# sound quality at the end of a night... well built pc or high end headunit



## hdrugs

what would give a audiophile higher quality signal? 

*a head unit along the lines of alpine f1, hxd2, p99rs. 

Or 

car pc with a top of the range sound card processed by 701 bit one ect


----------



## WuNgUn

I'm partial to the PC myself...
But I do all my processing thru the PC as well...why wouldn't you? It has the power and flexability to do whatever you wish!!

He's what I've been up to...

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...cs-water-cooled-car-computer-95-complete.html

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...crossover-linearization-design-56k-death.html

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ion-crossover-etc-using-impulse-response.html


----------



## dbiegel

Top of the line CarPC -- no comparison really. Car audio technology, even F1 level, is obsolete compared to modern signal processing software, studio grade hardware, etc. The only car audio products I've seen that at least offer some semblance of modern signal processing tech are Alpine H-650 (many find the auto-tune problematic, but at least it has 512 band FIR filters per channel) and JBL MS-8 (unknown how effective it is or what kind of filter technology was used).

Everything else is pretty much just the same old same old, 30+ years old IIR equalization and time delay technology, repackaged with cooler and cooler interfaces every 5 years...


----------



## hdrugs

how much power would i need to run

a dual core 2 duo, i think a 160 w psu might be weak


----------



## ReloadedSS

Just MHO, but I think in a short amount of time (a few years) as the CarPC becomes more mainstream, the aftermarket will head that way. I like the idea of a high end CD player, but as the market changes, and in particular, the cost of solid state drives drops with each year, they'll become the standard on the market. I don't attempt to be an expert on computers or even mobile audio, but I am a keen layman observer of markets.

Figure at the $500 price point, would it be unrealistic to have in a few years:

- Core 2 processor (possibly Core2 Duo, but considering what it's being used for, maybe not)
- 175-180w power supply
- good sound card and D/A converter
- onboard digital sound processing
- mobile computing OS
- 40 GB SSD

Simplified construction so that folks who want to upgrade (through dealer, or on their own) could do so. They could even release items at lower price points, but the basic DIN size could be retained. 

Sorry, no room for a CD in there...manufacturers will still sell those, just in increasingly smaller quantities. Look at Alpine's line for example...not nearly as many CD units, but four or five Ipod only units.

The market for a uber-sq unit like the Pioneer P99, DRZ9255, or Alpine F1 isn't terribly big, and will likely remain a somewhat esoteric market for the future. 

So...to sum up my rant, personally I would like a high-end CD unit...connected to a solid state drive holding lossless music files. Simple interface for audio -- volume knob, track up/down, secondary controls to change playlist, etc. When the time comes, I would prefer to have a netbook or something like that attached on a swivel mount inside the car for GPS and other such uses (something like what you see in a police cruiser).

I think the CarPC or something like that is the way of the future. Right at this moment, I think a high end cd player in a car has a slight edge on pure "sound" to a CarPC (I won't get into the argument about CD vs. lossless). But consider the possibilities in processing, tuning, upgradability with a CarPC (how many people, outside of DIYMA, that would tear open a $2000 CD player to upgrade it?) and the long game goes to a CarPC.

Also, WuNgUn, great install!


----------



## jp88

This is what I would build 

motherboard $89
Asus AT3GC-I Atom Motherboard - Intel Atom N330 1.60GHz Dual Core CPU, GMA 950 Graphics, VGA at TigerDirect.com

2 Gb ram $44.99
Centon 2048MB PC5400 DDR2 667MHz Memory at TigerDirect.com

2.5" mobile hard drive 250GB $59
Seagate ST9250410AS Momentus 7200.4 Hard Drive - 250GB, 7200rpm, 16MB, 2.5", SATA at TigerDirect.com

12v atx power supply $69
M2-ATX 160W Intelligent DC-DC PSU

sound card M-audio 1010lt 10 inputs 10 output pro audio sound card. $149
M-Audio Delta 1010-LT :: All DJ Soundcards :: DJ Sound Cards :: Audiolines.com - Pro Audio, DJ Equipment, A/V and Lighting Discount Distributor.

Build your own case


----------



## WuNgUn

jp88 said:


> This is what I would build
> 
> motherboard $89
> Asus AT3GC-I Atom Motherboard - Intel Atom N330 1.60GHz Dual Core CPU, GMA 950 Graphics, VGA at TigerDirect.com
> 
> 2 Gb ram $44.99
> Centon 2048MB PC5400 DDR2 667MHz Memory at TigerDirect.com
> 
> 2.5" mobile hard drive 250GB $59
> Seagate ST9250410AS Momentus 7200.4 Hard Drive - 250GB, 7200rpm, 16MB, 2.5", SATA at TigerDirect.com
> 
> 12v atx power supply $69
> M2-ATX 160W Intelligent DC-DC PSU
> 
> sound card M-audio 1010lt 10 inputs 10 output pro audio sound card. $149
> M-Audio Delta 1010-LT*::*All DJ Soundcards*::*DJ Sound Cards*::*Audiolines.com - Pro Audio, DJ Equipment, A/V and Lighting Discount Distributor.
> 
> Build your own case


Good choice on the sound card...
BUT...
M2 (and M4) PSU's are garbage...trust me.

Atom MB/CPU combo just isn't very powerful at all...with plugins and USB devices etc, it would be easily overrun...

Also, 2GB of RAM is likely overkill, especially when considering hibernation times with this much RAM.


----------



## newtitan

if you are going atom, id highly recommend the 330, mated to a geforce 9400


----------



## bahlgren342

How about the new Nvidia ION products? Everything bundled into one, and it's decent priced and compact, good for fitting into small areas, such as in car installs.


@ReloadedSS or anyone who can answer. Are iTune downloads lossless? or similar?


----------



## BassAddictJ

dbiegel said:


> Everything else is pretty much just the same old same old, 30+ years old IIR equalization and time delay technology, repackaged with cooler and cooler interfaces every 5 years...



It hurts but it's true....


----------



## WuNgUn

bahlgren342 said:


> How about the new Nvidia ION products? Everything bundled into one, and it's decent priced and compact, good for fitting into small areas, such as in car installs.
> 
> 
> @ReloadedSS or anyone who can answer. Are iTune downloads lossless? or similar?


iTunes...no, I really don't think they are lossless...

All-in-one PC's scary me a little bit...lol
The way I see it, something that is designed to perform well under many circumstances, likely fails badly when specialized for a single task.

Build your own custom-tailored PC if this is the route you wanna take.


----------



## 14642

WuNgUn said:


> I'm partial to the PC myself...
> But I do all my processing thru the PC as well...why wouldn't you? It has the power and flexability to do whatever you wish!!
> 
> He's what I've been up to...
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...cs-water-cooled-car-computer-95-complete.html
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...crossover-linearization-design-56k-death.html
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ion-crossover-etc-using-impulse-response.html


This is very impressive.


----------



## WuNgUn

Thanks Andy!

I'm looking forward to doing more tuning/experimenting in the near future...possibly ambiophonics stuff...maybe 3-way front stage? Definetly more log sweep/crossover tuning too!!


----------



## ReloadedSS

My computer with my main iTunes account is down, so I can't verify this, but what I seem to remember is that they implemented iTunes prime or something to improve the quality of the downloaded music -- but not yet offering lossless for download. Better quality than before, but also $0.30 more per song. And still not lossless (again, as far as I can recall).

Obviously, you can and I do import CD tracks as lossless audio, and for the sake of convenience, will download songs (knowingly in a lower quality) from iTunes every so often. They do take up a bit of space after time, I haven't imported all of my CDs yet, neither has my wife, and we're taking up a lot of space on our computer hard drives and the media server. My wife doesn't care much about lossless, so her songs are smaller in size, but we're already considering additional drives to the network. 

Haven't seen the Nvidia ION product, so I can't comment on that.


----------



## WuNgUn

Prices on HDD are dirt cheap...nows a good time to update that server!
My car has a 500GB drive, and I also have a 500GB drive just sitting on my desk, unused!


----------



## Fractaltctrl

The sound quality that you can achieve with studio grade audio interfaces can hardly be compared with any hu available on the market, and I am not really talking m-audio here, although the new Profire series offer quite an amazing value for the price, but as far as pci interfaces go I would suggest to look into Lynx and/ or RME, of course it means spending more but in the end you will know that you're getting the best possible sound processing. But still even with the best gear I think that your car's acoustic space and treatment will be the limiting factor in terms of the sound quality that you can achieve.


----------



## ReloadedSS

WuNgUn said:


> Prices on HDD are dirt cheap...nows a good time to update that server!
> My car has a 500GB drive, and I also have a 500GB drive just sitting on my desk, unused!


I've got 1.5 TB on the server right now, adding dozens (close to 100) of GB every week putting music, photos and digital movies on there. I can add two more drives, looking for a couple of 1 or 1.5 TB Western Digital Green drives relatively cheap. Yes, HDD are shockingly cheap, and prices seemingly drop every month or two. 

I'm actually holding off on getting a new laptop (desktop replacement) until the quad cores get less pricey (and get combined with less expensive SSDs). Time may be here sooner rather than later for a mass-market PC with interface. I see cars like the new(er) 5-series, or Audi, or even the current gen Honda Accord with the screen mounted up high to make a good display for a powerful mobile PC. Some kind of iDrive interface or the like will probably be necessary though, so to minimize driver distraction from the road.


----------



## 14642

Fractaltctrl said:


> The sound quality that you can achieve with studio grade audio interfaces can hardly be compared with any hu available on the market, and I am not really talking m-audio here, although the new Profire series offer quite an amazing value for the price, but as far as pci interfaces go I would suggest to look into Lynx and/ or RME, of course it means spending more but in the end you will know that you're getting the best possible sound processing. But still even with the best gear I think that your car's acoustic space and treatment will be the limiting factor in terms of the sound quality that you can achieve.


My only advice regarding sound card choice is to beware of spending too much money on claims of high-end performance at the expense of setup ease and features that you'll need. I've tried many cards and for the money, I find the Edirol 10-channel USB interface I use to be a great blend of reliability, ease of use and competent sound quality at a reasonable price. My previous attempt at using an esoteric firewire interface that cost 4 times as much was fruitless, irritating, disappointing and ultimately a huge waste of time and energy. Unless you're using some processing specific to the interface, the processing is all in the PC anyway and the interface is just a collection of connectors and AD/DA convertors. Look for balanced in and out, bus power (or a wall-wart that you can replicate easily with 12V or a simple regulator), a device that will allow your PC to hibernate, compatability with your VST host, digital input (makes selection of a front end software simpler, as you won't have to choose one with ASIO; or makes use with ITunes as a front end simpler). 

If you want to apply channel-specific EQ to the digital stream from the WDM driver, look at ESI cards with "ReWire". It's an ingenious way around the DRM garbage that sends the output of the WDM driver directly to interface's outputs.


----------



## Fractaltctrl

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> My only advice regarding sound card choice is to beware of spending too much money on claims of high-end performance at the expense of setup ease and features that you'll need. I've tried many cards and for the money, I find the Edirol 10-channel USB interface I use to be a great blend of reliability, ease of use and competent sound quality at a reasonable price. My previous attempt at using an esoteric firewire interface that cost 4 times as much was fruitless, irritating, disappointing and ultimately a huge waste of time and energy. Unless you're using some processing specific to the interface, the processing is all in the PC anyway and the interface is just a collection of connectors and AD/DA convertors. Look for balanced in and out, bus power (or a wall-wart that you can replicate easily with 12V or a simple regulator), a device that will allow your PC to hibernate, compatability with your VST host, digital input (makes selection of a front end software simpler, as you won't have to choose one with ASIO; or makes use with ITunes as a front end simpler).
> 
> If you want to apply channel-specific EQ to the digital stream from the WDM driver, look at ESI cards with "ReWire". It's an ingenious way around the DRM garbage that sends the output of the WDM driver directly to interface's outputs.


There are several reasons for spending more on a higher end unit, besides higher quality of converters, one being the *stability* of drivers and second the ease of use and setup, just take a look at RME's matrix based mixer. 

I am not sure why you perceive firewire as esoteric, since it is a standard way of connecting interfaces that's used by all manufacturers. There is no real reason to chose usb over fw. 

Not sure what you mean by saying that all the processing is done in the pc. It's audio interface/sound card and the DSP chip inside it that do the processing, but of course the latency associated with buffer size will rely on how fast your cpu will be able to fill the buffer, so yes in a way the processing does rely on the abilities of your pc, but in the case with car audio latency is not really an issue and you don't need a very powerful pc to have a high quality sound. The quality will depend on the type of interface you use and the quality of it's components.

That being said I think that a very high end card like Apogee would be an overkill for a car audio setup, but there is no need to spend thousands, you can have an excellent interface form motu, rme or lynx for around 500-600 bucks that will prove to be reliable and will save you a lot of headaches. Plus the quality of sound of those cards can't really be compared to that of cards from edirol, e-mu, or m-audio (exception being the profire series). Those cards might work fine, but nothing to write home about.


----------



## 14642

The point wasn't that firewire was esoteric, it was that the whole "man, buy the high-end card 'cause it'll sound better" is less important than getting something that actually works. We have a MOTU interface that seems to work pretty well and a RME boxes here and there that are also nice. The card I had such a horrible time with was a TC Electronics card--driver sucked, service sucked, compatability with the TI firewire chip in my Mac Mini was bad--no one--not TC nor MAC would fess up or provide any useful help. In the past I've also found Echo Indigo to be a reliable but over-priced card when compared to a Soundblaster notebook card which integrated seamlessly with the windows mixer...blah blah blah.

I'm not saying no one should buy a high end card and I would if I could find one that did what I need it to do, but just getting this stuff to work reliably in a car with no noise, ho hibernation issues, etc. Is far more important than eeking out the last bit or two of resolution.


----------



## rugdnit

Andy-- I appreciate your interaction on this forum. The more reading I do-- I WANT THAT MS-8.


----------



## Fractaltctrl

Well for those exact reason I suggested the cards that I did. Reliability and stable operation are the most important aspects in any DAW. From experience I have found Motu to work great on macs, while RME on pc's, that's of course a pretty general statement and all components of your specific setup need to be considered for a flawless operation, but the type of mb and compatibility with the fw chip are very important. That's why I think a pci interface like RME hdsp would work very well in a carpc. Also since the op was asking about audiophile sound quality and wanted to compare a carpc setup to ~$1500 competition range hu's, I think the use of a proaudio interface has it's place and fits the bill.


----------



## WuNgUn

The problem with pro audio PC equipment, is it's tailored for studio work, ie. digital recording...
Analog playback is not what these cards were designed for.


----------



## 14642

WuNgUn said:


> The problem with pro audio PC equipment, is it's tailored for studio work, ie. digital recording...
> Analog playback is not what these cards were designed for.


DING DING DING...we have a winner.


----------



## WuNgUn

Andy Wehmeyer said:


> DING DING DING...we have a winner.


lol
Although, if you wanted to go digital/optical playback, and run a DAC in front of your amps, then pretty much ANY decent sound card would do...


----------



## goodstuff

From a reliability standpoint I'd still go with a h/u over pc based. Really amazing what the pc's can do though.


----------



## bbfoto

Computer Audiophile | High-End Audiophile Music Servers

Just another decent reference web site. Not tailored to Car Audio specifically, but hey, Check it out.


----------



## bahlgren342

Would you do all your processing and tuning through the PC? And just use a digital optical out? Or would you still have to put a digital out to a processor and have that split through to the amps?


----------



## WuNgUn

bahlgren342 said:


> Would you do all your processing and tuning through the PC? And just use a digital optical out? Or would you still have to put a digital out to a processor and have that split through to the amps?


Yeah, why not? You can manipulate the signal anyway you want, then send it out digitally to a DAC then the amps...
With a really nice DAC (tubes anyone?), you could build a really nice setup this way...

One thing to remember, is 5.1, 7.1, Dolby Digital, etc are *compressed *before leaving the device...
2 channel would be good, uncompressed stream.

However, if doing an active setup like me, I dunno how you'd do it...you'd have to modify the DAC to handle what you want with the signal.

With analog out, I do what I want with it, and use the 4 output jacks anyway I wish!


----------



## goodstuff

WuNgUn said:


> One thing to remember, is 5.1, 7.1, Dolby Digital, etc are *compressed *before leaving the device...
> 2 channel would be good, uncompressed stream.


I didn't know that. Do all 5.1/ 7/1 systems use compression?? Is it there own proprietary encoding format?


----------



## kapone

goodstuff said:


> I didn't know that. Do all 5.1/ 7/1 systems use compression?? Is it there own proprietary encoding format?


Yes. "Almost" all audio formats (in the digital domain) are implemented using some sort of compression. That's why you have these fancy names and logos on equipment. "Dolby Digital", DTS, SDSS etc etc  The logos look good on equipment.. All of them ARE proprietary, hence the logos and names (and the licensing and patenting behind them).

The exception "may" be some of the newer formats being implemented on Blu Ray discs, like DTS MA (DTS Master Audio) and 7.1 channel PCM bitstreaming. These formats are "supposed" to be as near lossless as can be implemented today, and the reason we never had these in the past is simple. Storage space.  A single layer DVD can hold 4.7GB of data. A dual layer can hold about 8GB. A BD disc can hold almost 50GB.  Hence the "better" audio (and video) formats, with less "losses".

TRUE multichannel lossless audio (100% equivalent to a multichannel analog signal), still doesn't exist.


----------



## goodstuff

kapone said:


> Yes. "Almost" all audio formats (in the digital domain) are implemented using some sort of compression. That's why you have these fancy names and logos on equipment. "Dolby Digital", DTS, SDSS etc etc  The logos look good on equipment.. All of them ARE proprietary, hence the logos and names (and the licensing and patenting behind them).
> 
> The exception "may" be some of the newer formats being implemented on Blu Ray discs, like DTS MA (DTS Master Audio) and 7.1 channel PCM bitstreaming. These formats are "supposed" to be as near lossless as can be implemented today, and the reason we never had these in the past is simple. Storage space.  A single layer DVD can hold 4.7GB of data. A dual layer can hold about 8GB. A BD disc can hold almost 50GB.  Hence the "better" audio (and video) formats, with less "losses".
> 
> TRUE multichannel lossless audio (100% equivalent to a multichannel analog signal), still doesn't exist.


wow.


----------



## WuNgUn

kapone said:


> Yes. "Almost" all audio formats (in the digital domain) are implemented using some sort of compression. That's why you have these fancy names and logos on equipment. "Dolby Digital", DTS, SDSS etc etc  The logos look good on equipment.. All of them ARE proprietary, hence the logos and names (and the licensing and patenting behind them).
> 
> The exception "may" be some of the newer formats being implemented on Blu Ray discs, like DTS MA (DTS Master Audio) and 7.1 channel PCM bitstreaming. These formats are "supposed" to be as near lossless as can be implemented today, and the reason we never had these in the past is simple. Storage space.  A single layer DVD can hold 4.7GB of data. A dual layer can hold about 8GB. A BD disc can hold almost 50GB.  Hence the "better" audio (and video) formats, with less "losses".
> 
> TRUE multichannel lossless audio (100% equivalent to a multichannel analog signal), still doesn't exist.


Good info...thanks for the post!


----------



## hdrugs

what would you guys personally use

m-audio delta 1010lt or asus xonar d2x?


----------



## ungo4

You car pc guys are killing me! Granted, pc's are cool and extremely powerful and flexible, but they're hard to keep cool in a car, the operating system interface doesn't lend itself to ease of use while driving, and you are constantly having to update or download stuff to keep the system working properly just as you do with a home pc.

For the average person or even alot of car audiophiles such as myself, the hassle just isn't worth it when I can use a nice headunit that's easy to operate with extremely flexible tuning, has better sound quality than I'll ever need in a car, and operates perfectly pretty much every time I turn it on without having to update, reboot, or download something.

There's something to be said when every time a manufacturer tries to implement something similar to true car pc's, such as the BMW Idrive, people complain about the complexity of operation. Most people just don't want to deal with the hassle. Ease of use is king in the car.

My hat is off to you guys that have the patients and energy to build and use a great car pc setup. Its just not for me.

That being said, I think you can get equally great sound from either type of setup. The installation, tuning and general car environment have way more affect on sound quality than your actual source does after you reach a certain level of quality, which is not very high in the price range.


----------



## WuNgUn

I use 2 Asus Xonars, because I'm running analog output...they have excellent OpAmps and DAC's (Burr Brown)...
The M-Audio equipment is good for studio work...DIGITAL studio work (recording/mixing). For playback, if your thinking analog, I'd pass on 'em. If you got a DAC in stream somewhere, then onboard audio would be fine...

As far as keeping the PC cool...it's not really a problem at all...I use coolant!


----------



## kkant

ungo4 said:


> has better sound quality than I'll ever need in a car


While I can't say that this is untrue since it's a statement about your needs, I will say that it represents a very low bar on sound quality. I think what you probably mean by this is that more expensive sources do not automatically "create SQ", and I would agree with that. But here's what's missing with a car HU: they simply do not have the tuning capability required to produce great SQ in a car. That's where a CarPC can help. Not necessarily in the user apps, but in the availability of robust customizable tuning tools.


----------



## ungo4

kkant said:


> But here's what's missing with a car HU: they simply do not have the tuning capability required to produce great SQ in a car. That's where a CarPC can help. Not necessarily in the user apps, but in the availability of robust customizable tuning tools.


I have to disagree. 99% of the people on here are not optimizing their setups with the tuning tools they have available now. Adding more stuff is just making the tuning process more complicated and harder to set up. The best cars I've ever heard, and I've heard alot of them, have pretty much all used conventional headunits. This re-enforces my case that pc's aren't always the best solution.

Your statement about having a low bar on sound quality is also wrong. I have a extremely high bar on sound quality, probably higher than most people. I have built and tuned competition cars for along time as well as enjoyed listening to music in a variety of settings. If I didn't think that a conventional headunit could give me the sound quality I was after then I wouldn't use one. 

Assuming that a car pc will always be capable of better sound than any headunit is a mistake. There's a reason high end home systems and musicians regularly use dedicated independent components instead of always using pc's. Many times people actually use analog components instead of digital. Conventional headunits and pc's are equally capable of great sound quality. To argue otherwise would be to show ignorance and/or intolerance toward the other side.


----------



## kkant

ungo4 said:


> I have to disagree. 99% of the people on here are not optimizing their setups with the tuning tools they have available now. Adding more stuff is just making the tuning process more complicated and harder to set up. The best cars I've ever heard, and I've heard alot of them, have pretty much all used conventional headunits. This re-enforces my case that pc's aren't always the best solution.


I couldn't care less what 99% of people use. What matters to me is what sounds good...and no car head unit has the tuning tools available to really sound good (as compared to a serious reference). How can I say this? Because no car HU has anything better than a graphic EQ with maybe a couple parametrics. This is woefully inadequate compensation for the acoustic nightmare of a car interior. Most people don't want anything else, because most people don't care about SQ. But anyone who cares about SQ should be aware of the advantages that a CarPC can provide. Your statement that "no more SQ is needed" than a HU is false. In a car especially, there is always room for improvement.



ungo4 said:


> Assuming that a car pc will always be capable of better sound than any headunit is a mistake. There's a reason high end home systems and musicians regularly use dedicated independent components instead of always using pc's. Many times people actually use analog components instead of digital. Conventional headunits and pc's are equally capable of great sound quality. To argue otherwise would be to show ignorance and/or intolerance toward the other side.


In an environment that requires a huge amount of room correction (like a car), what determines the SQ of a preamp or processor is the tuning capability it provides. CarPC's can provide far better tuning capabilities than a HU alone; they are not at all equally capable. Therefore CarPC's are better for SQ, in a car, than a HU alone.


----------



## ungo4

kkant said:


> I couldn't care less what 99% of people use. What matters to me is what sounds good...and no car head unit has the tuning tools available to really sound good (as compared to a serious reference). How can I say this? Because no car HU has anything better than a graphic EQ with maybe a couple parametrics. This is woefully inadequate compensation for the acoustic nightmare of a car interior. Most people don't want anything else, because most people don't care about SQ. But anyone who cares about SQ should be aware of the advantages that a CarPC can provide. Your statement that "no more SQ is needed" than a HU is false. In a car especially, there is always room for improvement.
> 
> In an environment that requires a huge amount of room correction (like a car), what determines the SQ of a preamp or processor is the tuning capability it provides. CarPC's can provide far better tuning capabilities than a HU alone; they are not at all equally capable. Therefore CarPC's are better for SQ, in a car, than a HU alone.


I'll just agree to disagree. I've never heard a car with a pc have really great, phenomenal SQ despite all these great tuning advantages. But I have heard several really great, phenomenal sounding cars with "inferior" headunits and processors. Seems that the disadvantage is in the tuner of the system not the equipment and its processing power to me. Having all this processing power doesn't do you any good if you can't or don't know how to utilize it properly. BTW, tuning capabilities don't determine the SQ of a processor, the person's skill using it does.


----------



## kkant

ungo4 said:


> I'll just agree to disagree. I've never heard a car with a pc have really great, phenomenal SQ despite all these great tuning advantages. But I have heard several really great, phenomenal sounding cars with "inferior" headunits and processors. Seems that the disadvantage is in the tuner of the system not the equipment and its processing power to me. Having all this processing power doesn't do you any good if you can't or don't know how to utilize it properly. BTW, tuning capabilities don't determine the SQ of a processor, the person's skill using it does.


Oh, I'm not disagreeing at all with that. Obviously you have to know how to use the tools at your disposal. That wasn't my point, and that's not the question at hand. I was simply pointing out that CarPC's have far better capabilities for SQ than any car HU does. If you are a great tuner, you can make a car sound much better with a CarPC with the appropriate software than with any HU alone. Car HU's are completely behind the times as far as tuning capability (and therefore SQ). Take any great sounding system with only a HU, and assuming you know how to tune, you can improve the SQ by putting a CarPC in the mix.


----------



## armen818

I wanna ask you guys something.

Lets say you have all the hardware for a car computer, what kind of a software would you use??? and how would you connect the car computer to the OEM H/U??


----------



## mosca

I'm currently doing a setup with a Mac Mini coupled with an ESI U24 XL 24 USB soundcard connected via optical to a Bit One.

I'm thinking I might just ditch the Bit One and upgrade the soundcard to something with multichannel output. this MOTU card MOTU.com - UltraLite-mk3 Hybrid Overview has a price that could make me do the upgrade (~500 euro), do you think it is a good option? if not, can you point me to some alternatives (external USB/FireWire) that do not go beyond that price?


----------



## duckymcse

Here is very simple way to setup a CarPC

Hardware:
Viliv S5 ultra portable computer (smallest PC you can find currently) 
Any USB audio transport with digital output (I'm using X-FI USB 5.1 Surround, I'm still looking for other USB alternative with even better sound quality output)
Audison Bitone.1 sound processor 

Software:
Windows 7 with Winamp using Kernal Streaming.
I tried MANY other music player softwares and Winamp with Kernal Streaming is the BEST sounding to me so far. 

My current Viliv S5 CarPC with Audison Bitone.1 sound better than my used to own Eclipse CD7200 mkII with Audison Bitone.1.



armen818 said:


> I wanna ask you guys something.
> 
> Lets say you have all the hardware for a car computer, what kind of a software would you use??? and how would you connect the car computer to the OEM H/U??


----------



## ungo4

kkant said:


> Oh, I'm not disagreeing at all with that. Obviously you have to know how to use the tools at your disposal. That wasn't my point, and that's not the question at hand. I was simply pointing out that CarPC's have far better capabilities for SQ than any car HU does. If you are a great tuner, you can make a car sound much better with a CarPC with the appropriate software than with any HU alone. Car HU's are completely behind the times as far as tuning capability (and therefore SQ). Take any great sounding system with only a HU, and assuming you know how to tune, you can improve the SQ by putting a CarPC in the mix.


So what's the appropriate software so I can investigate?

Interesting that the 2 guys that posted after us are using pc's with digital out to Bitones to do their processing. They need to know what software to use also, so they can get much more capable tuning and SQ instead of wasting time with the inferior Bitone.


----------



## kkant

ungo4 said:


> So what's the appropriate software so I can investigate?
> 
> Interesting that the 2 guys that posted after us are using pc's with digital out to Bitones to do their processing. They need to know what software to use also, so they can get much more capable tuning and SQ instead of wasting time with the inferior Bitone.


<Shrug> Do some google searches for VST plugins for parametric EQ's, crossovers, spatial processing, even room correction. There are also linux-based DSP filter packages I have tried, but linux may be harder to integrate in an "embedded" environment like the one we are speaking of. The forums at mp3car.com have a wealth of information about this. Admittedly that is a commercial website, but even the product lists there give you a good idea what can be done with a carpc. 

If someone has already bought a bitone, chances are that they've never used a parametric EQ. The carpc can easily replicate the simple graphic EQs of a bitone, and much more besides. But, as you rightly say, the tools only provide the potential for a great sounding system. If you've never tuned or you are no good at tuning, getting a toolbox isn't going to magically fix the car.


----------



## duckymcse

Please explain why the Bitone had inferior tuning and SQ?



ungo4 said:


> So what's the appropriate software so I can investigate?
> 
> Interesting that the 2 guys that posted after us are using pc's with digital out to Bitones to do their processing. They need to know what software to use also, so they can get much more capable tuning and SQ instead of wasting time with the inferior Bitone.


----------



## ungo4

I wasn't directly saying the bit one is inferior because its not. Just read the posts between kkant and I and you'll understand more about why I was saying that. 

Kkant, thanks for the heads up on which direction to start looking at this stuff. I'll check it out as I'm curious even if I never use a car pc.


----------



## duckymcse

If you serious want to get into CarPC for SQ, the last thing you wants to do is maniplulate the sound of the original recording. EQ and crossover is sufficient. Choosing a soundcard with a good quality DAC is very important if you are not using an external sound processor. Run Windows 7 if possible. Choose a media player that support Kernal Streaming, ASIO or WASAPI which does bit perfect output instead of Directsound or Waveout.
Many here agree that the Bitone is the best sound processor until the JBL MS-8 come out soon. I don't think a CarPC sound as good by throwing bunch of plug-in to manipulate the sound will sound as good as a dedicated sound processor. If it does, show me the way and I will sell the Bitone 



ungo4 said:


> I wasn't directly saying the bit one is inferior because its not. Just read the posts between kkant and I and you'll understand more about why I was saying that.
> 
> Kkant, thanks for the heads up on which direction to start looking at this stuff. I'll check it out as I'm curious even if I never use a car pc.


----------



## matthewo

i have been using a WDTV Live, with digital optical output into my audison bitone processor, playing flac lossless recordings. so far its sounded pretty good. im running a dls A4 Active to 2 way front stage. and a single 12 for bass. still could use some tuning, but the potential is deffently nice with this setup.

personnally i dont use a car computer anymore cause the ease of using the WDTV live, and it does exactly what i need it to, if i need navigation or youtube/pandora, i use my iphone.

but i still think that 75% or more of the music i listen to isnt the best recording and having the best sq setup isnt really going to do squat, you know how much popping and distortion is in some red hot chili peppers music.


----------



## kkant

duckymcse said:


> Many here agree that the Bitone is the best sound processor until the JBL MS-8 come out soon. I don't think a CarPC sound as good by throwing bunch of plug-in to manipulate the sound will sound as good as a dedicated sound processor. If it does, show me the way and I will sell the Bitone


The whole point of the bitone or the ms-8 or a carpc-based DSP or a pro-studio DSP is to "manipulate the sound". What makes you think the bitone is more capable than a carpc-based DSP? Do you have experience tuning with parametric EQ's?


----------



## mosca

my interest in ditching the Bit One is because I purchased it before getting interested in what the MS-8 does with a center channel. I also purchased the most appropiated bi-channel soundcard that I could find given my budget constraints.

alas, I'm finding now that if I want to go the n.1 route — not buying an MS-8 for now, I like to fiddle with stuff just to learn — I should change de soundcard because the Bit One flattens to stereo any AC3 or DTS signal. from the manual:



> DIGITAL IN - WARNING: the digital inputs accepts up to 48 kHz / 24 bit stereo PCM signals. So DOLBY DIGITAL (AC3) multi-channel signals coming from audio/video sources (such as the audio of a film in DVD) or DTS can not be reproduced. The output of these devices will therefore be set in STEREO mode for the signal to be reproduced. If digital signals at frequency higher than 48 kHz (96 - 192 kHz) are supplied, the Bit One locks up. In that case, turn the Bit One off, supply the adequate signal and turn it on again.


I also have a question, would be glad is someone can answer it. I've learnt now that I can connect optically the Mac mini to the Bit One via an adapter like this Amazon.com: Toslink To Optical Mini Adapter: Parts Express: Electronics. so the question is: do I have any benefit passing through the external soundcard versus making a straight Mac -> Bit One connection?


----------



## duckymcse

I use the wrong word of manipulating. What I mean is alter the sound of the original recording using VST pluggin. Anything other than EQ, crossover and Time Alignment is not necessary. It just make matter worst in the car environment. At least that is what I experienced.
As for parametric EQ, yes I have tackle that to death with my Eclipse CD7200 mkII with 7-band parametric EQ. I'll take the 31-band graphic EQ of the Bitone over the 7-band PEQ anyday. PEQ is over-rated IMO. Don't questioning me about tuning because I been tuning my car virtually everyday or research better way to making sound better in my car.
Instead of question other people about their ability, why don't you provide some knowledge and tools to help other improve their sound system?
What I mean is what specific tools, softwares method that you use in your CarPC which help to improve sound quality. We need details, not vague answer.



kkant said:


> The whole point of the bitone or the ms-8 or a carpc-based DSP or a pro-studio DSP is to "manipulate the sound". What makes you think the bitone is more capable than a carpc-based DSP? Do you have experience tuning with parametric EQ's?


----------



## duckymcse

That toslink adapter will do for your Mac Mini. Give that a try first, if you not satisfy with the SQ, there are many other USB option.
I'm currently looking into the M2TEch HiFace usb audio transport. I heard high praise from it at head-fi forums. It does bit perfect transport with nearly zero jitter. Jitter is the culprit of SQ in case you don't know.




mosca said:


> I also have a question, would be glad is someone can answer it. I've learnt now that I can connect optically the Mac mini to the Bit One via an adapter like this Amazon.com: Toslink To Optical Mini Adapter: Parts Express: Electronics. so the question is: do I have any benefit passing through the external soundcard versus making a straight Mac -> Bit One connection?


----------



## duckymcse

I was about this try out my WDTV with the Bitone. I'll compare it with my current CarPC setup and see which sound better 



matthewo said:


> i have been using a WDTV Live, with digital optical output into my audison bitone processor, playing flac lossless recordings. so far its sounded pretty good. im running a dls A4 Active to 2 way front stage. and a single 12 for bass. still could use some tuning, but the potential is deffently nice with this setup.
> 
> personnally i dont use a car computer anymore cause the ease of using the WDTV live, and it does exactly what i need it to, if i need navigation or youtube/pandora, i use my iphone.
> 
> but i still think that 75% or more of the music i listen to isnt the best recording and having the best sq setup isnt really going to do squat, you know how much popping and distortion is in some red hot chili peppers music.


----------



## mosca

duckymcse said:


> That toslink adapter will do for your Mac Mini. Give that a try first, if you not satisfy with the SQ, there are many other USB option.
> I'm currently looking into the M2TEch HiFace usb audio transport. I heard high praise from it at head-fi forums. It does bit perfect transport with nearly zero jitter. Jitter is the culprit of SQ in case you don't know.


I already paid for an ESI U24 XL 24 USB (before discovering this adapter), but sure I will try to go without it.

I know jitter from passing on (so to speak), but I still haven't put my head into it because I didn't had the need until now. I'll start my readings now, thanks


----------



## kkant

duckymcse said:


> I use the wrong word of manipulating. What I mean is alter the sound of the original recording using VST pluggin. Anything other than EQ, crossover and Time Alignment is not necessary.


VST plugins can also be used to do EQ, crossover, and time alignment. The corresponding filters available for CarPC's (as well as many pro-sudio DSPs) are far more capable than those included with the bit1.



duckymcse said:


> As for parametric EQ, yes I have tackle that to death with my Eclipse CD7200 mkII with 7-band parametric EQ. I'll take the 31-band graphic EQ of the Bitone over the 7-band PEQ anyday. PEQ is over-rated IMO.


OK. I think I see the problem. There are better PEQs available in the pro-studio and CarPC world...PEQ's that will be far more useful than a 31-band at correcting room response. A 31-band doesn't really help with room correction, except in a very approximate way in the bass frequencies. If you want to correct anything above say 150 Hz, a GEQ is virtually useless. At those frequencies, a GEQ is really more suited to shaping the overall tone of the sound, not to response correction. The way that a good PEQ is better is that it allows for much tighter bandwidth and more precise center freq control.

I urge you to get your hands on a good pro-studio PEQ and start tuning with that. There are a number of models from Behringer and Rane, for example.


----------



## matthewo

duckymcse said:


> I was about this try out my WDTV with the Bitone. I'll compare it with my current CarPC setup and see which sound better


i dont expect a wdtv to be better then a well built car pc for sq. im sure any car pc with a good sound car will be better. i mean you can buy a wdtv for like $100, is pretty cheap, i wouldnt think they have the best components inside that little box. i got it because hey, its got to be better then my deck playing mp3s, and i can play flac with the wdtv and send it to my bitone and let the bitone do the D/A switching, because its probably the best component in my system to do that.


----------



## Shami

I understand about all the equalisation and time delay functions that a car pc can do but when talking ultimate sound quality, high end audio component manufacturers spend so much time and effort to ensure the sound path is clean and untainted.

Is there a computer system that can process a signal in such a clean way as say one of those high-end Denon head units? Or take it to the ultimate, moving to home stereos, is it possible to achieve the same clean signals as these stereo systems that cost 10s of thousands?

If the answer is no, wouldn't it be best to use a head unit, specially developed for clean sound and then position and fabricate the speakers so as to minimise unwanted reflections?

The other point I can't understand is even if a car pc can give clean unprocessed sound signal, surely, wouldn't such heavy processing in itself reduce the sound quality?

Would be great to hear arguments along these lines. So far, from reading what everyone else is saying and applying logic, it seems the best is to start with a top end head unit to give a clean signal, position speakers as best as possible to eliminate unwanted sound (e.g. the sphere enclosure for tweeters and mids) and try to play with the sound as little as possible, ultimate goal of a direct source signal all the way to the speakers.


----------



## duckymcse

Now this is a good way to communicate 
Can you provide a link where I can read up on this pro-studio PEQ?
Just provide the one which you think is the best. Thanks.



kkant said:


> I urge you to get your hands on a good pro-studio PEQ and start tuning with that. There are a number of models from Behringer and Rane, for example.


----------



## t3sn4f2

Here's an evolving thread you guys might be interested in.

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-tutorials/78465-mathematics-jitter.html


----------



## duckymcse

Spend about an hour comparing the WDTV with my portable CarPC.
First of all,the WDTV sound pretty good with the Bitone. I would be happy with it if I never heard my CarPC. But when compare to my portable CarPC(using X-Fi USB Surround 5.1 as optical transport), I still like the sound of my CarPC.
Here is what I notice:
The bass(Subwoofer) sound loose on the WDTV whereas my CarPC is tight and under control.
Imaging and staging is better on my CarPC.
Instruments/Vocals seem to sound more details on my CarPC.



matthewo said:


> i dont expect a wdtv to be better then a well built car pc for sq. im sure any car pc with a good sound car will be better. i mean you can buy a wdtv for like $100, is pretty cheap, i wouldnt think they have the best components inside that little box. i got it because hey, its got to be better then my deck playing mp3s, and i can play flac with the wdtv and send it to my bitone and let the bitone do the D/A switching, because its probably the best component in my system to do that.


----------



## mosca

t3sn4f2 said:


> Here's an evolving thread you guys might be interested in.
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-tutorials/78465-mathematics-jitter.html


yep, saw it on the homepage and subscribed immediately


----------



## kkant

Shami said:


> I understand about all the equalisation and time delay functions that a car pc can do but when talking ultimate sound quality, high end audio component manufacturers spend so much time and effort to ensure the sound path is clean and untainted.
> 
> Is there a computer system that can process a signal in such a clean way as say one of those high-end Denon head units? Or take it to the ultimate, moving to home stereos, is it possible to achieve the same clean signals as these stereo systems that cost 10s of thousands?


Briefly--Yes. To elaborate a bit further, I need to understand what you mean by "clean" and "untainted". If you are talking about noise floor, then my answer would be that care needs to be taken in any install to use best practices to avoid noise--whether you use an expensive HU or a CarPC or rackmount equipment. If you are talking about various vague and magical claims by HU manufacturers regarding sound quality, then I'd have to say that such claims are usually bogus. From a sound quality perspective for a car system, what makes the difference between various source and preamp combinations is the capability of their processing filters.



Shami said:


> If the answer is no, wouldn't it be best to use a head unit, specially developed for clean sound and then position and fabricate the speakers so as to minimise unwanted reflections?


Unfortunately, this approach is not ideal. No matter how good your install and positioning, the overarching factor affecting SQ is the horrible acoustic environment of the car interior. The elephant in the room, so to speak.



Shami said:


> The other point I can't understand is even if a car pc can give clean unprocessed sound signal, surely, wouldn't such heavy processing in itself reduce the sound quality?


This is a common misconception. The fact is that the pure signal has already been mutilated--by the car's interior. The car interior is an extremely complex "processor" that absolutely destroys the sound. If your audio system doesn't have a correspondingly complex processor to nullify that initial processing, then you end up with not a "pure sound" but rather a completely mangled sound.



Shami said:


> Would be great to hear arguments along these lines. So far, from reading what everyone else is saying and applying logic, it seems the best is to start with a top end head unit to give a clean signal, position speakers as best as possible to eliminate unwanted sound (e.g. the sphere enclosure for tweeters and mids) and try to play with the sound as little as possible, ultimate goal of a direct source signal all the way to the speakers.


I agree with what you say regarding speaker positioning and install. It's worthwhile to eliminate as much of the crappiness as you can, and certainly it is worthwhile to eliminate rattles and nonlinearites wherever possible. However, forget the top end head unit. All head units produce "clean" sound, including your own stock factory HU. Spend the money instead on a top end processor. Like the MS-8.  Again, the goal is not a direct signal to the speakers. That doesn't get you anywhere in a car. The goal is a direct signal to the *ears*.


----------



## kkant

t3sn4f2 said:


> Here's an evolving thread you guys might be interested in.
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-tutorials/78465-mathematics-jitter.html


Thanks for the pointer.


----------



## hdrugs

just wondering if anyone here has tried using a laptop with a added usb soundcard


----------



## matthewo

I agree I use my factory g8 headunits ( bluapuknt) unit high level output and the sq is pretty good, into my bitone


----------



## WuNgUn

hdrugs said:


> just wondering if anyone here has tried using a laptop with a added usb soundcard


Lame...I've heard many complain about USB/onboard audio in their setups.


----------



## mosca

WuNgUn said:


> Lame...I've heard many complain about USB/onboard audio in their setups.


what kind of complaints? it's just a computer with an USB card attached...


----------



## Shami

kkant, thank you for the explanation. I did not realise that internal effects were so significant. I am thinking about how to add time delays to my system now.

I guess it makes sense when you think about it. Just a shame the idea of an untouched signal is not possible in a car.


----------



## kkant

mosca said:


> what kind of complaints? it's just a computer with an USB card attached...


Probably noise. When using a computer or pro-studio DSP in your system, you have to be extra careful about noise--and also sometimes impedance mismatches and voltage level issues.


----------



## kkant

Shami said:


> kkant, thank you for the explanation. I did not realise that internal effects were so significant. I am thinking about how to add time delays to my system now.
> 
> I guess it makes sense when you think about it. Just a shame the idea of an untouched signal is not possible in a car.


No problem. IMO a pure signal is not ideal in any practical environment, but of course this is especially true in a car. Even if you consider high-end in-ear monitors such as Etymotics, which is the closest you can get to having the signal directly moving your eardrum in the exact original shape, still in this case a pure signal doesn't work quite right. The Etymotics for example deliberately inserts a frequency transfer function into the chain to compensate for the (lack of) the natural transfer function of the outer ear, which is of course bypassed for an IEM.


----------



## WuNgUn

mosca said:


> what kind of complaints? it's just a computer with an USB card attached...


Usually because external USB audio devices use low quality DAC's and OPAMPS...low line level, no shielding, etc...
On board audio is generally just as bad.
Check out (reviews) the Asus Xonar for comparison.


----------



## duckymcse

The Musiland 02US USB soundcard might give the mighty Asus Essence STX some competition 

Musiland 02 Monitor US > Asus Essence STX (ya really!) - Overclock.net - Overclocking.net



WuNgUn said:


> Usually because external USB audio devices use low quality DAC's and OPAMPS...low line level, no shielding, etc...
> On board audio is generally just as bad.
> Check out (reviews) the Asus Xonar for comparison.


----------



## mosca

ok, I understand there might be some lame sounding soundcards, but that does not mean that all of them should be lame.


----------



## WuNgUn

Put it this way...I don't know of ANY good USB sound cards...


----------



## t3sn4f2

WuNgUn said:


> Put it this way...I don't know of ANY good USB sound cards...


I know many.


----------



## mosca

WuNgUn said:


> Put it this way...I don't know of ANY good USB sound cards...


what about this? BENCHMARK DAC1 USB HIGH END BLACK

the price seems right.


----------



## M-Dub

Have carpc's reached a point yet where they can take an analog input (from a stock HU), do it's processing, then output to analog?


----------



## WuNgUn

M-Dub said:


> Have carpc's reached a point yet where they can take an analog input (from a stock HU), do it's processing, then output to analog?


Sure, why not?


----------



## t3sn4f2

M-Dub said:


> Have carpc's reached a point yet where they can take an analog input (from a stock HU), do it's processing, then output to analog?


There is no reason why an A to D stage can not be as good as a D to A stage. Depending on the card, it will likely be even better then the D to A stage, since it will need the added resolution for digital manipulation and mixing. The D to A just needs to make our relatively poorer hearing happy.


----------



## M-Dub

Cool! I just always read/heard that their not fast enough to process all that data in realtime and the signal would degrade.

This stuff can get very confusing very fast. The way I see it there are 3 types of carputers.

1. carpc as source + carpc as processor
2. carpc as source + external processor (Bit One, DSP6)
3. HU as source + carpc as processor

I was told that #3 was not possible yet. That is why some people do #2 opposed to #1.


----------



## t3sn4f2

M-Dub said:


> Cool! I just always read/heard that their not fast enough to process all that data in realtime and the signal would degrade.
> 
> This stuff can get very confusing very fast. The way I see it there are 3 types of carputers.
> 
> 1. carpc as source + carpc as processor
> 2. carpc as source + external processor (Bit One, DSP6)
> 3. HU as source + carpc as processor
> 
> I was told that #3 was not possible yet. That is why some people do #2 opposed to #1.


NPDANG had one a couple years ago doing just that. I think the thread is called something like "the ultimate processor" or something to that effect.


----------



## M-Dub

(link for reference http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/classifieds/26023-fs-ultimate-audio-processor.html )

Thanks! Great info there. 

I'm just brainstorming now but wouldn't the output voltage of a sound card be much less than a high end headunit? Would one need of a linedriver.


----------



## t3sn4f2

M-Dub said:


> Thanks! Great info there.
> 
> I'm just brainstorming now but wouldn't the output voltage of a sound card be much less than a high end headunit? Would one need of a linedriver.


2 volts rms out is very common. Some even higher. Maybe not so much from a USB _powered_ variety though. Those are usually 1 or 1.5 volts rms. If they don't show actual voltage ratings, just find the dbv/dbu max rating and convert it to rms volts with an online calculator.


----------



## WuNgUn

I dunno why anyone would run a carputer to an external processor...lol
Even 2 generation old dual core (even a single core) CPU can manipulate the audio in many different ways...
For example, with me running Audiomulch with various VST's, I output at 48/96-24 bit (depending on the source), run a 4-way crossover, delay modules for each channel. At 48Khz sampling, I barely see 20% CPU usage.
That, or I run an impulse reverb sample recorded in my car, room correction/delay/crossover thru a different VST...more CPU intensive, but also possible.


----------



## mosca

WuNgUn said:


> I dunno why anyone would run a carputer to an external processor...lol
> Even 2 generation old dual core (even a single core) CPU can manipulate the audio in many different ways...
> For example, with me running Audiomulch with various VST's, I output at 48/96-24 bit (depending on the source), run a 4-way crossover, delay modules for each channel. At 48Khz sampling, I barely see 20% CPU usage.
> That, or I run an impulse reverb sample recorded in my car, room correction/delay/crossover thru a different VST...more CPU intensive, but also possible.


I'll have my Mac mini connected via TOSLINK to a Bit One, and I will be using 7 channels active. there you have it.


----------



## mosca

for the sake of the discussion, I think we should also separate the processing part from the routing one.


----------



## kkant

mosca said:


> I'll have my Mac mini connected via TOSLINK to a Bit One, and I will be using 7 channels active. there you have it.


You can do this with a carpc alone--with enough external outputs. This is what WuNgUn just described in fact. No need for the bitone.


----------



## t3sn4f2

WuNgUn said:


> *I dunno why anyone would run a carputer to an external processor...lol*Even 2 generation old dual core (even a single core) CPU can manipulate the audio in many different ways...
> For example, with me running Audiomulch with various VST's, I output at 48/96-24 bit (depending on the source), run a 4-way crossover, delay modules for each channel. At 48Khz sampling, I barely see 20% CPU usage.
> That, or I run an impulse reverb sample recorded in my car, room correction/delay/crossover thru a different VST...more CPU intensive, but also possible.


I have great two reasons. It's simpler and there aren't any JBL MS-8 Logic7 plugins.


----------



## mosca

kkant said:


> You can do this with a carpc alone--with enough external outputs. This is what WuNgUn just described in fact. No need for the bitone.


I know, but he asked why someone would do it. and that was one answer.

he also says that no USB card is decent, so given that I have a Mac mini which does not accept PCI cards, the Bit One would give me better audio quality.

of course I have not made my mind regarding this issue, yet.


----------



## mosca

t3sn4f2 said:


> I have great two reasons. It's simpler and there aren't any JBL MS-8 Logic7 plugins.


:smash:


----------



## t3sn4f2

mosca said:


> I know, but he asked why someone would do it. and that was one answer.
> 
> *he also says that no USB card is decent, so given that I have a Mac mini which does not accept PCI cards, the Bit One would give me better audio quality.
> 
> of course I have not made my mind regarding this issue, yet*.


Go here and look at the 16/44 unbalanced analog results for an emu0404usb ($200).

Then go here and look at the 16/44 results (column "B") for my emu04004PCI ($100).

Then go here and look at the 16/44 results for a LynxTWO-B, a $600 plus professional and highly acclaimed mastering PCI card.

All outputs are 2 volts.

The emu usb should be as clean or cleaner then mine. Their results where limited on the usb because of the way they performed the RMAA test. They played and recorded at 16/44, which limits the combined results.


----------



## kkant

t3sn4f2 said:


> I have great two reasons. It's simpler and there aren't any JBL MS-8 Logic7 plugins.


Yup. Now here is a good reason to ditch the CarPC--the MS8. The bitone is not a good reason. Sure you can use it, but $800 for a splitter? Why bother when you can get the MS-8 for the same price, and then you wouldn't need the carpc for dsp either.


----------



## WuNgUn

kkant said:


> Yup. Now here is a good reason to ditch the CarPC--the MS8. The bitone is not a good reason. Sure you can use it, but $800 for a splitter? Why bother when you can get the MS-8 for the same price, and then you wouldn't need the carpc for dsp either.


Interesting device...but I can do the same thing with my computer, without spending another $800.

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...crossover-linearization-design-56k-death.html

That was just for adjusting the speakers themselves...you can do the same process from each seating position and save the output accordingly.

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ion-crossover-etc-using-impulse-response.html

Also, can a MS-8 monitor the tire temp and pressures, display inside/outside temp and humidity, interface with and control speed radar, go online and browse/check email, give you live weather and radar, use multiple navigation programs, connect to Wi-Fi and 3G and bluetooth, connect to your phone and make/receive calls, play videos and HD audio, locate and mark Wi-Fi locations on the move using GPS, interface live with your cars OBD diagnostics, store (in my case) 500Gb worth of lossless music and video, use a backup camera, listen to HD radio, listen to Shoutcast programs, watch TV thru HULU, watch satelite TV thru Slingbox, connect and control an iPod, track the cars location live, record trips, etc., get real time traffic updates thru Google Maps, Skype, monitor the PC, etc...

I'm sure I'm missing some things, but you get the idea...


----------



## t3sn4f2

WuNgUn said:


> Interesting device...but I can do the same thing with my computer, without spending another $800.
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...crossover-linearization-design-56k-death.html
> 
> That was just for adjusting the speakers themselves...you can do the same process from each seating position and save the output accordingly.
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ion-crossover-etc-using-impulse-response.html
> 
> Also, can a MS-8 monitor the tire temp and pressures, display inside/outside temp and humidity, interface with and control speed radar, go online and browse/check email, give you live weather and radar, use multiple navigation programs, connect to Wi-Fi and 3G and bluetooth, connect to your phone and make/receive calls, play videos and HD audio, locate and mark Wi-Fi locations on the move using GPS, interface live with your cars OBD diagnostics, store (in my case) 500Gb worth of lossless music and video, use a backup camera, listen to HD radio, listen to Shoutcast programs, watch TV thru HULU, watch satelite TV thru Slingbox, connect and control an iPod, track the cars location live, record trips, etc., get real time traffic updates thru Google Maps, Skype, monitor the PC, etc...
> 
> I'm sure I'm missing some things, but you get the idea...


You can do 5.1 or 7.1 stereo that's specially designed for the interior of a car on a carPC?


----------



## kkant

WuNgUn said:


> Interesting device...but I can do the same thing with my computer, without spending another $800.


The response shaping is extremely cool, and obviously it is far better than anything available for a car--except for the MS-8. The MS-8 has an autotune which has been proven to work, and that includes speaker response correction, car-specific room correction, and center channel image processing. The CarPC can't do that. So while I certainly agree (and have argued vehemently) that regular car processors like the BitOne are a complete waste of money when a CarPC is available, the existence of the MS-8 changes things. I'd much rather have an autotune (assuming it works) than a manually tuned processor.



WuNgUn said:


> Also, can a MS-8 monitor the tire temp and pressures, display inside/outside temp and humidity, interface with and control speed radar, go online and browse/check email, give you live weather and radar, use multiple navigation programs, connect to Wi-Fi and 3G and bluetooth, connect to your phone and make/receive calls, play videos and HD audio, locate and mark Wi-Fi locations on the move using GPS, interface live with your cars OBD diagnostics, store (in my case) 500Gb worth of lossless music and video, use a backup camera, listen to HD radio, listen to Shoutcast programs, watch TV thru HULU, watch satelite TV thru Slingbox, connect and control an iPod, track the cars location live, record trips, etc., get real time traffic updates thru Google Maps, Skype, monitor the PC, etc...
> 
> I'm sure I'm missing some things, but you get the idea...


All good stuff....I don't disagree. But I would get a carpc and hook up the outputs to an MS-8 for sound processing.


----------



## mosca

t3sn4f2 said:


> Go here and look at the 16/44 unbalanced analog results for an emu0404usb ($200).
> 
> Then go here and look at the 16/44 results (column "B") for my emu04004PCI ($100).
> 
> Then go here and look at the 16/44 results for a LynxTWO-B, a $600 plus professional and highly acclaimed mastering PCI card.
> 
> All outputs are 2 volts.
> 
> The emu usb should be as clean or cleaner then mine. Their results where limited on the usb because of the way they performed the RMAA test. They played and recorded at 16/44, which limits the combined results.


thanks for providing suporting data, *t3sn4f2*.


----------



## mosca

kkant said:


> Yup. Now here is a good reason to ditch the CarPC--the MS8. The bitone is not a good reason. Sure you can use it, but $800 for a splitter? Why bother when you can get the MS-8 for the same price, and then you wouldn't need the carpc for dsp either.


sorry, but I disagree with the splitter part in the context we are talking about. how would you use the Bit One only as a splitter? how would you do the delays, for example?


----------



## WuNgUn

t3sn4f2 said:


> You can do 5.1 or 7.1 stereo that's specially designed for the interior of a car on a carPC?


Not sure what you mean....
My setup isn't typical. I'm running active, 2 ways front and rear + sub (3-way front + sub, bridged drivers are next) so my outputs are all customized in Audiomulch.
For example, all my left channel audio is lowpass...all my right channel, high pass. 
I don't run surround sound, but I'm sure you could with a simpler setup (passive).


----------



## t3sn4f2

WuNgUn said:


> Not sure what you mean....
> My setup isn't typical. I'm running active, 2 ways front and rear + sub (3-way front + sub, bridged drivers are next) so my outputs are all customized in Audiomulch.
> For example, all my left channel audio is lowpass...all my right channel, high pass.
> *I don't run surround sound, but I'm sure you could with a simpler setup *(passive).


As Kkant mentioned, the JBL MS-8's Logic7 setting can take a 2 channel stereo input and processes it into a 7.1 multichannel STEREO output, much like Dolby Pro Logic II but even better since it was designed for the short comings of the car environment versus those of a big living room like Dolby.


----------



## kkant

mosca said:


> sorry, but I disagree with the splitter part in the context we are talking about. how would you use the Bit One only as a splitter? how would you do the delays, for example?


You would get a soundcard with multiple outputs and use the carpc for the individual delays. That way you just don't need the bitone.


----------



## audiogodz1

The carpc game has changed: YouTube - iPad in Car, Pt. 1, First Ever, SoundMan Car Audio


----------



## M-Dub

I've got an ipod touch hooked up to my HU. Is that a carpc?


----------



## mosca

kkant said:


> You would get a soundcard with multiple outputs and use the carpc for the individual delays. That way you just don't need the bitone.


I know that, but you answered a question I wasn't asking...


----------



## mosca

audiogodz1 said:


> The carpc game has changed: YouTube - iPad in Car, Pt. 1, First Ever, SoundMan Car Audio


there's a thread running already on DIYMA http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-fabrication/78903-first-ipad-integration-car.html


----------



## kkant

mosca said:


> I know that, but you answered a question I wasn't asking...


Then what are you asking? If you already have a bit one hooked up, then obviously you'd use that for time alignment. My point is that you don't need the bit one at all if you have a carpc.


----------



## audiogodz1

mosca said:


> there's a thread running already on DIYMA http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-fabrication/78903-first-ipad-integration-car.html


Still relevant to the OP question. Moreso now than ever.


----------



## mosca

kkant said:


> Then what are you asking? If you already have a bit one hooked up, then obviously you'd use that for time alignment. My point is that you don't need the bit one at all if you have a carpc.


maybe because people (actually the immense majority of them) can have a CarPC for other reasons than do the processing (meaning splitting etc) of their audio system...

I also don't understand how you can ditch a CarPC for an MS-8 but not for a Bit One. what makes them different for everybody?. does your CarPC autotune? do you assume everyone uses Logic7 or a center channel?. can the MS-8 mute the sound when you receive a call?. my Mini has analog (headphones) and digital ouput, can I connect the digital one to the MS-8?.


----------



## mosca

audiogodz1 said:


> Still relevant to the OP question. Moreso now than ever.


although I will buy one, and I use an iPhone for everything in the car, I don't think it is going to get used much, at least where these guys are putting it. mostly because it is freaking big and too autistic.


----------



## kkant

mosca said:


> I also don't understand how you can ditch a CarPC for an MS-8 but not for a Bit One. what makes them different for everybody?. does your CarPC autotune? do you assume everyone uses Logic7 or a center channel?. can the MS-8 mute the sound when you receive a call?. my Mini has analog (headphones) and digital ouput, can I connect the digital one to the MS-8?.


CarPC > bitone. MS-8 > bitone. MS-8 in particular costs the same as the bitone. I can think of absolutely zero reasons to get a bitone, other than digital input (which doesn't matter much if at all).


----------



## mosca

kkant said:


> CarPC > bitone. MS-8 > bitone. MS-8 in particular costs the same as the bitone. I can think of absolutely zero reasons to get a bitone, other than digital input (which doesn't matter much if at all).


 did you read my post at all?


----------



## Hernan

I have been around the idea of running a Mac (mini?) at my car.

At home I use a MacBook linked via toslink to a beresford DAC (nice!) and a Marantz power amp.

In my car I still use the Alpine 9861/701 combo. Sarotech media server to the 701 via optical and sometime I hook my Macbook also. I have to recognice that the 701 is a very flexible processor. It lacks a more powerfull EQ and can't be feeded with 196/24bits signals *yes it makes a difference*.

At home I use AU lab for plug in managment and soundflower for aplication ruting. I ditch Itunes and use Soundbird player as it works nice and plays flacs.

The DSP processing power of the Mac is well above any car audio processor.
You send 196/24bits streams to a good DAC and it sounds wonderfull.

AU lab and SoundFlower lets you configure up to 16 I/O channels.

You can use as many filters as you want. Some of them are very interesting.

A little but nice product for simple DSP use is HEAR. It runs on tops of All apps and have some nice effects, compresors, expansors, "n" band EQ, not bad.

If you have the pacience, you can really enhance you listening experience. I'm a bit lazy and my system sounds nice out of the box so I don't play too much with the software capabilities at home.

For car audio could be very interesting to give it a try.


----------



## mosca

thanks for your comments Hernan, I had opened AU Lab before, but didn't know it was so powerful, specially with Soundflower 16ch


----------



## hdrugs

i finished building my system it runs okay from home but now i need to run it in the car, pretty fast

running 
dual atom 1.66
4gb ram 
500gb hd
asus xonar

if i can get by with 150watts i could do okay if i can't i might have trouble


----------



## cycfari

hdrugs said:


> i finished building my system it runs okay from home but now i need to run it in the car, pretty fast
> 
> running
> dual atom 1.66
> 4gb ram
> 500gb hd
> asus xonar
> 
> if i can get by with 150watts i could do okay if i can't i might have trouble


I've used the same MB with ASUS Xonar D2 + a M2ATX. No problem with the power supply so far. In fact I placed another 10A inline fuse to before the M2ATX(M2 is using 15A fuse). So the power drawn is much lesser. Have fun with your new toy.


----------



## WuNgUn

I had MAJOR issues running a M2 (and M4) with my 2 sound cards...no audio would play!! Just static...
Switched to an OPUS, and all good...
I also run an ATX board, which might be an issue.


----------



## gutz

Wierd 
Because I've had 2 systems on M4 with no issues : Atom330 and the current which is an Intel Mini-ITX with E7500
Also here in Israel almost all of us carpc guys are using M2 or M4 - and no one ever reported an issue with either..


----------

