at higher decibel levels or they concede that having higher quality parts doesn't matter anymore, which defeats the purpose of the aftermarket.
> 
> why buy Stage 4, when you can legitimately take Bose's cookie cutter drivers that comes with the car off the lot, and not tell a difference?


After market stuff in the _right_ hands will beat the caddy 10/10. Thats a bit different from saying, I have 4K invested in top notch, bnib, audio toys and hence my sound should be better than the caddy.


----------



## ncv6coupe (Oct 25, 2009)

chefhow said:


> It sounded recorded and "movie theater like" which is what most ppl want out of their cars. Where mine has a live studio or concert feel(you know what I mean Roy ) the Caddy has an at home on your couch feel. But it drove beautifully!!! The DTS was a beast on the highway, has some real get up and goooooooooo


I'll be sure to take my buddy Orville and a can of Dr. Perky with me when I go to the dealer, Concert feel in your car so thats what a virtual guitar pick "feels" like


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> not so fast...
> 
> haha...
> 
> ...


*You really need to research **** before you comment on it. You could have, and still can answer all your own questions before you open your pie whole if you just read the info from the source instead of getting involved in a conversation that you obviously have no knowledge of the topic..*exactly not!

you proved it by saying you had been trying amplifiers and speakers all season! 
*I havent bought anything new all year and have sold almost everything to finance the replacement equipment. Used Adcoms(thanks Wheelieking), used Aura's, entry level ID amps. A used H701(ebay), a used CD7100(here) and an MS8 that spent all of 3 weeks in my car, was sent back to JBL and sold for what I paid. Speakers(Trinities) were the only new thing in my car and they were the least expensive thing in my car. *

what, you didn't pay for them, UPS just shows up with them? * Nope I bought it all used and most of it on the forums from members just like us, a few things off eBay but not much. My lamp cord was new though...*

I need to live on your block... *There are a couple of houses for sale really cheap but I'm not sure you'd like my neighborhood, its quite ghetto...*


Sure, if you take just the component costs and throw in a bunch of used equipment, you're going to come in under the cut-off, but my statement is about retail costs, or even buying new stuff off the internet for 50% of manufacturer's recommended, it had nothing to do with getting a buddy's amp that he don't need anymore because he's in the slammer for pimpin' his baby momma on the corner....


----------



## imjustjason (Jun 26, 2006)

thehatedguy said:


> How do you figure I am "slamming" him?


By reading this...



thehatedguy said:


> I'm not tripping on anything, other than you complaining about judging when you made a ton of rookie mistakes and looking to blame someone other than yourself.


Not trying to argue or anything. It just seemed like you were being unjustly harsh toward him. That's all. We can drop it.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> and you shouldn't claim "I lied" when it's a bad shoot.
> *But you said you would leave this thread if I could find that one person, we found MANY. I'm just sayin...*
> 
> Everything you do to your car costs money. Trying one set of speakers, then another, moving the tweeters to pods, building sail panel mounts, adjusting the DIN fascia with ABS, color matching, dyed carpets, buying replacement kick panels and A-pillars out of the junkyard. But I didnt do any of that. I AM IN FACTORY LOCATIONS!!! I have said it several times. I have not changed speakers out only the way they are positioned. No color matching, no kicks, not custom grill covers NOTHING, just FACTORY LOCATIONS. Please read the rule book then come back to us.
> ...



Nobodies car was judged against a Caddy, that was somebody with sand in their vagina that had their feelings hurt when they found out they werent as good as they thought. There werent any Caddy's there. You really need to take a look at the MECA website and read the rules, read the classes and how they are broken down, the write up on the GM visit and then get back to us.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Cajuner, its not about the equipment and its not about the fancy, expensive installs. 

It's possible to win with decent equipment (read hu/speakers/amps), tons of dsp (read processor), correct speaker placements and a thousand plus hours a year x 2-3 years min, spent on listening and tweaking, listening and tweaking.....till you get to the point where you're not sure if you're hearing or hallucinating .

Why is it so difficult to understand this concept?


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

City Slicker......

c'mon now you're just being silly. I guess your 'humble' post in the other thread was just a ruse


----------



## Horsemanwill (Jun 1, 2008)

everyone mentions a cadie but the article i just read wan't a cadi it was a Cruze.


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

It's hobby. I went to finals as well. I'll built my system for me and me only. I love meeting people and listening to there cars and learning. End of the day it's a hobby and it's a hobby I truly enjoy.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> but you didn't find anybody that would claim they had only spent 1999 dollars or less on their car system, and since I was extending that to being at finals.
> 
> the list, is ruthless.


If you like I can go back to page 7 and quote you but this started as find someone who built their system in 4 days and for less than a couple of thousand dollars and you would leave. Not only did I but others did as well with more than one example. Then you came back to argue again, I proved you wrong again but you still didn't leave. Now you are rewording what you originally wanted to say because you didn't think anyone could call you out, well here I am again, if you want to play this game fine so can I. You stated that but my definitions of what I spent you would have spent less than me but here is the thing, you're coming from LA to compete in finals which is MUCH further than my short 660 mile 10 hour drive to Nashville, so I would still have spent less than you on all the expenses listed in your thread and probably done better than you. 

You happy now


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Was it the same car that was in the article last month of the audio engineer from GM talking about his reference recordings?


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Now you are just being f.cking asinine and have completely changed your argument when someone proved you wrong.

And your list is not ruthless, but retarded as in completely stupid. 



cajunner said:


> but you didn't find anybody that would claim they had only spent 1999 dollars or less on their car system, and since I was extending that to being at finals, that includes:
> 
> 
> entry fees
> ...


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> For my own amusement, please find me one competitor* at finals* *that doesn't have thousands into their car install*. Just one, that's all I need. And then ask them how long they took to put it together, start to finish. You find me this "four day winner" and I'll let this whole thread go...
> 
> there it is, now interpret that how I meant it?
> 
> ...


Install is defined as INSTALLATION!!! It has nothing to do with entry fees, travel expenses or any of the other BULL **** that you would imply it means, ITS A ****ING INSTALLATION. 

Need I say more?


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

cajunner are you jealous or just pissed off. Really!


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

Really. Let go dude.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> it's completely relevant, and it's not even all the things it takes to be a competitor at finals. *The only thing it takes to be a competitor at Finals is a MECA membership, a car registered and insured in YOUR NAME, an invite and 40 points. No more, no less....*
> 
> my argument is valid, it's not changed, and makes perfect sense. *Maybe in your own little world but most of us see you as a flip flopper who isnt up to the challenge so you need to justify your own existence. *
> 
> ...


Good luck to you in the future...


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

Wow. At the end of the day its about the music. Cajun just listen to the music.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

How do you get bias from that?

Your argument conversely would imply that you have negative bias...and anyone who has an opinion has created bias.

Lifting the veil? To what? Erin had called into judging bias and I countered that with, well, maybe there wasn't any bias just a series of mistakes.

Before you start yelling bias at judges you better have all of the facts and proof in order...not just some idea that you should have scored higher than you felt like you should have.




cajunner said:


> again. You have proved nothing more than your interpretation of my words, is at odds with what I was trying to say. I should know, because I said it. I don't have to ask anybody what they think I was trying to say, because I know what I said, and what I was trying to say. Maybe I wasn't clear enough, didn't write out everything it would take to get me out of this thread.
> 
> My bad.
> 
> ...


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I have met Chris Zener exactly two times. The first time I met him I didn't know his name, only he was the short MECA judge. The second time was at the same show the following year where the extent of our conversation was me saying, "If you know where Joe is at please get him. I think we are going to have a bad situation here (there was the beginnings of a fight happening)." That's it. He wouldn't know me from Adam. Anything I know about him has come from competitors telling me about him and reading the MECA web page.

The only time that I've had any length of contact with Steve Stern was at a judge's training he held. I've seen him at shows and we are friends on Facebook, but I doubt he knows anything about me or would remember me.

I don't think that I picked a side. I went right down the middle calling what was true "true."

With regards to Erin, he did really well. I have judged Steve Cook's truck and it is pretty awesome. I've never heard Gary's car, only heard about it. To finish behind those guys is a pretty nice feat, especially considering how little time Erin has been competing. Who really knows what happened with his car and when it happened...and how it may or may not have affected his score. That is pure speculation at best. Finals is over. Learn and make sure any mistakes that could hurt your scores don't happen again. 




cajunner said:


> You explained how it was, that bias might be explained in the judges scores. You brought in how you knew the judges, you know the MECA founder, how surely this entire sound-off proposition isn't tainted, but then by coming into the picture and defending non-correlative elements in the score totals, you placed yourself in the position of being the defender. And, that's okay, I can understand where undue hardship to the sport itself is to be avoided, questions like this thread poses, are damaging to the idea that the competition is not leaning in any direction, or worse, out and out corrupted. I can see where that might be a defensible position, I'm only exposing the bias as it pertains to my integrity being called into question, I didn't say anything about it until calls for my silence erupted, which is why I put that little blurb in there to begin with. It was a trap to expose who was on which side, and it worked like gangbusters.
> 
> 
> If it's not obvious already, I'm not in the habit of leaving threads, or letting myself be excused from any thread based on the content.
> ...


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I'm not defending the scoring.

The point I keep trying to make with the GM system is that within a very strict set of rules it is very possible for it to do well. Outside of those rules, who knows. I mean the Chesky disk isn't really representative of all types of music. And the judging criteria is pretty specific as to what tracks are to be used to judge different aspects of the recording.

And as far as checking an ego...wasn't directed at anyone is particular. GM can do pretty spectacular things when they decide to do it. The Z06 Corvette can hand many Italian and German sports cars their asses at a fraction of the price. A Ferrari owner may not like getting spanked by an American car that cost at least half of what his car did, but it doesn't change the truth in the matter that the Vette can and does do.

We all want to be the snob Porsche owners of the stereo world...and it takes a pretty big ego check when you get beat by someone who spent a lot less money than you did.

But even the money thing is speculation. Anyone know if this is a premium system upgrade, and if so how much is the option package? I don't know the answer to that.


----------



## SomeGuy748 (Feb 24, 2010)

For those that haven't seen it, this is the article that got my attention last summer.

GM Invites MECA to Judge New Cars; Results Like Aftermarket | ceoutlook.com

Would be interesting to know what GM, Toyota, etc. are asking for these systems.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

cajunner said:


> try re-reading my post for content?
> 
> there is no implying anything. If you choose to interpret my words as involving the equipment costs only, and your labor was free, (sure, my labor is free, I can see that) then we have a communication problem. I'll concede that much. But I'm looking at it from the perspective of "IT" being finals, which means somebody had to have been to other sound-offs, entered, and at least won or placed. Maybe they have these things every weekend in your town? Down here we have them rarely? Travel to and from, costs.
> 
> So, let's just forget I said I'd leave this thread for my amusement, because the burden of proof has still not been met to my satisfaction, and the proof you are certain you have provided, is suspect based on interpretation.


The expenses you listed are the basic costs of competing. Costs that most guys shell this out of their pocket. Gas money to get there, a room at the cheapest Comfort Inn and eating at McD's to keep costs low, doesn't add to your install / sq. Yes depending on where you are, you could spend 1-1.5K a year on competing. Money that these guys could have used elsewhere for sure. 

As already mentioned, the avg cost of equipment and install for a lot of guys would be in 1.5-2.5K range. So technically you're right, they have put in 'thousands'. But 'thousands' does not mean 8-10K. I'm sure some setups are in that range, some even way beyond. But the bulk probably are not. I'm talking about the top 10-15 cars here.

There is a reason why most people who have the 'sound' or are close, don't talk about it or share their experience on forums. That's cause a lot of guys who haven't experienced the sound, will jump in and start asking the the typical numeric, left brain centric, prove it, kind of questions. 

If you seek answers, instead of arguing with Howard, see if you can hook up with him or some other competitor near you who scores well. Get some seat time, listen with your eyes closed. See if you can feel a connect. You may get the answers that you seek.


----------



## Andy Jones (May 12, 2006)

On the caddy thing---the caddy was not judged at finals. You are talking about two different points in time. You can't compare the scores--even with the same judges. 

This is especially true come finals. The MECA scoresheet is a 1-10 in most sections (some 1-6 others 1-3). Which means you don't have that much room to separate cars. At finals especially scores tend to come down a good bit. Judges have to do that to make sure they don't give a 10 to the first car of the day, and then realize that everyone else in that class actually smokes the first car. What would a judge do then?

Saying that the caddy or any car from any other show, sounded better than any car at finals is not possible. All finals scores show you is the order of cars on that day at that show. Nothing else. 



On the judge--I've made my feelings known about that. . .


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

thehatedguy said:


> GM can do pretty spectacular things when they decide to do it. The Z06 Corvette can hand many Italian and German sports cars their asses at a fraction of the price. A Ferrari owner may not like getting spanked by an American car that cost at least half of what his car did, but it doesn't change the truth in the matter that the Vette can and does do.


haha, that made me laugh-maybe on American roads-without any corners!:lol: 

No offense to ANYONE, but if American cars were really any good we'd see loads more in Europe...


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

Andy Jones said:


> On the caddy thing---the caddy was not judged at finals. You are talking about two different points in time. You can't compare the scores--even with the same judges.
> 
> This is especially true come finals. The MECA scoresheet is a 1-10 in most sections (some 1-6 others 1-3). Which means you don't have that much room to separate cars. At finals especially scores tend to come down a good bit. Judges have to do that to make sure they don't give a 10 to the first car of the day, and then realize that everyone else in that class actually smokes the first car. What would a judge do then?
> 
> Saying that the caddy or any car from any other show, sounded better than any car at finals is not possible. All finals scores show you is the order of cars on that day at that show. Nothing else.


I was thinking the same exact thing sir. Great point. It is just like show to show scores differer. Everyone knows at the finals the judging is harder and should be.


----------



## Andy Jones (May 12, 2006)

^if that is what you took from what I posted, you, sir, are a moron.


----------



## Andy Jones (May 12, 2006)

I will agree, the actual score means very little. That part I do agree with. 

The rest of what you were insinuating above was asinine. 


Look up comparative judging. See how that works.


----------



## Andy Jones (May 12, 2006)

Why wouldn't he? Promotes his organization. People who never heard of MECA might check out a show. 

They may even enter their factory system. Get hit with a 60-65 or so. Listen to some aftermarket systems, realize what they are missing out on. Buy said aftermarket system. Come back and compete some more.

What's the worst that happens from letting GM use "his scores"? Some joker on an internet forum who doesn't understand the judging post a bunch of crap due to his not understanding that is painfully obvious to almost everyone else on Earth? he ran that risk.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I have a friend who has had a few Ferraris, a Ford GT, a couple new Skylines...and has a Z06. He says what the car magazines have been saying about it- it is a world class sports car that delivers world class performance. And it hurts him to say that about a Chevy. Hell even Top Gear loved the Z06.



The Baron Groog said:


> haha, that made me laugh-maybe on American roads-without any corners!:lol:
> 
> No offense to ANYONE, but if American cars were really any good we'd see loads more in Europe...


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

Have you listened to ANY of the vehicles cited in the article?

Do YOU compete in MECA?

If the asnwer to any of those questions is no, then why the hard on?

Rather than playing keyboard commando, go listen to the Caddie. Get out to some shows and listen to the competition vehicles. I suspect both will be an eye opening experience. Besides both should be a good deal of fun! Nothing like new car smell or listening to good systems 

I'm out.


----------



## CraigE (Jun 10, 2008)

Wow.. I bet at finals next year, there will be a lot of Caddys sport'n MS-8s.


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

Really do you even know any of these people. If you did I think you would think differently.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

cajunner said:


> as an impartial observer, innocent bystander, no dog in the fight guy...


Forget about the guys who've posted in this thread. If any 'impartial', third party were to read your posts, that is not the conclusion they would reach. 

Anyone who knows sound will tell you that a lot of it is subjective. Yet good sound can be confined within a narrowish range where its possible to judge it objectively against some fixed norms. that leaves the question, 'is the process of judging fair?'. Since I'm an outsider, I'd take the word of the top competitors. If they say its fair its fair. However, this is the real world and s**t happens. Does that mean things have changed overnight and now white is black? the web site acknowledges the error and says that corrective action will be taken for next year. 

While we're on the topic of real world, it costs money to run the show in the real world. So unless The Bill gates foundation is running it, you will need 'sponsors'. What it finally comes down to, is selling out to the sponsors vs just giving them enough exposure while retaining adequate control. You're just trying to keep things running and hopefully growing. You're not doing it to make big bucks. So you give them advertising space not control. Here, I'd trust the judgement of someone who mortgaged his house to keep meca running and fair.

So, some competitors got dinged harder than others by this judge. S*** happens. Seems to me you're carrying a cross for someone else. Can't think of any other logical reason for your boner.


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

thehatedguy said:


> I have a friend who has had a few Ferraris, a Ford GT, a couple new Skylines...and has a Z06. He says what the car magazines have been saying about it- it is a world class sports car that delivers world class performance. And it hurts him to say that about a Chevy. Hell even Top Gear loved the Z06.


Sneezed at - BBC Top Gear

6min 50sec onwards. Yes, it's quick, did Jeremy like it?-he'd rather "live with bird flu". Ride was poor, build was poor, noisey and you can push the panels in with your finger. 

I'd agree it's got world class performance, but not really a "world class sports car" as the rest of the package lets it down...


----------



## Andy Jones (May 12, 2006)

Good lord, someone needs to learn to be concise in their ramblings.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Thats just the way Brit's talk.  Right Baron?


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

sqnut said:


> Thats just the way Brit's talk.  Right Baron?


:laugh:


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

"World Class Performance"

To get that do you do it at "cost is no object" or do you find ways to do it by leaving thing out?

A perfect classic example can be found 60 years ago The Japanese Mitsu Zero was a "world class fighter plane", but to get that world class performance they left a few things out, like armor plating for the pilot, self sealing fuel tanks and made it as light as possible. The down side of all that was hit it with a couple of 50 cals and it fell apart or blew up. Sure hitting it was a bit of a problem but US Navy pilots found ways.

I'm sure GM could have built the Z06 better but would you be willing to pay $10k more for it? 

Hell in car audio the manfacturers find ways to get their price points down by finding a thirty cent piece to replace the better $2 piece all the time. But who is willing to pay $500 for a 50x2 amp? They rather pay $100 for it.

The real thing we all should be asking Mr Stern and his merry crew of judges is this. Did you guys judge those OEM cars as "hard" as you did the 40 or so cars at MECA Finals? If not this thread is moot. And Mr Stern needs to go on the record and say as much. 


Markey Dietrich


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

^only if that $10k put the steering wheel on the correct side

Agreed on the Mr Stern comment, will have to wait until they hit th UK and have a listen for myself


----------



## dkh (Apr 2, 2008)

This is certainly an interesting read - I wouldn't compete in Meca if I was competing in the US.

I'm sure there is an equal number of people that, having read this post, would think the opposite.

I look forward to hearing the GM offering, as I have yet to hear a stock car sound anything but pants in competition terms


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> I think I've made some relatively valid points.


 \

if you are paranoid and have a tinfoil hat nicely fitted

you seem to speculate an awful lot.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

Im just seeing what you are saying here, and what you have said in the ultra thread and it blows my mind, bordering on slander/defamation.

Speculation is fine, but your brand lacks all class.


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

IMO - Offering opinion that is NOT based upon personal experience or ANY type of first hand knowledge but solely on conjecture and hearsay does ABSOLUTELY NO ONE any good.

I stand by my recommendation - get out and listen to the caddie and get into a comp. You might be surprised how much you enjoy both.


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

Guys,

He does make sense. With the MS8 you have to goto an aftermarket shop to have it installed or bought.

But with this Caddy thing you have an OEM that can say our vehicle can beat X amount of COMPETITION READY SYSTEMS from a major soundoff organization.

The shops are having enough problems with installing aftermarket headunits,dsps, amps and other stuff now. Compound the problems the brick and mortor shops are having with the grey market and the internet where will they catch a break. I know if I owned a shop and MECA came around promoting their org., I would throw them out on their ass. Why would I support a company screwing with my business ? 

I've been trying for years to promote aftermarket equipment being better than OEM and in one swift act MECA has given an OEM a leg up. Hell I can admit the OEM's are doing a better job but damm why did a SOUNDOFF Org. go and say they are and actually compare the OEM to aftermarket systems?

Markey Dietrich


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

not really, everything he says the manufacturers do to make our life as installers more difficult, also happen to be the same things we do to make systems sound better.. more complex electronics, more equalization, more of this, more of that.. so.. maybe, they have learned from us and are now using our weapons against us. 

If it aint broke, dont fix it, certainly dont fix it till its broke.

The insinuation that this guy is of questionable character is beyond acceptable speculation. simple as that. The people you are calling out are not hiding behind semi-anonymous user-names... I have a hard time respecting the accusations/conclusions/speculations from some no-name source of unknown bias. Perhaps what cajunner has said is true, who knows, but taken with his other outlandish speculations in the past I seriously think he is the one of questionable character. He is clearly willing to say almost anything to defame a person to prove his.. point? You want to see the kind of guy he is all you have to do is look at his rants in the ultra thread to see him backtracking on multiple occasions when his speculations are called out for what they were. 

Im not saying disregard what he has to say in its entirety, Im just saying take it with a grain of salt, he is clearly biased against anybody with an actual interest (real interest, not interested) in the field.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

Except you dont have Facts. You have conjecture and speculation which you dreamed up in your head

One Fact which you are missing is Steve didnt re-mortgage his house this year as you keep repeating and spewing--it was years ago when MECA was starting out.

FACT--the GM thing did little to hurt the aftermarket segment at all. If anything it has helped b/c it peaked some curiosity as to what GM has finally done and people are trying to figure out how to apply it to their application.
2nd-After market customers will always be there, regardless of how good a stock system is bc that is just their mentality.
I guarantee that no active member of this forum is someone happy with their stock system and there are people on this forum who had stock systems MUCH better than the GM.

Next--MECA is a business. Steve had a chance to put MECA before a national audience and now people like you crucify him for it.
He's getting the MECA name out there which is where many other organizations have failed.
The vast majority of population have no idea there are autosound competitions,especially those that judge sound quality.

and a Deal w/ GM and BOSE? You try and make it seem like such a grand scheme where Steve Stern is receiving kick backs and money from doing this. GM helped cover travel costs and meals--thats it end of story. Vinny, Chris were chosen bc they are MECA's top 2 SQ judges.
They all volunteered their time to help promote MECA and Grow MECA.

You are really like a ****ing child playing games. I killed you--No you didnt I have a force field--well I have a force field killer--no you dont b/c my dinosaur eats force field killers....on and on and on and on


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> Actually, I'm making the questions at the beginning of the thread more relevant, with every post that comes against what I've had to say, yours included.


Sorry Im not adept enough to figure out how to do multi quotes right now.

How Do I know Steve Stern or MECA isnt receiving money from GM or at least wasnt really paid---

simple answer--I asked the people involved.

GM called, said what they wanted, said theyd pay travel expenses and food. MECA gets essentially free advertising on a National Scale.

Why would anyone pass that up?

If you want real answers, put down the keyboard and pick up a phone--or if you have to hide behind the keyboard send people involved and email and ask your questions.

Otherwise everything you say is just hearsay bc its being based on something someone else said and none of it can be treated as fact.

You have No idea how good the system in the Cruze really is--and you have no real interest in ascertaining the real truth--you just want your truth.
You want to believe that there is no way that a stock system can be better than aftermarket stereos or that it can be better than people who compete in car audio contests---sadly its been the case for much longer than 4months ago.
I am sure you have a GM dealership near you, it would take all of maybe an hour of your time to go find out how good it really is---much less time than youve spent responding to posts.

Here is Steve Stern's email.
[email protected]

he is usually quick to reply so you wont have to put your keyboard down for long.

You say you want to expose the truth--how about get answers and truth from those involved and get real knowledge of the facts instead of just piecing together hearsay and rhetoric into what you believe is the truth and then spreading it around into multiple posts unrelated to the topics


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> good. You send him a link to this forum and this thread, and you tell him I think that his scoring stock systems to be better than the best his organization had to offer, stinks.
> 
> I think he sold everyone out by judging the cars and using the same scoring that he gives to anyone who enters one of his competitions.
> 
> ...


Whoa Whoa Whoa.....you've preached and preached that you are calling it like you see it and you are trying to expose the truth.

But whenever someone gives you and opportunity for YOU to gain the truth you try and wiggle your way out of it.

Like I said, you dont want the truth, you want to stay in your fantasy land where you make your own rules and your own truth as it pertains to what benefits you.

Like you said, me and everyone else are biased bc we compete in MECA--so it really makes no sense for me to email Steve about this.

But since you are an unbiased, call it like you see it guy, who is only seeking to reveal the truth is probably much better if you do it--that way there is no chance of any further bias or anything else tainting the request or asking the questions.

He's a nice enough guy that he will respond to your email, regardless of who you are and probably more emphatically b/c you arent already involved in MECA.

the proverbial ball to reveal the real truth is in your court---your decision or lack there of is what will be really telling to everyone who has read and responded to this post.


----------



## BigRed (Aug 12, 2007)

This thread inspired me to purchase the new Cadillac cts with the Bose system. If I don't score a 76 in meca I'm going to be pissed 

I don't know much, but there is now way it does 120db in the sub department. Just my initial impressions

Carry on guys


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

cajunner said:


> good. You send him a link to this forum and this thread


You feel Steve should come here and appologise but don't have the guts to write him and tell him that? 



cajunner said:


> and you tell him I think that his scoring stock systems to be better than the best his organization had to offer, stinks.


Better than the bottom 2/3 of his competitors, the 'best' are in the top 1/3. Get your logic right.



cajunner said:


> I think he sold everyone out by judging the cars and using the same scoring that he gives to anyone who enters one of his competitions.
> 
> I think that if I don't get at least a 77 in sound quality at one of his competitions, then I've not been able to beat a stock system, and that this sport sucks if the best people can't score better than that 2 out of 3 at his finals..


That's reality. Face it. In any competition the race for top 3 will be between 15-20% of the competitors. Thats life. 



cajunner said:


> You tell him, because I don't have any rapport with him like you do, I don't sit at his house and eat his barbecue, and I don't enjoy winning in his competitions like you do...


You're the one who has the issue and you want someone else to do your work for you? What happened? lost your nerve?

If I was in your shoes and wanted to test the conspitacy theory you expound, I would get the email add of all the competitors and ask then if they think Meca is fair. You may just be surprised by the results. 

But I guess it's easier to be a limelight hog. Based on your responses here and in the xover thread, I think you just enjoy being a contrarian.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> You have anything concrete to go with that blather?
> 
> 
> Where are my "multiple backtracks" ?


here is one, there are more



> I am sure you have seen worse leveled against the ID brand, in other posts and let it go, so if I did swing the hatchet wildly, I apologize as the fun element of watching manufacturers defend higher profit margin product, was much too tempting.
> 
> I will scale back the motives and conspiracy conjecture now, thanks for being a perpetual good sport.
> 
> an anonymous internet keyboard jockey


interesting, here in your backtrack you are essentially agreeing with my position that you are a speculative anonymous internet keyboard jockey.. those are your words, not mine.. well, they're mine too but they sound better coming out of your keyboard. There are more over there, one only needs to look.

so if by asking if my blather is based on something, the answer would be yes, it would be based on your backtracks in the thread as I had indicated and what you have already said about yourself.


> IF asking questions is so worrisome, maybe you should ask yourself why they are worrisome?


The questions themselves aren't worrisome, it's the rest of the ******** your questions are shrouded in that are worrisome.. it's like showing a picture of a car accident followed by a picture of an asian and saying 'hey, i'm, not saying that asians are bad drivers.. but.. (insert picture) draw your own conclusions' really smooth there.. but completely transparent to anyone with a real brain.


> What is it about me questioning the scores, questioning the judges, and questioning the motivations of a guy that sold out the aftermarket (he did it, there's no speculation about that, the only thing to speculate is what he got for it) that makes what he does a personal thing for you?


did he sell out the aftermarket? or is that your perception of what he has done based on your biased speculation and conjecture? I know what I think.



> Your whole post reeks of contempt for truth, and a head in sand is the image you portray.


 that's the best you could come up with?


> I think you are of questionable character, because you attack me instead of my point of view, do you understand where you just missed?


LOL,hypocrite much?



> Come at what I've said, debate it, talk about it, whatever but when you simply start slandering me and my "speculations" while people here are in agreement that it looks downright awful, then you give yourself and your bought and paid for opinion away.


Debate what? your opinion? No thanks. If you want to have a debate I would be happy to have a debate based on facts, but you bring none to the table, so attacking you, is attacking your position since you are all you've brought.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

here is another little gem from the ultra thread.. another backtrack.. putting it out there to prove that there were multiple backtracks to avoid any silly games of semantics


> Cajunner:
> 
> DUATH and Eric Stevens:
> 
> ...


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> I use a self-deprecating approach to smooth over the harsh, people have egos and if I bruise them I like to approach the impasse with tact if possible, and here I was talking to none other than industry "royalty" so if you believe I was backtracking here, be my guest. It's not accurate, but whatever.


It's completely accurate to characterize that as a backtrack, because that is what it was. I invite everybody to go back and read your statement in the continuity and context of the thread and it will be crystal clear that the statement I have quoted is exactly how I have characterized it. 


> you have indicated where I allowed someone an out. I didn't concede defeat, so much as bow out of the debate with some modicum of finesse, mind you.


Wow, who has an ego that might be bruised?


> dude... you can't see the forest from the trees, and I'm being honest here.


This statement makes no sense whatsoever. Have you ever tried to see an entire forest from a tree? If you're in any type of real forest (I prefer rainforest myself, but a coniferous stand is a nice place to be too) you can't see much of a forest from any given tree. Perhaps this is why your perspective is flawed and narrow. I assume you mean 'see the forest FOR the trees' but I can't be sure. Either way.. what are you trying to say here? I see your forest and it is comprised of trees made of ********.



> Say what you think! I want to hear it, if it's better than what I've come up with, then it should be a NO BRAINER to accommodate an anonymous internet jockey!


I think your bias has caused you to misread the article in its entirety and as such have come up with a flawed premise on which you've based speculation and conjecture bordering on defamation.. 


> You choose to blow hard and puff up your chest, but there's little wind in them sails.


Is that you the-big-beat?


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

it proves definitively that you have backtracked multiple times as I had indicated for the reasons I had indicated. It bolsters my case that you make unfounded speculations. If it wasn't your error then why would you remove it? Who made the error in your post that caused you to remove something from your post? Is it even possible for someone else to make an error in your post that you have to remove, and then state that you have removed the offending material? It doesn't make sense dude, it doesn't add up. Seems like you're looking to wriggle out of something you have said and deflect the blame to save your character...


----------



## d5sc (Aug 14, 2007)

The self-fulfilling prophecy (of guilty until proven innocent):



cajunner said:


> in the spirit of the thread, I raise a few questions in keeping with the thread's original intent, and it's because I look into things. I like trying to find the motivations for why people do what they do, as most of it is self-centered and self-promoting.



Now, I am trying to figure out what your "motivations" are based on your statements (above). You're given the opportunity and challenge to prove the validity of your assertions/beliefs regarding MECA and its practices; yet, you back-track and try to put the onus back on Mic10is. 

Regardless, no explanation will quite do as your "motivations," as well, are inherently biased, "self-centered," and "self promoting" to justify *your* cause and rationale. Look at what you, yourself, wrote earlier. 

Fortunately, this thread is not about Mother Theresa or Gandhi as they probably would've ripped to shreds regarding their altruism and the 'true' motives behind what they did, "as most of it is self-centered and self-promoting."


----------



## d5sc (Aug 14, 2007)

Yes, I am serious. Just about all of your retorts go against the central tenets of the logic and reasoning course that I took in college.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> I said something that is controversial, Mr. Roberts took offense, and I opted to remove my comments because of his reply. I don't doubt that it was offensive, but nobody can prove I was wrong and I accepted Mr. Roberts explanation, and his word in lieu of leaving my post up and being an *******.


You don't seem to mind if people think you are an *******.. I don't buy this explanation because it makes no sense. It makes more sense that you were proven wrong and removed the statement because if you didn't you would come off looking like an idiot. Even if the situation developed how you said it did (which it didn't) it is still a backtrack. You took something that you said back. That is a backtrack.



> Should Mr. Stern come here and approach this thread with his side of the story, depending on how he sells it, I might do the same here. I don't know, because I don't have that information.


Mr. Stern whoever he is has nothing to worry about coming from you. Any person with two brain cells to rub together can see how badly you've misread and misrepresented this article. He probably wants you to leave what you have said up and not BACKTRACK so everybody can see how much of an idiot you actually are.. rather than giving you the opportunity to obscure your motivations and claim the moral high ground. I prefer that tactic as well.



> you see what people tell you to see, otherwise you'd have given your "you know what I think" instead of having to bounce it around first.


Nobody tells me how to see anything. I picked up on your hooey by seeing the forest for the trees. I have read the article five times and still cannot see how you could draw the ridiculous conclusions you have drawn unless you are either a drama queen or operating on a flawed foundation. I suspect it is a little bit of a and a little bit of b.


> really? Now we're getting somewhere. Go on, please. Be specific.


specifically, there is nothing in that article that would lead any reasonable, lucid individual to come to the conclusions you have put forth.


> I'm not ready to blow up in a bunch of curses, but from your responses, you've lost your cool more than I have.


more baseless speculation

oh well, par of the the course

(see what I did there with the of.. I know it's really for)


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> so, forest from the trees slips you up? wow. A real semantics player in 2010. Who knew? Can't wait until you get the grammar hammer out.


Big text makes me more right and you more wrong

:laugh:




> if you can't articulate the matter better than that, and have nothing to go by but what is out there now, then obviously you just missed out on what was in my post to begin with, and are now using a straw man to hold your hand. Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't enjoy calling out ID on the Klippel thing because they did contradict themselves several times, as that is what my post was about, I believe... but since you choose to call my decency and civility in a public forum, a backtrack, then I guess it's right for you. I say you're an ******* for trying it, and I believe I've proved my point, but whatever.


You 'believe' Does this mean you do not know for a fact? If you do not know for a fact, how can you make such a definitive statement?

I remember the post in question, you were calling out the ethical application of the klippel testing and you got hammered... that is why the post went missing. You've deleted the post and are using your own straw man (the moral high ground argument) to deflect the responsibility you shoulder for your actions. Which is typical of your conduct. Even on this thread you have apologized for making statements your fact bank couldn't sustain. It like you just take what I say, say it isn't true, come up with some fallacious fairy tale and tell me I'm wrong... and you think you're winning.. Brilliant strategy!



> actually, you're a bit dense. But that's okay, we need your kind to make fun with around here.


density is a ratio of matter per given volume.. I would agree with your implied assertion that I have more substance than you.


> so, forest from the trees slips you up?


Nope, but it seems to slip you up 

I reread through the thread and still have not found you basing your conjecture on a single available fact. If you can do that I will happily concede.

I would love to accumulate facts to prove you wrong, but it is an impossibility because you have not provided any facts to prove you right.



> Dude, you need to understand that I put myself out here for a reason. I think it's ****ty that people got short-shrift by having the meaning of MECA Finals downgraded to that of 2/3rd's of a stock Caddy.


^ this... NEVER happened. Your bias has compromised your logic and illuminates your fundamental misunderstanding of what was actually written.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> All the facts are here. All the discussions about scoring, are here in this thread.
> 
> All the comments backing up my point of view, here.
> 
> ...


I know you have a hard time understanding how scoring works since obviously you haven't ever scored.. but those scores are based in relation to the variables of the given day. They mean nothing to the finals unless those scores were achieved at the finals. period. Those scores will never make it to prime time beacuse nobody gives a ****ing ****. Know what sells dell computers? some stoner saying dude you're getting a dell. There MIGHT be a passing mention of the fact that the stereo is comparable with a mid level aftermarket system, or that they are better than their oem competition as judged my MECA but the score will never be in the commercial because well, it simply doesn't MEAN anything.

what did the guy do? well this is what he did



> MECA, the car stereo competition group, has confirmed what many car electronics people already knew. A new car sounds comparable to a mid-level aftermarket sound system.


He confirmed what pretty much everybody already knew. That new systems sound comparable to what you could replace them with for sub 1500 dollars. What a ****ing epiphany...


> Judges from MECA were hired by General Motors to rank the sound system of a Chevy Cruze (which is replacing the Cobalt), against a Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic.


Well H-OLY ****.. he found that one oem system sounded better than two other oem systems.. jesus.. the aftermarket industry sure is in trouble! But wait.. wouldn't LOGIC dictate that if you own a corolla, or civic and you want a system that is comparable to a mid level aftermarket system that you have no option within the oem constraints? Sounds to me like he is saying that every person who has a civic or corolla needs to run out and buy an aftermarket system... hell maybe even compete.


> The judges ranked the cars as they would in a consumer sound off competition. The outcome was that the Cruze won the competition but more importantly for the aftermarket, it confirmed that a factory sound system can compare favorably to a retail car stereo system priced in the $1,500 range.


As they would in a consumer sound off competition.. you mean, versus one another? Got news for you.. in a competition there are usually winners and losers. Now, how much performance you can get out of 1500 bucks is up for debate, but for sure even replacing the deck, speakers and adding a couple amps and a sub is going to put you over 1500, and that might not actually even put you ahead of a stock system... considering some of the junk i've come across at competitions it is reasonable to assume that the sub 1501 sample pool is filled with some pretty awful sounding setups... perfectly reasonable to compare a decent factory system with this segment of the aftermarket. Notice, comparable does not mean better..



> MECA president Steve Stern and MECA judges Vinny Taylor and Chris Zenner were invited by Chevrolet to Detroit last Friday to judge new cars on sound quality, sound pressure level (SPL), and real time analysis (RTA).
> Chevrolet aimed to show that its Cruze, featuring 9 speakers, delivers sound a cut above the typical OEM factory system.


What's this? they're not even trying to compare these systems to the aftermarket? Just their segment of competition.. What is the actual quantification of a 'cut' above? slightly better, most excellent? sonic nirvana? premature aural ejaculation? Who knows, I suspect it means better than in the past.. which seems like a statement that makes sense.


> The Cruze did, in fact, win 2 of the 3 tests, scoring the highest in sound quality and SPL when compared to the other cars in its class (all under $20,000).


Still not seeing how these results have any impact on anything other than their closed evaluation.. unless you're insinuating that the civic and corolla sounded better I am at a loss to find any conspiratorial evidence yet.


> All 3 judges scored the vehicles independently using MECA’s 100 points score sheet. The Cruze scored 74.83 points and the Corolla was 2nd with 69.75, (both considered a strong score for a factory system) and the Civic scored 58.83 (considered average for a stock system). A 2011 Cadillac was also judged, and it beat the economy vehicles just slightly with a score of 76.25 points.


So, if you don't have any experience with scoring (points at cajunner) it is obvious how you could come to a flawed conclusion. Outside of this test these numbers are meaningless.. Why? Because of margin. In a competition there will be a best car, and the worst car, and everything in between. Say you have a REALLY awesome car, and you are sure you will not hear a better one that day, you give it a perfect score. then, you have five more cars roll in that sound progressively better... you can't add more points... you've ****ed the judging. So.. in the beginning of the judging you have to establish a benchmark. If you set your benchmark too high you can potentially run yourself out of points. So say the first car comes in and it sounds the best and you give it a 50.. that might suck on paper.. but if every car comes in and sounds worse then guess what, you still have 50 points to throw at those cars and relatively speaking 50 is 100.

As time goes on and you see and hear more and more cars your rubric becomes more finely tuned (pun) and you can come up with a pretty accurate score, however the competition scene is always evolving and if you use a constant for the sake of consistency you could end up running yourself out of points and end up ****ing the judging.

The point of a competition isn't scoring points, it is to win. Points are a way to determine the winner, a means to and end and nothing more. Unless you are judging an install on physical criteria that can be a simple yes or no you will always have a fluctuation of scores due to perception and judge methodology. 

So, unless you have these cars judged in the same stream as the world championship cars these numbers do not correlate.. unless you are an ignorant ****wad who has no idea how scoring **** actually works.. if you are, you come to your conclusion based on the belief that these numbers actually mean something in comparison.



> In comparison to a retail car stereo system, Stern said the Cruze “was comparable to an aftermarket system but not at the highest level of performance. There’s no way these systems could even think of competing with the world champion systems.


It seems to me he is doing everything he can to distinguish aftermarket/competition installs as superior. Maybe a picture would help you understand this but big bold letters will probably do the trick 

he's saying that aftermarket systems are still ****ing better and if you want to compete you need one.


----------



## tinctorus (Oct 5, 2009)

I noticed that the guy who makes those ridiculous "shockwave" speakers competes in MECA :laugh::laugh:


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

cajunner said:


> dude... you can't see the forest from the trees, and I'm being honest here.


If you're going to use big words and obscure quotes at least get them correct. It's "can't see the forest for the trees." Jesus Christ...


----------



## d5sc (Aug 14, 2007)

cajunner said:


> then you failed your course.
> 
> how about instead of whirling your little dervish, you come with instead?
> 
> ...


Why is that you are becoming overly defensive? I actually received an A in my logic and reasoning course as well as invited into and a member of Phi Beta Kappa, Golden Key National honor (societies), and was on the Dean's list for my university for all the quarters I attended. 

Normally, I would not bring this up at all as I feel I am very mediocre at best, in terms of intelligence, given that many of my friends are Ph.D's in ChemE and EE, some of which are the most difficult in the engineering field, and many in my company, who have Ph.D's/MBA's from Harvard, MIT, Brown, Stanford, Dartmouth, Caltech, and many other upper-echelon universities.

Based on your knowledge and all-knowing nature, I am assume you went to a top-notch institution and a member of MENSA. Is this the case?

Interestingly enough, had you met them in person, you would just think they are/were regular, normal people (i.e,, they don't flaunt it whatsoever).


----------



## d5sc (Aug 14, 2007)

Sure, reason away to prove your point...

You are right and we are all wrong...

You have won your/the Pyrrhic victory battle...

To that, I concede, as some fights are not worth fighting regardless of whoever thinks they are wrong or right...


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

let's try this in the quickie box.


> the thing about the scores, is that either GM will use them directly, or GM will infer what the scores mean. What the scores mean, is that MECA judges awarded higher scores to stock GM cars than what 2/3 of the people invited, and entered in their finals competition got.


means absolutely nothing. You yourself have said that you have never competed... so you literally do not know what you are talking about. Youa are in that uneducated segment that that type of marketing ******** might actually work on.. But sure, I'll bet you fifty bucks that the SCORE is never used, and that GM WILL NOT say their sysem is better than 2/3 of the cars at the competition.

Besides, this is pure speculation. You cannot say what gm will do.. gm might decide tomorrow to advertise the fact the have a spaceship.. as far as your comment about the finals.. just more ignorant from ignoramus. Just digging your hole deeper from the bottom up.



> that's it! you can say what you think, but it makes no sense for GM to put out the MONEY they did, to get a wishy-washy result. In no uncertain terms, this will be lifted out of context, and you'll never hear about how "today's stock systems can't compete with world class" because it's not in GM's interest!


Out of context? Hmm.. wonder what that means  Gm doesn't sell stereo systems, they sell cars. They will use their stereo system to sell cars by comparing their car stereo to systems in cars offered by other *car* companies. GM is not competing with alpine or hertz, they are competing with honda and toyota.. There is NO benefit for GM to use the information in the way you contend they will because they don't care who sells more decks and speakers they care about who sells more cars. People who are inclined to purchase aftermarket gear will see through any marketing ******** and either won't buy the upgraded system or will replace it anyways.

Just because you won't hear that GM 'doesn't compete with world class' doesn't automatically mean that they will claim the opposite. My guess is, the won't say anything about it... but of course, that is just speculation.



> You seriously don't know how this works, do you. I'll wager you that the scores are in the commercial, either in numerical form or in their relation to other scores by actual competitors from actual entrants at their competitions.


I know exactly how this works. You have unequivocally proved that you however do not. You have failed at every step of the way to disprove anything I have said, be it my judgment on your character or be it the flaws in your logic. I'll take your bet, though I don't believe for one second you will honor it.. honor is not an attribute you have displayed at any point to date. But it's out there for all to see. I'll take that bet.



> It doesn't matter how much you defend the position, the truth that the scores are relative, isn't even truth according to the article! The truth is that Stern says they can use his judgement, his scores, and his organization to promote stock vehicle systems.


I do not need to defend my position because it is based on the available facts. The position defends itself because it literally is what it is. Other than this reply to your jetsam I have made NO speculative posts and offered nothing but facts to support my position. You, on the other hand have used nothing but conjecture and conspiracy theories worthy of mention by alex jones to support your crusade.

the article does not say anything about the relativity of the scores. However, anybody who knows how this works (unlike you) knows that the scores are indeed relative. Yes, they can use the scores to promote stock systems, and dumb folks like you who can't read or are happy to be led down the garden path by ike the child molester might actually be duped. I still contend they won't because it does not serve their interest to directly claim they are better than the after market.. their target doesn't give a ****.

I still doubt though that any mention of scores will be used in comparison to anything MECA might do in terms of their own competitive undertakings. In fact, any businessman worthy of owning two testicles would probably ensure that a contract was in place to ensure that this would never happen.. which is why I am so confident in my bet... my bet I am sure you will both lose and never pay up on.



> You are still stuck on how you think it's supposed to go, but why would GM make a point that detracts from their product?


It is a gigantic jump to say that they will make a point that detracts from the viability of the aftermarket.. because they can't. The results they obtained from their closed test does not validate that position. In fact, the only position it validates is the fact that their system is better than the two other systems it was tested against on that given day, and that is exactly how GM will use the information.. to compete against their competition, of which alpine and hertz are not.

*I never said GM would make a point that detracts from their product. If that is what you read in my statement you have once again proven that you cannot understand the written word. The article never mentioned anything about what GM WILL DO, only what MECA DID... which is why I call ******** on everything you have said.. there is nothing there to SUPPORT your position other than your OWN wind.*

But go ahead, please reply to this and continue to display your profound ignorance. I know none of this is making it through your tinfoil hat but it is at the very least entertaining for me to walk you around like a dog on a leash..


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> well, we'll know if I'm wrong when the commercials start airing and either they make no mention of it, or they feature Stern prominently in the background with his microphones and RTA and the judges are standing at his side with their arms crossed all gangsta....
> 
> haha...
> 
> ...


Way to speak for people who are not yourself. I will do the same.

People who compete in MECA know better than to think of this in the manner that you do. The know how scoring works and what the scores mean and as such will NOT be comparing their scores to the scores of a stock system, they will be comparing their score to the car next up in the lane.

You've never competed and are typing out your ass. Give it up already.. the only point you have successfully proven is that you do not have a clue what is going on.


----------



## d5sc (Aug 14, 2007)

cajunner said:


> I am not being overly defensive.
> 
> You misjudge what overly defensive is, if you feel that way, and that calls into question your judgement.
> 
> ...



Interesting, your foci changes in terms of proving/validating your arguments and beliefs: first, it's of a personal nature/attack (against you); then it (the onus) is up to Mr. Stern; I must have of failed my course (when in fact I didn't), Mic10is and others are in cahoots with MECA (given that the judges are volunteering and not compensated monetarily for what they do); that The Hated Guy; Grand89, and many others with cogent and valid responses are wrong in regards to MECA and all that you espouse, ad infinitum...

When the facts and explanations are presented to you, then they are discounted. Likewise, when you're given the opportunity to contact the vary source to validate and expose the truth, well, then, the "it is not my responsibility" card is drawn...

Once again, you are right and we are all wrong...

P.S. On the contrary, I never said they (smart people) were like you and me. As mentioned earlier, I am very humbled by those I know (in terms of intelligence); perhaps, you should re-read what I wrote.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

perhaps you should use a dictionary to find out that may and will are two different concepts entirely



> "Chevy may use video footage of the judging competition in its TV commercials for the Cruze, said Stern.
> Looking at the sound quality scoring, the judges gave the Cruze good marks for ambience, staging, and sub-bass response, said MECA."


May, means something could potentially happen, will, means something is going to happen. It is clear that you simply have no understanding of this article because you cannot differentiate between the words and their meanings. I am not going around in circles my point is linear and well developed based on the facts with almost no speculation whatsoever, in contradiction to your position which is based on nothing but a flawed understanding of the article and almost 100% speculation.


> what, about this is ambiguous? Either he says "Chevy may (as in authorized) use video footage of the judging competition"


May is ambiguous by its definition.. so.. what about it is ambiguous.. all of it.


> You think that Stern is unsure of what he's saying? You think that he's doing this because he likes GM products?


Without using your own words, how about you tell ME what stern is saying.. can you do that? I've already done it for you, he is saying absolutely nothing about the system in the GM other than it compares with mid-level systems and is better in comparison than its OEM competition. Anything else you have extrapolated is simply your speculative opinion, which you are entitled to.. but it goes to far to call this guys motives into question based on your extrapolations based on your speculations.



> You think that Stern would do this at all if he thought it might be looked upon as a wrong turn for his organization, that it might reflect poor judgement?


I refuse to project my personal opinion of what stern may or may not have done/do as what he should have done. That is purely classless speculation and I will not partake in that kind of douchebaggery.



> Obviously, you think that this won't be a bought and paid-for spot, promoting the new stereo systems in Chevy's latest product offerings.


I cannot tell you what will happen with any degree of certainty as you cannot tell me. You can speculate and look like an idiot doing so but I will not supply any speculation to what chevy may or may not do with any of the data they have obtained. I'm not that guy, you are.


> Hey, I hope you're right. How's that for my character, huh? You seem bent on bruising my ego but you know what? You're cementing for the class, the lesson that truth prevails. Truth, will set you free.


It's only true if it is actually true. There is not enough evidence out there (yet) for you to claim that what you are saying is the truth. All you have at the moment is speculation and conjecture.. if you had anything more you would be able to point at it but you can't because it doesn't exist. You're the self admitted speculative keyboard commando and this is just more of you being what you have already claimed to be.



> " I'll wager you that the scores are in the commercial, either in numerical form or in their relation to other scores by actual competitors from actual entrants at their competitions. "


tomatoes tomatoes but fine, I'll bet you fifty bucks on that. I am confident that you will welch on the bet because you will lose but put up or shut up. I agree to your terms.


> now, by relation to other scores, I mean it's going to be featured in the commercial. I mean that when GM people talk about their system and the MECA organization, or Stern, or the judges, they are going to mention how the cars fared. They are going to use scores to do that, or they are going to use percentages, or they are simply going to say that "the scores for the Chevy were higher in sound quality than either OEM car they competed against, and were in line with other scores given to the cars in their custom stereo competition" or something along those lines. Look up at the bolded text. They are already doing it by saying what kind of marks they scored, it's right there in the article.now, by relation to other scores, I mean it's going to be featured in the commercial. I mean that when GM people talk about their system and the MECA organization, or Stern, or the judges, they are going to mention how the cars fared. They are going to use scores to do that, or they are going to use percentages, or they are simply going to say that "the scores for the Chevy were higher in sound quality than either OEM car they competed against, and were in line with other scores given to the cars in their custom stereo competition" or something along those lines. Look up at the bolded text. They are already doing it by saying what kind of marks they scored, it's right there in the article.


That is not what they are doing. You can only come to that conclusion if you base your conclusion on evidence that doesn't exist within that article. If we assume you are biased then your conclusion makes some sense, but on its own as it sits in the article that conclusion has no foundation. But again, 'they are simply going to say' is nothing but speculation. Speculation by its definition is not rooted in facts. Speculation is simply a theory reached by conjecture and conjecture is a hypothesis based on inconclusive or incomplete evidence. You cannot claim what GM will say because you are not GM and they haven't said it... you can claim what you THINK they will say and I can state that you are speculating... why, because it is a fact that you are speculating... Why are you speculating? because you have no facts to base a sound conclusion on. It is all right there for everybody with a brain to read. 

You say something is GOING to be in a commercial when the article says MAY, May does not mean will. You are speaking as to what GM *WILL* say when you cannot possible know.. 'they' as in GM aren't even using the scores at all for any purpose at this point as you contend! they were published in an independent journal! You just jump to wild conclusion based on emotion and no actual evidence.. it's really quite hilarious!



> Otherwise, why is Stern saying they may use the material in the commercials?


Who knows. Probably because he doesn't know whether or not they will use the material.. otherwise he probably would have said something like 'gm WILL be using the material in the commercials'

What's the point?


> The whole point of involving a "sound-off organization" is to get credit where credit comes from, the judges!


That is your opinion of why and based completely on speculation. It is reasonable to speculate that perhaps they wanted a fresh set of eyes in on their R and D to improve some facet of their design. There is nothing there that says this is a marketing gimmick at all really. Other than of course your unfounded conjecture.



> I don't know how this is so hard to understand.


Your position is hard to understand because it is not based on anything except your conjecture.. which is based on a flawed understanding of the article and no experience with the other half of the equation which is competition and scoring. Your position makes no sense because there is simply no fact you can point to that supports it.

You can keep saying you're right over and over again, but the lesson in truth is that your say so does not make it so.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

so.. in other words you'll continue to talk **** and not back it up.. pretty much what I expected...



> You don't set the terms of a wager, like you continue to try to do. I said I'll wager, nothing more explanatory than that, and I would hate to call you out here when the commercials feature Stern and they use his judges to explain how good the stock systems are. I was thinking a gentleman's bet, because that is how I roll and online wagers with people I am certain have some kind of issue with me, doesn't appeal to me.


For the record, you do set terms on a wager.. it is how a wager works.. you could find that out by referencing the definition of the word wager.. terms are actually a critical part of the term that is wager  Until you realize tht words mean things literally you will continue to come off like an idiot. You wanted to make a gentlemans bet, then act like a gentleman. Using speculation to infer that somebody has wronged a group of individuals is very ungentlemanly and you continually do it. By the way.. what is a wager based on (besides terms?) SPECU-****IN-LATION  That's why they work. You were the one that brought the wager to the table, not me  I accepted and now you are backtracking.. that is also very ungentlemanly and definitely suggests you are of dubious character.

The rest of your idiocy is just more of the same BACKTRACKING that we've become accustomed to from you. Way to prove my point yet again.. oh but wait, I'm sure you're just taking the moral high ground right 

you're right, the internet is a free country, you're free to be an idiot and Im free to call you out on being an idiot. Great place isn't it.


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

Ditto!


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> let's investigate this wager thing, then?
> 
> I say I'll wager, and I leave no qualifying value on what I'd wager, you automatically assume that leaves the option open for you to fill in the blank?
> 
> ...


blah blah blah.. do we have a wager or not? or are you just typing for the sake of it?



> so, back to the set of wrong assumptions you pack end over end in your reply.
> 
> I chose to eat with my family, so excuse the small pause in getting your spanking, as this is fun but it pales in comparison to a nice meal with decent people.


Too bad they didn't share the pleasure. What are they doing now that you've set them free? I find it hilarious that you had to take time out of your busy internet arguing schedule to enjoy a meal with your family.. how pathetic is that? you should get your priorities straight you loser. 'sorry honey I don't have time for anything but a quick meal with the fam, I have internet injustice to fight' I pity your family.



> anyways, I blew a hole right through your backtracking broken record, yet you continue to put it on the player, interesting.


No you didn't.



> and, the simple truth is already laid out, and every time you say my speculation is "douchebaggery and classless" you are taking that point to everyone in the thread who agrees with me directly, and the ones whose information backs up my "speculations."


There is not any information to back up your speculations... that is why they are speculations... while you were at dictionary.com reading up on the definition of wager you should have also looked up speculation.

Speculation can surely be accomplished without classless douchebaggery... you however, have not accomplished that feat.. 



> so every insult you hurl my way, is going at them too.


 People like you are like you.. not my fault and yes.



> And, we don't know what your motivation for defending Stern, or trying to argue against speculation, is.


I'm not defending stern.. just pointing out that your speculation is not grounded in fact.. which is the basis of speculating  you're the one who can't seem to grasp that concept. If you are agreeing that you are speculating you are agreeing that your points have no foundation in fact.



> You sound like a shill, so much like a paid operator it's not even funny. Somebody is likely pulling your strings as we speak, telling you how to move because some of the stuff you come up with is so off the wall, I have trouble believing you came up with it yourself.


A shill? really.. now THAT'S funny. I ran a brick and mortar shop for ten years.. I actually had vested interest in the industry and an interest in seeing this as you do to protect that investment. I mean, in the position I was in you would be doing me a service trying to bag against anybody who might cause the aftermarket suppliers sales grief. Lord knows definitely felt the pinch of the crappy aftermarket systems that have become hard to deal with, systems that impacted my personal bottom line directly..

but that is just how bat **** crazy your position is. Even being sympathetic to the industry I can't get on board your ridiculous ******** ride because it is so far out there and asinine that to agree with you would make me stupid by proxy.



> You use weak methods, you try to engage in logic puzzles, and you define my questioning in overwhelmingly negative terms.


Your questioning I have no problem with. Asking why is always a good thing.. but you don't stop at asking why, you ask why and then you tell us why. There is a HUGE difference between the two, asking why gets you places, speculations gets you looking like moron on the internet.



> That sounds like someone who's parroting someone else.


Again, more groundless speculation. Have any facts to back up this assertion or is it just more of the same? I don't have to parrot anybody, I don't need to reference all the people who agree with me to infer that there is some form of consensus.. all I need is you to keep talking and providing me with the evidence I need to claim rightfully that you are an idiot. So, keep talking.



> You see, the real motivation someone might have if they loved this sport, would be to see if wrongdoing has indeed progressed due to the obtuse nature of most businesspeople who have their heads on other things, not something like psychological manipulation of the aftermarket's main consumer base.


When that evidence actually presents itself I will be as outraged as the next person. I will not however be basing that outrage on speculation because that fits the definition of ignorant pretty much literally. I don't want to put myself in the same position you have been time and time again.. you know saying sorry and deleting posts because I look like an *******. 

See, if you really love the sport you would wait until you have enough evidence to make your conclusions valid, because if they turn out to be bogus (Which they will) then all you have done is help **** up an organization which HELPS the industry.



> But you act different. You come at the one who raises questions, you betray your neutrality each time you attack indiscriminately without accepting the truth. The truth, as it is, is that GM didn't go after Stern for nothing.


I provided a plausible explanation as to why GM might have approached stern that has NONE of the negative connotations that your line of speculation entails. My position based on no facts is just as valid as yours and that is that GM brought in stern to aid them in research and development. 



> The truth, is that Stern had something worth going after. That's how you know.


Maybe, maybe not. We don't know HOW GM is going to use the information, therefore we do not know if the information is of any value. If GM doesn't use the information for anything, then the information has little value.



> So, we can continue your semantics tirade, or you can address the issue. All you've done so far is expose your bias.


My 'bias' is simply towards factual arguments. I am biased against your argument because you have not based it on facts. There is no semantic game happening here, I am simply stating the fact that the majority of your position is nothing but speculation.. if your argument is based n speculation then it by definition is excluded from being based upon facts. You seem to agree that you are speculating, if this is the case, then you are also agreeing that you argument is not based on any fact  

Until the facts can back up your argument there is no issue to address.



> And that goes for anyone else who doesn't want to debate the topic but stoop to little girls on the playground tactical errors and underestimations.


That's your game, not mine  I deal with facts and evidence, you deal with speculation and conjecture. So if you want to debate, you are ill equipped to do so as guess what, we HAVE been debating.. you not so well. I have impeached your arguments by identifying the fact that by definition they are not based on any fact and I have impeached your character by illuminating a pattern of behavior re backtracking. You have been completely outclassed at every turn during our little fun time and you continue to be so long as you continue to put up illogical and unfounded arguments. So keep on bringing it. I am not going anywhere and would love to continue to hand you your ass in this little game of ours.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

I have a forcefield!!!


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

Mic10is said:


> I have a forcefield!!!


I've got a force field killer!!!!

Cajunner, I didn't realize MECA had multiple operating chapters. I really think you should do some research on MECA and Steve Stern, Chris Zenner and Vinny Taylor before you speculate or accuse anyone else of anything.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> if not officially, there is a contingent of people that live on the west coast, those that live on the east coast, and some smaller pockets in between. *So by your definition of chapters diyma has chapters that span the globe? There are a contingent of ppl that live all over the world in pockets that participate? *
> 
> this is another semantics issue designed to undercut my credibility and really, my whole rant isn't involving the two hired judges for their part, but mainly focused on the owner of MECA using his influence as a head of an organization several hundred members strong, (I'm guessing here, sue me) to make a monetary decision that benefits himself, GM and Bose, and subtracts from the aftermarket, devaluing the aftermarket "brand" for something that comes with the car. GM advertising execs pushed this, because they had something to prove, but it also increases sales of their cars, it increases their profit margin on accessory inclusion, and it's got an added benefit of discouraging aftermarket stereo installation due to efficacy concerns. *This isnt symantics its you not spending ANY time to find out ANYTHING about the ppl you accuse of throwing the aftermarket and what we do under the bus in an effort to support the OEM side of car audio and its manufacturers. What does anyone in MECA, either owner, judge or competitor have to gain by putting themselves out of business? By what you are saying Rockford Fosgate, JBL, Infinity, Focal, Dynauio, A/D/S and a host of other audio companies have been doing exactly this for DECADES. Rockford is in Nissan, JBL/Harman/Infinity in Ford and its domestic subsidiaries, Dynaudio and A/D/S in Volvo and VW, Focal is in Ferrari, and on and on. THIS IS A BUSINESS and as such you are in business to make money. If you dont like how he does it dont suppport it but at least know what you are talking about and have all of you facts straight if you are going to accuse somebody of doing something. *
> 
> ...


Actually this is all getting to be comical and a source of humor during the day for me. 

On another note if you are going to quote a Devo song at least get the lyrics correct...


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> diyma does have areas of concentration, that's right! People go to diyma events, whether it's Marv's BBQ or bikinpunk's party time, whether it's bunking at CES or just making a show in Binghampton.
> 
> again, you take something I say so literally, but have no desire for the truth about what's happening.
> 
> ...


 Ask Steve, you know what they say about assumptions? They are the mother of all **** ups....


----------



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

cajunner..... how do you sleep at night since the world is out to get you?


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Since this is now a conspiracy theory thread, here's another one. 

The OP and Caj, are actually undercover agents on the payrolls of a rival organisation out to destroy and maybe pull some competitors away. 

The point is that, I can take a set of facts, interpret them a particular way and reach what would seem like a logical conclusion, like the one above. Of course, it would be wrong and ridiculous. That's because my initial interpretation was wrong. 

You just need to back up for a bit and look at that possibility.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

WHY THE **** IS THIS THREAD STILL OPEN?????

Close this **** down for crying out loud. Where the hell are the mods??


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> The OP and Caj, are actually undercover agents on the payrolls of a rival organisation out to destroy and maybe pull some competitors away.


That's what I think.. he can't prove he isn't therefore he is.

Cajunner... your entire post directed at me is just more of the same crap you have been trying to pull all along. You have no interest in truth otherwise you would base your position in facts. Your entire position is speculative and in bad taste. I have nothing more to say as my points in regards to this matter have been proven beyond reproach with regards to your character, your continuous backtracking and your boundless speculation.

I can take the above quoted statement and run with it. I speculate that you don't have much to do with your life because you have hours and hours to spend here bagging on people who have done more for the industry than you could ever hope to, I suspect that jealousy is a HUGE part of your motivation (other than the fact that someone is paying you to come here and bag on MECA, ultra, id and whoever else your boner activates for on any given day) (which I am sure is *NOT* your wife who I am also sure would *NOT* be touching that thing if she knew she was married to the guy that comes here) (good thing this is our little secret now isn't it)

It is clear that you are being payed by someone to come here and bag on manufacturers. Clearly there is a group of manufacturers paying you to come here and sew the seeds of prejudice against their competition. It is obvious if you sit back and look at your history of posts that someone out there is paying you to put this **** out there because I have a hard time believing you come up with this **** yourself.

You saying my position is erroneous does not make it so. My position is based on FACTS which support my argument... That is why I don't need logic or speculation, the argument is based in reality of what has happened and therefore cannot be impeached by your simple say so.

Every point you have made in this argument is based on speculation, someone may do this (insert speulation), meca may have done this because (insert speculation) I could go on and on and on but there is no point.

You have not proven anything. All you have to back your position is your say so. From a man who claims to be of a scientific mindset you have clearly shown that you will go against that philosophy when it suits your personal interest. This thread, and the ultra thread show that you have absolutely no class and will say anything to get a rise out of people.

I feel sorry for the people who are choiceless in the matter of your presence. I can choose to ignore you (not that I would) but your poor children are stuck with you and I fear for the nation that your brand of ignorance will be perpetuated with your family legacy. If this is the way americans are learning how to think, we are indeed in a lot of trouble.

You don't question, you answer. That makes you not what you say you are, it makes you an ignorant fool with an outlet. I am glad that there is an outlet for you to broadcast your ignorance because (using your trick) you are currently the only person disagreeing with what I have said  

I'll take that as a win any day of the week, not that I need extraneous validation.. I know what you are and I have nothing to prove to you or anybody else. My points are proven by the facts at hand and I am merely the vessel by which they are delivered. That is a difference between you and me.. I have facts to validate my argument, you only have the congruent opinions of others to validate yours, a bunch of bitter hacks who have never made a contribution. Well, have fun being the champion of that group you can have it.

You can continue to argue your 'points' but really, you have not said anything new since reply number three in this thread and that position has been sufficiently invalidated by a mass of folks.

I will however address your position just to keep this semi-on topic

With regards to everything you have said... PROVE IT.

But we all know, you can't


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

you *DO* have to prove your position if you want to be taken seriously. Otherwise, I can say you just say **** and have no foundation in truth or fact, which is what I have been saying. If you are okay coming off as a crack pot lunatic then you can continue to just say **** with no factual basis and we will be here to call you out on that.



> Stern took what wasn't his, (ethically, morally, and possibly financially) and profited from it. I don't care if all he got out of it was a vacation with his judges in tow, it wasn't right.


What is it that he took that wasn't his? There is no ownership flowchart available on their website and his title seems to be the highest I could find with a rank of commissioner. It would seem that he is actually the only person who CAN decide what to do with MECA, unless there is a board of directors, who would have to sign off on what he does. At an rate, it is illogical to conclude that he does not have the authority or standing to take himself and his judges to gm to provide a service. 



> Proving it wasn't right, is not logical, it stands on it's own, it is it's own proof!


No, it is YOUR speculation that provides the basis for your proof, which is not based on fact. Not any real facts that haven't been extrapolated from your conjecture.


> Charlie Brown, let me spell it out for you one more time. It doesn't matter if he didn't get anything compensatory for his troubles, the fact remains that he took the organization's clout, it's standardized judging capability, and he used it to promote a car manufacturer!


Where did *HE* personally use it to promote a car manufacturer? How can he even do that? I haven't seen HIM PERSONALLY use this information for anything. I have seen an independent journal comment on what he has done, but even within that article I see him time and time again drawing a distinction of aftermarket as BETTER than factory systems. I see nowhere in that article meca saying "buy this car because it is super badass and cool" only them stating what their scoring results, on that day, with that sample pool were. I did see him time and time again mention the fact that aftermarket systems were still better in competition and that at best the systems he tested for GM competed well against pretty much the lowest price demographic available in the aftermarket. He did mention however that they scored better than toyota and honda.. which if true is not an endorsement but a statement of fact. If you read the article it is clear that he was not endorsing GM at all, only providing them with a service and results. 

The only way your position makes any sense is if you misread and misrepresent the only evidence you have to support your conclusion which is the article. Taken with your previous speculative postings it is clear that you prefer it this way as it allows you to say anything you want without backing it up with evidence. That is what makes you an ignorant stain on this hobby and that is what will continue to prevent you from making any serious conclusions.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

The only way your position makes any sense is if you misread and misrepresent the only evidence you have to support your conclusion which is the article. Taken with your previous speculative postings it is clear that you prefer it this way as it allows you to say anything you want without backing it up with evidence. That is what makes you an ignorant stain on this hobby and that is what will continue to prevent you from making any serious conclusions.

I know the only reason you haven't backtracked as usual is because I put a pin in that tactic. Loser


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> MECA isn't in the business of manufacture, or anything of that nature. MECA's only product, is the scores.* I never said they were in the biz of manufacturing, I compared them as an audio company who you claimed sold out just as all the others would have if they lended their name to an auto manufacturer. You like to twist words...*
> 
> MECA decides who sounds good, and who doesn't, and as such, is basically like Underwriter's Laboratories, or Consumer Reports, they aren't like JBL or Image Dynamics.* They are nothing like Underwriters Lab or CR, those 2 are companies that dont accept advertising or support from the companies they test, MECA on the other hand has sponsors and support from within the electronics industry. *
> 
> ...


Oh I bet he thought about it and said GM, nationally publicity for my club, possibility to grow....


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

BoostedNihilist said:


> The only way your position makes any sense is if you misread and misrepresent the only evidence you have to support your conclusion which is the article. Taken with your previous speculative postings it is clear that you prefer it this way as it allows you to say anything you want without backing it up with evidence. That is what makes you an ignorant stain on this hobby and that is what will continue to prevent you from making any serious conclusions.
> 
> I know the only reason you haven't backtracked as usual is because I put a pin in that tactic. Loser





> but sadly, only to those who know MECA scoring ins and outs.


such as the competitors who are intelligent enough to completely disregard your ignorant rant and see this situation for what it ACTUALLY is when strained through a perspective not based on paranoid delusions.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

You've gone beyond talking in circles and too a figure 8, endless multiple loops of **** over and over again. This is literally pointless....


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

yeah, he's a gem alright. He was a clump of carbon, but the force of him being an ******* is so intense he's turned himself into a diamond.

He's got nothing, except a flawed understanding of pretty much every possible idea transmitted within this thread.

No worries, I'm sure he'll be back in a few days to retract everything he has said here, it is his pattern.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> Most of the people here do. Because, they want to continue competing under favorable conditions. If they have to concede that the scoring depends on whether they were first car, or whether the judges score veterans higher based on something other than the sound, and rookies get "runner-up" because that is the good ol' boy system, then certainly they would place less value proportionally to the awards given out.


A more complete misunderstanding is a universal impossibility


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

the point of a competition is not to score points but to win. If I win with a one or win with a 100 it doesn't matter to me because I have still won


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

Cajun your a douche bag.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> you don't even realize that you bolster my position by maintaining the "scores are relative" argument.


You don't even realize that in actual fact, it doesn't.

If you care to, if you can, explain exactly HOW it bolsters your argument. Simply saying that it does is not an acceptable form of explanation.

You obviously don't even fully understand the relativity argument. Which is why you think it bolsters your position. Which it doesn't

All I hear from you is
blah blah blah

same same same

blah blah blah

same same same

I'd give you a few days to cool off and retract what you've said, but that is a foregone conclusion so isntead I will sit here and entertain myself playing with you.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> another peanut needs his shell back..


Pm me your address and I'll send it to you

regarding your above rant, more baseless speculation. You don't have an iota of proof to offer, only your continued delusional rants. It's quite hilarious that you are so worked up over this perceived injustice. I would have loved to see you in the sixties when there was real injustice to fight (not like you couldn't find some fake injustice to fight any place any time) probably wouldn't live up to expectations though as I assume from your posts here that you were into some pretty heavy stuff drug wise and were probably equipped only to opine about matters you would never have the balls to actually do anything aout.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

Im not threatening you. I don't do that. I was insinuating that you were the peanut.. though I wouldn't want to insult a peanut. 

I don't want to meet you face to face ever because somebody might mistakenly think that we were together because I am your friend. I couldn't live with that hanging over me

besides, beating you physically would never provide the satisfaction I have experienced beating you mentally here. It would almost be anti-climatic. Besides, with your attitude, I am sure that somebody will take care of the physical beating of you and I won't have to lift a finger.



> I can assume you have a 10th grade education from your posts here, what difference does that make?


From your posts, I can assume that you didn't make it past grade 8. You should have started at one that way I wouldn't have had anywhere to go (cough relative scoring argument cough)


> I think you've fully exhausted any other "speculations" even though on post 245 of this thread, I offered an alternative, I have constantly said Stern's story might reveal something that refutes my observations, and yet.
> 
> nothing?


And by saying that you have entirely sunk your argument. Thanks for coming out. 

Nothing you can say will exhaust my speculation argument because you make that argument for me with your above comment.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

yeah, you much prefer playing with yourself  

You still haven't struck down one point of my argument and I will take your verbal tap out as a win 

In fact, you have confirmed in your own words every point I have made  Yet you continue to claim you have what? won? won what, the fact that you believe your own horseshit? In that case, I concede, you win  

I highly doubt anybody will take another run at you because I have exposed you as you are, a one trick pony with NOTHING to back up your position except unfounded allegations and conjecture  

I would wager that the only reason you know about dunning-kruger is because someone used that term to describe you and your ridiculous 'debate tactics' some time in the distant past on some other forum you have polluted like cancer. (they probably used you as one of the original case studies)  I don't need an ad-hominem attack to dispel your position because I can do that with facts, facts I can point to (as I have time and time again) to sink your theories and positions.

The real reason you are not responding to my dismantling of our position is because I have dismantled your position to the point where anything you say will simply add to the mound of evidence already available and further discredit your position. The first smart move you have made all thread.


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

How about this.

ALL YOU KEYBOARD JOCKEYS SIGN YOUR REAL NAME TO YOUR POST and maybe just maybe you may be belived........

Markey Dietrich

see, real name......


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

cajunner said:


> Dunning-Kruger, dude.
> 
> 
> check it out.
> ...


Actually if anyone exemplifiers the definition of Dunning Kruger it would be you.

*The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which an unskilled person makes poor decisions and reaches erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to realize their mistakes.*


also, D&K refers to skill sets, so technically you are misusing the term as well, which makes it even funnier b/c your incompetence doesnt let you realize it


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

cajunner said:


> now, that's conjecture, and I would be the first to say it's just a story, just like me operating for a rival sound-off organization is conjecture, I don't get mad about it, because it doesn't mean anything to me. I'm not in the business of sound-off organizations.


Caj you missed the whole point of my post. Please re read it.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> MECA, the car stereo competition group, has confirmed what many car electronics people already knew. A new car sounds comparable to a mid-level aftermarket sound system.
> Judges from MECA were hired by General Motors to rank the sound system of a Chevy Cruze (which is replacing the Cobalt), against a Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic.
> The judges ranked the cars as they would in a consumer sound off competition. The outcome was that the Cruze won the competition but more importantly for the aftermarket, it confirmed that a factory sound system can compare favorably to a retail car stereo system priced in the $1,500 range.
> MECA president Steve Stern and MECA judges Vinny Taylor and Chris Zenner were invited by Chevrolet to Detroit last Friday to judge new cars on sound quality, sound pressure level (SPL), and real time analysis (RTA).
> ...


here is the article reposted again for reference

Those astute members of the board who can read will notice that NONE of what cajunner has surrounded in QUOTATION marks can be found anywhere in this article.

The post above by cajunner is nothing but the sad conspiratorial inferences of someone with a bias of unknown origin or intent. He cannot prove anything he has inferred with the available evidence (the quoted article above)

There is no need for me to reply to him directy because clearly his delusions prevent him from reason therefore I will put it out there for those of us with working thinking devices that if you read what he has said and reference the available facts you will find none of what cajunner is talking about in the fact pool. He is clearly using his fairy wings to reach the extremity of the limb he is out on. He is creating a fantastic tale based on nothing but what his malfunctioning brain is telling him and is polluting this board like an infectious disease.

Look at all of his quotations and ask yourself how he knows what gm said to anybody. Are we to assume that he was party to these discussions? Then, ask yourself how he knows what the details of the arrangement of any legal contract between GM and MECA.

He doesn't and can't and he admits it.

So, what does that leave us with? The paranoid delusional ramblings of somebody with some kind of bias against MECA.

He says he isn't trying to bring Stern down or give meca a bad name, but I suggest that given the content of all of his posts that this is exactly what he is trying to do and that his denial is just more of what every post he has made in this thread actually is... fiction.

This guy is a sad pathetic liar and does not deserve the response from any member of this board. I simply cannot allow his ******** to stand and will continue to debunk his ********. He has already submitted to my complete obliteration of his position with a verbal tap. He is back though with more of his conjecture and baseless accusations and therefore so am I. I will continue to call this sad pathetic attempt to defame and libel MECA and Stern to task because I do have a clear bias to act upon. That bias, is a bias against complete ********.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

I see the light. WTF are car manufacturers doing...I was watching the CMA and ****in Chevy were sponsoring segments of the awards...
I cant believe country music sold out like that...it almost completely ruined it for me. If my friend Brad Paisley hadnt won Entertainer of the Year, I'd have the network execs on the phone demanding to know why a car company is interfering with my awards show.

its tainted now!! tainted! 

I cant believe Car companies are using music shows and music in general to advertise people--its such a personal thing...I feel violated...

Thank you Cajunner for becoming a martyr for such a great cause!!!


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> so far we have only 3 competing theories, one of which was pulled, another that I showed the incongruity of, and the last one is mine, which uses facts that pertain to the argument, and mostly from the article published to inform industry people what went on.


The only fact that supports your argument is that stern scored one of GMs cars.. that's *IT* There is NOTHING in that article that any reasonable person could use to come to the conclusions you have come to. Your ridiculous speculation and conjecture does not even rank as a theory and the contention that you have based your position uses facts is laughable and a flat out lie as demonstrated by your own contention that you are speculating. 

for the record, 



> spek-yuh-ley-shuhn] Show IPA
> –noun
> 1.
> the contemplation or consideration of some subject: to engage in speculation on humanity's ultimate destiny.
> ...





> con·jec·ture
> /kənˈdʒɛktʃər/ Show Spelled [kuhn-jek-cher] Show IPA noun, verb, -tured, -tur·ing.
> –noun
> *1.
> ...


So for anybody to make a firm conclusion based on speculation or conjecture is ludicrous because by definition it is essentially impossible to come to a reliable conclusion based on either and if you do you fit the definition of this word


> ig·no·rant
> /ˈɪgnərənt/ Show Spelled[ig-ner-uhnt] Show IPA
> –adjective
> 1.
> ...





> now, that's conjecture, and I would be the first to say it's just a story,


Those are cajunners words. He is admitting with the use of the word conjecture that his conclusion is not based on sufficient fact to be considered reliable. Yet with his typical double speak he would also contend that his theory is the only one based on sufficient fact to be considered. That is a logical impossibility. His position is based on his story... this story



> Stern gets wind of a shift in OEM systems by a friend in the business. You know, somebody at Bose knows somebody and blah blah, he is forced to accept that a car might be entered into his competition by someone in their advertising department. So he's aware that the car scores well, because somebody told him. 120 on bass, wowza, that's aftermarket grade for sure.
> 
> So the wheels start turning. If he grades the Caddy good, because he doesn't know it's a stock system, and it's been disguised as something else, then he gets caught with his pants down giving the stock system a high score.
> 
> ...


this is the entirety of his position in a nutshell. Notice, that he follows it with this statement



> now, that's conjecture, and I would be the first to say it's just a story, just like me operating for a rival sound-off organization is conjecture, I don't get mad about it, because it doesn't mean anything to me. I'm not in the business of sound-off organizations.


and follows up in a later post with this statement:



> so far we have only 3 competing theories, one of which was pulled, another that I showed the incongruity of, and the last one is mine, *which uses facts that pertain to the argument, and mostly from the article published to inform industry people what went on*


He wants to have it both ways. It is a logical impossibility for his argument to be based on facts and be reliable if he claims his position as conjecture. It simply cannot be done.

What does this mean? It means that he is misrepresenting the article and drawing an unprovable conclusion and smearing meca with his vicious conjecture. A completely sad and pathetic manipulation of information and I am positive what he has done can be called libel and defamation. I want Stern to come here and see what this fool has written and sick his lawyers on this douchebag. Cajunner is now outed as a walking contradiction and an ignorant crusader with no real clue of what he is sayaing.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> you've continually put words in my mouth, twisted my arguments, and now out and out lie about what I've written.


hmm so you can dish it and not take it eh... that's exactly what you've been doing to stern this entire thread you ****ing dolt. I have not lied one time about what you have written, I can back up with proof every position I have taken. My positions are NOT based on conjecture or speculation. That is how *YOU* roll



> If anyone shouldn't take heed of what has been written in this thread, it's the person who agrees with you and your incoherent babbling.


my incoherent babbling that is somehow more linear and relevant than your entire ridiculous position which has no basis in fact? 



> Your constant insistence on using relative scoring at a competition as a reasonable justification for why we shouldn't give weight to the scores given to GM's stock systems, is stupid on it's face. If you admit that all scoring is relative, and then you use that to defend Stern's scoring outside of a competition, then you are a fool. GM didn't say "these scores aren't representative of an actual sound-off competition" did they?


GM DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS... EVER. Show me *ONE* sentence in this article that can be confirmed as written by GM. This article was NOT WRITTEN BY GM, FOR GM, AT THE BEHEST OF GM and GM doesn't need to say that because it is OBVIOUS that these scores are NOT representative of an actual sound off competition to ANYBODY who would read that article. It is afterall an INDUSTRY journal which is probably why you have a problem understanding WHY what you say is irrelevant and flat out wrong.



> Stern didn't say it either.


you mean he didn't say anything to a journal written as you say for the industry.. he probably dind't believe he had to. He probably didn't even have a choice... did Stern even write this piece?Most of us here, who have experience *IN* the industry and *IN* competition have been saying the same exact thing. *WE* all seem to understand because *WE* have been there and *KNOW* how it works. *YOU* as the outsider here are the only one who seems to not get it. 


> He makes a bunch of statements about how the aftermarket is better at the very top of the competitive margin, but he also doesn't say that the scores are relative, and that's what everyone seems to be saying.


Hmm, that article was intended *FOR US* the only one being hung up by this **** is you and that is because *YOU HAVE NO ****ING CLUE WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT* It is a known fact by ANYBODY WITH EXPERIENCE that the scores ARE RELATIVE. It's a ****ing journal, the guy who wrote the article and stern probably believed that the people who would read it would know the obvious points and I surmise they simply assumed it was common knowledge. Because you are ignorant to the facts is not their downfall it is yours.

The reason the scores are relative has been explained to you more than five times by three different people that *I* have seen. There are probably more. It is a necessity that the scores are relative and this is true of ANY form of subjective judging... Figure skating, synchronized swimming, ****ing miss america competitions, artwork.. you cannot objectively mark a subjective idea... 



> Well, dickwad, if the scores are relative, then they aren't just relative based on the progression from first car to the last in a competition, they must be relative because GM's stock system can't possibly have beaten 2/3 of the entrants at the Finals, that is what everyone is saying, right?


Nobody knows this, MAYBE it could have. Being that it wasn't judged against THOSE cars it is impossible to know. The scores are relative based on a baseline.. 



> then what makes you think the scores are meaningful in one instance, (true competition) and not meaningful in the other? Why else would they print the actual scorecard numbers if they didn't have meaning with regards to a competitive baseline?


If the caddys score was attained at a competition it WOULD be meaningful. Even the scores published in the article are meaningful WHEN COMPARED TO THE POOL OF CARS IT WAS JUDGED AGAINST. They could take all of those cars to a real competition and put them up against a larger pool of cars, and guess what, the cruze would still beat the civic and the corolla, and it might be scored lower.. the important part is, it is still going to beat the civic and corolla despite the fact that its scores are lower. So the scores were published to show which car was better according to the judges. This doesn't mean that the cruzes 74 will beat an aftermarket 74 on the day of a real competition, it just means that the corolla and civic won't be getting their 58 or 70 but will be behind the cruze at the end of the day.

I am absolutely stunned that you cannot wrap your.. brain? around this simple concept.



> When Stern says publicly that they graded the scores differently in Detroit and contradicts the article's contents, then we'll know better. Until then, we don't know.


spoken like somebody with no clue about what they are talking about. Stern isn't responsible for educating your ignorant ass. Competitors and industry insiders have told you how it is. We know how it works, you don't. You are in ABSOLUTELY no position to question what we tell you because *WE* are the ones with the experience and knowledge. What we are saying would be self-evident to you if you were not some entry-level hobbyist with a beef.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> blah, blah blah.
> 
> 
> blah blah blah.
> ...


the entire post which you quoted was based on nothing but your position and facts that show your position is completely false and ill-conceived. Im not pushing the wheelbarrow that's dumping dirt on stern, Im giving you enough rope to hang yourself with a defamation lawsuit.. Keep talking dipshit  you're going to make somebodies lawyer very happy. Who would have thought letting some internet hack run his yap would be potentially more profitable than judging a car for one of the worlds largest vehicle manufacturers.

I haven't simply said you are wrong

I have proven it.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> "A 2011 Cadillac was also judged,..."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You are a ****ing idiot... that ENTIRE sentence reads more like this



> Judges from MECA were hired by General Motors to rank the sound system of a Chevy Cruze (which is replacing the Cobalt), *against a Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic.*


Maybe that is what is happening here, you are only reading the first 2/3s of every sentence and letting your emotions do the talking.

I guess the distinction is worthy though. People know the can't trust you with facts because you simply don't use them, as you have admitted time and time again.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> tasty private messages, wha?
> 
> oh, you deleted it, aren't you clever, with your edit feature.
> 
> ...


I am not in cahoots with anybody  I am as independent as can be. Haven't competed in MECA, haven't met anybody affiliated with MECA and have no motivation whatsoever to shut you up. If there is a reason I would want you to shut up it would be so you would save YOURSELF from looking like a complete moron. The only reason I know what I know is because I received unsolicited information from an anonymous source. I could not verify the information so I decided against publishing it on an open forum. See unlike you, unless I can prove something, I will not say it, even when my emotions are telling me I should.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> Again, you're about as capable at discerning facts from an article's text, as an imbecile reading and understanding the Constitution.
> 
> Further down the article, the second quote I put in there, is the proof that you are nothing more than hot air, your ability to decipher anything cannot be accepted by any measure, you not only got tossed out on idiot grounds, your return to the court room only to be beaten back down and kicked out again, is pathetically comic.


Prove it. With facts pls.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

You're a real piece of work Cajunner  You have a history of talking out of your ass and I have completely owned you but here is more of you in your own words confirming what I have been saying this entire thread



cajunner said:


> if that's directed my way, I think I have established that conjecture is a part of my process.


in-****ing-deed



cajunner said:


> I will scale back the motives and conspiracy conjecture now, thanks for being a perpetual good sport.


no you won't



cajunner said:


> an anonymous internet keyboard jockey


Could *NOT* have said it better myself



cajunner said:


> now, that's conjecture, and I would be the first to say it's just a story


Anybody noticing a trend here 



cajunner said:


> I don't even compete, I am the most accidental and inappropriate arbiter perhaps, I don't have any idea what happens in the lanes.


Clearly



cajunner said:


> I'm a "prove it" kind of guy


Riiiight



cajunner said:


> I'm one of those in the crowd, watching this epic struggle to ascertain truth from fiction, and in the process I see some things.


you definitely have proven that you ascertain truth from fiction


cajunner said:


> We don't know what will fall out because of this


my point exactly


cajunner said:


> Since I'm Mr. Conjecture


and you're proud of this? and you think you're winning a debate.. give me a ****ing break.



> "cajunner"]No, but because I'm a decent sort I take out things instead of leave them in


To save face.. good work man.  you're like a jailhouse snitch with your edits.


cajunner said:


> All the inferences, all the hypotheticals, all the conjecture, it's all here,


All provided by you, all of them based on nothing but your fantasy. None of them based on fact (by definition)

there are more... but I'm bagged, I have actual responsibilities to tend to and arguing on the internet with the ill-equipped is #9 on the priority list. 
Suffice it to say I have now demonstrated that your argument is well, not even worthy of the term argument, completely unfounded and worthy of being relegated to the trash

and I have shown that you have a habit and demonstrated pattern of saying nasty things about folks and not being able to back them up with fact. Until tomorrow. (I'm sure you will be up all night trying to figure out a way you can convince yourself you've won.. save yourself the time and simply copy and paste any number of your 50some odd ridiculous posts that all say the same thing)

Until tomorrow, unless of course you backtrack and retract all of your ********, which has also been proven to happen in the past.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> wow.
> 
> the backtrack accuser backtracks.
> 
> isn't that special. so when you throw out how you received "tasty private messages" about legal proceedings against me, and then you tell me you are giving me enough rope to hang myself with a defamation suit, you don't think you are crossing an ethical line? Buddy, you don't have an ethical bone in your body if that is the case. And, unfortunately since you are edit-man-fu, I don't have the luxury of putting that up for the class to see. But no mas, you admit to it anyway.


you have been proven to edit posts with relevant content in the past as well, so your criticism of me is ringing kinda hollow. And NO I do not think I am crossing an ethical line... at all.



> if you look at the article again, and quit threatening me with legal action like you were Stern himself, you'd see where both cars were judged, according to the article.
> 
> scores from both cars, are in the article.


I never said that both cars weren't scored. In fact, I mentioned that a total of four cars were scored, the caddy, the cruze, the corolla, and the civic.


> The Caddy's score is the one that beat the scores of 30 out of the 40 something cars at Finals, and is the one everyone got caught up about.


It didn't beat the scores of 30 of the 40 something cars AT THE FINALS, it beat the scores of 3 cars AT THE FACTORY. HUGE DISTINCTION TO BE MADE THERE as has been discussed thoroughly. 


> The Cruze's scores, while good, weren't what caused the issue to erupt because they weren't as high in sound quality scoring, the part of the competition that the Caddy's scores were brought up at the beginning of the thread. It illuminated the issue of relative scoring, and I brought up the issue that the scores reflect a leveling of the difference between aftermarket and OEM systems. Which might be true, but then everyone who "is in the know" as you say, discounts the idea that the scores these cars achieved count, or matter.


I never said the scores did not matter, just that the did not matter relative to the scores achieved at the finals. They matter relative to the vehicles they were tested against. I agree with you, the caddy MIGHT actually be level with a 78 point vehicle as scored at the finals, but the score it achieved that day when it was judged against a civic, corolla and a cruze do not transfer over to the day of the finals. Therefore, we can't draw any reliable conclusions based simply on the score. 



> I say they do. And the article says that they were scored just like in an automotive competition.


Which doesn't mean the scores will be the same on that day and the day at the finals, only that they scored the car as if they would be at a competition... with four cars. If they would have expanded their sample pool it is almost a guarantee that their point scores would be less, but because the pool is so limited you can set a high baseline and still have plenty of room to accurately place systems in relation to each other.


> so that right there, is it, there's what you think, and what I think, and then there's the truth.


The way you are thinking about this is flawed. It is obvious to anybody who actually knows what happens at these competitions and how this stuff actually works. I am seriously not saying that as a pejorative Im just saying that perhaps you should consider your lack of experience and knowledge of the matter at hand and question whether or not you are in a position to draw a reliable conclusion.



> who's closer? Obviously, by not even realizing that both cars received judging, you couldn't have read the article thoroughly, or perhaps your cognitive skills are damped by some substance?


I read the article five times thoroughly and I still did not read anything that could lead a reasonable person to the conclusion you have drawn. The only way your conclusion makes sense is if you speculate that the boogie man is out to get the car audio industry. I didn't reference the caddy directly, not because I didn't see it there but because it literally makes no difference, nor does it invalidate my point. 

Yeah, reading your **** has made me stupider. I wish it was just drugs.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

cajunner said:


> It's open because of content.
> 
> This is a valid topic and as it affects us all, should be allowed to be debated.
> 
> I bring one side of it, my motivations are simple, the other side? Hard to say.


It's not even being debated anymore. It's now a pissing contest between you and boosted. You haven't even talked about the issue at hand for how many pages now?? Exactly. You two are both just arguing about why the other is wrong and childish and why you each are right. 

Get the **** over it and let the thread die. This thread should have been closed down 2 or 3 days ago.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> you know, you could do a lot with what I've left open to interpretation don't you?


If I wanted to SPECULATE I probably could.. But I don't roll like that.



> You could point out that although the Caddy was also judged, it doesn't say the Caddy was specifically judged in Detroit, when the other 3 cars were judged. So that part of the article might be out of sync, the issue is we don't know where the Caddy was judged because they don't specifically state when or where the Caddy was judged.


**** why not go big... Maybe a sasquatch stole the testing gear and two of the judges, packed all of them and their gear on his back to where the cadillac was, the first judge caved when saquach made an ooga booga sound and grabbed his crotch michael jackson style and immediately gave the caddy a score. 

The second judge, he tried to run, but sasquatch is savvy... he cut the second judge off at the pass and dragged him by his hair back to the car. The hairy beast then threw the second judge into the caddy and gave him a titty twister until finally the judge caved, and scored the vehicle . 

The third judge was back at the factory because, despite being huge sasquatch could only carry an rta and two judges at a time.. so sammy stole a mule from juan valdez and returned for the third judge... but the third judge wouldn't have anything to do with the scheme. Not one to take no for an answer the hairy mullet shaped ball of anger whipped out his nunchucks and beat #3 to within an inch of his life. Sammy heaved the judge onto the borrowed mule #3 survived the beating eft with just enough motor function to stroke his pen across a scoresheet.

On the way back to the underground anechoic chamber developed by nasa (the secret location housing the cadillac) #3 was surprised to hear the mule comment that he had been beaten like that before and from now on when talking to his other mule friends he would say he had been beaten like a borrowed sound off judge.

#3 held out for as long as he could but eventually caved and scored the caddy knowing full well that the evil corporation that is GM was going to use the scores to implode the world.




> It may have been judged in California, and the relevant paperwork brought from there to Detroit, or it could have been sent to the author to use in the article.


That makes no sense. Maybe captain kirk used a transporter beam to steal a flux capacitor from doc. Then using his vintage delorean he accelerated the enterprise to 80 miles per hour with the delorean strapped to the roof. Sulu was riding ***** blowing kirk when the flux capacitor kicked in and they travelled backwards in time to the moment after the third judge had finished averaging the score.

Out of plutonium the situation was looking hopeless but luckily one of the engineers that developed the anechoic chamber came up with a complex system of pulleys and levers powered by a single rubber band that could develop enough energy to accelerate the delorean back to 80 miles per hour. Using this system kirk and the donkey were transported forward in time back to the uss enterprise. Sulu was left to be the ***** of sasquatch and since you weren't available kirk took the talking ass to prove to the crew that talking asses did indeed exist.

Once back on the enterprise scotty worked feverously trying to recreate the system of pulleys and levers required to power the delorean for its return trip back in time to deliver the sensitive documents. Poor scotty worked on that system for hours until the talking ass piped up that they should just fit the delorean with a custom miniaturized warp core. Within fifteen minutes the core was created and installed and the delorean was back to operating status. Kirk, though infatuated with the talking ass gave into the crews wishes for the return of sulu.. you see, talking asses smell like ********, and the enterprise is a ship. Nobody wants their environment to smell like ******** so it was out with the donkey.

With a flash the delorean accelerated through the holodeck and before you could say 'i know you are but what am I' they were back in 2010, this time outside the office of GM.

Nobody could know at the time but transporting talking asses is against the rules of quantum physics so upon their return they discovered that a rift had been created in the space time continuum and the new owner of general motors came out to retrieve the documents. Kirk was frisked by the secret service and obama snatched the documents from his hand, and took the delorean and exchanged it for a cruze saying as he walked away, don't worry man, this **** has the best ess q's ever.

BUT NO ****ING FLUX CAPACITOR. Luckily sulu was still on earth and now had connections with the columbians.. one well placed blowjob and juan valdez had a flux capacitor delivered in the back of an elcamino with hydraluics. Pedro valdez hit the switches and as the car bumped the flux capacitor was bounced perfectly into place in the delorean. The talking ass actually turned out to know everything about everything and instructed the nasa engineer on how to install it back to working order. back to the pulley/lever apparatus kirck and sulu were off... documents safely delivered their job was done. The talking ass went back with Juan and was summarily beaten like a borrowed sound quality judge and put back into service.



> The author could have been fast and loose with the facts as they are presented, or the author could have been directed to make only some things look a certain way, and leave things pertinent to what really went down up there in Detroit, out of view.


Smashing his fists to the mahogany desktop the author of the article in question cursed the judges for not inflating the scores even more than their coercion had promoted. Batman would have none of this, he said you ****ing doctor those facts or I'm going to rape robin.. and then shove this bat shaped throwing star up your ass. There was only one choice.

You see, batman has an exclusivity deal with bose for all of his electronics so in order to expand his research and development budget, thus increasing his fly new gadgetry, he had to ensure bose sold lots of cadillac stereo systems. The only logical way to accomplish this was to use MECA s prestige to hoodwink the unwashed masses into buying **** they didn't need. 

What a mastermind.



> Yes, there's a lot to work with, but in lieu of trying to formulate good oppositional theory, you choose to believe what I'm saying, then turn that against me with your obfuscation and your deceptive interpretation.


Actually, I choose to completely disregard what you believe as it has no basis in reality. My interpretation is the literal interpretation of what is written devoid of any bat **** crazy speculation.



> Which goes to show you as a two-bit hack who doesn't belong in a battle of wits on the internet.


I don't believe your argument which is based on no facts whatsoever and I'm the two-bit witless hack? Man, you are WAY too old to be hanging out on the internet. In modern times, we believe that the guy who makes his arguments based on facts wins  Since your position is nothing but a speculative mess I win by default, even though I haven't actually made an argument


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> hahaha...
> 
> you win, boosted kneehigh.
> 
> ...


So are you saying the people that compete in the Special Olympics are humorous and laughable?


----------



## truckerfte (Jul 30, 2010)

In before the seriously overdue lock 

You two owe me the last 30 min of my life back. I have learned nothing reading this. 


One question though, when you two finally meet, will you both be giving the other the courtesy of a reach-around?


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

cajunner said:


> no, you just said that.
> 
> and if you haven't seen the ubiquitous picture posted when people argue online, then you don't know what I'm referencing, but I believe you do.
> 
> ...




Actually no I didnt, I wanted to clarify what you said about Boosted. If you want I can go ahead and quote it again but its quite obvious to everyone what your intentions were. To many ppl that is INSANELY offensive. 

As to not knowing if there is a "Special Olympics" jersey, as with all organized sports there is a uniform worn while playing, so common sense says that yes he would have been in a track uniform since he was "lumbering down a rope towards a finish line" as you so eloquently put it.

True colors buddy....


----------



## kukusz (Nov 2, 2010)

I'm new to this forum. I already ran out of popcorn, and I mean like the Costco/Priceclub sized tubs. Good times.


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

Hmmm...

Tell you what Cajunner when we all see either in print,web or tv an ad by GM saying their car can beat competition sq vehicles, until then this waste of space is moot.

So far all that has been put out is within the auto industry, something not in the "public" domain. true?

Markey Dietrich

see.....real name


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> not really as the article is by CE, which is an online publication that reaches many people who happen to have an interest in consumer electronics.
> 
> I cannot determine the impact of what I've said in terms of damage to Stern or MECA, nor can anyone else approximate it, suffice to say I have been attacked and can measure the amount of damage I feel I have taken for making a distinction about Stern's involvement.
> 
> ...


so many assumptions

so little proof.

sasquatch, kirk, juan valdez and a rubber band propulsion system.


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

OK Cajanner,

It's on line in a pub. that is directed to people "intrested" in the 12v industry or consumer electronics. That in itself is not going to get much traction on the street. So once again it's easy to jump to a conclusion without all the facts and actions happening. Or....do you have an axe to grind with MECA and Mr. Stern?

And for the record I have no present ties to MECA or Mr. Stern. I was consulted by a few people about MECA when it was first formed, they wanted my feedback on their rules. A few e-mails happened and that was that. At present I have friends that do compete in MECA, but that is as far I go with MECA.

So that should make it clear I have no dog(s) in this shindig.

assumption.... the mother of all ****-ups


Markey Dietrich

see.....real name


----------



## tintbox (Oct 25, 2008)

Reading way to far into it bro. Step back walk outside and breathe some fresh air. Like is to short and life is all we got.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

Nobody here is protecting stern, they are simply making a stand against your ignorance.

It is not defending stern because we say you are wrong, it is simply pointing out the fact that you are wrong.. which you cannot handle at all.

If some of your wild speculations turn out to be TRUE (and by this I mean backed up by something other than your say so) then by all means, BE OUTRAGED, hell I'll even be outraged with you, but we are not at that point in time yet.

You still are showing that you completely misunderstand the relativity of scoring despite having it explained to you over a dozen times by at least six different people. 

Your entire conclusion as to what stern did means is based on what might happen in the future and a flawed understanding of competition. This is probably because you have admittedly never competed. You should stand back and read what has been written instead getting all bent out of shape that you have been proven wrong. 

When the time comes, and the evidence exists to prove your conclusions, I will gladly admit that I was wrong. But until that point you will be sitting here defending a position that cannot be proven, no matter how much logical sense it seems to make.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> you see, it's not MECA competition that they are targeting. The ones who are their target, are the ones that are going to be in front of a tv or in front of a salesman, or reading brochures, or checking out car information online.


Exactly, which is why they are irrelevant.. continuing.

It's MECA competition... YOU ARE TARGETING.

That is what your whole rant is about, the illegitimation of MECA as a COMPETITION organization, and the erosion of the industry based on misinformation.

GM's target and MECA's target are two completely different demographics that run parallel.. which means, they will never intersect. They are literally irrelevant to each other. 

Those people who you cite, DON'T ****ING MATTER to MECA or retail aftermarket car audio because THEY AREN'T COMPETING, and they sure as hell aren't going to to buy a new deck to cram in their brand new car.. They aren't the target audience of MECA and that demographic of people will have NO impact on MECA whatsoever. The people buying those cars weren't going to be replacing the system anyways, unless they are into car audio, in which case they're changing whatever is in there no matter what the scores are.

At any rate, it is pretty irrelevant, because at this point in time there are NO t.v. ads, there are NO brochures, I would guess that the salespeople DON'T know about it and even if they did.. have you ever actually been employed in the retail environment?

I have, I have sold new cars, AND I have sold audio equipment, for YEARS in both fields and I can tell you that about 80 percent of the people who come in to buy a headunit are only doing so because theirs no longer functions. speakers, same deal The slim 20% of the people who actually come in for an upgrade are going to upgrade no matter WHAT system is in their car, and they certainly will not be taking a salespersons word for ANYTHING.

Selling cars I learned that 80 perecent of people don't give a **** about the details of the car audio system, Most of them don't even care about the car... they care about whether or not the financing terms match their expectations, whether they can afford the monthly payments, airconditioning, transmission, this, that, the other thing, eight more things and then MAYBE the car stereo. The 20% of people that give a **** about the stereo.. guess what, they're replacing WHATEVER stereo is IN there.

So, I can say, being that I have been there done that that this article is going to have an impact on the aftermarket industry that ROUNDS UP to ZERO. Thankfully your idiotic libel of MECA is contained within a group of people who can see through the ********. 

You actually come off as exactly how you say GM will act.. Which is hilarious.. misrepresenting information to hurt the aftermarket. Good job, way to become what you are rallying against.




> How is it that you keep saying "relative scores" when the story has no mention of anything of the sort, going so far as to say Stern scored the cars like they were in competition?


They were scored like they would be in competition, RELATIVE TO THEIR COMPETITION. That is how competitions are scored. When the article says 'as they would be in competition' is is the same thing as saying 'relative' because THAT IS HOW THEY ARE SCORED IN COMPETITION. How come you cannot wrap your brain around this simple concept. I speculate that you actually fully understand but cannot admit to understanding because it would **** your argument right in the ear... (which you've done quite completely already on your own)

Take figure skating, you judge a figure skater at the olympics one year and they get a high score in figure skating and win the gold medal. Four years later someone wins the gold medal with a lower score.. does it matter? No, the guy with the gold is still the guy with the gold, the score of the previous olympics has NO ****ING bearing beacuse the scores that matter, that year, in that olympics are RELATIVE TO THE ****ING FIGURE SKATERS THAT ARE SKATING THAT YEAR, SAME ****ING SCORE SHEETS AS YEARS PAST, DIFFERENT ****ING SCORES, SOMEONE WINS AND SOMEONE LOSES. The score are NOT RELATIVE TO THE SKATERS FOR EVERY YEAR OR EVERY EVENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE ****ING OLYMPICS. 

Who is the better figure skater.. we won't know unless they skate against each other and are judged against each other! How do you become recognized as the best figure skater? You consistently win over a period of time... you win a FEW gold medals and then your rank as the best is legitimized.. and guess what, people don't give a **** about the scores because all they need to know is you've won five gold medals.

SAME DEAL FOR MECA AND AUDIO COMPETITIONS. It's ****ing basic competition stuff... which you admittedly have *NO* experience with. So this article, published in a 12 volt journal, skips over the part of the scores being relative is because they assume their readership isn't ignorant to the given fact that the scores are relative.



> What's ambiguous about the scoring sheets? They are the same as the ones used to judge MECA entrants, where does it say anywhere that the scores are anything but relevant?


How ambigious is 'tonality, or how about 'focused sound stage'? pretty ****ing ambiguous stuff.. RTA, not so much, that is scientific data, but the rest of it is completely subjective. Sure there are guidlines but in the end the most focussed gets the best score, the system with the best tonality gets the best score and the best overall car is going to win... that competition, that day. The scores are not irrelevant, when compared to the GROUP THE CARS WERE JUDGED AS PART OF. 



> it's going to be regular people, and if you think that GM's advertising dept. that bought the scores are going to qualify the relative nature of those scores to the buying public, you're seriously not understanding the gist of it. At all.


I get the gist of what you are saying completely. You just don't get the gist of why it makes no difference. Prove it is going to have an impact on the aftermarket, Prove that it makes MECA scoring illegitimate. These are the two parts of your argument you haven't proven, and those are the parts of the argument I have a problem with. 

ALL that other **** about GM misrepresenting data, well, they probably will.. however, it still isn't going to make a difference to those who know, those people who are in the market for a kickass stereo know that the aftermarket is the only way to go. hose people who know about MECA and car audio competitions and CARE are going to know better, those who don't aren't the ones buying aftermarket stereos. If JR want's to buy a deck for his cruze, guess what, jr's gonna ****ing do it. Anybody who want's a better stereo, really, is going to go out and buy something from the aftermarket no matter what the salesman says, because they will know better.

And if they don't **** them, their complex factory **** is STILL going to break and need to be replaced... and *THAT* is where MOST of car audio happens in the real world.. swapping out old **** that doesn't work. THe market you are talking about being compromised by your conspiracy theory is THE SMALLEST portion of the industry and probably wouldn't even show up on a pie graph. 

Stern KNOWS all of this because he has been around the block, unlike you, and can see that no matter what GM does it will not impact the aftermarket car audio industry.

By the way, I seen more of your jabs at ID in some unrelated thread.. more classy acts. It establishes more of a pattern of ****ty speculation intended to defame (though in a veiled fashion that is pretty transparent to anybody with a brain) manufacturers and industry insiders. It seems that you are creating a situation that you crusade against stern for.. eroding the credibility of the aftermarket. Way to be a gigantic hypocrite.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

cajunner said:


> that's the most convoluted, irrational and disparate explanation you've shared yet.
> 
> what you just said doesn't even make sense to the casual viewer


Well his post was long yes, but no issues on coherence or logic. Events that can only be measured subjectively like skating, gymnastics and yes sound are evaluated across the relevant field on the day. So the car was evaluated against the other cars. Competitors at any final would be rated against other competitors in the same class. The judge would mark a competitor in 'street' vs other competitors in 'street', that year. Not against the best sounding 'master' install. 

Events like shot put, javelin, etc you can score by objective measurement. Here you can compare against competitors, years events etc. Furthest is furthest.

The nut shell is not, 'you don't compete and hence can't comprehend'. Its's just that 'you don't have the sound' and hence can' appreciate whats being said. .


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

Cajanner,

Actually the day of the average car buyer not upgrading their car stereo has already happened. I have one of the better car audio competition systems sitting about thirty feet from me. My wife, when we bought her latest car told me with no uncertain terms to leave her car alone because it's good enough for her as it is. She drove our first comp car as her daily driver so she knows what a car can sound like. FYI That car placed in the top five at both IASCA and USAC when each class had 20+ cars each at Finals, not 40 cars for all classes total.

A funny story.

Greg Davis the heart and soul of the old KCG gave me a ride in his personal vehicle one time. I asked him any upgrades? And he answered "nope". It was a Lexus with a stock system.

So we can "assume" the average person walking into a showroom isn't making the car stereo one of their top five issues. I'm sure color is ranked higher than the car stereo. The only people buying aftermarket equipment are the few wanting more than the OEM's give now. But the vast majority like what the OEM's are putting out.

And your argument that a salesman will say "MECA says our systems are world class", won't happen because 99% of the average car buyers will say "who/what the hell is MECA?" And that overworked and underpaid salesman will be more worried about making the sale of that car than some obscure car audio competition body saying their audio systems are world class. And the average car buyer will see the ad in the showroom and say "that's nice", now can we get the car for $500 below your cost?

assumpstion......the mother of all ****ups


Markey Dietrich


see.....real name


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner you are quite simply an ignorant fool. Your position has been proven wrong many times over in many ways by many people. You continue to grasp at straws and attack my position with your straw man argument. You have drawn conclusions which are not there, are not based in fact, and are not based in reality. You continually use your flawed understanding of every facet of this article to perpetuate a libelous argument against MECA. You have zero experience in the field in which you are arguing. It is hilarious to watch you match wits with people who have been there and done that. It's like watching a child who has just learned how to speak throw a bunch of words out in a desperate effort to communicate with grown ups, and you make about as much sense. Every one of my points in this thread has been on point and logical. My batman and sasquatch post has as much basis in reality as everything you have said and now, even when faced with an argument against your position you have simply resorted to the most basic and ill conceived of any personal attack I have ever seen passed off in an internet argument. You suck at arguing fact and you suck at personal attacks. You should pack up your **** and go the **** home. Have fun with your life you sad pathetic man.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> goo goo gaa gaa, daddy poo poo


You were reduced to this crap with your first post in this thread. You must be one of those semi-retarded inbred southerners we hear so much about.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> If what you are saying is true, The Real Old Guy, then what I'm saying doesn't matter, and is not even worth attacking, right? If you have voided my premise with your example, if everyone in this thread who has attacked my position used logic and good sense, why is it people are still trying to say my contention is harmful to anything or anyone?


Because you are still here beaking off about something you know nothing about.. based on your ignorance and inexperience. Youre using your wild conclusions to base further conclusions none of them which have any real foundation unless based on an original flawed understanding of 'evidence' which doesn't actually exist.

You have no clue what you are talking about and it is offensive to those of us who do. That is another reason we are still here shooting your ingorant speculation down, because we are afraid that there are others out there, who are as ignorant as you, who might go on perpetuating this ridiculous position. 


> I know the *few times* I was out there talking with people who were deciding which car they wanted, the stereo was a huge deciding factor. If a car on the lot had the "audio brand" upgrade, that's the one that was used for a demo car. Simple tactic, put your best foot forward to make a good impression.


See, that is all you have, a 'few times' i heard this guy say he wanted a good stereo in his new car. Big ****ing deal, I *HAVE* over 300 vehicle sales under my belt selling NEW cars, New cars that spread the spectrum of what is available, and I am telling you from real world experience that what you are saying is bogus. Who gives a **** if a few of your friends happen to say something (Which I doubt anyways) that supports your ridiculous contentions. In the real world of car sales it DOES NOT work like that. I don't know how you can contend to know because you haven't been there. How many cars have you purchased? how many have you sold. Please enlighten us... we already know you don't compete so you are ill equipped to comment on anything on the competition side of the article, and we know you haven't sold cars which means you are ill equipped to deal with any of the possible speculations on the car sales part of the article.. so, where are you getting the experience and knowledge that would validate your position? You don't have it.. you need it if you want to speculate with any degree of authority. 

But alas, your position is nothing but pure speculation. There are no facts to back it up. A few sentences in an article is not going to support the massive amount of **** you have put forth period. You are going to need more evidence for your speculation to have any relevance... more evidence other than your self supplied logic and quotes of what GM sales people might say.


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

The Real Old Guy said:


> Cajanner,
> 
> Actually the day of the average car buyer not upgrading their car stereo has already happened. I have one of the better car audio competition systems sitting about thirty feet from me. My wife, when we bought her latest car told me with no uncertain terms to leave her car alone because it's good enough for her as it is. She drove our first comp car as her daily driver so she knows what a car can sound like. FYI That car placed in the top five at both IASCA and USAC when each class had 20+ cars each at Finals, not 40 cars for all classes total.
> 
> ...



As an audio retailer i hate to say it but I agree with this, the average car buyer wouldn't have a clue who MECA are or what a good stereo would sound like. Those that think the standard system is lame will sometimes pay for the factory upgrade, which in most cases is still lame by our terms, as it is sufficiently better then the standard option and for an extra £6.00 per week on their installments a cheap and easy box to tick when in the dealer-the rest will put up with it.

The bulk of my customers are 17yr olds(start driving that age here, not 16 ) and are only interested in cheap and loud. Quality is beyond them and style is far more important. They listen to their un-educated mates advice about fitting 6x9s and amping them with a sub over my advice to forget the 6x9s and concentrate on the front end and a decent sub. They won't buy sound deadening or pay for your time to properly mount their speakers/run wires into doors/build custom enclosures etc. Infact most do not budget for install at all and assume I'll throw in free fitting on the stereo i've just made £1 on in order to compete with the knobs on the net selling just above cost.

When you consider that DIYMA only has 30622 members and is available world wide it gives a fairly clear indictaion that most of the worlds drivers are pretty content with the POS stereo in their car. Compare that to xbox live users-about 20million and the US market alone turning over in excess of $11BILLION in 2008-try googling the value of the car audio market and nothing comes up...

What I, and other retailers, have to do is try and change peoples perception of car audio and get more people interested in it-all with poor support from the manaufacturers-maybe GM are going to help with this as people will here a "decent" system in their mates car and want one?


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> So you think that a salesman is going to overlook the audio upgrade on an options checklist, when someone is sitting there in his chair? They push freak'n floor mats, they push pin-striping, they push rims, leather, Tilt-telescopic, motorized rear-gate lifts, motorized steps, but somehow they leave out the audio upgrade, one of the biggest money maker items going?
> 
> You mustn't have been very good at your job, or they just let you push cars on the lot, and left the people coming in ordering cars to someone who knows what they are doing. And, judging from your previous use of all sorts of tactics to insult me, I certainly don't believe anything you say, especially that you were successful at selling new cars. Not if your track record online has any reflection on the matter. I do agree that you'd lie, cheat and steal to gain personal profit, though. So maybe you are a salesman of some sort, jury's out on that one.



Lol, this just shows that you know less than nothing about car sales. The factory options don't net the salesperson a lot of money... the undercoating, the floor mats, The financing terms, THOSE net more money for the salesperson than the audio system, or any of the factory options for that matter. Anything the dealership puts into the vehicle = good money for the salesperson, anything the factory puts in, not so much. So, it is a big moneymaker for the factory, but the factory does not sell cars to consumers, in fact, they are prohibited by law from doing so.

I don't give a **** what you believe, your opinion of me does not matter. I have never sold anything to you, and chances are I wouldn't. I qualify my buyers with a degree of cunning that can only be descrbied as monumental. I could smell a pain in the ass deal the minute the guy walked on the lot or into the demo room, and you, are a pain in the ass deal. I would literally just say whatever I knew would piss you off to avoid having to sell anything to the likes of you, I would rather give you to my competition (not that I would wish you on my worst enemy but business is business) and laugh at the fact that they had to deal with you. Yes, that is how good I am, I can choose who I sell **** to and it makes no difference to my life because I don't NEED to make every sale, therefore I don't NEED to lie and manipulate data.. Those guys, they get a bad rep and their time in sales is limited, they usually end up on the internet badmouthing the competition from the safety of an anonymous forum.. hmm.. I think I'm onto something.

If you had any experience in vehicle sales, which clearly, you do not, you would know that you can't make a lot of money lieing and cheating... most of your money comes from referrals, and if your reputation is **** you won't last long because word gets around. My track record is quite provable and the trophies on my wall for being a leading salesman in both car audio and in car sales is enough validation for me... oh yeah, and the stacked bank account. I took a gigantic step down in earning potential to get out of retail sales and into my new career, people like you however made the choice easy. People with no experience or true frame of reference coming in knowing nothing about everything... I got tired of listening to the same type of ******** you are spewing day in and day out. Too bad, both industries lost a true professional when I decided to leave... However, when I left I left my creations in the hands of my predecessors. I left them a great business that I established and they are continuing to do extremely well for themselves to this day.

My current field embodies the ideals of an ethical professional. Decisions I make and actions I make determine the welfare of my customers to a black and white life and death level. I do not screw up and nobody questions my integrity because it has been proven. Every level of government and consumer outlet recognizes me as a professional of the highest calibre and that is all the validation I need. The criticisms of some anonymous internet keyboard jockey mean literally nothing to me. The only reason I am here poking holes in your ill conceived argument is because I find it entertaining and I love watching you make a complete idiot of yourself. I can lead you to the water and watch you drink. It is quite amazing 

You're like a guy bitching about the government, you make a lot of noise but the noise doesn't really matter. Your ramblings are contained to a place where those who matter know what you are and what you are all about. You and your merry band of followers (if they exist) mean exactly nothing to car audio, or car audio competition. If someone doesn't go to MECA because of what you have written, good, MECA doesn't need them, they weren't serious anyways. If someone doesn't buy a system because of what some car salesman tells them, great, they are a pain in the ass deal and it's better somebody else has them anyways. 

All the negative impacts of your position are actually positive for the industry. Less ignorant people, more serious people, less chaff, more wheat. More quality, less rot. I know what categories you fit into.

You sad pathetic man.


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

Cajunner.....Cajunner......Cajunner

For starters my wife has been by my side since I started doing car audio competitions. The most resent show was USACi Finals 2010. She just didn't want/need any upgrades and I have enough equipment sitting on the shelf to do it. Remember, assumpstion.....the mother of all ****ups..... you seem to have that down pat. 

Now I have read all the post in this thread and at first you made some rational statements. But you seemed to have backslid to the childish side.

A question for you... If GM did this "test" before/or as the 2011 model year cars came out, logic could "assume" they would have used the MECA angle this Fall, so why haven't we seen it yet?

Use your keyboard and google my real name signed below.... I unlike you i'm not hiding behind a keyboard.

I have a name in the 12v industry....do you?

I unlike you,I sign my real name to anything I post on any forum I visit.


Markey Dietrich

see.....real name


----------



## KP (Nov 13, 2005)

I stopped seriously reading this about 10 pages ago. My thoughts.

I remember when Stern told me about the upcoming trip to GM. I forget which MECA show we were at but I thought it odd that GM was even interested in knowing. Did not ask him his motive and did not think much else about it. 

Acura: The TL has used a Panasonic system since the 2004 model year. The person that works for Panasonic that tunes the Acura TL OEM is an IASCA World Champion.(Several times over) A MECA judge that works for Panasonic has also been involved in the Acura line set up. This is nothing new. Is using their experience in competition to tune OEM cars wrong? Or did what they have learned from the OEM helped them in competition?

Kirk Proffitt


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> This thread became comedy when bootsy kneehigh decided to dip into his diaper and have a toss.
> 
> Hey, it's great you got that real name thing going, I appreciate your candor and if you read the posts in this thread, you would know that I admit, I not only don't have a name in the 12V industry, I don't have a name in the sound-off circuit either. Matter of fact, I'm just a guy who has loved car stereo for the last 28 years, and it has been a luxury I allowed myself, even when it stole away time from loved ones. I know what it's like to have someone say "haven't you done enough to that car?" and mean it.
> 
> ...


It's not that people cannot see what you see, it's that we can see MORE than you see since we have experience in the industry and we can see why your position is simply ridiculous.

You admit your entire position is speculation therefore it is unsubstantiated. Period.

and yes, your complete lack of experience does make your position less credible because you are making a statement about what is going on and you have no frame of reference, other than a single article which you have taken badly out of context.

The thread turned to comedy when you came in as a completely ignorant party and brought wild and unsubstantiated conjecture to the thread. That was WAY before I showed up.

I showed up to show people that you have a trend of speculating and then being proven wrong and then backtracking on your statements. Which is still there for everyone to see.

People who read this thread are going to see you for what you are, an ignorant fool on a crusade to save your ego.

you sad pathetic man.


----------



## FAUEE (Jul 22, 2010)

I can't speak to the competition angle of this all, but I can speak to the general SQ of OEM systems aspect.

First of all, the CTS Bose system is by no means one of the better OEM systems out there. I can say this safely having driven them and their competition. It's better than the normal crap GM gives you, but nothing to write home about. There are significantly better sounding systems in other vehicles (BMW's H/K systems, Audi's B&O, and several others come to mind). I've never been to a competition for SQ either, but I've heard some nice sounding cars (I'd like to think my car sounds pretty good, it's definitely not SQ competition level, but I think it sounds pretty decent). The cars I've heard that sound much better than mine are likely competition level cars. I can attest that if a car sounds better than mine, it sounds better than any Bose system I've heard, including the CTS's.

This sounds like very typical GM hype, which doesn't surprise me. They do things like this all the time, they "persuade" a favorable victory in a comparison or review to use as a selling point. There's a few reviews where they reviewed the new SRX, and it was handily beaten in every category, yet it ended up winning the comparison because they said it "looked and felt sportier", clearly a selling point for non sporty designed Luxury crossovers. GM typically doesn't flaunt these things however as victories, because they know the truth behind them, and know that if they flaunt them, the truth will come out and they will look terrible. So they let it become the stuff that low rent journalists talk about, and forum wars are filled with.

I agree its disappointing to all the competitors who without a doubt sounded better than a stock car with a not that great stereo system. But that's one of the risks in competing in a competition with no actual quantitative way to score (ie times in a race, SPL, etc).

That said, OEM systems have made leaps and bounds in SQ in the past decade or so. I remember a time (not that long ago) when even the premium systems sounded like garbage comparatively. I'd say that the bar for a standard audio system has been raised significantly since then, which many stock stereo systems being as good as a basic aftermarket system or better. A lot of this has come from partnerships with big car audio companies (Kicker, RF, Panasonic, H/K all come to mind). Some have come from technology and DSP going into the cars (Acura's microphone system cancelling out exterior noise, the different cars that have DSP settings to adjust for the imperfect locations of the speakers, etc). But the fact is that the bar has been raised compared to your average car stereo. 

But this is all a moot point. Would GM "persuade" a good score for no reason? Definitely. It's cheap (to them), and it might score them some points here or there. Does that mean the audio system is actually better than the competitors its been rated against, or even its OEM competition? No. Does it mean that the other OEM systems sound as good as the SQ competitors cars? No. It's another pointless tidbit that might sway some uninformed buyers. The dealer, a friend, etc. tells the potential buyer "this stereo was ranked as one of the best in the world, over the B&O in Audis and all sorts of stuff, it's top end stuff, there's only a few cars with aftermarket systems in the country ranked higher than it", and that person will believe it, placebo effect themselves into thinking the same, and buy it hook, line, and sinker.

I will say one thing, if people get it in their head Bose is the best, nothing you can show them will change that. We were with one guy who was looking for a new home theater system, he wanted a Bose. We took him to listen to various other even higher end stereos (money was no object for him) and had him listen to them. Klipsch Reference, Definitive Technologies, Mirage, Martin Logan, Denons, etc. He always swore the Bose system sounded better, even just the basic Bose cubes. Nothing we showed him would sway him, despite the well known fact that they sounded better.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> But this is all a moot point. Would GM "persuade" a good score for no reason? Definitely. It's cheap (to them), and it might score them some points here or there. *Does that mean the audio system is actually better than the competitors its been rated against*, or even its OEM competition? No. Does it mean that the other OEM systems sound as good as the SQ competitors cars? No. It's another pointless tidbit that might sway some uninformed buyers. The dealer, a friend, etc. tells the potential buyer "this stereo was ranked as one of the best in the world, over the B&O in Audis and all sorts of stuff, it's top end stuff, there's only a few cars with aftermarket systems in the country ranked higher than it", and that person will believe it, placebo effect themselves into thinking the same, and buy it hook, line, and sinker.


It hasn't been rated against competition systems, it's been rated against a civic, a corolla and a cruze.


> I agree its disappointing to all the competitors who without a doubt sounded better than a stock car with a not that great stereo system. But that's one of the risks in competing in a competition with no actual quantitative way to score (ie times in a race, SPL, etc).


What do you think would happen with a stock GM system if it competed in the lanes?


----------



## The Real Old Guy (Jan 4, 2009)

Cajunner,

How about answering my question....... Why hasn't GM used the Stern/MECA angle this Fall yet?

Oh FYI it's either Cajun or ******* not that cute made up Cajunner. Whatever that's suppose to mean........... But being from the left coast you can have a pass I guess.


Markey Dietrich

see....real name


----------



## FAUEE (Jul 22, 2010)

BoostedNihilist said:


> It hasn't been rated against competition systems, it's been rated against a civic, a corolla and a cruze.
> 
> 
> What do you think would happen with a stock GM system if it competed in the lanes?


Maybe I'm missing what you're getting at. But the table on the first page has scores for competitors, and then another column for the CTS's score (which I don't think is a bad idea, as having a "control" for judging is not really a bad thing. At least in things with quantitative data that is supporting it). Are you getting at that it wasn't ranked against similar stock systems from Audi, BMW, etc? Or are you getting at that when the CTS's score was given, it was judged against those cars?

Perhaps I missed additional information, I didn't read the huge number of pages worth of posts. I merely intended to give my observations of the factory systems.

If a stock GM car were to be judged in a quantitative way, I can't foresee it doing very well. Most of their cars have very muddy bass and highs, with severely rear biased sound. Many of them are overpowering on either highs or lows. I doubt even their highest of systems would fare well when compared to their competition from Audi, BMW, etc.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

FAUEE said:


> Maybe I'm missing what you're getting at. But the table on the first page has scores for competitors, and then another column for the CTS's score (which I don't think is a bad idea, as having a "control" for judging is not really a bad thing. At least in things with quantitative data that is supporting it). Are you getting at that it wasn't ranked against similar stock systems from Audi, BMW, etc? Or are you getting at that when the CTS's score was given, it was judged against those cars?


The problem with the numbers as they appear in that table is that the cadillac was not judged against any of those cars. Therefore the score is not relative to the scores on the right side of the table. The cadillac needed to be judged against those cars in order for the comparison to be drawn. In other words, it wasn't judged against the control, it was judged in isolation. 



> If a stock GM car were to be judged in a quantitative way, I can't foresee it doing very well. Most of their cars have very muddy bass and highs, with severely rear biased sound. Many of them are overpowering on either highs or lows. I doubt even their highest of systems would fare well when compared to their competition from Audi, BMW, etc.


On the day of the competition, the control will be established from a sample from the pool to be judged. If the cadillac is not part of the pool it cannot be judged against the results of that pool because it was not subjected to the same control. If the best car is judged first, all the other scores have to be lower based on the control established by the first car, but if the first car isn't the best, you cannot give it the highest mark and run yourself out of room to ensure you don't end up with a tie of a perfect score... which is conceivable. If you judge a car at a 90 and you have 11 cars that are progressively better, and your points max out at 100.. what do you do for car #11? You can't make more points... 

That is why the cadillac needs to compete in the lanes to validate its position within the pool that did compete in the lanes, and that is why I asked you how you thought the GM car would do in the lanes. Clearly, it is not going to do very well because it will be judged against a different control.

The cadillac was judged against a cruze, a corolla and a civic, or nothing at all, either way it was not judged against the cars in competition.

That table is very misleading and has caused at least one person to draw an erroneous conclusion as to its validity.


----------



## FAUEE (Jul 22, 2010)

BoostedNihilist said:


> The problem with the numbers as they appear in that table is that the cadillac was not judged against any of those cars. Therefore the score is not relative to the scores on the right side of the table. The cadillac needed to be judged against those cars in order for the comparison to be drawn. In other words, it wasn't judged against the control, it was judged in isolation.
> 
> On the day of the competition, the control will be established from a sample from the pool to be judged. If the cadillac is not part of the pool it cannot be judged against the results of that pool because it was not subjected to the same control. If the best car is judged first, all the other scores have to be lower based on the control established by the first car, but if the first car isn't the best, you cannot give it the highest mark and run yourself out of room to ensure you don't end up with a tie of a perfect score... which is conceivable. If you judge a car at a 90 and you have 11 cars that are progressively better, and your points max out at 100.. what do you do for car #11? You can't make more points...
> 
> ...


I definitely agree with this. A "ranking" is only as valid as compared to the other vehicles it's ranked against. Especially in a qualitative ranking.

On a test,a 20/50 sounds pretty bad. But if the highest score is a 22/50, its not that bad. By the same token, a 78/100 is pretty average sounding, but if that score is compared to a mean of 105, its not that good anymore.

I think the real fact that may get lost in this all is that the CTS's Bose system is not in any way a world class stereo. It's not even the best in its class as far as entry level luxury cars.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> I probably shouldn't feed the **** slinging monkey, but what the hell, it's comedy for me...
> 
> have you read the first page of this thread?
> 
> ...


Totally not livid. I have zero emotional attachment to this debate. Just because I point out facts about your character does not imply that I am emotionally involved in this debate.

My position is simply that your position is completely unfounded based on the complete lack of evidence. I am not contending that MECA is a good organization or that GM will not manipulate the data, only that there is not enough available evidence to draw either conclusion unless you engage in wild speculation.

You have stated time and time again that your conclusions are speculation and conjecture, which means, by definition, that I am completely justified in calling your conclusions unfounded. Simple as that. There is nothing more to say.

you sad pathetic man.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

My position is simply that your position is completely unfounded based on the complete lack of evidence. I am not contending that MECA is a good organization or that GM will not manipulate the data, only that there is not enough available evidence to draw either conclusion unless you engage in wild speculation.

You have stated time and time again that your conclusions are speculation and conjecture, which means, by definition, that I am completely justified in calling your conclusions unfounded. Simple as that. There is nothing more to say.

you sad pathetic man.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

The result is the same every time, I am still right and you are still wrong.

My position is simply that your position is completely unfounded based on the complete lack of evidence. I am not contending that MECA is a good organization or that GM will not manipulate the data, only that there is not enough available evidence to draw either conclusion unless you engage in wild speculation.

You have stated time and time again that your conclusions are speculation and conjecture, which means, by definition, that I am completely justified in calling your conclusions unfounded. Simple as that. There is nothing more to say.

you sad pathetic man.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

no you didn't. You haven't been able to prove anything because there are no facts to support your argument. No facts, no proof, no sound argument.

My position is simply that your position is completely unfounded based on the complete lack of evidence. I am not contending that MECA is a good organization or that GM will not manipulate the data, only that there is not enough available evidence to draw either conclusion unless you engage in wild speculation.

You have stated time and time again that your conclusions are speculation and conjecture, which means, by definition, that I am completely justified in calling your conclusions unfounded. Simple as that. There is nothing more to say.

you sad pathetic man.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

only to an unthinking pathetic man with an agenda. You admit your position is speculation and conjecture, therefore you are admitting it is without foundation. These are the facts that are self evident and supported by your statements. 

My position is simply that your position is completely unfounded based on the complete lack of evidence. I am not contending that MECA is a good organization or that GM will not manipulate the data, only that there is not enough available evidence to draw either conclusion unless you engage in wild speculation.

You have stated time and time again that your conclusions are speculation and conjecture, which means, by definition, that I am completely justified in calling your conclusions unfounded. Simple as that. There is nothing more to say.

you sad pathetic man.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

keep trying to dig yourself out of the hole via the bottom. My position isn't changing because it does not need to  I am right and you are not. You cannot prove me wrong because you cannot prove yourself right. You have self admittedly based your argument on nothing but your own fantasy. You have no logic, because you have no logic. Only some sort of strange crusade that you need to validate your sad pathetic life. You layer conjecture upon conjecture in a desperate effort to convince yourself that you are right... an effort which has been successful, but to those with brains that know what they are talking about you are simply an ignorant moron with nothing left to give but simple deflection tactics and ill conceived defenses of an argument long since proven wrong.

I don't need to offer any more logical criticisms of your argument because my logic has sufficiently dismantled your argument time and time again. Now all I have to do is reaffirm my position by restating it in simple terms for everyone to see. I will not let my position be obscured by your continued irrelevant babble and as such will continue posting it so others aren't bamboozled by your ignorance.

My position is simply that your position is completely unfounded based on the complete lack of evidence. I am not contending that MECA is a good organization or that GM will not manipulate the data, only that there is not enough available evidence to draw either conclusion unless you engage in wild speculation.

You have stated time and time again that your conclusions are speculation and conjecture, which means, by definition, that I am completely justified in calling your conclusions unfounded. Simple as that. There is nothing more to say.

you sad pathetic man.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

> quoted for proof of debilitated brain function.


lol, almost time for some cat pics  

that's all you have left.. nothing  personal attacks and literally no mention of the argument  thanks for verbally tapping yet again  you sad pathetic man

I don't need to offer any more logical criticisms of your argument because my logic has sufficiently dismantled your argument time and time again. Now all I have to do is reaffirm my position by restating it in simple terms for everyone to see. I will not let my position be obscured by your continued irrelevant babble and as such will continue posting it so others aren't bamboozled by your ignorance. It is obvious that you are convinced you are right because you completely misinterpret, misrepresent and misread every available reference provided in this thread. Your hate for establishment is playing into your emotionally blinded perspective and preventing you from seeing why your conclusions are bunk. Thankfully for those not constrained by ignorance and emotions it is clear that your positions have been debunked to a degree that can only be described as complete.

You simply have no facts to back your argument, no experience to back your argument and no defense to back your argument  I am pleased that you have resulted to one line personal attacks because it simply proves that you have no legitimate defense of your actual position. Another nail in the coffin of your ill conceived rant. Thank you for again proving my point.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> quoted for further evidence of self-delusion.


Yep, that post clearly shows that you are self deluded.


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

cajunner said:


> again, my position not only trumps your position, you have no evidence to prove anything you've said at all. You just point and cry. Wahhh, relative scoring. Wahhh, can't see **** syndrome, Wahhh, gonna hurt the industry, Wahhh, I sic my legal team on you, Wahhh...
> 
> Point and cry guy, you know what you've been accusing me of? That's you, no evidence to prove anything, any point in this thread is wrong. Nothing at all. You talk up a storm about my scenarios and then make up your own. You say speculation is fine then you go on a one-man tirade about speculation. You don't address the parts that are self-evident, and why? Because you're a masturbator, er... debater. The beauty of my position is that you can't refute it, so you make negative campaigning your cornerstone, and well.. it's easy to see through. You're a one-trick pony and it's a sad trick, boosted.
> 
> People recognize you now, other people keep you at arm's length, and it's because you showed yourself here. We've all been burned by people in life, people like you. People who walk all over anyone and everything. You don't even have a real reason other than to be an *******, and said as much. Do you know how bad that makes you look? Probably not. Probably don't even know.



I have not made up any scenarios, that is you. I have been on a crusade against speculation period. I can easily refute your position because your position is a work of fantasy. Your position is based on nothing but speculation, you've said so yourself. So even if what you say exists within the realm of possibility you cannot prove it because the evidence you need to affirm your position has not happened yet, and does not exist yet. That is why you need to constantly foretell what will happen, because without the word will your argument has nothing. Will does not exist, will is merely a possibility until it has become has  so until that point in time exists I will be right and you will not.  

I don't care if what I say makes you think I am an *******, you're the one who needs validation. My position is validated by logic, facts and experience, all of which your argument is lacking. You have shown time and time again that you have no understanding of what you are speaking of. I would rather come off as an ******* than come off as you have, an ignorant *******.

I can see every angle of this argument because I have been there done that. What have you done in this industry? bought a few goods? read a ****ing article.. big ****ing deal. That does not give you the insight to make these grand proclamations of what is to be. I have the experience and knowledge of how this industry works to see clear through your ********. I have never claimed that anything here will hurt the industry because I quite simply know better. That is your position not mine. I have stated though that the propagation of your ignorant ******** will do more damage to the industry than this article, or the actions of stern, but that is self evident. Arrogant ****heads like you tend to drive people away from anything they have contact with.

If people like you wish to keep me at arms length, ****ing great! That is seriously perfect for me. You have literally nothing to offer me in the way of anything. You have no knowledge in the field that I don't have, you have no connections that I don't have and you have no other quality that would lead me to need you as part of my life. I don't measure my success in how many facebook friends I have or how many people agree or even give a **** about what I say. I've been enough places and done enough things to know that in the grand scheme of things the slice of the pie people like you occupy is a sad pathetic place to be where the only validation you have in life can be measured by how many people agree with you on an internet forum.

So have a good time projecting your own shortcomings on me, it is all you have left and just reaffirms my contention that you are a sad pathetic man.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

@Caj : Your two big issues are:

1. The concept of relative scoring 
2. Your hypothesis that Stern has sold MECA to GM, or something to that effect.

Issue # 1 : My 10 year old girl goes for ballet classes and the institute also has gymnastics classes for 4-8 year olds. Last week, the institute had its annual day and this 8 year old poppet won the gymnastics competition with a score of 9/10. So now, if the same judge were to judge the Olympics and the winner there scored 9/10 as well, would the 8yr old and the gold medalist at the Olympics be at the same level?

Issue # 2 : Time will tell. If there is something fishy at Meca, the top competitors will walk away, like they did from IASCA. If and when that happens you will be correct. Till then its pure conjecture. theres a limit to which you can carry conjecture.

@ Boosted : You're never going to convince caj because now its a fight between the two of you. Your points are valid, everyone who has read this thread knows it. Let it go. 

Just my $ 0.02. Chances are neither of you'll will listen


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

cajunner said:


> You're in the UK?
> 
> I didn't know MECA was the major sound-off organization over there, that's interesting...


We all know they're not. 

My point is that probably 99% of the UK don't know who are the sound-off organisations in the UK/Europe and even less people would actually know what a sound-off is.

Yes it's a nice bit of marketing for GM, but car audio is so far down most buyers lists I don't feel it's as important as you seem to..


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

cajunner said:


> If the salesman uses his considerable charm


I'm in the wrong country, American car salesmen have charm? What are the saleswomen like? lol

I bought an S2000 from a UK Honda dealer, the guy clearly knew less about cars then my missus who the car was for, so I asked him how often the cam belt needed doing-knowing full well that the car didn't have one.-Point being even when the guy makes his living off selling cars he still knows less then the punter, the car is sold before the salesman is even in the picture...


----------



## BoostedNihilist (Mar 3, 2008)

the only way that article had controversial implications is if you are a complete moron who can't read.

if this, will that, then this...

an argument based on nothing. This is what cajunner brings to the table.

What a loser.


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

cajunner said:


> on a car like the S2000?
> 
> I can see that, niche car, like the old RX-7, or the 280ZX, or even the Miata.
> 
> ...


All cars are niche, they fit the purpose for that market. I know cars are cheaper in the states but still feel anyone in this scene is more likely to buy 2nd hand and then modify-again the market you are talking of are unlikely to want to change anything. Whether or not the S2000 is "niche" the salesman should still know the basics.

If it's this Cruze,Chevrolet | Build Your Own - Customize Your Perfect Car By Trim
it won't set youngsters hearts racing over here, looks like a cross between a Focus and a Honda with Vauxhall dash. Also no mention on the site about the MECA results, and a massive 250w Pioneer upgrade seems to be the only audio option.

As said by other posters the system was tested in relation to the other cars there-check Talkaudio.co.uk for reviews on the Alpine SXE series speakers, score high-but it is pointed out the score is in relation to price..

Doesn't Cruz(e) refer to the original Iberian meaning of the word: Cross? As found in the Chevy badge and the fact it looks like the ugly cross-bread of the Honda and Focus


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

I heard a funny commercial today. Lexus has contracted Yamaha's musical instrument designers and engineers for the new Lexus LS and SC models to help them with the sound of the cars, not in tuning the music side but in tuning the exhaust and the sound they wanted... So much for marketing to audio....


----------

