# Comp winners with just OK equipment



## beerdrnkr (Apr 18, 2007)

I'm just curious, when's the last time anyone has placed top 5 in SQ comps with just ok equipment? By ok equipment, I'd say $100 per driver, so basically a $600 or less 3way frontstage. Also with just budget friendly amps. 

Does it happen much anymore? Are there a lot of competitors doing well with just decent equipment? It seems like most people entering competitions have really expensive equipment usually.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

kyle ragsdale, mark eldridge (jl audio c5's, and i think did it with kicker speakers too).. all i could think of off the top of my head


----------



## 1fishman (Dec 22, 2012)

Big T won some with new PPI speakers, amp, DSP... http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ew-pc-65c3-3-way-components-just-came-17.html 

EDIT. see post 412


----------



## beerdrnkr (Apr 18, 2007)

SkizeR said:


> kyle ragsdale, mark eldridge (jl audio c5's, and i think did it with kicker speakers too).. all i could think of off the top of my head


I think I remember of somebody winning an sq comp with the square solo-barics.


1fishman said:


> Big T won some with new PPI speakers, amp, DSP... http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...s-new-pc-65c3-3-way-components-just-came.html


Oh wow, that's interesting. I'll see if I can look up some of these installs.


----------



## Lycancatt (Apr 11, 2010)

install is the key, along with tuning and the right compromizes. theres a guy out here with a vw jetta that's doing very well for little investment, lots of daton drivers and good install/tuning.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Lots of folks running all kinds of gear at the comps.......it's the better tune that wins. High dollar gear sounds no better than its tune.


----------



## hurrication (Dec 19, 2011)

claydo said:


> High dollar gear sounds no better than its tune.


Don't try and tell that to the high dollar gear owners, though. :surprised:


----------



## Manic1! (May 17, 2011)

I'm guessing most guys in the higher classes are sponsored so it comes down to install and tuning.


----------



## rayray881 (Jul 15, 2013)

I have won every comp I entered with a system that cost around $900 total. Problem is, I was the only person ever in my class, but at times had higher scores than people in classes above me. I quit competing last year because I realized there is no point in doing it unless you are sponsored or have an obligation to rep the installer that did the install, none of which applied to me (diy). There was no point for me to spend money to travel and pay entry fees so somebody(judge) can tell me if they like how MY stereo sounds in order to get a $5 trophy. It is purely subjective and every judge has their own preference. I built my car for what I want it to sound like based on what I feel is right to me. Why should I care what others think and pay them to give their opinion. There is no right and wrong, as long as you are happy with it. I think its more beneficial to have meetups where people can get together and just listen to each others setups and have a good time!


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

There should be a rule in the entry classes of SQ competitions that the speakers, in total, should not cost (MSRP, not "on sale") more than, say, $500 to force folks into spending more time on installation (positioning, not just processor adjusted) and tuning.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

sirbOOm said:


> There should be a rule in the entry classes of SQ competitions that the speakers, in total, should not cost (MSRP, not "on sale") more than, say, $500 to force folks into spending more time on installation (positioning, not just processor adjusted) and tuning.


Isn't there "El cheapo" class?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

sirbOOm said:


> There should be a rule in the entry classes of SQ competitions that the speakers, in total, should not cost (MSRP, not "on sale") more than, say, $500 to force folks into spending more time on installation (positioning, not just processor adjusted) and tuning.


well what if that persons tune and install are 100% nailed? or what if they get that stuff for free since theyre sponsored? or what if they just want that product? theres already a ton of classes with not enough competition at most shows in each. no need to make more that only 1 or two people will enter. like yesterday at the syracuse customs show, i think the most cars in a class was three..


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

Victor_inox said:


> Isn't there "El cheapo" class?
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk



Does that include lamp cords from the local dump? That would have been me when I just started this hobby 

Matter of fact...I'm having a hard time getting rid of some of those habits!


----------



## goodstuff (Jan 9, 2008)

Chef How in Meca a few years back. Don't remember the class. 
Image Dynamics coaxials.


----------



## sirbOOm (Jan 24, 2013)

SkizeR said:


> well what if that persons tune and install are 100% nailed?


_That is what I'd be hoping for... an install that speaks for itself and speakers that benefit from the install._



SkizeR said:


> or what if they get that stuff for free since theyre sponsored?


I've never actually competed so... grain of salt but I personally I'm against sponsors in the most entry-level classes (at least whatever the very first class is) but, if they are, we're talking about the MSRP of the speakers (which as a measure is itself an issue, I get that), not necessarily what the owner of the car paid for them (if at all). 



SkizeR said:


> or what if they just want that product?


Well then if they install it well and it sounds good, they should place well.



SkizeR said:


> theres already a ton of classes with not enough competition at most shows in each. no need to make more that only 1 or two people will enter. like yesterday at the syracuse customs show, i think the most cars in a class was three..


Well, there's more SPL competition participation than SQ. The thought I had may get negated because it might cause folks to compete against essentially themselves at times. Or it could cause people to feel that the playing field is more level and that the competition is about skill, not necessarily speakers (which they didn't design, they just bought and installed). I'd personally want to compete more (if I was competing) if I knew that there were dollar/class limits on the equipment. But that's just me.

Good conversation, I think.


----------



## Brian_smith06 (Jan 31, 2008)

only problem I have is when people are representing a product/company and have it on display in their car and then they have other products behind the scenes running things. Same with modifications. 

I will be the first to say I run modded amps. That being said I don't compete and these amps are purely for my own enjoyment but dislike people being dishonest.


----------



## truckerfte (Jul 30, 2010)

I don't see some price based comp classes happening. 

Seems I remember a magazine feature back in the day with someone tearing up IASCA in a pickup with Orion Cobalt series equipment. 


Just the other day I was thinking a 24 hours of lemons- style comp would be a lot of fin though....maybe a $500 claimer style deal?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Brian_smith06 said:


> only problem I have is when people are representing a product/company and have it on display in their car and then they have other products behind the scenes running things. .


can you give an example?


----------



## stills (Apr 13, 2008)

I remember a fella back in the old days that was whippin' ass with some cheap Audax tweets


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

What if they had classes based on total cost of install? I have a feeling SPL contests get more attention from crowds because they don't "seem" as difficult or snobby. Then again, I haven't competed in either...just repeating others sentiments


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

I800C0LLECT said:


> What if they had classes based on total cost of install? I have a feeling SPL contests get more attention from crowds because they don't "seem" as difficult or snobby. Then again, I haven't competed in either...just repeating others sentiments


because it still wouldnt be fair. 1) different shops charge more, 2) most dont even pay shops to do their work, so they essentially just paid for materials and time


----------



## LaserSVT (Feb 1, 2009)

hurrication said:


> Don't try and tell that to the high dollar gear owners, though. :surprised:


That's it. I am offended. I think you should be illegal and be taken off all the Walmart shelves.





Meh, I don't compete. I just like good sound.


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> because it still wouldnt be fair. 1) different shops charge more, 2) most dont even pay shops to do their work, so they essentially just paid for materials and time


you got a good point there. But maybe that's the part that can help individualize these things? Maybe they can use a standard rate per hour for labor?

Maybe separate DIY from "teams" so to speak? It's one thing to have a huge supporting cast vs. joe schmoe showing up with his highschool hobby shop skillsets as a lone wolf. I know they have "classes" for entry level but then again maybe he isn't entry level? Maybe he's got a bamf sound stage with terrible install? I dunno...

Honestly, that's probably a major contribution to car audio becoming a niche environment. The intimidation factor that those teams bring to it all.


----------



## LaserSVT (Feb 1, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> because it still wouldnt be fair. 1) different shops charge more, 2) most dont even pay shops to do their work, so they essentially just paid for materials and time


Screw it, treat it like a kids soccer match. Everyone gets pizza and a trophy.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

still not gunna happen. you can easily lie about how many hours it took you. not gunna happen. i dont think that classes will change much if they ever do


----------



## Brian_smith06 (Jan 31, 2008)

SkizeR said:


> can you give an example?


never physically seen it in an sq car. Only hear say

I have seen many pictures of spl vehicles with hidden amps behind their amp racks though. Wonder if that's why some organizations clamp now?



Also with the amp modding it doesn't bother me. I see no reason not to. If you can improve a potential weak link by all means do it. Manufacturers had to cut costs somewhere on some items to keep their pricing reasonable for the manufacturer. A buddy of mine has been buying up a lot of old school us amps for his cars. He has gotten in good with a guy who works for US amps and picks his brains on some of what he does to them. He was once told one of the things he had done was supposed to go in originally but they had to cut costs somewhere


this could also just me passing along gossip I have heard. Suppose it makes me no better than a teenage girl


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

LaserSVT said:


> Screw it, treat it like a kids soccer match. Everyone gets pizza and a trophy.


actually, thats exactly what most non major comps are lol


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

I800C0LLECT said:


> What if they had classes based on total cost of install? I have a feeling SPL contests get more attention from crowds because they don't "seem" as difficult or snobby. Then again, I haven't competed in either...just repeating others sentiments


It's not difficult or snobby necessarily. it's subjective verses objective.

SPL is a number from a calibrated device. Repeatability and no way for judging preference/prejudice.

SQ is subjective...

Sports analogy

SPL- Olympic deadlift

SQ- Figure skating


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

I guess your right. Removing all the subjective opinion's means you have nobody else to blame


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

cubdenno said:


> It's not difficult or snobby necessarily. it's subjective verses objective.
> 
> SPL is a number from a calibrated device. Repeatability and no way for judging preference/prejudice.
> 
> ...


your gunna make us look that lame? lol


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> your gunna make us look that lame? lol


Just call me twinkle toes


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

I800C0LLECT said:


> Just call me twinkle toes


got it


----------



## Hammer1 (Jan 30, 2011)

The Comps in my area are getting to the point of Not worth going to. Half the classes only have one person competing so there is no competition. The rest of the classes have just a couple in them and there always the same people. Also there is always a different judge and each Judge has a different perspective on how it should sound. I have gone to two in the last month and with two different judges had a 50 point difference with the same tune.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Hammer1 said:


> The Comps in my area are getting to the point of Not worth going to. Half the classes only have one person competing so there is no competition. The rest of the classes have just a couple in them and there always the same people. Also there is always a different judge and each Judge has a different perspective on how it should sound. I have gone to two in the last month and with two different judges had a 50 point difference with the same tune.


this is how it is almost everywhere. the people who do make the trips to compete do it to get enough points to go to finals.


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

That's commitment.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

I800C0LLECT said:


> That's commitment.


yeah man. some people are driving 6+ hours just to go and compete in a class with 3 people in it. i know that guy on youtube exo came to syracuse yesterday all the way from maine, and goodstuff drove there from massachusets. hell, i drove 5 hours just to demo a couple cars


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

The best sounding cars are 70% tuning, 20% speaker placement and 10% equipment. As long as it's wired correctly, the install can be butt ugly but with the right tune it will still win, placement trumps install. The best tuners would win even with basic equipment.

My buddy Aaron came second to KP at finals a few years running. One of the years the difference between 1st and second was 0.5 points. If you want to look at it from an equipment perspective only, then the Zapcos beat the Polk Audio amps. The reality is what got them to first and second was their respective tunes. My buddy is a decent installer but no where near the best. But when it comes to tuning...... 

The difference between the top 10-15 cars and the rest is largely down to tuning ability. What they should do is have separate classes for those who tune their own cars and those who pay for the install and tuning. Although it's practically impossible to do this.


----------



## DLO13 (Oct 24, 2010)

sirbOOm said:


> There should be a rule in the entry classes of SQ competitions that the speakers, in total, should not cost (MSRP, not "on sale") more than, say, $500 to force folks into spending more time on installation (positioning, not just processor adjusted) and tuning.


That's how Europe and Asia do it. EMMA
Price limit


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

I've won my class the last 32 years of competing in sound quality.

The guy that always comes in second, is my alter ego and he was NOT HAPPY.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> can you give an example?


Like about all of them.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

cubdenno said:


> It's not difficult or snobby necessarily. it's subjective verses objective.
> 
> SPL is a number from a calibrated device. Repeatability and no way for judging preference/prejudice.
> 
> ...


I prefer figure skating over farting deadlifters.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

cajunner said:


> I've won my class the last 32 years of competing in sound quality.
> 
> The guy that always comes in second, is my alter ego and he was NOT HAPPY.


 SQ competition is as lame as it can be. what sounds good to you may not necessarily sound as good to me.

I`ve been at SPL competition once, never again.
80% distortion is not my cap of tea. 
It has no point from sound reproduction POW.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

competition actually is pretty fun. make of it what you will. 

the thing about competition is that people start off with "ok" systems. and they progress toward better sounding systems (and ones they like) based on feedback. so subjectively, even to them, they are benefiting from a better sounding system.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

Victor_inox said:


> SQ competition is as lame as it can be. what sounds good to you may not necessarily sound as good to me.
> 
> I`ve been at SPL competition once, never again.
> 80% distortion is not my cap of tea.
> It has no point from sound reproduction POW.


if I'd journey to a comp, it would be to take in some of the workmanship/ideas and not to attempt to judge the sound quality.

I agree that my reference is going to sound different from others, especially with all the industrial noise abuse my ears have taken.

Also, if making new friends is a "thing" for you, then as a social event it can take precedence over the usual bar on Friday night, although the thought of hitting on a competitor's woman, is probably frowned upon..

but that is what gets me out to something like that, if there was a nice sub-genre for the ladies that went on concurrent with the audio division, maybe a tattoo division or... no, no wet t-shirt contest, haha... less sexist...

I don't know, what do the ladies like to do in competition, what could draw a dual purpose crowd?

and don't say fluffy, I don't want no fluffies in sight.

but that's maybe just me?


----------



## DLO13 (Oct 24, 2010)

cajunner said:


> if I'd journey to a comp, it would be to take in some of the workmanship/ideas and not to attempt to judge the sound quality.
> 
> I agree that my reference is going to sound different from others, especially with all the industrial noise abuse my ears have taken.
> 
> ...



...really?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

does anyone else wonder where the hell cajunner comes up with some of the things he says? lol


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> does anyone else wonder where the hell cajunner comes up with some of the things he says? lol


Not anymore.


----------



## thefordmccord (Oct 18, 2012)

I just scored a 79 in MECA stock class with the equipment in my sig. Was enough to get second place. I have less than $1000 in my whole setup.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

DLO13 said:


> ...really?


well, I see a space of time where people (mostly male) are hanging about and I know it's like poker night or something for some of you, just getting out and hanging with the guys, but...


ha! who am I kidding, I've been with the same woman for 13 years.

you can't let the internet distortion ruin your happy place, right?

anyways, I think if there was a way to combine "crafts day" with "GTG/SQ comp" day, and people could just walk back and forth from one pavilion to the other, it would pull a lot more couples into the game of audio, not that one necessarily needs to compete but that a Mars/Venus type situation can work out, after all...


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

Victor_inox said:


> I prefer figure skating over farting deadlifters.


:laugh:

True. Most of the girls are all bendy as well. MMMMMmmmmm bendy....

In a competition, I like objective number rather than subjective. You lift 1000 pounds and the next guy lifts 990, you win.

You throw a triple axle or some other skating move as does the people before you and somehow, judges can determine the flaw or notice cheek movement which gets someone an extra half point....


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

cubdenno said:


> :laugh:
> 
> True. Most of the girls are all bendy as well. MMMMMmmmmm bendy....
> 
> ...


you could also compare it to snowboarding. contest snowboarding (which is lame to begin with..) is subjective and (according to the judges, but it seems to be a lie) style is part of the judging. style would be how good you make whatever trick you did look. of coarse all contest snowboarding is pretty much spinning and flipping as fast as you can so theres pretty much no room for style.


----------



## LaserSVT (Feb 1, 2009)

While sometimes I do want to compete I realize SQ is just way too different from one person to the next. I like the way it sounds so that's all that really matters. On the other hand I am always curious as to others opinions of my sound.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

the way its all formatted and if you have a good judge, it should be pretty damn similar results each time. its not the judge going "oh i like the way this one sounds, he wins".


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

cubdenno said:


> :laugh:
> 
> True. Most of the girls are all bendy as well. MMMMMmmmmm bendy....
> 
> ...


 exactly. in figure skating like ballet emotion must be expressed through dance not facial expressions, that actually lower point unless it`s freestyle.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

LaserSVT said:


> While sometimes I do want to compete I realize SQ is just way too different from one person to the next. I like the way it sounds so that's all that really matters. On the other hand I am always curious as to others opinions of my sound.


part of the reality of competition is that it's easy to think you've got a good tune and when you hear what other people have done, it blows you away... you go home with a damp hanky...

and it helps people here get a sense of whether or not you can be trusted as a source of information.

I don't compete and people want me to give it a try so they can assess whether or not to dismiss me and my suggestions, or fill my PM box with love..



I don't need love...

haha.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Your senses can be trained to measure accurately and objectively. What's the point of measuring ad nauseam if it still sounds crappy? This whole bit of SQ being subjective and 'sounds good to my ears', just means your ears aren't trained, cause if they were you would understand the difference between meh, good and better sound.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

sqnut said:


> Your senses can be trained to measure accurately and objectively. What's the point of measuring ad nauseam if it still sounds crappy? This whole bit of SQ being subjective and 'sounds good to my ears', just means your ears aren't trained, cause if they were you would understand the difference between meh, good and better sound.


Thank you. I don't have the best ear for it yet and I can still realize that sound quality is not subjective. Your PREFERENCES are, but your preferences may not be 100% true to the source

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

SkizeR said:


> Thank you. I don't have the best ear for it yet and I can still realize that sound quality is not subjective. Your PREFERENCES are, but your preferences may not be 100% true to the source
> 
> Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk


and your preferences are not set in stone.

I can honestly admit to myself, if say, Gary Summers tuned my car, and he made it sound like his car, which is to say he made it sound as true to a live unamplified event as possible, that I'd take that tune over my own, probably without having to compare them.

my new tune, would ostensibly be his tune, which, even though I've never heard his car or his tune, I would accept his tune as a new reference.


because that's better than having no baseline, right?

I do listen to music sometimes, and I know what live music sounds like but I don't get out to a place where live music is playing very often since I live in the bayou...

but someone like Gary who is doing it daily in studios designed to BE the reference, I can't compete with that, I mean I can attempt it but I am pretty sure he'd be able to make any tune I had, that much better.


Now, some dude like ErinH, I mean... come on... 



hahaha..

sorry,  you know you got to respect that man's contributions towards this hobby and if he wasn't


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

sqnut said:


> Your senses can be trained to measure accurately and objectively. What's the point of measuring ad nauseam if it still sounds crappy? This whole bit of SQ being subjective and 'sounds good to my ears', just means your ears aren't trained, cause if they were you would understand the difference between meh, good and better sound.


Pretty sure there are enough articles/white papers/thesis papers that will discuss a human being not so good at objectively measuring sound. I get the training aspect of what you are saying. but especially at a competition, fatigue, preference, having a bad day, feeling rushed, environmental issues can all cause different results without even going into the sound of the system. Heck I would still like the judges to be blind folded.

That is not to say that one can't tell the difference between bad, meh, good and great sound. The problem I have is when you are at competition level systems, they are supposed to be great. So explain how someone scores higher in SQ over another equally great system. 

Further more, is each system set to a specific db level before testing? I mean we all know the soundboard tricks at a brick and mortar. Have the amp you want to sell turned up a bit higher in level than others and the louder amp gets sold. Just curious as it has been a long while since I have seen an SQ comp.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

cubdenno said:


> Pretty sure there are enough articles/white papers/thesis papers that will discuss a human being not so good at objectively measuring sound. I get the training aspect of what you are saying. but especially at a competition, fatigue, preference, having a bad day, feeling rushed, environmental issues can all cause different results without even going into the sound of the system. Heck I would still like the judges to be blind folded.
> 
> That is not to say that one can't tell the difference between bad, meh, good and great sound. The problem I have is when you are at competition level systems, they are supposed to be great. So explain how someone scores higher in SQ over another equally great system.
> 
> Further more, is each system set to a specific db level before testing? I mean we all know the soundboard tricks at a brick and mortar. Have the amp you want to sell turned up a bit higher in level than others and the louder amp gets sold. Just curious as it has been a long while since I have seen an SQ comp.


Look into the rules and how cars are scored in meca

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

a skeptic, I love it!

I have heard what other "non-audiophile" people have done to their systems, who emphatically want you to give your comments because they think it's great, and just once I actually started through the deck menu, reversing everything back to a flat line, just to see what that was like, (I hadn't heard kicker coaxes before) and the guy goes "what are you dooing! I spent an hour making those settings!" and I felt bad for the guy... I think he didn't even know what changes he had made, which is kind of ignorant not to put somewhere, if you like them, haha...


so I don't fiddle with people's settings anymore. I don't tell them it sounds bad, or that the bass is too loud, or anything, I just nod with a smile and say "that's nice" when we're done with the audition...


----------



## LaserSVT (Feb 1, 2009)

cajunner said:


> part of the reality of competition is that it's easy to think you've got a good tune and when you hear what other people have done, it blows you away... you go home with a damp hanky...
> 
> and it helps people here get a sense of whether or not you can be trusted as a source of information.
> 
> ...


I understand what you are saying. Every day I hear a stereo someone thinks is the shiznet and sounds like ass. I have people in my Lincoln club that swear the stock Mark VIII stereo sounds fantastic! Argh!
I do look forward to this weekends event though as it will give some well known and trusted members here a chance to see if I am full of poop or if there is truth behind what I say in my reviews.

As for the love or hate.....
"Love me or hate me If you love me then thank you! If you hate me then **** you!"
*_Lady Sovereign_


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

LaserSVT said:


> As for the love or hate.....
> "Love me or hate me If you love me then thank you! If you hate me then **** you!"
> *_Lady Sovereign_


Luv u bb <3


----------



## pocket5s (Jan 6, 2012)

So far there have been what, 2 or 3 people who actually compete respond and the rest don't compete and debate over rules, shows and tuning. 

Brilliant. 

As a couple have eluded to, install and tuning have far more impact than cost of equipment. 

Examples? Kevin competes in meca with $15 wideband drivers, at the top 3 of his class. Ally ran $35 midrange a year ago and did very well at the college station money round. Todd ran $45 midranges a couple years ago and placed 2nd at finals.

As for shows with only one or two people per class, that is true in most areas, but not all. Never know when someone might show up to check it out and decide to get involved though. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

I think if somebody is asking questions about competition and if it can be won with "ok" equipment, the people replying should at least qualify if they've ever been to a competition before. 

From what I've read, this thread has become more about competition bashing than anything. My opinion is only worth the value you give it, but here it goes:

-I have heard numerous cars that sounded great (and placed well) in competition. I know of at least 3 who had systems under $1000 (complete systems), were DIY, and placed well at MECA 2013 Finals (I can't qualify if it was Top 3 per OP's request).

-I know of several cars that sounded WORSE after a person upgraded to more expensive gear because they neglected install for the sake of fitting a larger/better speaker. Eventually those cars sounded better, some through changing the install, some through more tuning, and some through reverting back to less expensive gear (that afforded a better install).

-Car audio sound quality is a niche, both from a hobby and competition standpoint. There isn't lots of money or fame to come from it, so WE (the enthusiasts) are the means of growing it. Competition can be fun as it's essentially a way to hang out with fellow enthusiasts and to help hone in our your system. Don't like the turnout in your area? Try and get some friends into the hobby and encourage them to come to shows to build it up!

-I find it sad that most people who vocally hate on competing do so with never actually going to competition. Or they go once and end up doing so poorly that instead of trying to improve, they get butthurt and say it's lame/unfair/too subjective/etc. I can say *for a fact* that the best cars I've heard all sound more similar than different and I would take any one as MY vehicle/tune. Those cars being perennial winners like: Mark Eldridge, Gary Summers, Steve Cook, and Kirk Proffit (and countless other GREAT cars that don't carry internet based name recognition). I have not heard "the magic bus" or Bulwada's car or many of the other West cost cars (like Big Red)...but I feel my listening experience is at least expansive enough to make my opinion valid.

-SQ judging is subjective and there can be some unfairness inherent to that. Some are biases, some are judge experience, some are fatigue throughout the day of judging. What I can tell you is that MECA runs as fairly as possible in the fact they judge all cars in one class completely before moving to the next. So while things are as subjective, they do try and keep things level by keeping the classes together so a judge isn't going from Street, to MODEX, and back to Street again.

It is easy to say that you don't like competition because that doesn't "sound good to your ears." I agree wholeheartedly that preference does not equal SQ bliss all the time. I will openly admit that I tick my tune up in the bottom end for personal listening, but that is also a function mostly of road noise I encounter while DRIVING compared to being judged while STATIONARY. After you spend time in some of the "greats" in the competition circuit, I highly doubt you will say that a really good sounding car ISN'T what you'd want yours to sound like. If you are basing your opinion solely something like not liking a car you heard that also went a competition a few times (or even worse...basing your opinion solely on speculation), I highly encourage you to find one of the larger events (3 point events in MECA) and go to it. Listen to the cars (most people will gladly let you do it) and make an honest judgement for yourself instead of a keyboard commando here.


----------



## rayray881 (Jul 15, 2013)

I still have not read one single post that explains the benefit of competing. I attended and competed in quite a few shows the past few years. It was always the same 6-7 people at every show in Florida. I was new on the scene and the others were doing it for many years. There just isn't a point to it unless you like collecting trophies or bragging about how you beat one other person in your class. If there was money involved, I could see there being a draw but then I think politics would kill that scenario. All of the money spent for travel, membership fees, and comp fees didnt make sense for me. I would love to just have get togethers every so often at a park or business where we can all mingle and demo without any pressure or attitudes. Buy some food and beverages and make a party out of it!


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

haha..

here come the clique defenders of the competition circuit, all bow before their omniscient foliage.

I think if someone wants to know if "just okay" equipment can win competitions, then a peek at the equipment being run by winners will suffice.

and it's overwhelmingly in the favor of the deep pocket, top tier brands.


You want a couple of exceptions that break the rule, sure, man.. they're out there. Good luck finding them without being told, because it's not often or common to find.


----------



## pocket5s (Jan 6, 2012)

The same pointlessness can be said about softball, bowling, golf, haters, car/truck shows, and just about any amateur competition format out there. 

Some do it to learn (which they won't do here), some just enjoy it. 

The only people that look for trophies are the spl crowd and newcomers. Except maybe at finals, which at least is nice to get but not an end goal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Niebur3 (Jul 11, 2008)

I have competed off and on for many years. I've never been in a car personally that had anything other than big brand, top tier equipment, not to say there isn't any.

I like competing. I really liked meeting people and listing to others' systems. Unfortunately, all the large shops in my area stopped doing competitions and I would love to, but it would end up being really small. So, GTG's are a fun way to spend an afternoon as well.

The problems I had recently with competing is the lack of SQ cars in the event (at least here). Usually I was the only one or maybe 1 of 2. I would attend local competitions where the USACi judge didn't even want to listen (because I was the only car). I would have to hound him to listen to it and my score sheet was usually meaningless. Oh, and he would listen in the midst of SPL competitors showing off around us (believe me, i didn't even need a sub). There were a couple shows that I walked up at 10am, gave him my fee, he literally handed me the 1st place trophy and I left.

I have been to USACi finals a couple of years. One year went I went (and I placed in the top 5 in "Q"), 2 of the cars that beat me sounded awful. One was a VERY expensive car built by the shop that sponsored finals. I literally saw the judge get out of the car and shake the hand of the owner of the shop with the owner of the car right there. I immediately went and asked to listen and it sounded bad, by anyones standard, yet I lost to this person. I also didn't like the head judges girlfriend helping to decide "Best of Show", when she wasn't a USACi judge.

I'm not trying to put down USACi or saying this is the norm, but things like this have gone on for years to varying degrees and it really hurts competitions as a whole.

Give me a good GTG where it is a relaxed, fun environment and I think people will come.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Niebur3 said:


> I have competed off and on for many years. I've never been in a car personally that had anything other than big brand, top tier equipment, not to say there isn't any.
> 
> I like competing. I really liked meeting people and listing to others' systems. Unfortunately, all the large shops in my area stopped doing competitions and I would love to, but it would end up being really small. So, GTG's are a fun way to spend an afternoon as well.
> 
> ...


its ok, everyone knows usaci is a joke


----------



## Niebur3 (Jul 11, 2008)

SkizeR said:


> its ok, everyone knows usaci is a joke


There were honestly a coupe of years I literally paid the finals fee and was invited to finals without competing all year...don't think that would have gone over in MECA or IASCA.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

Howards Volvo (chefhow) won MECA Finals Street Class in 2011 or 2012 I forget which with a system consisting of ID CTX Coaxials in stock locations. Thiel 8s which were on clearance for $99ea. 2nd hand IDQ12. ID I-series amps. a very used Alpine H700 and a used Alpine Head unit. 

in 2003 I finished 2nd in IASCA Street class by 2pts with a System consisting of ID CSX components. Vifa PL 7s midbass which were on clearance from Partsexpress for $19ea.
Alpine H700. Helix A series amps. Image Dynamics ID12s.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

LaserSVT said:


> I understand what you are saying. Every day I hear a stereo someone thinks is the shiznet and sounds like ass. I have people in my Lincoln club that swear the stock Mark VIII stereo sounds fantastic! Argh!
> I do look forward to this weekends event though as it will give some well known and trusted members here a chance to see if I am full of poop or if there is truth behind what I say in my reviews.
> 
> As for the love or hate.....
> ...


the idea that you are hinging your online, Average Joe reputation on whether or not you place well in a competition, (is that what you are doing, or just getting well-known ears on your tune?) isn't what I'd do, even if there was a competition around that I could afford to attend, since it would mean a bit of travel for me...

and everything that competition represents, pitting subjective responses from subjective judges, against your own, is going to be tied to your rep. Unless there's a net positive that comes out of it, (which, I'm sure most people do come out of it, with something of value) I don't believe it would be worth doing.

You've got the equipment and you've got a lot invested in the install, and **IMHO** if you score low, you'll have to abandon your factory locations to bring up the scores since you self-imposed that limitation yourself.

you can always use that, as a hedge against scoring low, I mean... that's not really a positive, though.


I've watched your slow succumbing to the addiction and who knows, maybe you'll be one of those veteran competitors after riding the highs and lows of competition.

I wouldn't be able to afford the hobby of competition, the hobby of internet interlocution is all I'm willing to spend. I don't really look down on anyone, competitors included. The hater stuff is just internet misinterpretation when it comes to me judging or being told I'm judgmental towards competition folk.

Actually, I really enjoy reading about people's experiences at competition, there's no bias or resentment towards that part of the hobby and knowing how the sport can help drive innovative companies to research and produce more and finer-grade of products, I'd be foolish to love car audio and not have appreciation for the competition side of it.


----------



## omnibus (Feb 20, 2015)

We don't even have comps in my area. There aren't even any local shops anymore, just BestBuy lol.



LaserSVT said:


> While sometimes I do want to compete I realize SQ is just way too different from one person to the next. I like the way it sounds so that's all that really matters. On the other hand I am always curious as to others opinions of my sound.


Same with me. I also tend to get bored with how my setup sounds after a while and will play with settings again. Sometimes i'll just swap between presets but the music makes a difference too since I listen to everything from smooth jazz to 80's music to death metal...so it's hard to find a good tune for all.

It doesn't help that my music is 320kbps MP3 either.


----------



## rayray881 (Jul 15, 2013)

pocket5s said:


> The same pointlessness can be said about softball, bowling, golf, haters, car/truck shows, and just about any amateur competition format out there.
> 
> Some do it to learn (which they won't do here), some just enjoy it.
> 
> ...


Gotta disagree here! Softball, bowling, and golf are not subjective. I do agree about car shows. It always make me laugh when some people build cars that are strictly trailer queens. Never could understand the point of building a beautiful car with 1000hp to have it sit and not enjoy it. To each their own though!


----------



## pocket5s (Jan 6, 2012)

The analogy was geared towards "usefulness", not the scoring aspect. I'm not much of a trailer queen person myself, but I do appreciate the builds of them for what they are and try to find something to learn from them, be it a full on show car or audio vehicle.

Thankfully the days of being a top tier car audio car needing to be a trailer queen are gone. Yes there are a couple here and there, but they are the exception. Having said that, even the NASCAR is driven on the track a couple times a year and that's cool. Hell Mark even went to the trouble of making it street legal even though he really didn't have to.


----------



## LaserSVT (Feb 1, 2009)

cajunner said:


> the idea that you are hinging your online, Average Joe reputation on whether or not you place well in a competition, (is that what you are doing, or just getting well-known ears on your tune?) isn't what I'd do, even if there was a competition around that I could afford to attend, since it would mean a bit of travel for me...
> 
> and everything that competition represents, pitting subjective responses from subjective judges, against your own, is going to be tied to your rep. Unless there's a net positive that comes out of it, (which, I'm sure most people do come out of it, with something of value) I don't believe it would be worth doing.
> 
> ...


I am not competing. At least not as far as I know anyway. I am going there to meet members, allow the ones that want to hear the Sinfonis hear them, make some contacts and listen to some nice SQ systems. Get pointers, see how others do things, hear what different speakers sound like etc etc. I am going to have fun, show off my stereo, make some friends, buy Chad some lunch and beer, get pointers and maybe someone can learn me a thing or two about tuning my truck.
I figure it couldnt hurt if others that we know and trust on here hear my stereo and give an honest level of feedback on it. That may help some people such as yourself realize that I may know a thing or two about sound. On the other hand it may prove I am tone deaf and spend money because I already have enough drones and hookers.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

LaserSVT said:


> I am not competing. At least not as far as I know anyway. I am going there to meet members, allow the ones that want to hear the Sinfonis hear them, make some contacts and listen to some nice SQ systems. Get pointers, see how others do things, hear what different speakers sound like etc etc. I am going to have fun, show off my stereo, make some friends, buy Chad some lunch and beer, get pointers and maybe someone can learn me a thing or two about tuning my truck.
> I figure it couldnt hurt if others that we know and trust on here hear my stereo and give an honest level of feedback on it. That may help some people such as yourself realize that I may know a thing or two about sound. On the other hand it may prove I am tone deaf and spend money because I already have enough drones and hookers.


if you accomplish half of that list of things to do, you won't have wasted the day...

and if you are tone deaf, don't tell anyone.

and don't worry, the hookers don't care if you have perfect pitch, you can slide them the money and they're okay with that.


----------



## beerdrnkr (Apr 18, 2007)

A few years back I hit up a couple of SQ meets and comps and remember being blown away by Buzzman's mercedes and Big Red's truck, that was back in the day before all their latest changes.

I've had pretty decent systems with average to slightly above average equipment and was curious if there's just another level that great equipment brings you up to? I know install and tuning play a major role. 

I get a lot of compliments from people and they tell me how great my setups sound but that's coming from mostly SPL guys and the average car audio guy, not really from people that have actually gone to SQ comps and listened to awesome sounding cars. I feel like I've hit a wall to the point that I get to about 90% of where I want to be but just can't get over that hump. Maybe I just need that last bit of tuning expertise more than changes in equipment which is usually what ends up happening.


----------



## chefhow (Apr 29, 2007)

I was an unknown in 2009 when I started competing again and I took 3rd at MECA Finals with a pair of OEM 8's, Trinity wide banders, a used IDq12, a VERY used 9860/H700 combo thru a pair of Adcom amps.
The following year I changed out my front stage for a closeout set of Theils and a pair of $99 CTX 4" coax's and switched out to ID i Series amps. Took 2nd.
Year 3 I took first with the same setup.

As long as you have decent, NOT EXPENSIVE, equip and a good tune and understanding then you should be fine.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

cajunner said:


> haha..
> 
> here come the clique defenders of the competition circuit, all bow before their omniscient foliage.


I can't help but feel that I was part of what this comment was directed at. I won't spend much time defending myself since I have come to recognize you to have an attitude tantamount to that of a child looking to get a reaction by doing something offputting (aka, a sh*tstarter). 

Either way, I felt my reply was thoughtful and primarily did two things: encouraged people to go to a competition for themselves instead of judging based on preconcieved notions or the comments of others, and judge a "SQ" car by listening to one of the "upper echelon" vehicles. I can tell you that there is a wide margin between somebody who competes and scores in the low 70's and somebody who scores in the low 80's (by MECA scoring format). 

I don't fault people who don't care to travel long distances to compete. I will freely admit I don't. I am lucky enough to be just outside Nashville which is where MECA is based, so it's actually easier for me to go to competitions than it is many of the other GTG's in the region. I haven't competed since 2013, but I still go to shows to just hang out with fellow hobbyists. That said, I still defend that a "SQ tune" can sound really good and if people heard some of the best cars out there they wouldn't be saying a "SQ tune can't be good" (which I most often see from people who have never competed). Anyway, nowhere in my reply do I feel I was a blindly defending the point of competition but more encouraging people to decide for themselves. 



cajunner said:


> I don't really look down on anyone, competitors included. The hater stuff is just internet misinterpretation when it comes to me judging or being told I'm judgmental towards competition folk.


I wouldn't consider there to be much to misinterpret from "here come the clique defenders of the competition circuit, all bow before their omniscient foliage." It was pretty direct and VERY "hater like". But I'm glad to see you recognize you don't _really_ look down on anyone...you simply heavily imply it.



beerdrnkr said:


> A few years back I hit up a couple of SQ meets and comps and remember being blown away by Buzzman's mercedes and Big Red's truck, that was back in the day before all their latest changes.
> 
> I've had pretty decent systems with average to slightly above average equipment and was curious if there's just another level that great equipment brings you up to? I know install and tuning play a major role.
> 
> I get a lot of compliments from people and they tell me how great my setups sound but that's coming from mostly SPL guys and the average car audio guy, not really from people that have actually gone to SQ comps and listened to awesome sounding cars. I feel like I've hit a wall to the point that I get to about 90% of where I want to be but just can't get over that hump. *Maybe I just need that last bit of tuning expertise more than changes in equipment which is usually what ends up happening.*


There is a reason people say things like install and tuning are worth much more than the price of your gear when it comes to good sound. It's because it's true. I don't know your system, but I can say that you could probably improve it with more tuning (or an install change) more effectively than you can with filling the same spots with more expensive speakers. 

I have competed two seasons in MECA. 

The first year I was in Modex. My gear was: DRZ9255, Mosconi 6to8, JL HD amps, 2 Dayton HF 12's, JBL GTi midbass (dual midbass--4 total), Aura whisper midrange, and Scan tweets. It wasn't the most expensive gear, but it wasn't cheap either. I believe I scored a 67 and placed 8th (of 8).

The second year I moved up to a tougher class (Extreme). My gear was: Alpine CDA-117, MiniDSP 8x8, JL XD amps, 1 dayton HF 12 (ported), Scan Discovery 10" midbass, JBL GTi midrange, and Alpine tweets. The value of my gear went down roughly $1200. I scored a 79.xx and placed 5th (also of 8) and missed 3rd place by 0.5pts. 

The second year I focused on install and tuning and even though my gear was "inferior" to what I ran the previous year, I achieved superior results.

I'm not saying any of this to pat myself of the back. Taking 5th at Finals one time is far from achieving that. All I'm trying to do is illustrate that getting past that 90% mark is more easily achieved via install and tuning than it is through more expensive equipment.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

I love true to the source from all of you dsp junkies.
Once you equalized or phase adjusted your signal it's not longer true to the source. 
What does that tell us?
That you full of yourself or something else?



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Victor_inox said:


> I love true to the source from all of you dsp junkies.
> Once you equalized or phase adjusted your signal it's not longer true to the source.
> What does that tell us?
> That you full of yourself or something else?
> ...


how do you expect to get that in a car without anything to correct this tin can of an environment, and to correct unequal distances


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

From the SQ cars I have sat in that scored very high in MECA if I ever get a show anywhere near me I'll place high.. Using "SPL" amps and a "SPL" sub.

I'm sure that will make a few people upset.

I will be in a pretty low class with DSP. Nothing modified, all stock locations.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

That is not what I asked

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

Victor_inox said:


> I love true to the source from all of you dsp junkies.
> Once you equalized or phase adjusted your signal it's not longer true to the source.
> What does that tell us?
> That you full of yourself or something else?


*NONE OF US* are listening to music "true to the source" the minute that a recording is...recorded and mastered. At that point the closest we can come to "true to the source" is what the producer intended for us to hear.

In this scenario, let's assume: a quality studio with a producer who knows what he is doing. The speakers are genelec (have good polar response and good phase coherence). The speaker and the room's acoustic treatments result in a flat response (so what HE hears for mastering IS true to the source) and the producer is equidistant from the speakers (so they are time-aligned). 

Our goal is to reproduce the producers mix.

In order to do that, we need speakers that exhibit the same phase coherence and SIMILAR acoustic response. The acoustic response should only be similar because the size of the listening environment dictates how the response should be shaped. In other words, compared to a mastering studio you would need a different overall response curve in: a car, a living room, a movie theater, and an arena in order to net the same PERCEIVED RESPONSE the music producer intended for you to hear.

Simply put, you need EQ just to correct for the room you are in based on size/shape, before even accounting for how it effects the speakers response itself. You also need to account for driver placement. The listener's offset of the speakers from left to right and each sides offset from their respective drivers (midbass to midrange to tweeter). 

In a home, it is much easier to sit equidistant from each side and get a speaker (like the genelec) that has all it's drivers mechanically distance/phase aligned. So I would conclude that a properly set up home listening room could be "true to the source" utilizing only EQ and no other signal processing.

In a car, the listener is almost NEVER equidistant from the speakers and each sides drivers are almost NEVER equidistant from each other (midbass in door, midrange and/or tweeter on dash/pillar sound like a common arrangement). 

In a car (if we have any care to be "true to the source"), we MUST electronically delay each driver relative to their distance to electronically achieve that same distance/phase alignment. Once the drivers on each side (left and right) are aligned, the entire side (typically the left side for cars where the driver is on the left) must be delayed to electronically create equidistant spacing. 

Even the above is a simplistic view of tuning as it doesn't account for the influence the room and speakers have on the acoustic response of the system or the phase response of the system (which is influenced by the room, the speakers, the distance from each other, and the crossovers used). But in the end it should paint a adequate picture of why DSP isn't a bad thing, and is almost 100% of the time required in a car to achieve sound that is "true to the source." 

And if you say I'm "full of something" for believing that using DSP gets me closer to being true to the source, I will say *you are delusional* for thinking otherwise.

You may never change your view on this (which is wrong by the way), but if what I've typed opens the eyes of a single person, I consider it worth the time.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Victor_inox said:


> I love true to the source from all of you dsp junkies.
> Once you equalized or phase adjusted your signal it's not longer true to the source.
> What does that tell us?
> That you full of yourself or something else?
> ...


You're looking through the wrong end of the telescope. You're using the dsp to overcome the effects of the environment so that the ear level response in the car is closer to whats recorded on the cd.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

sqnut said:


> You're looking through the wrong end of the telescope. You're using the dsp to overcome the effects of the environment so that the ear level response in the car is closer to whats recorded on the cd.


No I`m not, perhaps I don`t understand desire to tune as flat as possible. 
how do you know what recorded? You don`t, plain and simple.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

DDfusion said:


> From the SQ cars I have sat in that scored very high in MECA if I ever get a show anywhere near me I'll place high.. Using "SPL" amps and a "SPL" sub.
> 
> I'm sure that will make a few people upset.
> 
> I will be in a pretty low class with DSP. Nothing modified, all stock locations.


You can do well with cheap drivers. You can do well with "SPL based" gear. The install and tune are more important than the other factors. 

Do you mind qualifying what cars you have sat in? Since you are using all stock locations and minimal EQ but believe you'll be upsetting people, I am genuinely interested in who you may be upsetting.

Also, difference in local competition and national competition can be eye opening. I typically placed 2nd and 3rd regionally(Steve Cook typically took 1st) in my first year competing, and so I though a podium finish was possible. But when I went to finals...well Cook still took 1st and I landed in 8th (of 8 competitors). 

Please note that I sincecerly hope you have achieved good playback even with "less than ideal" gear, but your post sounds more like a "I'm better than you" comment without having actually stepped into the ring.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

pionkej said:


> *NONE OF US* are listening to music "true to the source" the minute that a recording is...recorded and mastered. At that point the closest we can come to "true to the source" is what the producer intended for us to hear.
> 
> In this scenario, let's assume: a quality studio with a producer who knows what he is doing. The speakers are genelec (have good polar response and good phase coherence). The speaker and the room's acoustic treatments result in a flat response (so what HE hears for mastering IS true to the source) and the producer is equidistant from the speakers (so they are time-aligned).
> 
> ...



Uh...yeah....sorry vic, but this......this all muffuggin day.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Victor_inox said:


> No I`m not, perhaps I don`t understand desire to tune as flat as possible.
> how do you know what recorded? You don`t, plain and simple.


You do if you've gone back and forth a million times between car and 2ch with the same content.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Victor_inox said:


> No I`m not, perhaps I don`t understand desire to tune as flat as possible.


In car car if you tune to a flat response you'll never really hear the cd the way it was recorded.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

Victor_inox said:


> No I`m not, perhaps I don`t understand desire to tune as flat as possible.
> how do you know what recorded? You don`t, plain and simple.


I appreciate you not replying to my post since it pretty well puts all the facts in place, but the simple truth is...you don't know what was recorded. *You are right about that part.* The best we can do is assume an "ideal recording" scenario which should be flat response played over speakers with phase coherence. Anything not mastered in that environment will not be accurate, but I believe your better aiming for the ideal scenario than no scenario at all.

So in a car, you use EQ to build a curve that sounds "ear flat". Ear flat being that it doesn't measure as a straight line, but when you listen to band-limited pink noise, it will be perceived as flat from 20-20khz (it will also approximate the MS8 target curve, but will be specific to your vehicle). You use time alignment to get speakers and phase coherence and approximate equal listening distances from left to right. 

That "ear flat" approximately transfers the flat response heard in the studio during mastering to your car. This is about the best we can do, and it will never be perfect, but it IS better than not doing anything at all.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

I understand points you trying to make here but you missing mine. Stop talking about true to the source if it`s not.
It`s not what tuning suppose to be about. 
you can play pink noise and compensate for cabin shortcomings but it will not be true to the source the moment you started playing with DSP. 
It will sounds better in that particular environment but far from true. 
I`ve heard so many ****ty sounded DSP installs when people rely on measurements instead of listening music. Say, mastering engineer dropped certain frequency 2db to compensate for listening room in his studio is your cabin going to have same bump in that spectrum? highly unlikely. or he used supposedly great headphones to master recording, same shortcoming. point is no matter what you do it will never sounds the same as in studio it was mastered. Point being tune to your liking not to get best graph.


----------



## captainscarlett (Mar 15, 2011)




----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

sqnut said:


> In car car if you tune to a flat response you'll never really hear the cd the way it was recorded.


Exactly my point.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

captainscarlett said:


>


im not playing this with any volume since im at work, but if you expect a highly highly highly compressed youtube video to give any sort of accurate representation of how a system sounds, i have some bad news for you


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Vic....it is accepted a car will never approach a well setup room........but in our cars with drivers spread out on assorted planes, as well as the asymmetrical seating situation the way to make it sound best is electronic manipulation. If you can present a focused coherent stage in you're car without dsp......well, more power to you. I'd say you went above and beyond with the install. Most of us require dsp to approach the levels of essque we desire in our rides. I don't understand how a few poorly tuned systems could make you abandon the most logical path.......


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

claydo said:


> Vic....it is accepted a car will never approach a well setup room........but in our cars with drivers spread out on assorted planes, as well as the asymmetrical seating situation the way to make it sound best is electronic manipulation. If you can present a focused coherent stage in you're car without dsp......well, more power to you. I'd say you went above and beyond with the install. Most of us require dsp to approach the levels of essque we desire in our rides. I don't understand how a few poorly tuned systems could make you abandon the most logical path.......


 Am I writing in mandarin so you people having hard time understanding my point?
I never said I`m against DSP just so stop calling it true to the source. 
I use dsp everywhere but my main listening room. but when I do I never call it true to the source.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

Victor_inox said:


> Am I writing in mandarin so you people having hard time understanding my point?
> I never said I`m against DSP just so stop calling it true to the source.
> I use dsp everywhere but my main listening room. but when I do I never call it true to the source.


That is about the clearest you have put it and it then comes down to a game of bullsh*t semantics. Somewhere in some post, one of us used the term "true to the source". Your entire point has been that we can never be "true to the source" just because we use DSP.

I'll recant. The use of DSP gets us *"truER to the source"* than not using it.

Happy now?


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Aw sit....my bad vic......you seemed to be downplaying the role of dsp in a good car. The only thing that is true to the source is...... well...... the source, lmao.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

pionkej said:


> That is about the clearest you have put it and it then comes down to a game of bullsh*t semantics. Somewhere in some post, one of us used the term "true to the source". Your entire point has been that we can never be "true to the source" just because we use DSP.
> 
> I'll recant. The use of DSP gets us *"truER to the source"* than not using it.
> 
> Happy now?



I never stopped being happy, you should drop this attitude, seriously dude.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

claydo said:


> Aw sit....my bad vic......you seemed to be downplaying the role of dsp in a good car. The only thing that is true to the source is...... well...... the source, lmao.


:beerchug:


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

pionkej said:


> I can't help but feel that I was part of what this comment was directed at. I won't spend much time defending myself since I have come to recognize you to have an attitude tantamount to that of a child looking to get a reaction by doing something offputting (aka, a sh*tstarter).
> 
> Either way, I felt my reply was thoughtful and primarily did two things: encouraged people to go to a competition for themselves instead of judging based on preconcieved notions or the comments of others, and judge a "SQ" car by listening to one of the "upper echelon" vehicles. I can tell you that there is a wide margin between somebody who competes and scores in the low 70's and somebody who scores in the low 80's (by MECA scoring format).
> 
> ...


first pocket5 makes a post about people who don't compete, and then immediately after, another by you sharing the same intent.


as a person who doesn't compete, I cannot embrace all of the supposed enlightenment that comes from the exercise, in the way it's being broadcast on the forum. 

and since most people here don't compete in the formal sense, seeing the defending of competition used as a shield, used as a tactic, well I find that to be a little off the mark.

YOU in your eloquent dissolution, deem yourself an authority, you wear a mantle in the form of paying a fee for membership. I think that's fine but when you place your authority in that membership, you are the one who is doing what you accuse me of doing, without even being aware of it.


when I throw out "omniscient foliage" it's what I see happen in threads where the competition people gang up, and they do a "hoo-rah!" after, like they told some loser what's what in their world...


and I'm saying it's not your world.


the forum is filled with plenty of people who don't need qualification, or vindication, or substantiation, in order to advance their systems, or share their knowledge, or just muse about sound and it's effect on their lives, and the assumption that only contestants, and by that I mean contest winners, are the authority to speak, is what I humorously (to me, imho, whatev) apply a code. I flag that activity.


which doesn't really count in "hater" parlance, I am the hedge, I am the springboard upon which you might spring from or off, which is to say, the board is not without fault, if you land in a different way than which you thought.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Uh.......wat? Damn caj......yer the hedge....or springboard......uh...wat?


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

claydo said:


> Uh.......wat? Damn caj......yer the hedge....or springboard......uh...wat?


I was accused of being a ****starter, so isn't that some ****?



I know it looks bad, but this is the Trump way, let's embrace it.


----------



## Kevin K (Feb 11, 2013)

Just as a reminder, below was the original question.

And yes, you can get a very good sound without spending a great deal of money on equipment. A vehicle environment hurts a "true to source" sound so the dsp helps fix that issue ,although it can't get rid of the issue being the vehicle itself, but helps. And once dialed in.....ahhh so nice to enjoy. I've learned a great deal as this is my third year to compete but the neat thing is...there is so much more to learn, so much more experiment with and try to understand,...so much that hasn't even been tapped into yet. 

There is a good mixture of low cost doing well, and high cost doing well. But don't think just because you have x amount to budget for audio that you have to fault on the side of not sounding good and even doing well in a contest, cause that is not the case. 
I hope your able to visit a contest and take a good listen to as many vehicles as you can. Be sure to ask about the system, in many cases, I'll think you'll be surprised.




beerdrnkr said:


> I'm just curious, when's the last time anyone has placed top 5 in SQ comps with just ok equipment? By ok equipment, I'd say $100 per driver, so basically a $600 or less 3way frontstage. Also with just budget friendly amps.
> 
> Does it happen much anymore? Are there a lot of competitors doing well with just decent equipment? It seems like most people entering competitions have really expensive equipment usually.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Ahhhh....maybe...I think I....****, I don't know......lmao. Sometimes I wonder if you get lost in your own vernacular......or if it's just me.....


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

I don't think anyone is trying to say that you can't win a competition with lower cost gear.

I think that my observation about exceptions and the rule is substantiated by evidence and no one is disputing it. 

With regular competitors recommending that people attend and drumming up interest in the competition as something more, a value-added enterprise.

And I'd be fine with that, because I feel like with the relative ease many of you have to attend, it'd be no more difficult than spending a day at a local park or pub, talking amongst like-minded folk. The fees, the travel, the extra time off are no obstacles and that's great.


For the many who are in rural areas or don't have the capital to commit, it does appear that there is an undue influence being placed on the merit of competing, even if someone claims "you gotta have a score, so I can measure your opinion" which is where the rubber hits the road for a small minority of forum members.

Lycan didn't compete, and his thoughts on sound resonate throughout this place, I mean if that insight escapes you, if that doesn't make you give pause...


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Five guys who had never seen an elephant were blindfolded and each got to touch and feel a different part (trunk, legs, ear, tail etc) based on this they were asked to describe the elephant. These are the guys who claim SQ is subjective, different for each person, sounds good to my ears etc.

Attending a competition and listening to the top cars is like taking the blindfold off and viewing the beast in its entirety. If you listened to the top 5 cars at finals you'd be surprised at how *similar and close to each other they sound*.


----------



## brewermoe (Apr 11, 2015)

I800C0LLECT said:


> Does that include lamp cords from the local dump? That would have been me when I just started this hobby
> 
> Matter of fact...I'm having a hard time getting rid of some of those habits!


lol ... that reminds me of the SMD 72 Chevelle re-build !!


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

Victor_inox said:


> I love true to the source from all of you dsp junkies.
> Once you equalized or phase adjusted your signal it's not longer true to the source.
> What does that tell us?
> That you full of yourself or something else?





Victor_inox said:


> I never stopped being happy, you should drop this attitude, seriously dude.


Never once in your first comment did you say, "even with DSP, you cannot match what the producer intended because you don't know the response of the system he mastered to." No, what you said was "once you equalized or phase adjusted your signal it's no longer true to source". 

I agree completely that you will never match every producer's intended response (true to the source in the absolute sense and what you "really meant" according to you last post). I disagree completely "once you EQ or TA the signal" you are further away from being trueER to the source than not applying DSP at all (which is VERY MUCH what you implied and then proceeded to imply that those who think otherwise are "full of themselves or full of sh*t").

My replies started because of lack of clarity on your end. Not mine. Instead of telling me to "chill out" for being offended, maybe realize you should have better worded your initial response and apologize for the way it was taken. Just a thought.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

pionkej said:


> Never once in your first comment did you say, "even with DSP, you cannot match what the producer intended because you don't know the response of the system he mastered to." No, what you said was "once you equalized or phase adjusted your signal it's no longer true to source".
> 
> I agree completely that you will never match every producer's intended response (true to the source in the absolute sense and what you "really meant" according to you last post). I disagree completely "once you EQ or TA the signal" you are further away from being trueER to the source than not applying DSP at all (which is VERY MUCH what you implied and then proceeded to imply that those who think otherwise are "full of themselves or full of sh*t").
> 
> My replies started because of lack of clarity on your end. Not mine. Instead of telling me to "chill out" for being offended, maybe realize you should have better worded your initial response and apologize for the way it was taken. Just a thought.


So now I have to apologies for you being butt hurt? 
OK I apologies you jumped to conclusions.


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

pionkej said:


> You can do well with cheap drivers. You can do well with "SPL based" gear. The install and tune are more important than the other factors.
> 
> Do you mind qualifying what cars you have sat in? Since you are using all stock locations and minimal EQ but believe you'll be upsetting people, I am genuinely interested in who you may be upsetting.
> 
> ...


The front stage isn't cheap. And the install has MANY hours. Tune is not little.
Stock locations are fine.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Werd caj........you don't have to be an active competitor to know this from that. I'm sure there's many a fine install here that sounds great and has never had a judge anywhere near it. I think what you interpret as a sense of arrogance from the competitors who rally in the threads debating the values of sanctioned events, might be more of a display of pride.........as in "I went after the kirk profitt....the mark eldridge....the steve cook".....the universally recognized "best", yes the names change over time, but to put up or shut up on the same field as the best in the business to see how close you can come.....it's bound to build a comradaery amongst those baring the fruit of their labor to be categorized and ranked by a third party. Most competitors I know just wish to spread the news, and keep competition viewed in a positive light, to encourage those unsure of themselves to come on out and join the party. The game can only be improved with more participants..........


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

sqnut said:


> Attending a competition and listening to the top cars is like taking the blindfold off and viewing the beast in its entirety. If you listened to the top 5 cars at finals you'd be surprised at how *similar and close to each other they sound*.


^^^THAT^^^


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

sqnut said:


> Five guys who had never seen an elephant were blindfolded and each got to touch and feel a different part (trunk, legs, ear, tail etc) based on this they were asked to describe the elephant. These are the guys who claim SQ is subjective, different for each person, sounds good to my ears etc.
> 
> Attending a competition and listening to the top cars is like taking the blindfold off and viewing the beast in its entirety. If you listened to the top 5 cars at finals you'd be surprised at how *similar and close to each other they sound*.


to paraphrase, if you want your car to sound good, then it should sound like a contest winner?

is that what you're trying to say here?

And hey, I get that people's systems, are judged objectively using score sheets that define aspects of sound so one can distinguish between, more believable, and less believable, is a part of the deal.

and I don't disagree that competitors have been "in battle" and a lot fewer mistakes are to be found in cars that have had their systems corrected by competition.

what I find unappealing is the way that competitors assign value and rate each other's collective usefulness as a way of promotion for their own merit, because it's usually competitors making that claim.


on the one hand, I see a guy make a statement about how it's all high-grade stuff in the lanes, I mean is it somehow bad for the sport to acknowledge it?

Then a guy says "I'm a winner and I did it with cheap stuff, so my glory is greater still" and you have to wonder if the tack being set is not to introduce more people with less-costly merchandise into the hobby, but to make a small humble-brag about how even with a handicap of low priced gear, the superior being rises to the top?

I don't know if that all strikes anyone as conflicted, as it does me but whether or not the value of competition is correctly represented here on the forum or not, the sport of listening to music is still the overwhelming attraction, imho...


and the fringe who spend hundreds of thousands, or just hundreds, to join the fraternity of sound-off participants with a check for a membership fee, don't automatically gain from it just because the bill was paid.

it's what you do with it, it's how you act towards others, it's...

all I see is paper bag, someone help me out here...


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

THis summer my son decided to compete in dart competition while on vacation in Mexico.
He was the only one who entered in his age group, 6 y/o. he won and got a trophy.
question is how valuable that trophy for you, for my son it made his day.
he is very proud of such achievement no matter what.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

cajunner said:


> first pocket5 makes a post about people who don't compete, and then immediately after, another by you sharing the same intent.
> 
> 
> as a person who doesn't compete, I cannot embrace all of the supposed enlightenment that comes from the exercise, in the way it's being broadcast on the forum.
> ...


That parts placed in bold say a lot about you and my comments of how you choose to "stir the pot".

For a moment, I thought you may have been right about my post taking a air of superiority, so I went back and read it. The result is that I don't really think anything was out of line or superior in tone. I tried to answer the OP's question in that people have done well with less expensive gear, and some people who did well with cheaper gear erroneously thought the next step in improving the sound would be...more expensive gear.

So people have done well with "cheap" gear and when they upgraded have also taken a step back in the overall sound of their system (both by fellow subjective listeners and in competition).

I then said I don't think it is fair for those who have never competed before to blindly bash competition and I encouraged those who have never competed before to not be dissuaded by comments but to instead come and decide for themselves. There were also "competition bashing" comments in the form of "I just don't like the way competition cars sound". To that part I simply believe that you need to hear some of the *top cars in competition* before that comment can be valid. There are lots of people who compete and don't do well, so somebody heard one of those cars and said, "I don't like the sound of that", it DOESN'T mean they don't like a good sounding competition car. But saying it out loud propagates the hypocrisy that "SQ cars don't sound good." And I see comments like, "I don't compete because I don't like how competition cars sound." pretty regularly. 

To the end of ganging up or deeming myself an authority. I think it was coincidence that Pocket5s and myself posted closely to each other. I also never deemed myself an authority but simply qualified my comment that "competition cars that perform well sound VERY good" by including the cars I've heard tied to names most would recognize. Again, that was a qualification of what I've heard not an assertion I'm superior. I cannot help if you perceived it that way based on previous experiences, but I can assure you it wasn't the intent.



cajunner said:


> *I don't think anyone is trying to say that you can't win a competition with lower cost gear.
> 
> I think that my observation about exceptions and the rule is substantiated by evidence and no one is disputing it. *
> 
> ...


There were several posts where people stepped up and said they did well with common/cheap gear. It's really tough to properly give value to "lower cost gear" anyway. Mark Eldridge has beaten cars with Mosconi, Helix, Rainbow, Sinfoni, etc. gear for years with his JL HD amps and C5 components. The equipment isn't bargain basement but IS relatively cheap compared to what those run competing against him. Now, you can argue he built a NASCAR from the ground up to compete with (and he did), but all that really illustrates is how much more important install and tune are to the overall sound than the drivers themselves.

If you're looking for somebody to step up and say that they whooped the competition with parts express buyout speakers and a basic headunit, it isn't likely to happen. Mostly because people choose to spend a little bit more on the drivers after investing all the time in the build. But if brands that give you big value for the buck (like Dayton, Tymphany, Peerless, Scan Discovery, etc) are ok being considered "cheap"....then victory with those brands happens literally all the time.

Lastly, I never said or implied you had to compete to have "value". I loved Lycan's (and Werewolf's) threads. If you look at my post history, you'll see I often contributed to them before "haters" drove him away...twice. If you look at my build logs you'll also see I tried many of his suggestions including L-R rear-fill and multiple midbass (cone of confusion). 

So again, I tried to be very fair and judicious in my initial response (and even my second response where I discussed how I personally performed and learned the value of install and tune over cost of gear), but even in doing so I was painted with a broad brush of preconceived notions by you and others.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

sqnut said:


> Attending a competition and listening to the top cars is like taking the blindfold off and viewing the beast in its entirety. If you listened to the top 5 cars at finals you'd be surprised at how *similar and close to each other they sound*.


this is actually spot on. i demo'd 3 great sounding cars at syracuse this weekend, and all of them sounded very similar. only real difference was staging, but i couldnt tell with one if them since it was a 2 seat car and i demo'd from the passenger side. even then, they all sounded eerily similar


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

Victor_inox said:


> So now I have to apologies for you being butt hurt?
> OK I apologies you jumped to conclusions.


You made an EXTREMELY misleading comment and then implied an EXTREMELY insulting one in the same breath. 

I am a level headed person and don't believe I jumped to a conclusion. I believe I took what you said and carried it in the most logical direction it could have meant. Unfortunately, it turns out, you were just being picky about the difference between the absolute comment of "true to the source" vs the relative comment "truER to the source" (which I apologize one thousand times for not using). 

So yes, I feel myself and anybody else who felt like they were being told they were "full of sh*t for using DSP" is due an apology for your less than clear initial post. 

In the end, a "I'm sorry you jumped to conclusions" shows you're the kind of person who cannot admit fault, and since that means you'll never learn and grow and we'd continue to go in circles, I will bow out of the conversation with you.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

claydo said:


> Werd caj........you don't have to be an active competitor to know this from that. I'm sure there's many a fine install here that sounds great and has never had a judge anywhere near it. I think what you interpret as a sense of arrogance from the competitors who rally in the threads debating the values of sanctioned events, might be more of a display of pride.........as in "I went after the kirk profitt....the mark eldridge....the steve cook".....the universally recognized "best", yes the names change over time, but to put up or shut up on the same field as the best in the business to see how close you can come.....it's bound to build a comradaery amongst those baring the fruit of their labor to be categorized and ranked by a third party. Most competitors I know just wish to spread the news, and keep competition viewed in a positive light, to encourage those unsure of themselves to come on out and join the party. The game can only be improved with more participants..........


very nice.

I do sometimes, attribute wrongly and I am the first to admit that the competition folk here are some of the most helpful, enduring, long-suffering and dedicated to be found anywhere, in the sound quality realm.

I don't want to exude my critique of the sport of music appreciation, beyond the hubris of ego and poseurism, to obscure, to shroud anyone's idea of what I'm about. I do not go about my day spoiling for a fight with the competitor type, as a Socratic exercise.

And by and large, most of the competition folk have earned it, they are laboring under the weight of a score card, controlled by the subjective opinions of people who may be less qualified to say what is and what isn't great sound, than many of you(us) are, qualified.

So I tip my hat to the competitor, and I acknowledge your value and worth. I respect your commitment and I applaud your participation.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

cajunner said:


> to paraphrase, if you want your car to sound good, then it should sound like a contest winner?
> 
> is that what you're trying to say here?
> 
> ...


You admittedly don't compete, so I understand you only being able to take what is posted by others as being fact (as many do), so I will interject.

The first comment is *not* accurate. It IS NOT only high grade equipment in the lanes nor is it only high grade equipment performing well. Most vehicles that do well are part of a team (and that DOES NOT mean they are always sponsered which somebody else implied in this thread, though some are) because the teams work together and help provide feedback and tuning tips. I will concede that being part of a collective can have advantages over the individual, but most teams also are based on running common gear or being from a common area, and I've never found it particularly difficult for a person to become part of a team if they were so inclined.

The second comment was to answer the OP's question of "can people do well with cheap gear." He qualified his reply, which you again took out of context as bragging and assigned it as "my glory is greater still". I haven't read a single post where somebody took stance of superiority when regarding competition. Some answered the OP's question and others defended against people hating on the idea of competition. I personally attempted to do both.

So if you were struck as being conflicted because the two viewpoints, I can say one is not accurate and the other was to try and answer the OP's question. No conflict to be found.

As an aside, there are also a lot of people who come to shows just to listen and gain experience and NEVER pay to play. The competition scene has become a pretty open source community where people will gladly demo, critique, and give advice...whether you are a teammate, a competitor, or even a spectator.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

pionkej said:


> That parts placed in bold say a lot about you and my comments of how you choose to "stir the pot".
> 
> For a moment, I thought you may have been right about my post taking a air of superiority, so I went back and read it. The result is that I don't really think anything was out of line or superior in tone. I tried to answer the OP's question in that people have done well with less expensive gear, and some people who did well with cheaper gear erroneously thought the next step in improving the sound would be...more expensive gear.
> 
> ...


very nice, no attitude, presents very well.

you are still operating under the umbrella of competition, the auspices of being an entrant, of being judged.


and underlying a lot of the braggadocio, is the element that someone who hasn't been judged, is not able to carry as much water.


that is what I defend against.


You may feel a need for the scorecard to put a relative importance to someone's input, but I am saying that it's not necessary.

I'm saying the site is built from people who want to have better car stereos, not from people who have to be better than others at something.


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

pionkej said:


> You made an EXTREMELY misleading comment and then implied an EXTREMELY insulting one in the same breath.
> 
> I am a level headed person and don't believe I jumped to a conclusion. I believe I took what you said and carried it in the most logical direction it could have meant. Unfortunately, it turns out, you were just being picky about the difference between the absolute comment of "true to the source" vs the relative comment "truER to the source" (which I apologize one thousand times for not using).
> 
> ...


Don`t read between the lines, especially if there nothing in there
Show me where I said that everyone using DSP is full of ****, because it`s not entirely what i said. And I`m sorry for not making my post clearer.


----------



## lizardking (Nov 8, 2008)

sqnut said:


> Five guys who had never seen an elephant were blindfolded and each got to touch and feel a different part (trunk, legs, ear, tail etc) based on this they were asked to describe the elephant. These are the guys who claim SQ is subjective, different for each person, sounds good to my ears etc.
> 
> Attending a competition and listening to the top cars is like taking the blindfold off and viewing the beast in its entirety. If you listened to the top 5 cars at finals you'd be surprised at how *similar and close to each other they sound*.



You and Han are the only two that ever make sense in any of these types of debate. Rock on, dude!


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

pionkej said:


> You admittedly don't compete, so I understand you only being able to take what is posted by others as being fact (as many do), so I will interject.
> 
> The first comment is *not* accurate. It IS NOT only high grade equipment in the lanes nor is it only high grade equipment performing well. *Most vehicles that do well are part of a team* (and that DOES NOT mean they are always sponsered which somebody else implied in this thread, though some are) because the teams work together and help provide feedback and tuning tips. I will concede that being part of a collective can have advantages over the individual, but most teams also are based on running common gear or being from a common area, and I've never found it particularly difficult for a person to become part of a team if they were so inclined.
> 
> ...


when I think of teams, competition, and sport, in the pursuit of music appreciation I think of art being trampled by jocks.


the idea that most sound-offs are won with high cost equipment using installations that were either produced by sweat equity or just good ol' fashioned money expenditures, is a valid idea since that's what most of the field looks like on any given sound-off's entry listing.

Take just one sound off from the many, see if you can force it to fit your viewpoint.


see if there's one sound off where greater than 50% of the entrants are using gear specified in the OP's question, as lower cost.

I think you'll see that although the anecdotal evidence of low cost gear belonging in the competition conversation is all around, the truthy is that it's a straw man.

Now about Niebur3's remarks, I would believe his experience to be more truthful based on my perusing the competitor circuit occasionally and witness to gear, and prices that make my head spin. If he happens to be a promoter of high-end gear as a way of making money, then you could say he's biased.

which I'd agree with, but even with examples of people who can win, it's not indicative of those who usually do win.

that make sense?


----------



## spyders03 (Jan 5, 2013)

I've done it for a few years, took first in world finals last year, against some setups that were worth way more than mine. Better equipment helps, but is all about the install and tune


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

cajunner said:


> very nice, no attitude, presents very well.
> 
> you are still operating under the umbrella of competition, the auspices of being an entrant, of being judged.
> 
> ...


I appreciate my reply "graded well" to you, but I still find a bit of irony in your own reply. I joined this forum in 2008 (and you in 2007) and did not compete until 2012. In my time here as an "unbiased observer" I feel I've seen much more bashing of competition by those who have never competed than seeing competitors bash who don't compete for not competing.

In short, I find people calling competing (and it's competitors) "pointless and stupid" much more common than competitors calling non-competitors "unqualified". 

If you feel the need to be a defender of the little guy, may I suggest the stance you have taken to this point is possibly actually handing a pitchfork to the big guy?

To me, the names that have risen to the top in competition have given people (competitors or those who just observe) a reference. One with which they can judge their own system if they so choose. And one distinct advantage of having these people (and their names) is they often travel. I have heard all the vehicles I originally mentioned without leaving TN because they compete and came to shows here. 

That doesn't mean (and never has) that a person can't have a great sounding car without competing or without hearing a great competition car. Having those things can simply help provide a scale-able reference. Long-time member (and I believe moderator) Imjustjason has another one of the best sounding cars I've heard. He doesn't compete and never has to my knowledge. He really doesn't even demo much. But his car sounds great regardless (and sounds very similar to vehicles like Eldridge, Cook, and Profitt). I didn't mention him in my original post, not because his car has any less value, but because mentioning it would not help qualify the justification that my comments about good sounding cars all sound more similar than different was true...because he isn't established as a "household name" of having a great sounding vehicle.

I was trying to think of a dominant person in sports right now and came up with Serena Williams. There may very well be a person playing tennis this very moment who is even better than she is, but they aren't competing so she is accepted as "the best". She is the current measuring stick to which other players are compared. If everybody who played tennis in the world competed, we may find that person who is better than Serena. Nobody says they don't exist (just like there may be a car(s) out there better than the Eldridge's and Cook's that doesn't compete), simply they haven't stepped up to make themselves known (and therefore are not counted when people put up the SQ measuring stick).


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

cajunner said:


> when I think of teams, competition, and sport, in the pursuit of music appreciation I think of art being trampled by jocks.
> 
> 
> the idea that most sound-offs are won with high cost equipment using installations that were either produced by sweat equity or just good ol' fashioned money expenditures, is a valid idea since that's what most of the field looks like on any given sound-off's entry listing.
> ...


I think this will be my last reply, and I'll simply suggest you look in the mirror if searching for someone trying to "force fit a viewpoint". 

The OP asked if people place in the Top 5 anymore with "just ok" equipment. A simple wondering if Rocky can still step in the ring and take down Apollo Creed. The answer. Yes, it can happen, it has happened, and it does happen. 

People have stepped up and given real world examples of it happening. 

I have established that I placed in the Top 5 of MECA Extreme at 2013 Finals (I took 5th). I was 0.5pt away from 3rd place. 

That meets the criteria of the OP's question.

My gear was:

Alpine CDA-117 (bought used for $150 I believe)
Scanspeak Discovery 10" Midbass ($94.20 ea on madisound)
JBL 660GTi ($140.xx ea bought through Harman Parts in 2010)
Alpine DDL tweeters ($90 each bought through Yahoo Auctions Japan)
JL XD Amps (I can't remember the exact price paid, but it is the mid-level amp from JL and commonly run by "normal people" on the forum)
MiniDSP8x8 ($300)

I'd say I come pretty close to meeting the OP's requirements for cheap. The JBL's are the only thing beyond the limit he set and I paid a premium for them when they were my midbass. Since I loved the midrange sound they made so much, I elected to keep them when I went to a dedicated midbass in a 3-way system. 

This is not chest thumping, this is assigning actual value and personal experience to the OP's question, and I know (from real life, hands on experience) that I'm not the only one with this type of gear. And as I've said already, there are others who have done very well with even less expensive equipment.

I am not trying to force fit a viewpoint from a single data sample, but I don't know how to prove it any more clearly than it has already been shown. By others and now myself. So if you choose to ignore the proof in front of your face and believe the unqualified (EDIT: unqualified because there is no proof/data to corroborate the assertion) comments of "I've competed and it's all expensive gear", then I don't honestly know what else to say.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

pionkej said:


> I appreciate my reply "graded well" to you, but I still find a bit of irony in your own reply. I joined this forum in 2008 (and you in 2007) and did not compete until 2012. In my time here as an "unbiased observer" I feel I've seen much more bashing of competition by those who have never competed than seeing competitors bash who don't compete for not competing.
> 
> In short, I find people calling competing (and it's competitors) "pointless and stupid" much more common than competitors calling non-competitors "unqualified".
> 
> ...


two things:

you went from observer, to participant so your perspective changed.

I can understand how you will come to see those who attempt to qualify comments based on competition worthiness, as brothers. Whereas, once you were like me, largely uninterested and under-served by a bunch of team members rattling the forum with competition-derived minutiae, unless you happen to have some strange compulsion to list and categorize, like baseball stats...


it's possible too, that I'm much too sensitive, and not selectively tuning out the testosterone chest bumps every so often, as if I myself was not capable of putting a chest bump into the convo that deserved consideration, if not admiration...


<shades of 300 here, SPARTANS!>


haha..


and it's a devolution to only view car audio as a passive pursuit, I agree that there is a place for competitions and that there is a value afforded them, in the mainstream just like car racing can benefit mankind through research...


but I have to continue to disagree, in that I feel like competitor judgment and compartmentalization, (your SQ measuring stick) is more prevalent and that the "team this, team that" mentality erodes the basic tenet of the car audio congregation, personal satisfaction at having a transcendent experience while autonomous, operating autonomously....

maybe there's a parallel there, huh?


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

pionkej said:


> I think this will be my last reply, and I'll simply suggest you look in the mirror if searching for someone trying to "force fit a viewpoint".
> 
> The OP asked if people place in the Top 5 anymore with "just ok" equipment. A simple wondering if Rocky can still step in the ring and take down Apollo Creed. The answer. Yes, it can happen, it has happened, and it does happen.
> 
> ...


to me, your list of gear is the epitome of high end, top tier/grade stuff.


you might walk that BOM next to someone else's and see yours as cheap, but not from here. Not by a long shout.


I know you felt invested enough to the argument, to produce this post which tells me you are likely aware of the conundrum that most people in the winner's circle are running high end gear, and that you want to make a place in the OP's mind where he believes that he too can occupy the podium if he wants to, with gear he has, and which might not be at that top tier.


we basically came at the OP's question from different perspectives, I feel like the evidence of high end gear dominating the top place finishes, is insurmountable but leaves room for the outlier.

you seem to believe that there's just as many people running shoe-string and getting into the winner's circle, so if that's an error I am making, I'll forfeit to some other interpretation.


----------



## tnaudio (Mar 4, 2012)

The class system in MECA makes it usually very fair. The cost of drivers usually doesnt have a lot to do with it. Just knowing what the organization is looking for a system to sound is 75% the challenge. So joining up with a team makes a lot of since for someone just starting out.


----------



## 1styearsi (Aug 13, 2012)

claydo said:


> Lots of folks running all kinds of gear at the comps.......it's the better tune that wins. High dollar gear sounds no better than its tune.


what he said


----------



## Niebur3 (Jul 11, 2008)

So, are you guys suggesting that I can buy a set of speakers that test very poorly, have high distortion, etc., power them with a ****ty amp that has high distortion and a signal that colors the sound and with a good tune, I can win a car audio competition? Because it is 80some% install/tune?

Is that actually supposed to speak highly of the competition scene? 

I though better speakers and amps with clean signals were supposed to make it easier to tune and therefore less stress on everything and better sound?


I've also heard many people talk about tuning for a particular Judge, which is interesting. And also I've heard judges/people say things like, "It scored good, but it doesn't sound very good" on numerous occasions.


----------



## tnaudio (Mar 4, 2012)

Not exactly but you already know that with your experience. We are saying that good sound is blind to company logos and dollar signs. There are many good sounding speakers that are not expensive. Amps are a little harder in that there are a lot of bad products that lie about power output etc. But you do not need very expensive ones either. Usually just run of the mill kicker, alpine, memphis, etc will get it done

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

I'm curious to know, are competitors in European countries also exhibiting this characterization?

Do the people who make the German stuff, and the Italian stuff, go about saying "it's not equipment, it's tuning" that makes the diggigity doo..


haha..

I don't know if there is any validity to the claim, but I would imagine that the pragmatism shown here by competitors who seem to concur that being bested by entrants with systems much less costly than their own, is a commonplace thing, that pragmatism would be put to the test in other countries where perhaps, what is being built is being held to a higher standard than "designed in America, made in China" specification?


----------



## AccordUno (Aug 7, 2009)

I will say that I have known several SQ cars in MECA that have won with ok equipment:

Team Stereo One (prior to most of you guys journey into MECA)
Full size Chevy truck with with LP Tweeters, Silver Flute Mids, Memphis MClass Subs and Amps. 
Me - 1st install Silver Flute 6.5s, McClass Subs, MClass Amps (2nd place at finals)
2nd Last setup in my Car ran Memphis (4) st300 amps. (2nd place at finals)
my headunits where usually used, the only new HU piece I bought was the P9 processor. 
Brad ran memphis amps and subs in his cars
Gabe - LP tweeters, silver flute mids, and memphis amps/subs

Pretty much most of the TSO cars ran memphis amps, subs, wiring both SQ and SPL cars. 


There was that guy(he was a good competitor and friend) from WV that would IASCA finals with Aria Point Source component (fultron cheaper brand of memphis car audio)

It's not about equipment it's more about install and tuning, excluding my car the two trucks were didn't really have that much money in it, but game my car a run for the money every time in the stock classes and I was in the custom/master classes.


----------



## maddawg (Oct 28, 2014)

After reading all that I had to go back and see what the original question was. Most people I know use speakers off Parts Express and Madisound. You can find several great sounding speakers on those sites that are budget friendly. Amps and a DSP in my opinion are the main expense. You don't need nothing crazy expensive when it comes to amps, JL XD or slash some Rockford, whatever. The DSP, I would get something nice, I prefer the Helix but that's me. You need a Laptop, mic and measuring software. Once you have the tools and equipment you just need a butt load of seat time. 
As far as competing goes I love it, for me it is more about the people you meet. I have learned so much just from meeting new people. They share what they know and their ideas with me. I feel when you have a group think tank what you can achieve is greater. I feel you never stop being a student, always listen cause you never know when you might learn something new. I feel one main reason a lot pf people don't compete is they are scared. They are scared to lose, scared to be criticized, scared for a number of reasons. I have never known a competitor to not have a better sounding car at the end of the year than when they first started. I encourage you guys to make some of the bigger shows to hear some top vehicles, it might change some of your minds about competing. It's not about winning or losing, you meet some of the greatest people. It's just a fun hobby you get to share with great people and maybe some not so great but you just ignore them.


----------



## Niebur3 (Jul 11, 2008)

Maybe the problem is that competitions are not a place where everyone wins and gets a trophy and anymore we are taught not to hurt feelings and everyone wins.

Also that proper install and tuning takes work....good 'ole blood, sweat and tears.

I do think there are some really good inexpensive drivers that can be used to win competitions, if installed and tuned right. But inexpensive is much different than cheap, poorly made drivers/amps.


----------



## truckerfte (Jul 30, 2010)

Niebur3 said:


> I do think there are some really good inexpensive drivers that can be used to win competitions, if installed and tuned right. But inexpensive is much different than cheap, poorly made drivers/amps.


Too often people confuse value with price.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

truckerfte said:


> Too often people confuse value with price.


Werd.......all the fans, and sales folks of the megabucks gear always lump any suggestion of budget gear in with poor performing pieces. A scan 10f is a wonderfully performing alternative to dynaudio 430.........nobody ever says you can pull yer craco bynines from '76 and make a fine performer, but the big budget fans instantly assume you mean boss and pyramid when you state tune is where the weight lies. Of course you can't run high distortion, poorly designed equipment and achieve great sound on tune alone.....but a solid driver and amp combo......price irrevelant, as long as it's well designed and built.......can better pricier equipment if the install and tune of the high dollar system isn't up par, quite easily.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

claydo said:


> Werd.......all the fans, and sales folks of the megabucks gear always lump any suggestion of budget gear in with poor performing pieces. A scan 10f is a wonderfully performing alternative to dynaudio 430.........nobody ever says you can pull yer craco bynines from '76 and make a fine performer, but the big budget fans instantly assume you mean boss and pyramid when you state tune is where the weight lies. Of course you can't run high distortion, poorly designed equipment and achieve great sound on tune alone.....but a solid driver and amp combo......price irrevelant, as long as it's well designed and built.......can better pricier equipment if the install and tune of the high dollar system isn't up par, quite easily.


You hit the nail on the head with this one sir! The OP didn't ask if people could win in competition with "junk" gear, but "OK equipment" that "costs less than $100 per driver".

The answer is yes. It can be done and has been done. It even has been done with equipment that costs much less than that. The Scan Discovery line, the Dayton RS line, Fountek wideband speakers, and Peerless SLS midbass can be found employed pretty commonly in the competition scene. When used properly, these drivers have great response and distortion performance in their passband. When set up properly (like with installation and tuning that people keep talking about), they will outperform the "high end" likes of Sinfoni, Dyn Esotar, etc. if they are NOT installed and tuned with the same care.

**NOTE: I'm not dissing the top tier brands with that comment. The top tier brands are typically priced at a high level because they perform at a high level...when installed and tuned properly. But just like buying a pair of Air Jordans doesn't instantly make me a better basketball player if I don't also work on my dribbling and shooting, buying those expensive speakers doesn't instantly mean your car will sound better if you don't also optimize the install and tune.




cajunner said:


> to me, your list of gear is the epitome of high end, top tier/grade stuff.
> 
> 
> you might walk that BOM next to someone else's and see yours as cheap, but not from here. Not by a long shout.
> ...


I agree 100% that some of my equipment is the epitome of high end. The mids I run come from a $1400 component set and the tweeters regularly sell for $300+ when you can find them in the US. It doesn't change that I was resourceful and found the speakers for 1/10th that price and the tweeters for less about 1/2. The Dayton HF sub I run is $150 and is very fairly priced compared to what many people use (inside and outside competition) and I consider a 10" midbass for $95 a bargain compared to what I see many pay. 

Having said all that, I wouldn't personally consider my gear cheap or Ok or any of the other words being used in this thread, but since the OP qualified the criteria further as sub-$100 per driver, I felt compelled to share based on that.

Again, if you look at my build log, I have been VERY open with how I built and tuned my vehicle. Something that flies counter to what most people perceive as typical to the scene. And I am not an exception to the rule here For people that haven't been to a show in a while and perceive it to be all high-end gear, in shop-built cars, with a lot of guarded secrets...you may be pleasantly surprised. The field these days is highly composed on the DIY sort, who buy drivers at retail, and are willing to demo their vehicles and share details about it. 

I spoke up to help further validate the OP's question if competition can be won at a high level with value-priced equipment, not because I am "aware of the conundrum that most people in the winner's circle are running high end gear."



Niebur3 said:


> So, are you guys suggesting that I can buy a set of speakers that test very poorly, have high distortion, etc., power them with a ****ty amp that has high distortion and a signal that colors the sound and with a good tune, I can win a car audio competition? Because it is 80some% install/tune?
> 
> Is that actually supposed to speak highly of the competition scene?
> 
> ...


No, that isn't what anyone is suggesting and as cajunner said earlier, it feels a lot like you are trying to force fit a point. 

It isn't a secret that there are gems to be found in car audio, with most of them being in the raw driver format. Many of those brands are listed above, and, when properly set up, they can compete with many of the high cost/boutique brands.

I have also heard of people tuning for a particular judge. In fact, I've heard of people having multiple tunes stored to employ based on who is judging. I don't personally do this and I don't know of anybody who does, but I have heard the same thing. I can tell you that in my time spent competing, I've seen tonality preference vary slightly from judge to judge. That being said, it isn't some huge difference that will significantly vary from judge to judge. What I'm talking about is variations on a minute level (like +2db at 250hz for judge A vs judge B) to the overall tune in one's car. Perception of things like staging doesn't tend to change in my experience. For me and all the others I know, it's easier to use one tune and just take the average response of the judges as the score. However, some people may believe it's advantageous to try and have a tune for each judges <very minor> subjective preference differences (possibly even simple differences in actual measured hearing), but again, not I or anyone else I know.

I compete in MECA. I have never competed in IASCA or USACi or any other org I may not mention. I can say that I've never heard a car that "scored good, but doesn't sound good". Any car I've ever hear that scored good, also sounded good. The only exception I can possibly think of is people thinking a car that performs well in RTA could sound good. RTA is designed to measure how flat your response is. Literally flat (which is the goal for RTA) DOES NOT sound good. So in MECA that is the only scenario I could conceive that comment coming from. Outside MECA's scoring standards, I cannot say with confidence a if a vehicle can or cannot perform well score wise whilst not sounding good.


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

If you want good output and SQ across the entire volume knob you will pay for it. If you just want the max 120db judging volume daily that can be done cheap


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

DDfusion said:


> If you want good output and SQ across the entire volume knob you will pay for it. If you just want the max 120db judging volume daily that can be done cheap


I'd like to say that music played at 120db with A-weighting (which is what is used for judging volume level) is LOUUUUD. Especially since it deducts the low frequencies that help boost up non-weighted measurements (see wikipedia link below). 120db is also at the threshold of discomfort (see second wikipedia link below).

Hitting a meter at 120-140db at 50hz (like in an SPL competition) is fairly easy and is not the same as 120db broadband an A-weighted. 

I don't know of anybody who takes there system to 120db broadband and listens to music regularly...judges most certainly don't.

So I think there is something missing in your comment causing it to be inaccurate, but I can still address the rest with simple math.

A single speaker measuring 90db SPL (@1w/1m) will hit:

90db with 1 watt
100db with 10 watts
110db with 110 watts

So, in short, a 100w amp powering a 90db SPL speaker will reach 110db's of total output at 3ft (1m) listening distance. Since both amps of that power and speakers of that sensitivity are pretty common, I'd say you are again, incorrect. I've included a 3rd link below to an SPL calculator if you'd like to challenge my math with your opinion.

*LINKS*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-weighting

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_pain#In_hearing

Peak SPL Calculator


----------



## pocket5s (Jan 6, 2012)

DDfusion said:


> If you want good output and SQ across the entire volume knob you will pay for it. If you just want the max 120db judging volume daily that can be done cheap


nobody judges at 120db. read the rules.

and the first statement is nonsense. the only thing you "will pay for" is time in tuning.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

DDfusion said:


> If you want good output and SQ across the entire volume knob you will pay for it. If you just want the max 120db judging volume daily that can be done cheap


if they judged at 120, all cars would score like ****. by then, all staging and imagining are shot


----------



## pocket5s (Jan 6, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> if they judged at 120, all cars would score like ****. by then, all staging and imagining are shot


not to mention the judges' ears


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

pocket5s said:


> not to mention the judges' ears


judges would be sitting in the cars like this..


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

Page 10 of the MECA rule book. I was 5db off. I could of sworn it use to say something about cars that cant reach 120db will be judged at the highest obtainable volume.

6. Judge’s listening level will vary (80-115 dB) during judging to assess all system criteria.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

DDfusion said:


> Page 10 of the MECA rule book. I was 5db off. I could of sworn it use to say something about cars that cant reach 120db will be judged at the highest obtainable volume.
> 
> 6. Judge’s listening level will vary (80-115 dB) during judging to assess all system criteria.


And if you had experience with SQ judging you would know that average listening volume is in the 80-90db range. Tonality, staging, and the like are all taken at this volume. 105-115 is typically used for a single track to test the category of Dynamics.

The last show I went to (the Vinny) lasted around 8 hours. Judges wouldn't have the ability to remain judges for very long if they listened to every car, at every show, at 115db. 

What rule 6 is really telling somebody is that a judge will listen at volume levels between 80-115 and if you compete, he/she has the right to take the output level to 115db during their judging. It's like a disclaimer so people can't get upset if something gets broken at high output testing. Plain and simple.

Reading a rule book (or quoting it in this case) and knowing it's intent and how it's used is not the same thing.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

IASCA judging rules---Judge will 1st do left right verification, if the system passes that then judging can begin. If not, the judge will notify the competitor and they will have up to 5minutes to correct the issue or opt to be judged as is.

The judge will then go to track 28. Pink Noise. using a handheld SPL meter held at head level, the judge will adjust the volume until it reaches approx 90db.

Once that has been reached, the Judge will begin judging tonal accuracy and spectral balance using the appropriate tracks.


I did basically the same method when I judged for MECA, but used Don Chesky's voice on the opening of the disc and set the level to 85db, which was close to 90db on pink noise.


----------



## Lou Frasier2 (Jul 17, 2012)

cajunner said:


> if I'd journey to a comp, it would be to take in some of the workmanship/ideas and not to attempt to judge the sound quality.
> 
> I agree that my reference is going to sound different from others, especially with all the industrial noise abuse my ears have taken.
> 
> ...


hey now,nothing wrong with a little thick


----------



## Lou Frasier2 (Jul 17, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> does anyone else wonder where the hell cajunner comes up with some of the things he says? lol


if he is a child of the 80s than i think i already know


----------



## gstokes (Apr 20, 2014)

I800C0LLECT said:


> Does that include lamp cords from the local dump? That would have been me when I just started this hobby
> 
> Matter of fact...I'm having a hard time getting rid of some of those habits!


I don't blame ya, kinda like my cables with that beautiful patina color, adds character and gives it that antique look


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Gary Biggs and Mark Elridge had L7s...or some speakers that looked like L7s when they were on team Kicker. Kicker Competition Group had STRONG cars a few years back (ok, a decade). They all had Kicker subs, but none of them had Kicker front stages.



beerdrnkr said:


> I think I remember of somebody winning an sq comp with the square solo-barics.
> 
> 
> Oh wow, that's interesting. I'll see if I can look up some of these installs.


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

Lou Frasier2 said:


> hey now,nothing wrong with a little thick


my bad.


furries, I was thinking about furries and their convention sorts, I'm kinda weirded out by the softness/sex pairing.

fluffies, on the other hand:

Urban Dictionary: Fluffie [fluffy] [fluffies]


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Urh, I did that **** all the time.

The subs and horns were stock and what you could see...everything else that you couldn't see probably was not Image Dynamics, especially the midranges. Me personally, I could not stand the CX mids which were all ID had at the time...and being sponsored by ID, that was what I was supposed to run. Same for 8" midbasses...the parts for the IDQs dried up and the team was left with v3 ID8s to use if we wanted new 8" midbasses. However they made for not so good midbasses since they were true subwoofers.

And sometimes I did have ID mids and midbasses, but they weren't something the average person could go out and buy. Matt once made me some of my favorite midranges ever- a light paper coned 8 with minimal excursion. He made me a couple special CX6, but I don't recall them being any different than the regular ones...so he probably just told me they were custom to make me happy. He did make use some 8s that were a bit more suited for midbass, though they weren't that spectacular.

Other times I had Seas Excel W17EXs that I said they were Rainbow References. There was the time I had Audax PR170M0s for a major show and loved them. I had PHL 2420 8" midranges in there for a while. One Finals I had 7" Revelators, Ring Revelator tweeters, and a Velodyne 10 in front...though the pictures showed something completely different and more in line with my sponsor's products. I did get busted at that show by Matt...I saw him moving his head side to side a lot when he was listening- listening to that lazar-like dispersion pattern f the Scan tweeters. He was finger banging my grills to feel what was behind them, and felt the point on the tweeter. He ripped me a new one, and I felt about 2' tall. I wanted to win and did what I thought I had to do to win. It still bothers me a little to this day that I let him down so bad.

There were others on the team that did the same, but I won't tell their secrets. And there were other teams that did the same thing- like the Kicker Competition Group,Team Pioneer, and Team RF.

You would only believe what you saw was playing...but even then in some of those cars you *knew* something else was going on because those cars sounded SO much different than the other cars using the same speakers...differences that were solely related to tuning.



SkizeR said:


> can you give an example?


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

That's funny... So it sounds like there's more mystery not because of competitive edge but moreso due to escaping the confines of a sponsor


----------



## pocket5s (Jan 6, 2012)

That's pretty much a thing of the past, mostly because there aren't sponsorships like that anymore. At best team members get dealer pricing (give or take) on equipment and that's about it. Team members who are long standing might get prototypes or early production unit to test with, but rarely are these passed off as something else. Or maybe the team will go out for dinner at finals and the tab will be picked up for you. 

Some teams "strongly encourage" the use of their equipment, which frankly makes sense, but others are a bit more loose about it. On the team I'm on (MSE/JL), few of use have all JL equipment, especially speakers. Some members of the Focal team use their drivers, but not their amps. There are a lot of team arc members that don't use their drivers. There are other examples out there as well.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

thehatedguy said:


> Urh, I did that **** all the time.
> 
> The subs and horns were stock and what you could see...everything else that you couldn't see probably was not Image Dynamics, especially the midranges. Me personally, I could not stand the CX mids which were all ID had at the time...and being sponsored by ID, that was what I was supposed to run. Same for 8" midbasses...the parts for the IDQs dried up and the team was left with v3 ID8s to use if we wanted new 8" midbasses. However they made for not so good midbasses since they were true subwoofers.
> 
> ...


okay then.. lol


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

pocket5s said:


> That's pretty much a thing of the past, mostly because there aren't sponsorships like that anymore. At best team members get dealer pricing (give or take) on equipment and that's about it. Team members who are long standing might get prototypes or early production unit to test with, but rarely are these passed off as something else. Or maybe the team will go out for dinner at finals and the tab will be picked up for you.
> 
> Some teams "strongly encourage" the use of their equipment, which frankly makes sense, but others are a bit more loose about it. On the team I'm on (MSE/JL), few of use have all JL equipment, especially speakers. Some members of the Focal team use their drivers, but not their amps. There are a lot of team arc members that don't use their drivers. There are other examples out there as well.


I think at the end of the day, sponsorship is more about a band of brothers thing than any monetary or equipment gain. At the end of the day equipment is at best 10% of the story, with speaker placement another ten. 

The rest is all down to tuning skills. Since Eldridge is on your team, you would know first hand how he can make any car sound better in ten minutes just by listening and tuning.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

sqnut said:


> I think at the end of the day, sponsorship is more about *marketing*


fixed


----------



## pocket5s (Jan 6, 2012)

sqnut said:


> I think at the end of the day, sponsorship is more about a band of brothers thing than any monetary or equipment gain. At the end of the day equipment is at best 10% of the story, with speaker placement another ten.
> 
> The rest is all down to tuning skills. Since Eldridge is on your team, you would know first hand how he can make any car sound better in ten minutes just by listening and tuning.


I would be reluctant to even call is sponsorship anymore. That implies them giving you stuff, or paying your comp fees or other such things. Manufacturers do help, no doubt, just not in those ways anymore.

Yes, Mark definitely knows what he is doing  As do several others on the team I might add. More importantly, to me, is their willingness to share and teach.


----------



## pocket5s (Jan 6, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> fixed


I'd agree, which is why I don't think of the support that happens these days is really "sponsorship" like one would think of that term.


----------



## dietDrThunder (Nov 4, 2010)

In 2012, before I got jobbed by MECA BS (that still makes no sense and is still in the rule book today) I did pretty well with a very modest system in my Kia Spectra5.

Pioneer DEH-80PRS - $300
HAT Imagine 6.5, mids in OEM door spot, tweets in dash (ugh...see above) - $230
(1) Image Dynamics ID12D2V3 in a sealed box that I built - $140
Soundstream Rub4.600 running the front stage active - $160
Soundstream Rub2.450 mono for the sub - $135
Ebay generic interconnects, 4GA power wire, misc. stuff - $30

Total - $995

At one show I was beat by a guy with a super awesome Maxima. I forget his name (Pionkej or Mic would know for sure) but he had a really nice car with a huge system in it. IIRC he had (3) custom amps that each cost considerably more than my whole system, several thousand $$ worth of drivers etc. and he beat me by .75 points. I think it was 77.0 - 77.75, but my memory could be off on the number. I don't know if he remembers me (Hi!  ) but Pionkej heard my car many times, and I _think_ he'd agree that it sounded pretty good for being under $1000 in total expense.

I've only come back to the forum recently...have a 2011 Accord EX-L V6 sedan that I've just recently decided to do a system in and it will be built in the same vein. The one fly in the ointment is that because I have to use the factory head unit, I will be forced to spend way more on my processing in order to get satisfactory results. Even so, this system should out-perform the Kia by a good margin, and should come in around $1500 total.

I admit that I'm kinda tempted by the Helix DSP, and that alone is $1k, so that would be a budget buster...would put me close to $2000 total. Still not bad, but the $995 Kia build was really satisfying in the dollars-per-smile stat...not gonna be able to compete with that.

Also, with regard to the whole competition thing...what's the big deal? Some people enjoy it. Some people don't. I really loved it, but my favorite part was meeting new friends, checking out all the really amazing systems, and the friendly collaboration amongst everyone involved as far as tuning help, advice, nerding out in general car audio conversation, and in general, just being part of it.

I also really enjoyed having my hard work evaluated by very skilled and experienced professionals (Mic in particular). It's not that I want my car to sound the way he likes it and not the way I like it. It's that he would have very useful critical information to share regarding what could be better (stage, tonal balance, whatever), and through that, I could both improve my competition results, _and_ make it sound better to me personally.

One last note: Mic is, as I mentioned, a MECA judge, but nothing about my sour experience was his fault in any way. He was never anything but super cool to me in every way, at every opportunity (even when I was pretty hot about the whole thing he stayed cool).


----------



## rxonmymind (Sep 7, 2010)

sirbOOm said:


> There should be a rule in the entry classes of SQ competitions that the speakers, in total, should not cost (MSRP, not "on sale") more than, say, $500 to force folks into spending more time on installation (positioning, not just processor adjusted) and tuning.


You known that would be a fun comp. I think Road & Track used to do those sort of competition with the stipulation one couldn't spend more than x amount for the trials they would put the cars through. Do they still do it? Anyhow, there is of course the law of diminishing returns and am not sure how much time & effort one would want to put into that budget install.


----------



## rton20s (Feb 14, 2011)

dietDrThunder said:


> In 2012, before I got jobbed by MECA BS (that still makes no sense and is still in the rule book today) I did pretty well with a very modest system in my Kia Spectra5.


So I guess I'm not clear. What was your issue with the MECA rule book bag is still in place today?


----------



## dietDrThunder (Nov 4, 2010)

rton20s said:


> So I guess I'm not clear. What was your issue with the MECA rule book bag is still in place today?


I probably shouldn't have mentioned it...I just still get super annoyed whenever I think about it. If you're interested, look through my previous posts and you'll find out about it.

To the point of the thread, I see no reason at all why you can't win competitions with inexpensive gear. The fact that you can get solid amps and DSP for pretty short money makes this a fairly easy task IMO.

EDIT: I just found the 2014 rule book (the 2015 rules pdf on the MECA site is jacked up and doesn't give the SQL rules) and it actually appears to be fixed now. But, who knows...


----------



## XSIV SPL (Jun 24, 2014)

Gear actually does make a difference, as does tuning and install...

Show up, throw your hat in the ring, and expect what's to be expected... 

Although some may not want to hear this, the overall results generally prove that placing well usually coincides with a substantial investment in both time and money... and an ability to tune.


----------

