# Alpine h650 initial impressions



## npdang

With so many companies making OEM interface devices today, such as the JL cleansweep or RF's 3sixty, what really sets the Alpine h650 apart is the use of IMPRINT technology, also known as Audyssey's MultEQ.

The interesting thing about MultEQ that is different from your traditional EQ or digital processor, is that it does room correction. What exactly is room correction? The easiest way to think of it is it's the opposite of reverb... instead of introducing echoes and reflections into the sound, we are removing them. 

What makes it different from other room correction processer's like DEQX or Tact, is that it uses a form of spatial averaging that is supposedly more advanced. And to clarify, spatial averaging is simply measuring different areas of the car/room, and averaging those results together to get a more realistic picture of the room's response rather than at one location. How you go about averaging that response though, is an interesting point. If you have a +3db dip in the driver's seat at 2khz, and a -3db peak in the passenger seat, if you do a straight average of the response it would look like you have a perfectly flat response... however that would not necessarily be the best way to reflect the fact that you have a peak in one spot, and a dip in the other.

Moving on, let's talk about the good.

1. The unit is cheap. If you compare it to any other room correction processor or solution on the market, you won't find anything remotely comparable. At $400 retail and probabaly $300 on ebay this is as good as it gets.

2. The mic is of very high quality. I expect to see it soon on Pacparts at a steal of a price. The nice thing is you can even power it off most soundcard mic inputs. Easily worth $200 in my book.

Here's the frequency response of a dayton reference 2" dome mid I measured using the Alpine mic (in red) and my Praxis mic (in yellow). Pretty much identical. The Alpine mic is a bit different because it's shorter and was about 1' farther back from the speaker. Excellent results, considering you usually have to pay at least ~$200 for a good calibrated mic/pre-amp combo.










3. The auto correction is pretty good. More on this later.

4. It's small, and all the cabling you'll need for the ir remote and mic is plenty long. 

5. It can be software controlled.

6. The outputs are very strong

7. No noise from the unit as in hiss, alt. whine, etc.

Now the bad...

1. The IR remote control is a pain in the ass to use, since it's line of sight only. It's also a bit tricky if you want to use the HU volume control vs. the h650's.

2. The instructions are downright awful and confusing.

3. The auto correction also sucks in alot of ways.

4. There's a small turn on and off pop (although you won't hear it if you have music playing)

5. The custom eq/crossover etc. tuning options are severely limited

Ok, so to elaborate a bit more on the auto-correction of the unit. It's separated into 2 sections, AntEQ which corrects any kind of processing in your headunit, and MultEQ which corrects the time and frequency response of your speakers in the car.

The AntEQ is good, similar to JL cleansweep or RF 3sixty. My headunit has a mild boost at low volume to bass and treble, and the AntEQ does a good job of flattening that response. The downside to using AntEQ or any of these solutions is that you have to use the volume control built into the unit itself. You can't use your headunits volume control because the correction is dependent on the output of the headunit... for example at low volumes you might have a very strong bass boost, but as you increase the volume the bass boost becomes milder and milder. This necessitates keeping the hu volume at a fixed output, while using the h650 for gain. Anyways, a workaround should have been mentioned in the manual, especially for people using aftermarket headunits with flat frequency response.

The workaround for this is to use the "aux input" on the h650. Set the volume on your headunit to max before clipping. Now turn the volume up on the h650 to as loud as you can, preferably using a disc that was recorded at low levels. Leave it at that volume and turn down the volume on your hu. Now, you can use the volume control on your headunit... with the caveat that AntEQ will be disabled. For my TSX, that wasn't a problem for me at all since the frequency response of the headunit is ruler flat past half way (20/40 on the knob), and I think the mild bass/treble boost at that low of a volume didn't affect sound quality in the least.

For those that have to use the h650 volume, the remote needs a line of site to the IR sensor which thankfully comes with a long wire. Personally though, I just hate to use a remote and would prefer the steering wheel controls or hu knob.

Now onto the big stuff. How does MultEQ work? It allows you to use up to 8 mic positions to calibrate a response. Unfortunately, the manual doesn't tell you where would be a good place to put the mic... something that is VERY critical and I couldn't believe was hardly mentioned in the manual. So I tried 4 positions over the driver's seat positioned about 3" apart, and 4 over the passenger seat. 

Here's a pic of the mic: *note it should be facing upwards during measurement*










From there, you get to pick from a set of 4 target curves which are essentially graphs representing how you want the final frequency response to look. There's 3 choices with different levels of bass boost and a slightly rolled off treble response, and one choice with a mild bass boost and flat treble response. You also have the option to further reduce the top end response and one more option to take a cut out of the upper midrange.

I HIGHLY don't recommend using any of the treble or midrange cuts. The midrange cut makes the sound very boxy and clock radiosh sounding. The treble cuts suck all the life from the sound Imho.

I also recommend choosing the largest bass boost target response, as I think most people will find that it's still far, far too anemic for their liking. Overall, all the profiles are extremely weak in the low bass region regardless of what the graph might indicate, but tend to exaggerate the ~100hz region. The treble rolloff in the top end you can eq back in later, as well as removing the 100hz bass boost which Imho obviously colors the lower midrange/midbass.

And that gets to my point... I really hate how you can't draw your OWN target response. Nor can you adjust how aggressive the filter is in removing reflections. You're basically stuck with 4 really similar, unappealing target curves that really only vary in the amount of bass boost and treble cut you want to apply.

So after all is said and done, how does it sound? The results were decent, about what I'd expect to hear from a good factory system. Fairly diffuse imaging and somewhat thin in the midrange, and lacking any real top end extension. The bass is also extremely weak below 60hz.

So I went back and tried re-measuring with 5 positions across the driver's seat only, about 2.5" apart. MUCH better this time. Although I wouldn't say it's as good as a finely tuned expert system after 6 months, it's significantly better than anything I could do in 30 mins or an hour, and I suspect a LOT better than what 99% of the people out there could do. The midrange is much more tightly focused and smooth, and imaging overall is excellent. Tonally, it's very good... for the most part well balanced and fixes many hard to fix offensive areas such as upper midrange, and treble. Top end I thought was a tad bit laid back above 15khz, but that was easy to boost back in but I suspect many people wouldn't mind leaving it as is. Also, you will notice an overly strong upper midbass that leads to ringing in instruments such as bass guitars and cellos, and should be removed at around 100hz. Lower end bass is very clean as well, and very much upfront... however, below 60hz I bet most people will find it to be very lacking and I would recommend some boost there, and overall retuning to bring some life back into the bottom end. Bass response below 60hz is probably the weakest part of the overall auto correction.

Overall, I find the custom tuning options to be miserly, but perhaps sufficient for most people. If you're looking for a processer that will auto-tune a very nice sounding setup on a budget, this will do it... and so far is the only processor I've come across that is capable. Tonally, and imaging wise, you'll have a very good setup that only a very small minority of experts could outperform.

One problem I had though was that I couldn't figure out which outputs to use either. I absolutely HATE how Alpine does not make their outputs universal, and by that I mean that you could use any output in any manner you want. Rather, they prefer to give them labels such as front1, front2, rear, etc. What the heck does front2 mean to anyone? The manual also "suggests" using front2 and rear for your frontstage, which doesn't work. For anyone using a typical 3-way setup, you want to use front1 for the tweeters, front2 for the mids, and sub for the subwoofer.

I'm also going to gripe about how the selection of crossover points are very limited, and the EQ is divided into "bass, mid, and treble" bands. God aweful. Look at the manual and you will see there are some very critical GAPING areas that aren't covered. Thankfully, it isn't a huge issue with auto-correction, although for those with a bit more knowledge and wanting more, this processor is a sad let down.


This is the impulse response after correction:










As you can see the time correction isn't very aggressive. This is perhaps a good, and necessary thing for car audio as the benefits of aggressive time correction are easily outweighed by the compromises such as pre-echo, and narrow sweet spot. 

And frequency response of the system, tweeter, and mid after correction. Note the xover between the mid and sub at 80hz is not optimized. It looks as if the sub should be wired out of phase to the mids to fix the dip, *after* correction has been applied. This is the result of summing 2 4th order butterworth filters.


























And here is the response that MultEQ calculates for you (it's not an actual measurement, but just a "calculated" response after correction). You'll notice that the "front" speakers, basically your mid and tweet, are lumped together into one measurement and treated as one. Also note that MultEQ does all the level matching and time delay for you, and it does a rather good job here (these are things that measuring in car have traditionally been very good at).


----------



## rhinodog00

Very informative,thank you. Is this the same technology that is going to be used in the cda-9887 imprint proccessing?


----------



## Vampire

My first impressions of the FR plots was that it looked kind of bad and why would you say it was rather good. That is until I saw that except for the peaks at 45 and 100, most of the FR response was within a 10 db range.


----------



## xencloud

awesome intro review, overall, I think it does what I expected it to do. I think I might invest in this first, and then if I'm left wanting more tuning options, either upgrade to a better processor (MS-8?), or add on some additional processing after (730?)


----------



## ///Audience

Great review! its nice to finally see some realistic data and results from the Imprint.


----------



## bassfromspace

Could you give us a rundown of your equipment?

Thanks


----------



## DearS

So this H650 brings an RTA mic? I can measure the response of my system and adjust (Eq, time alig. etc etc..)


----------



## npdang

Yep, it does come with a very nice mic.

My equipment is the same. Stock hu, pdx amps, seas neos, and focal 6w4311's.

Fr doesn't look *that* good to me either, but it sounds alot more balanced and smooth than what most people can achieve on their own.


----------



## DearS

Thank you! good explanation/review.

I see the system corrects many things on its own and creates a more balanced sound.

Wow, someone is actually thinking about something like this. This seems like a very big step in SQ. For possibly under $300 street price? thats awesome.

A question...does the H650 crossover the tweeter and mid, automatically. Or is a crossover necessary somewhere in the system?


----------



## oneiztoomany

so are you satisfied with the finished result or do you see yourself going a different route in the future?

for people reading this thread who didn't read my previous posts. i also had an h650 installed in my TSX and decided to return it because i was not satisfied with the finished results. i ended up going with a CDA-9887 and ditched my stock HU. i am much more pleased with results of my CDA-9887 versus stock HU with the h650.


----------



## npdang

oneiztoomany said:


> so are you satisfied with the finished result or do you see yourself going a different route in the future?
> 
> for people reading this thread who didn't read my previous posts. i also had an h650 installed in my TSX and decided to return it because i was not satisfied with the finished results. i ended up going with a CDA-9887 and ditched my stock HU. i am much more pleased with results of my CDA-9887 versus stock HU with the h650.


Yep, I'm very satisfied. I'll be keeping this one for awhile.

My guess is that the mic positioning you used when tuning or the outputs you used were not optimal. Do you recall which outputs you used to for which drivers, and where the mic was placed? Or what target response you chose? This is a very critical part of the end result, and something that isn't even mentioned in the manual.

The minor issues I had with the response were relatively easy to remedy, but may not have been easily apparant to someone without good ears or measuring equipment.


----------



## oneiztoomany

npdang said:


> Yep, I'm very satisfied. I'll be keeping this one for awhile.
> 
> My guess is that the mic positioning you used when tuning or the outputs you used were not optimal. Do you recall which outputs you used to for which drivers, and where the mic was placed? Or what target response you chose? This is a very critical part of the end result, and something that isn't even mentioned in the manual.
> 
> The minor issues I had with the response were relatively easy to remedy, but may not have been easily apparant to someone without good ears or measuring equipment.


i'm not sure about the mic positioning used. all i know is that the shop played around with the system for a couple days and i just really wasn't nearly as impressed with the finished result as when i changed my HU.

what did you use to convert the signal from balanced to unbalanced?

I still want to tryout the Imprint Kit KTX-100EQ however and see how this technology works when using the CDA-9887.


----------



## npdang

oneiztoomany said:


> i'm not sure about the mic positioning used. all i know is that the shop played around with the system for a couple days and i just really wasn't nearly as impressed with the finished result as when i changed my HU.
> 
> what did you use to convert the signal from balanced to unbalanced?
> 
> I still want to tryout the Imprint Kit KTX-100EQ however and see how this technology works when using the CDA-9887.


AFAIK, the Imprint kit is the same as the 9887.

Sad to say, but I'm betting the shop didn't set your h650 up correctly. And I don't mean that in a bad way, it's just the h650 is a fairly complex processor that comes with poor instructions. If they did what I suspect and put the mic all over the place in the car, or even used the wrong outputs (as specified in the manual), then I'm betting it sounded pretty awful.

For now I'm just passively converting the outputs, and it works fine with no noise.


----------



## oneiztoomany

npdang said:


> AFAIK, the Imprint kit is the same as the 9887.
> 
> Sad to say, but I'm betting the shop didn't set your h650 up correctly. And I don't mean that in a bad way, it's just the h650 is a fairly complex processor that comes with poor instructions. If they did what I suspect and put the mic all over the place in the car, or even used the wrong outputs (as specified in the manual), then I'm betting it sounded pretty awful.
> 
> For now I'm just passively converting the outputs, and it works fine with no noise.


there is an additional kit that needs to be plugged into the 9887 to use the Imprint software. typical Alpine! 

yes i believe that they did what you said and put the mic all over the place. the feedback they had was that the processor is definately overly complicated and not nearly the userfriendly unit that Alpine is advertising it as.

are you a professional installer yourself or just do it as a hobby for your own enjoyment?


----------



## npdang

Sorry, I meant same as the h650 

I just do this for fun... but we Diy'ers tend to be a little more knowledgeable in these type of things than your avg. shop.


----------



## dawgdan

oneiztoomany said:


> yes i believe that they did what you said and put the mic all over the place. the feedback they had was that the processor is definately overly complicated and not nearly the userfriendly unit that Alpine is advertising it as.





npdang said:


> we Diy'ers tend to be a little more knowledgeable in these type of things than your avg. shop.


Not to stroke egos here, but npdang speaks the honest truth. 

oneiztoomany, that's a typical response from a typical audio shop with a typical customer base who wants their stereo to "hit hard and sound good". When presented with a potentially revolutionary new product, the knee-jerk response is to disregard it as either too complicated, unnecessary, or worthless altogether.

A highly-configurable tuning tool (such as any of the Imprint devices, the H701, or the Zapco DC Ref line) is generally best for a customer who has a specific sound goal in mind, not one who can simply accept a shop's word for "hitting hard and sounding good".

Sad, but true. Damn, I sound like a condescending ass.. oh well.


----------



## Ge0

I know the director of R&D at Alpine. You can thank him for the selection in frequency response curves. He is a strong believer that iterations of this response curve sound the best. He gets offensive when you question his judgement. Even though you do it politely and honestly (made that mistake on more than one occasion). In his defense, he spent years in research developing this back when he owned his own consultant company. He performed hundreds of tests with live subjects to develop it. The response may not be for everyone, but, a majority of his test subjects said it sounds the best. 

He developed a measurement system to more accurately model in-vehicle response. This is called the PTF measurement system. The mic array assembly looks like a head on a stick which can be moved with linear actuators. Alpine purchased the rights to this technology when he took the position. I'll bet this processor is based off of it. 

I tuned my last vehicle to such a curve using the PTF measurement system. With proper time alignment this response correction can sound DAMN good. Mind you, his super duper powerful PTF machine is probably quite a bit more advanced than this $300 piece of hardware. Perhaps it could help me achieve what the H650 can not? But maybe the H650 captures a lot of it too. 

I'm also guessing that the multiple mic positions they recommend (but I guess did not publish clearly) follow a certain pattern he has used before. This compensates for multiple size operators in the driver seat and various head position. Not for people sitting all over the car.

Ge0


----------



## oneiztoomany

dawgdan said:


> Not to stroke egos here, but npdang speaks the honest truth.
> 
> oneiztoomany, that's a typical response from a typical audio shop with a typical customer base who wants their stereo to "hit hard and sound good". When presented with a potentially revolutionary new product, the knee-jerk response is to disregard it as either too complicated, unnecessary, or worthless altogether.
> 
> A highly-configurable tuning tool (such as any of the Imprint devices, the H701, or the Zapco DC Ref line) is generally best for a customer who has a specific sound goal in mind, not one who can simply accept a shop's word for "hitting hard and sounding good".
> 
> Sad, but true. Damn, I sound like a condescending ass.. oh well.



totally hear you on that. i'm sure it doesn't help that my vehicle was the first one that they had used the H650 for and they were literally losing money in labor costs because they spent much more time than they had quoted me for. 

the finished result didn't sound terrible at all. i hope that i didn't give that impression. i think what discouraged me more was lack of user-friendliness and having to refrain from using the stock HU control either.

something else that doesn't help with giving a true apples to apples comparison is that at the same time i changed from stock HU+650 to the CDA-9887 i also changed my subwoofer setup from a single 10W6v2 to a single 12 inch Type x.

that change alone could have made a huge difference in my overall satisfaction. 

i was also experiencing suspension problems at the same time so my patience level was less than normal around this time period...


----------



## Ge0

dawgdan said:


> Not to stroke egos here, but npdang speaks the honest truth.
> 
> oneiztoomany, that's a typical response from a typical audio shop with a typical customer base who wants their stereo to "hit hard and sound good". When presented with a potentially revolutionary new product, the knee-jerk response is to disregard it as either too complicated, unnecessary, or worthless altogether.
> 
> A highly-configurable tuning tool (such as any of the Imprint devices, the H701, or the Zapco DC Ref line) is generally best for a customer who has a specific sound goal in mind, not one who can simply accept a shop's word for "hitting hard and sounding good".
> 
> Sad, but true. Damn, I sound like a condescending ass.. oh well.


Yes you do sound like a condescending ass.
.
.
.
.
Just kidding. Couldn't agree with you more.

Ge0


----------



## npdang

I understand, but why in God's name would they not give you the option to draw your own curve or do any tweaking at all? If you look at the sub to mid transition it looks like they didn't even get all the kinks out of it... (should've used different filters or staggered the cutoff points for flat summation).


----------



## Lightninghoof

npdang said:


> I understand, but why in God's name would they not give you the option to draw your own curve or do any tweaking at all?


It sounds like IMPRINT might be trying to keep things as automated and simple to the casual dummy as possible. Either that or they simply decided to cut corners whereever possible.

They may start marketing this as a smart system that does all of the tuning for you.


----------



## durwood

I'm curious about mic. Why does it stand straight up? Is it supposed to help in figuring out what are reflections and what aren't?  

Another question, what happens when you do the the room correction with the sub turned off?


----------



## durwood

I imagine Alpine purposely did not discuss how the use the H650 that much in detail in the manual to make it geared towards dealers/installers. I know my buddy installer at tweeter went through a training session on how to use the imprint and h650 IIRC.


----------



## npdang

I'm not sure why it stands up, but it seems to work. Maybe someone else can elaborate. Perhaps it better approximates how our ears hear things? I know for a fact though I can hear the top end rolloff as well as the large bump at 100hz, as well as the missing chunk at 80hz.

In any case it sounds better than all the setups I've heard that were tuned by Speakworks at costs >$500.... I guess the few hours of tuning work weren't enough to best the MultEq, with the exception of a few areas.


----------



## OgreDave

I've already flamed Speakerworks on another forum .. I'll stop there.


----------



## oneiztoomany

npdang - do you think the imprint kit for the CDA-9887 will be equally tricky to dial in properlly?


----------



## havok20222

npdang said:


> I'm not sure why it stands up, but it seems to work. Maybe someone else can elaborate. Perhaps it better approximates how our ears hear things? I know for a fact though I can hear the top end rolloff as well as the large bump at 100hz, as well as the missing chunk at 80hz.
> 
> In any case it sounds better than all the setups I've heard that were tuned by Speakworks at costs >$500.... I guess the few hours of tuning work weren't enough to best the MultEq, with the exception of a few areas.


I'm not sure that they really are modeled after our ears. I think they stand upright to hear reflections from all angles and adjust accordingly. All the Audessy home units use an upright mic as well, and I assume this is to achieve a full 360 response.


----------



## the other hated guy

acouple things to try...

1st...mic postions should only be calibrated at listening postions...and if you want to do an average curve then do one at right ear height...1 inch up and 1 inch down and the same for left ear....I wouldn't waste time measuring at places were our ears are not postioned at anytime....

also..a self calibrated machine is still light years behind a good tuner..I'd put more faith in a human...


----------



## Babs

This is a great read! Thanks npdang... Good stuff.

For those that don't know about the MS-8.. I think this gives their current design something to shoot for. The method used in the MS-8 is quite a bit different, for miking and calibration/tuning. If memory serves correctly, the driver wears a headphone style mike, performing calibrations while pointing the mike left, center, right, etc. (I'll have to look to confirm this).

So in the OEM solutions, there's the cleansweep, the 3sixty.2, the PXE-H650 and not yet released JBL MS-8. 

The MS-8 will also be priced accordingly as it includes amps for each channel, though not very big.. Probably class-d style. More of a one-box solution but capable of upgrade to outboard amps.

I still say with ALL of these units, they're only as good as the ability to output a nice clean un-grainy signal from it's OEM inputs, regardless of further processing. So the OEM head unit is the potential weak-link. Wonder how iPod lossless via the aux would do?

npdang, I would be interested in what you thought in that regard, either through the speaker level inputs or the auxiliary. I'm sure this thing is no DRZ9255 killer for sure. huh. 

Great review and discussion.


----------



## chadillac3

So does the unit set crossover points for you, or is that something you do before doing the auto-correction?


----------



## Ge0

Babs said:


> The MS-8 will also be priced accordingly as it includes amps for each channel, though not very big.. Probably class-d style. More of a one-box solution but capable of upgrade to outboard amps.


I talked to Andy about this. It uses the same analog BTL output devices that my current Harmon designed OEM 8 channel amplifier contains. They are rated at 46Wrms into 2 ohm. Many of you won't get a boner over this but I think they are not bad at all. 

If you listen to your music much over 110dB then I'd say add outboard amps. Definitely enough to drive tweets and rear fill.

Ge0


----------



## the other hated guy

chadillac3 said:


> So does the unit set crossover points for you, or is that something you do before doing the auto-correction?



how could the processor know what drivers youare using and what freq range it's capable of playing?


----------



## Babs

Ge0 said:


> I talked to Andy about this. It uses the same analog BTL output devices that my current Harmon designed OEM 8 channel amplifier contains. They are rated at 46Wrms into 2 ohm. Many of you won't get a boner over this but I think they are not bad at all.
> 
> If you listen to your music much over 110dB then I'd say add outboard amps. Definitely enough to drive tweets and rear fill.
> 
> Ge0


Yeah, I would consider it running stand-alone with maybe just a sub-channel amp to adequately drive the 10w6. I think it would work fine given some relatively efficient speakers.. I don't know how it'd do with Seas RNX's + Neo tweets.. 8 and 6ohms I think. Might have to reconsider hunting down a comparable 4ohm mid maybe.. I dunno.. Dayton RS180-4 maybe. Or possibly the MS-8 running tweets with a fat four-channel for mids and sub.


----------



## backwoods

the other hated guy said:


> how could the processor know what drivers youare using and what freq range it's capable of playing?


 
I don't think that would be too difficult to add to a processor. 

I measure fr and eq each driver by itself. Then go back and start adjusting xover points on my midrange, till I get it as wide as possible and still sound natural. Then, adjust the points on the tweeter/midbass till I get a fairly smooth response. I'll go back later and do some tinkering for imaging reasons, but tonally, that process can come pretty close, and wouldn't be too hard to implement, imo...


----------



## chadillac3

the other hated guy said:


> how could the processor know what drivers youare using and what freq range it's capable of playing?


Hence why I was asking.  So the H650 basically does the EQ'ing and time alignment for ya, but you still select crossover points. 

So, every time you change crossover points, you'd need to rerun the autocorrect again.

One thing I did notice when looking at the manual was that there were only 2nd order slopes, no 4th order. Can you verify npdang?


----------



## npdang

You set the xover points for the highpass between the tweeter, and it sets the mid/bass lowpass appropriately. As far as the sub to mid/bass, it seems to just auto-set at 80hz. 

I wouldn't disable the sub during tuning, as Imho room correction is most effective at those frequencies.

As far as auto-tuning... I honestly think it's going to be better than all but a very small minority of expert tuners, and certainly better than anything they could do in the *same* amount of time, provided you know how to work with the h650 and take care of a few of it's little quirks. Not to mention there are probably only a handful of people in this country with any experience using room correction in a car.

How many people come on this board looking for a good tune but can't seem to ever reach it? I really think this, and possibly the ms-8 are the perfect solution.


----------



## the other hated guy

npdang said:


> You set the xover points for the highpass between the tweeter, and it sets the mid/bass lowpass appropriately. As far as the sub to mid/bass, it seems to just auto-set at 80hz.
> 
> I wouldn't disable the sub during tuning, as Imho room correction is most effective at those frequencies.
> 
> As far as auto-tuning... I honestly think it's going to be better than all but a very small minority of expert tuners, and certainly better than anything they could do in the *same* amount of time, provided you know how to work with the h650 and take care of a few of it's little quirks. Not to mention there are probably only a handful of people in this country with any experience using room correction in a car.
> 
> How many people come on this board looking for a good tune but can't seem to ever reach it? I really think this, and possibly the ms-8 are the perfect solution.



well here is my .02.... my good friend randy eddy has what I consider the pinnacle of auto tune/auto correction processors "deqx" and yes it does do crazy things like phase/freq depent corrections.. it's still not perfect....and I doubt that this processor is on par with the deqx....


----------



## backwoods

the other hated guy said:


> well here is my .02.... my good friend randy eddy has what I consider the pinnacle of auto tune/auto correction processors "deqx" and yes it does do crazy things like phase/freq depent corrections.. it's still not perfect....and I doubt that this processor is on par with the deqx....


your in pursuit of perfection. Npdang is merely stating that it will do better then the average enthusiast. 


(which, really wouldn't take much. )

I'm sure you've ran into TONS of systems, where I often wonder if the user really knew that processing was supposed to "improve" the sound of the system.


----------



## npdang

chadillac3 said:


> Hence why I was asking.  So the H650 basically does the EQ'ing and time alignment for ya, but you still select crossover points.
> 
> So, every time you change crossover points, you'd need to rerun the autocorrect again.
> 
> One thing I did notice when looking at the manual was that there were only 2nd order slopes, no 4th order. Can you verify npdang?


Yeah only 2nd order slopes... that's why you see the mid/bass and tweeter xover points staggered for flat summation. The sub to mid is 4th order.


----------



## npdang

the other hated guy said:


> well here is my .02.... my good friend randy eddy has what I consider the pinnacle of auto tune/auto correction processors "deqx" and yes it does do crazy things like phase/freq depent corrections.. it's still not perfect....and I doubt that this processor is on par with the deqx....


DEQX isn't optimized for car afaik. The aggressiveness of the filtering is going to make a huge difference. MultEQ also uses a different kind of spatial averaging than DEQX.


----------



## sqkev

nice review!!

I agree that the lack of info on measuring might be the downfall of this kit. The room correction isn't that great if you didn't correct the uneven FR at the driver in anechoic (sp?). 
For example, take a seas metal cone driver. We all know it has at least 1 or 2 high level of cone resonances. When measured at a farfield, off axis, reflections, weird acoustic shapes of the car, the cone resonances will surely not show up. The other artifacts already masked the cone resonances. The DRC mode might be able to smooth out the responses, but the resonances are still there. 

BTW, I don't know of any non-pro mics to have accurate readings of the lower octaves in farfield mode. Personally, I'd leave the subs off and do the auto EQ. Then, do a bit of clean up with a few bands of PEQ later for the sub.


----------



## chadillac3

Would there be any issues with the xover points to run say a 2 way 4" set passively plus active midbass?


----------



## npdang

sqkev said:


> nice review!!
> 
> I agree that the lack of info on measuring might be the downfall of this kit. The room correction isn't that great if you didn't correct the uneven FR at the driver in anechoic (sp?).
> For example, take a seas metal cone driver. We all know it has at least 1 or 2 high level of cone resonances. When measured at a farfield, off axis, reflections, weird acoustic shapes of the car, the cone resonances will surely not show up. The other artifacts already masked the cone resonances. The DRC mode might be able to smooth out the responses, but the resonances are still there.
> 
> BTW, I don't know of any non-pro mics to have accurate readings of the lower octaves in farfield mode. Personally, I'd leave the subs off and do the auto EQ. Then, do a bit of clean up with a few bands of PEQ later for the sub.


Very true. It would be somewhat compromised to use the h650 with any driver like the Seas mag cones or the Dayton ref.

I wouldn't disable the sub though. Room correction works best at low freqs. IME there's usually a dip that doesn't respond well to traditional EQ either because of phasing issues, and this does a good job of correcting those. If you need more bass you can just crank the output level up and/or add in boost with an EQ.


----------



## npdang

chadillac3 said:


> Would there be any issues with the xover points to run say a 2 way 4" set passively plus active midbass?


Yes, you only have bandpass capability with the front2 output. The "rear" output only has a limited selection of highpass points... although I guess if your amp supported the right lowpass filter it could work... but IIRC the h650 is going to try and run the front2 output all the way down to the sub which could create problems.


----------



## chadillac3

Hmm, so it's ideally suited for a 2 way up front then. Are there any advantages to running rear fill with this unit?


----------



## npdang

There's no channel steering or surround... so I'd say no.


----------



## DonutHands

npdang, did you ditch the 730 for the 650? or was this just for a review


----------



## npdang

Yeah it's gone... reminds me I need to sell it. If I could draw my own curve and tweek the amount of phase/time correction I'd keep this guy. As is though, it's good enough to use for awhile until the ms-8 comes out or until I finish my own drc rig.


----------



## sqkev

npdang said:


> Very true. It would be somewhat compromised to use the h650 with any driver like the Seas mag cones or the Dayton ref.
> 
> I wouldn't disable the sub though. Room correction works best at low freqs. IME there's usually a dip that doesn't respond well to traditional EQ either because of phasing issues, and this does a good job of correcting those. If you need more bass you can just crank the output level up and/or add in boost with an EQ.


I'll need your help with some measurements once I have my final setup up and going :blush: 
I could never get drc to work well in my case, unless the mic is up close, the measurements are almost always varies and I have no idea how to perfect the measuring process of the lowend. 

BTW, does this unit do TA?


----------



## DonutHands

really, i thought you had the dcx dialed in pretty nicely, what made you decide to dump the 730? from your review it sounds like you had better control before.


----------



## npdang

Yeah it does time correction. The problem is that there are only 3 EQ bands. And the fact that you can't draw your own target curve.... really leaves you in a tight spot if you don't like the auto-tuning. Another thing I don't like is why would you use a non-linear phase EQ with a room correction processor?? The second you touch that EQ you just ruined all that nice time correction. I definitely noticed when cutting at 150hz it moved my stage over about a foot to the right... not cool.


----------



## npdang

Ok after about a week with this thing, these are some additional issues I found with the auto-tuning:

1. Bass is very clean and upfront, but completely lacking. I suspect most stock systems can put out more bass, by comparison. I fixed this by lowering the midbass highpass from 80 to 60hz, and bumping up the sub level about 6db. It's still perhaps a tad weak for most, but I'm fine with it as I enjoy the lack of bloom around bass notes and the near complete transparency of the sub. It also takes out alot of the low end boom, resulting in a more natural, flat sounding bass.

2. Lower midrange resonance is god aweful. I took a -6db cut with a wide Q at about 150hz and that helped eliminate most of it. Strings would resonate far too strongly, and if you've ever used a midrange driver in a much too small sealed enclosure you will know exactly what I'm describing. However, where I previously had very good imaging with little "bloom" around the images, now I had somewhat more diffuse imaging and the stage moved about a foot to the right. I suspect this is due to the use of non linear phase EQ, which in a room correction processor is unacceptable Imho... which is unfortunate because the imaging is very much improved and focused with the h650; definitely one of it's best areas of improvement.

3. I also had severe midrange bloom around 600hz that lended a very artificial, hazy sound to vocals. With Susan Wong, I noticed immediately that her voice would resonate audibly, and sounded as if I had bad door panel buzz. A midrange cut of -5db with a wide Q eliminated this issue.

4. Tweeter level is too high. I cut the tweeter back a bit, and it was much more balanced. 2khz is a tad too forward, but I had no EQ left in the unit to fix this. I would prefer a slight -2 or -3db wide Q cut here.

5. Upper midrange balance though, and overal treble tonality is excellent. Most cars I've heard either tend toward the dull and hazy, or far too thin and bright, or just stale. I thought the h650 did an excellent job of bringing out the upper midrange without sorely overdoing it, and overall balance is quite good, similar to say the AKG 501's in that area. It also does a good job at smoothing out sibilance, or peaky areas in the tweeter that I know many people have trouble fixing.


----------



## sqkev

thanks for the update, 
in this last week, have you try different positioning of the mic?
you mentioned in the first post that it takes 8 different responses from 8 positions and combine them. Have you try 1 or 2 in nearfield for the sub (with everything else turned off)? and the rest for either left or right channels at listening distance?

I think you still can get good results from this unit once you figure out the kinks.


----------



## npdang

Yeah I have. That's not really how it works though. You really shouldn't position the mic anywhere that's not a listening position, and if you want an improved response from one location you generally want all the measurement spots to be in that location.


----------



## sqkev

npdang said:


> Yeah I have. That's not really how it works though. You really shouldn't position the mic anywhere that's not a listening position, and if you want an improved response from one location you generally want all the measurement spots to be in that location.



I agree, but I just don't think the piece can recognize and get rid of reflections and panel resonances though. (which I know that they're certainly there in the measurements). A nearfield measurement will eliminate some of that, and might actually help?


----------



## durwood

Does it take seperate measurements for adjusting time delay and then frequency response?

Can you take four measurements at left ear location, and four at right ear location? and then do a seperate measurement for time delay right in the middle?


----------



## sqkev

durwood said:


> Does it take seperate measurements for adjusting time delay and then frequency response?
> 
> Can you take four measurements at left ear location, and four at right ear location? and then do a seperate measurement for time delay right in the middle?


I really wonder how the processor actually combine and measurements too. 

I'm beginning to think this is another software like the autoEQ in the behringer deq.


----------



## durwood

interesting news:

take this for what this worth, I just talked to my friend who went through training on this, but has not used one in person.

He said that it does not do averaging or summing for different seating positions. The different measurements are for selecting the seat positions either 5 or 8 (he can't remember) which can be selected later via remote. 

Again I could be totally wrong on this but that is what he remembers from dealer training.


----------



## durwood

Actually after seeing this screenshot of the imprint software, I think he might be correct. any screenshots of the 650 software?


----------



## rsvchad

sqkev said:


> I really wonder how the processor actually combine and measurements too.
> 
> I'm beginning to think this is another software like the autoEQ in the behringer deq.


FWIW:
http://www.audyssey.com/technology/index.html


----------



## npdang

sqkev said:


> I agree, but I just don't think the piece can recognize and get rid of reflections and panel resonances though. (which I know that they're certainly there in the measurements). A nearfield measurement will eliminate some of that, and might actually help?


A nearfield plot would eliminate the room effects from the response, but not the resonances in the baffle/door panel. If you eliminate the room effects, what's the point of room correction?


----------



## npdang

sqkev said:


> I really wonder how the processor actually combine and measurements too.
> 
> I'm beginning to think this is another software like the autoEQ in the behringer deq.


It's different. The Behringer auto-eq only reads the frequency response, and adjusts the eq bands to compensate for a flat response. The h650 looks at the impulse response (which contains both time and frequency info) and then applies an inverse filter to achieve a target response. This corrects both the time and frequency domains. Although the measured impulse response after correction is somewhat modest and doesn't even begin to approach that of even an average untreated room, it's still better than most cars :0


----------



## npdang

durwood said:


> interesting news:
> 
> take this for what this worth, I just talked to my friend who went through training on this, but has not used one in person.
> 
> He said that it does not do averaging or summing for different seating positions. The different measurements are for selecting the seat positions either 5 or 8 (he can't remember) which can be selected later via remote.
> 
> Again I could be totally wrong on this but that is what he remembers from dealer training.


What you're probably seeing is a spatial average of 5 to 8 locations, with "emphasis" on improving a selectable given location.

For example, if you were to place the mic in each of the 4 seats in a car, and then select front right, then (at a guess) the processer would optimize the averaging with an emphasis on improving the sound at the front right position, to the detriment of the other 3 locations. Selecting "all", would probably give equal weight to all locations.


----------



## npdang

None of those. Maybe... with a TacT or Deqx, although the spatial averaging and amount of correction is different. You need a processor capable of correcting both time _and_ frequency response.


----------



## javig999

I was considering this unit and the shop I was going to use to install it went on about how they demo'd it and it was great and flexible, etc, etc. When I called them just a two days ago to confirm they'd received units they indicated they had sold three and two had been returned. The tuning was difficult and the flexibility he boasted was non-existant. Not to mention that when I told him I wanted to go 3-way active front stage (using the rear as the midbass signal) he said this would be difficult since the midbass would be percieved as the rear channel by the mic and it would make the tuning even more difficult. Regardless of how you want to tune it, he said you HAVE TO use the Auto setup first. 

As soon as I said 3 way active he said lets go Audio Control LC6i and Alpine H701. Researching these two items I can say that they seem like they will do the job nicely.


----------



## npdang

Mild time/phase correction... not frequency response correction. It's actually fairly aggressive in that respect. So in that regard, you don't have to worry about metal cone breakup, or ragged upper end response as the filter will correct for that automatically. What's been brought up is that alot of times that breakup doesn't show up in the frequency plot at the driver's headrest, which isn't a problem so long as you keep your lowpass filter fairly steep and below a certain cutoff.

I honestly feel this, and possibly the ms-8 (if I can ever get my hands on one) are going to be more capable than all but a handful of pro tuners... given the multitude of setups that I've heard over the years. Check the list I wrote a few posts above... for the most part, these are very easy and quick things to have to "fix" manually.


----------



## oneiztoomany

javig999 said:


> I was considering this unit and the shop I was going to use to install it went on about how they demo'd it and it was great and flexible, etc, etc. When I called them just a two days ago to confirm they'd received units they indicated they had sold three and two had been returned. The tuning was difficult and the flexibility he boasted was non-existant. Not to mention that when I told him I wanted to go 3-way active front stage (using the rear as the midbass signal) he said this would be difficult since the midbass would be percieved as the rear channel by the mic and it would make the tuning even more difficult. Regardless of how you want to tune it, he said you HAVE TO use the Auto setup first.
> 
> As soon as I said 3 way active he said lets go Audio Control LC6i and Alpine H701. Researching these two items I can say that they seem like they will do the job nicely.


i returned my h650 after having it installed


----------



## sqkev

npdang said:


> A nearfield plot would eliminate the room effects from the response, but not the resonances in the baffle/door panel. If you eliminate the room effects, what's the point of room correction?



I wasn't being clear. I meant to say that you should try the nearfield measurement for the sub, and listening distance for both the mids and tweets. In my limited experience with convolution, it's easier to hear the differences in midrange moreso than the sub region. The lower frequencies are not easily measured by any mic, very room dependent and even mic positioning changes the responses by a whole lot. 
Hence I suggested nearfield for the sub and try to combine that response with the rest. 
Does alpine tell you exactly what signal it plays as IR? A sweep for how long? Do you actually get to see the results on the laptop?


----------



## Babs

I'm going to ask a stupid question here... With all this info (that I truly don't begin to understand fully) about the auto-time alignment, does it mean to suggest it's virtually impossible to adjust time-alignment based on speaker distances manually and get it perfect or close to perfectly aligned? 

TA isn't really something new to the better head units, but the auto-calibration seems to be.

I guess in simpler terms, can a guy like me with fairly decent ears tune the TA on say a CDA-9887 or similar TA-able processor or head unit, completely manually, by ear? Possibly via simple mono tones through tweeters for example, when you hear the delay in a single tone between left/right go away and the sound suddenly becomes a single perceived tone straight ahead in the sound-stage, then it's good chance the TA is dialed in for those two drivers?

Or would there be a better test-disc for this time of "by ear" tuning?

.. I'm just wondering if a guy with an ear for image and soundstage can do it properly by ear and rival the abilities of the auto-calibration type of TA setup like the Beringer or H650.

 My dumb question for the morning. hehe


----------



## rsvchad

Babs said:


> I'm going to ask a stupid question here... With all this info (that I truly don't begin to understand fully) about the auto-time alignment, does it mean to suggest it's virtually impossible to adjust time-alignment based on speaker distances manually and get it perfect or close to perfectly aligned?
> 
> TA isn't really something new to the better head units, but the auto-calibration seems to be.
> 
> I guess in simpler terms, can a guy like me with fairly decent ears tune the TA on say a CDA-9887 or similar TA-able processor or head unit, completely manually, by ear? Possibly via simple mono tones through tweeters for example, when you hear the delay in a single tone between left/right go away and the sound suddenly becomes a single perceived tone straight ahead in the sound-stage, then it's good chance the TA is dialed in for those two drivers?
> 
> Or would there be a better test-disc for this time of "by ear" tuning?
> 
> .. I'm just wondering if a guy with an ear for image and soundstage can do it properly by ear and rival the abilities of the auto-calibration type of TA setup like the Beringer or H650.
> 
> My dumb question for the morning. hehe


You should be able to get very close by simply measuring the distance from each driver to the desired listening position. Some units give you the option to correct in distance while others offer correction in milliseconds. You can figure out the required delay for each driver by using 340 meters/second for the speed that sound travels. Start with the drivers furthest away (typically subwoofers in a car). These will require zero delay. 
After you calculate the corrections you can sit in the listening position and tinker until you like what you hear. A few ms change on one driver can move things pretty drastically.


----------



## Babs

Ah yes.. The 9887 manual has a very nice little calculation but they use 343 m/s:

Farthest speaker in meters = F
Closest speaker in meters = C

L = F-C (in meters)
Time correction in ms = L (meters) / 343 (meters/second) x 1000

So your farthest speaker receives no delay naturally.

Looks easy as pie on paper huh.


----------



## Babs

This would be a question for npdang, or anyone that's compared actually, but how would you rate the SQ capabilities of the H650 to the 3Sixty.2.. 

Though the 3sixty.2 is manually tuned except for de-eq'ing and summing, how does it hang compared to the PXE-H650?


----------



## BlueAc

Is this gonna be the best option available for factory integration??? I need to pick a processor tomorrow... I'm stuck between the h650, 3Sixty.2 or the AudioControl DQL-8. Which do you guys think is the best option?
Since I'm clueless when it comes to tuning, I'm thinking the autoeq feature on the H650 is a BIG plus...


----------



## Whiterabbit

you can always add an EQ after the fact way down the line if you want hands on tuning. Dont you think?


----------



## Babs

npdang, 

Resurrecting this discussion about the PXE-H650 specifically..

You mentioned in post 1 about the remote being a pain in the ass because of having to be in "line of sight" with the unit.

How could the user control it then if you're driving and changing volume?? 
Does this mean the person is supposed to mount the box where they can point the remote at it?

Where'd you mount your PXE?.
Can you use the remote at all while driving?

Is it an infrared remote then?... If so, maybe an IR repeater to point the signal to the IR input on the face of the PXE.. Assuming it's IR.

Sorry.. I'm mr. 20 questions about using the remote on the thing.


----------



## b's07hoe

I just want to know since I believe we're both in so cal if I could get you to come set mine up when I get my system squared away. I'm definetely one of that 99% that can't tune worth a damn.

never met just been trolling a while


----------



## npdang

It's an IR remote. It needs line of sight. I don't use it at all. The cable is really long on it though, and I have my H650 mounted in the trunk while the IR is on my dash.

Basically, if you don't need or want to use AntEQ which fixes your hu processing, then you don't have to use the IR remote. In other words there's a workaround for keeping your hu volume control.

The H650 isn't just auto-time alignment. It's amplitude AND phase correction. This is also different from those continuously variable phase adjustment devices as well, which only work on the entire frequency range of a driver at a time... whereas this unit corrects phase at multiple different frequencies.


----------



## Babs

npdang said:


> It's an IR remote. It needs line of sight. I don't use it at all. The cable is really long on it though, and I have my H650 mounted in the trunk while the IR is on my dash.


Peeking at the manual.... I see it has a remote IR sensor.. nice touch, I think.


----------



## X Ray

Damn.  Does ANYONE like the PXE-H650 besides NPDANG?


----------



## npdang

X Ray said:


> Damn.  Does ANYONE like the PXE-H650 besides NPDANG?


I dunno, I guess it's hard to setup? Thought it was fairly straightforward if you read my review.


----------



## X Ray

npdang said:


> I dunno, I guess it's hard to setup? Thought it was fairly straightforward if you read my review.


Well, regardless of how everyone talks so badly of it, I trust your opinion over just about everyone else's on this board, so I ordered one. I don't think I'll mind the "lack of low end" everyone is complaining about. I used to own a recording studio, and I got VERY used to the way near field studio monitors sound. I do like the way FLAT sounds. 

I have a feeling I'm absolutely gonna love the H650.


----------



## npdang

Thanks, I appreciate you saying that. It does a good job but you just have to know how to work around it's eccentricities. You can get very good low end just by turning up the sub level... very easy to do.


----------



## X Ray

npdang said:


> You can get very good low end just by turning up the sub level... very easy to do.


Absolutely. There are other ways of changing the response without an actual EQ.


----------



## gsxrtin

npdang- does your tsx have OEM amp? if yes - do you take the input into the 650 from before the OEM amp or after?


----------



## npdang

I tap before the OEM amp.


----------



## X Ray

By the way, how does your stereo sound right about now? Did you get the bugs worked out? Has anyone else here on the board heard it?


----------



## AzGrower

BlueAc said:


> Is this gonna be the best option available for factory integration??? I need to pick a processor tomorrow... I'm stuck between the h650, 3Sixty.2 or the AudioControl DQL-8. Which do you guys think is the best option?


I am also interested in the response to this question. My wife will be getting a new VW Passatt soon, and I a new Tahoe after the new year, so I would like to know which is the better option. As there are a few good units out there, which one stands out as the clear winner for...
A. best bang for buck
B. ease of use/initial setup
C. features/adjustability


Has anyone else done similar reviews of the other units? (ie Jello Cleansweep, RF 360, Audiocontrol, etc...)


----------



## BlueAc

AzGrower said:


> I am also interested in the response to this question. My wife will be getting a new VW Passatt soon, and I a new Tahoe after the new year, so I would like to know which is the better option. As there are a few good units out there, which one stands out as the clear winner for...
> A. best bang for buck
> B. ease of use/initial setup
> C. features/adjustability
> 
> 
> Has anyone else done similar reviews of the other units? (ie Jello Cleansweep, RF 360, Audiocontrol, etc...)


I ended up picking the 3Sixty.2 b/c it met all of those same requirements that you mentioned. I hear that it very user friendly especially with the fact that you now can use a laptop to do adjustments. I think there's a 3Sixty.2 for sale on this board for a good price!


----------



## AzGrower

BlueAc said:


> I ended up picking the 3Sixty.2 b/c it met all of those same requirements that you mentioned. I hear that it very user friendly especially with the fact that you now can use a laptop to do adjustments. I think there's a 3Sixty.2 for sale on this board for a good price!


There were some past threads concerning the RF and some unwanted noise issues. Plus its more $$ than the ///Alpine. At least for the wifey's car, I mainly want something to un-equalize the stock signal and allow me to flexibility to add aftermarket amps, which will do the processing anyway (Next Audio VRz 5.500 which has full bandpass filters onboard).

Perhaps for the Tahoe I may opt to test the RF 360, and in the VW run the ///Alpine unit to see which one works best.


----------



## BlueAc

AzGrower said:


> There were some past threads concerning the RF and some unwanted noise issues. Plus its more $$ than the ///Alpine. At least for the wifey's car, I mainly want something to un-equalize the stock signal and allow me to flexibility to add aftermarket amps, which will do the processing anyway (Next Audio VRz 5.500 which has full bandpass filters onboard).
> 
> Perhaps for the Tahoe I may opt to test the RF 360, and in the VW run the ///Alpine unit to see which one works best.


If your not looking for processing then why not opt for the CleanSweep? It has 8V output and the only knock on it, is that it doesn't have any processing. I think you should look into that, plus they can be had for cheap on fleabay!


----------



## AzGrower

BlueAc said:


> If your not looking for processing then why not opt for the CleanSweep? It has 8V output and the only knock on it, is that it doesn't have any processing. I think you should look into that, plus they can be had for cheap on fleabay!


because from what I hear, you can not control the volume via stock head unit


----------



## BlueAc

AzGrower said:


> because from what I hear, you can not control the volume via stock head unit


I thought the same thing til I read JL's FAQ's on the CleanSweep...

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE CLEANSWEEP® CL441dsp

*“When you install a CleanSweep® CL441dsp, your OEM volume control can no longer be used.”*
FALSE. You can still use your OEM volume control when listening to the factory source. Simply set the CL441dsp’s master volume control at a high level and go for it. The master volume control has the advantage in terms of ultimate sound quality and linearity, but you can still get excellent sound using the OEM volume control. The master volume control must be used for the Aux Source, if connected.

http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_cleansweep_pages.php?page_id=211


----------



## AzGrower

Nice dood, you are awesome....


----------



## BlueAc

AzGrower said:


> Nice dood, you are awesome....


Glad to help...


----------



## X Ray

I'll obviously find out eventually, but I'd like to know before I install it. I got my H650 in the mail a few days ago and haven't had the time to install the new stereo yet. I was curious about the _AUX PRIMARY SOURCE_ switch. How am I supposed to set this? On or off? I plan on running the stock deck into the _AUTO RANGING INPUT_, and my iPod into the auxillary input. I'll mainly be using the iPod, but I'd like to be able to use my factory HU to listen to the radio, and a random CD every now and then.


----------



## Babs

X Ray said:


> I'll obviously find out eventually, but I'd like to know before I install it. I got my H650 in the mail a few days ago and haven't had the time to install the new stereo yet. I was curious about the _AUX PRIMARY SOURCE_ switch. How am I supposed to set this? On or off? I plan on running the stock deck into the _AUTO RANGING INPUT_, and my iPod into the auxillary input. I'll mainly be using the iPod, but I'd like to be able to use my factory HU to listen to the radio, and a random CD every now and then.


Best I can tell from the manual.. Set the "Aux Primary Source" to <OFF> if your input method is going to be the speaker level inputs labeled "Auto Ranging Input". Then use the "Aux Source Switch" buttons described on pg 15 apparently to switch to your aux rca input.

Let me know... I really wanna know your opinion of this thing.. I've come full circle back into considering the H650 or MS-8. I'd be interested in your comparison also to your head unit to your iPod input with some good quality or lossless tunes.


----------



## X Ray

Babs said:


> Let me know... I really wanna know your opinion of this thing.. I've come full circle back into considering the H650 or MS-8. I'd be interested in your comparison also to your head unit to your iPod input with some good quality or lossless tunes.


I'll let you know, but it could be a few weeks or more. I need to find some time to tear my car apart. More importantly, a place to do it.


----------



## Babs

X Ray said:


> I'll let you know, but it could be a few weeks or more. I need to find some time to tear my car apart. More importantly, a place to do it.


Cool.. Hey a play by play install thread for this thing would be cool too.. take some pics of the install.. I'd be interested in how to tap power and accessory lines to the unit.. showing my 12v installation newb-ness.


----------



## X Ray

Babs said:


> Cool.. Hey a play by play install thread for this thing would be cool too.. take some pics of the install.. I'd be interested in how to tap power and accessory lines to the unit.. showing my 12v installation newb-ness.


No problem. I'll get some pics and do a little write up.


----------



## Babs

Very cool.. I need to search to see if anyone's done a head to head with the H650 with a good head unit just on pure output SQ.. The concept of the H650 is just too tempting for a few reasons.. works with any car any time, and the extra two channels you don't have with something like the 9887.. Those extra rear channels allow for rear fills and/or mid-bass's..... BUT, there's that DA then AD then DA conversion thing that makes me think a standalone like the 9887 has an advantage.


----------



## dbiegel

I've been running the h650 for a while as well, if there's anything specific you want to know feel free to ask. I've been very happy with it overall.


----------



## invicticus123

Hi, I'm new here and joined so I could add my 2 cents on the H650. My profile is empty so fyi my system is:
1. 2007 Maxima Bose head unit, no nav.
2. Alpine SPR 17s components up front.
3. Alpine SPR 17c coax in back.
4. Alpine Type R 12 inch Sub in a 1 cf sealed box.
5. Trunk and all doors dynamat extreme. Double layer on doors.
6. Dynazorbs behind each cabin speaker and 4 dynazorbs on back wall of sub enclosure.
7. 2 PDX amps. 4.150 for the cabin, 1.600 for the sub.
8. H650 augmented with an AudioControl Matrix line driver (6 ch).

I had the stuff installed in what's considered to be a "good" shop. They couldn't get it sounding good and really upset me by trying to pawn it off on me by raising the SW crossovers and blaming the factory equipment for providing a bad,very noisy output. I pretty much kept my cool and eventually got them to say the unit was bad, although I maintained it was the setup. Anyway, they got another unit (BTW, there's another guy posting here from Mass, he and I got the 1st two units in New England. The shop I was DBW mentioned that (name left out) had a Customer and was having the same issues as I. Anyway, they installed the second unit and it STILL didn't sound right! They got the Alpine Tech to look at it who claimed the 2nd unit was also bad. The Alpine Tech interfaced with the Factory and R&D and got a "Fully Tested" unit and installed it. By this time, I was already convinced that the H650 output was to low to drive the PDX amps and ordered the AudioControl Matrix. I had the Alpine Tech install the matrix with the 3rd Unit....guess what it STILL didn't sound right!!!  At that point I gave up with the shop because I figured all the installing was complete and now it was a matter of properly tuning the H650 and amps. Here is what I had to do:
1. Increased Matrix to full gain (Turns out the Alpine tech, or anyone else, never tuned ANY of the system) this resulted in a MAX 2vlts to the 4.150 and under 1 vlt to the 1.600. I know this because the Matrix has Vlts indicators. Often the Preamp output given by the manufacturer is obtained using a test signal.....with music the preamp output is usually MUCH less.....this is very common. The Matrix at full gain provides a 10x gain..that means the H650 was outputing less than .3volts at the most! My HU is set to 21 of 30 (for the H650 HU volume needs to be 66-75%) and I'm using the autosumming/ranging input. I'm convinced that the shop took the output from the HU instead of from the bose amp and I'm glad they did. Luckily, the Matrix outputs are more than enough to cleanly drive my PDX amps. However, if you're H650 output is LOW, IE you find you have to crank your amp gains, then chances are good you're taking output from the HU too. This is good, technically cleaner, but you'll need to boost the H650 output. 
2. Go through the Auto Tune sequence. I used all 8 measurements. 6 on the headrest, 1 on either side of the headrest. I also moved the seat slightly forward to put the mic more in line with where my ears would be. Sound stage is AWESOME. Max gain for each set of speakers is +15 on the H650. I increased all of them by the same amount so that the sound balance wouldn't be changed, with the highest at +12 as to not overdrive anything.
2. Lowered LP to Sub from 80 to 40Hz.
3. Lowered HP to Cabin speakers from 80 to 70Hz.
4. At 125hz cut by -4db with .5Q. Having a resonance between 100 & 150Hz is very common in car audio.

End result is that the system sounds pristine...absolutely clean with NO noise at all.  The 4.150 gain is at minimum, the 1.600 ~ 9 o'clock. IMO, the manual is actually well written, however it does omit the fact that you can go in and manually increase/decrease gains.

So, right now the system is very well balanced. The subwoofer blends very well with the cabin and bass is about as upfront as it can be without using a bandpass box...very tight and clean and LOW. If I want the Sub to make the earth move I can....not that I listen to it that way, but sometime it is fun to have a kid pull up beside me booming and to crank my sub a little bit...LMAO!! It shocks the hell outta them when they look over and see a 40 something guy...LOL!!

What could be done to improve my system? Ummmmmmm......that's a trick question right???? LOL!! We all know that EVERY system can be better!!  This system is great for me...BUT....those Alpine SPX-17PRO's suuuuuuure looook goooooood. LOL!

In summary, my experience is that the H650 works great BUT has a very weak output for music. However, it could be that my setup uses the HU output. So, it is possible that if you use speaker level into the H650 you won't have this problem. I for one don't like the idea of using a speaker level output to drive good quality equipment.

In every day use, I've found that I can use the factory volume control. I've got my system setup so that there is no discernable difference in SQ from say 18 to 25 on the HU. If I'm in the mood to put a high quality CD in and play for perfection, I put the HU volum back to 21 and use the Remote volume. For my use and listening, the H650 provides enough adjustability. Actually, once you have a system tuned adjustments from that point tend to be minimal anyway.

I hope this helps. And I hope others can post experience that I can use to increase my SQ!


----------



## Dr.Telepathy SQ

So, right now the system is very well balanced. The subwoofer blends very well with the cabin and bass is about as upfront as it can be without using a bandpass box...


----------



## Dr.Telepathy SQ

Dr.Telepathy SQ said:


> So, right now the system is very well balanced. The subwoofer blends very well with the cabin and bass is about as upfront as it can be without using a bandpass box...


----------



## t3sn4f2

invicticus123 said:


> Here is what I had to do:
> 
> 1. Increased Matrix to full gain (Turns out the Alpine tech, or anyone else, never tuned ANY of the system) this resulted in a MAX 2vlts to the 4.150 and under 1 vlt to the 1.600. I know this because the Matrix has Vlts indicators. Often the Preamp output given by the manufacturer is obtained using a test signal.....with music the preamp output is usually MUCH less.....this is very common. The Matrix at full gain provides a 10x gain..that means the H650 was outputing less than .3volts at the most! My HU is set to 21 of 30 (for the H650 HU volume needs to be 66-75%) and I'm using the autosumming/ranging input. I'm convinced that the shop took the output from the HU instead of from the bose amp and I'm glad they did. Luckily, the Matrix outputs are more than enough to cleanly drive my PDX amps. However, if you're H650 output is LOW, IE you find you have to crank your amp gains, then chances are good you're taking output from the HU too. This is good, technically cleaner, but you'll need to boost the H650 output.
> 2. Go through the Auto Tune sequence. I used all 8 measurements. 6 on the headrest, 1 on either side of the headrest. I also moved the seat slightly forward to put the mic more in line with where my ears would be. Sound stage is AWESOME. Max gain for each set of speakers is +15 on the H650. I increased all of them by the same amount so that the sound balance wouldn't be changed, with the highest at +12 as to not overdrive anything.
> 2. Lowered LP to Sub from 80 to 40Hz.
> 3. Lowered HP to Cabin speakers from 80 to 70Hz.
> 4. At 125hz cut by -4db with .5Q. Having a resonance between 100 & 150Hz is very common in car audio.


Isn't the output from the Bose head unit a preamp type at 2 volts. That being said, did they connect those outputs to the _high level_ input on the H650 instead of the RCA preamp input (set to AUX as primary source)?

You might not be getting a strong outputs due to that input stage not being setup for low level preamp input signals. I think you are suppose to connect RCA jacks to the Bose and plug it into the AUX (setting it to "AUX primary source") and agjusting the input trim. Treating the Bose deck like any after market unit with RCA outs. DO THIS ONLY IF YOU KNOW FOR SURE THE BOSE IS OUTPUTTING AN RCA OUTPUT SIGNAL

They would not ship out the PXE and require you to buy a line driver to use with there own amps. Doesn't add up, somethings not normal. Besides, NPdang ran it with the PDXs just fine.


----------



## Babs

That is strange.. I'm interested also if you're using the head-unit output (which sounds like some kind of a line-level signal to feed the bose amp), into the speaker level in's rather than the aux level in as mentioned above. If that's the issue, might be worth trying for giggles to run it through the aux input as spec'd by the PXE. You might have one of those moments where the sky opens up and the angels sing, without the need for the line driver.


----------



## noshortcuts

I think this is my first post. Below I describe a bit about my first DIY car audio adventure.

I installed the H650 on my wife's 07' Prius with "Premium JBL" system and bluetooth and navigation. The JBL premium system on the Prius is widely known to sound really bad. The front speaker outputs are heavily altered depending on volume, the soundstage is awful, and the sound lacks lows and lacks definition. I needed a solution that would sum the front channels, clean up the sound, and well.... sound great.

My solution:
Soundproofing / deadening in the floor and doors, 
JL-Audio ZR-650s in the front (personally, I wouldn't pay retail for speakers this expensive for a car, but I got them cheap from someone), 
PXE-H650 (installed after the stock JBL amplifier) 
JL-Audio 300/4 amplifier.

Having never done anything like this before, it took a lot of study and a leap of faith. Amazingly, it all worked out and sounds awesome.

I did the Auto-Tune sequence (H650) but have not yet played with manual settings. The soundstage is incredible after the autotune. Really unbelievable what a difference it makes.

I think I should be able to get a bit more range out of the 6.5" ZR-650s. It seems they should go lower. I'm sure this can be solved with manual settings on the HR650 and/or the crossover controls on the 300/4, but I haven't played with it yet.

I set the 300/4 to "low input voltage" and set the Input Sensitivity most all the way up. I set the Prius HU volume at 40 (out of 60) for the autotune. I find that it works well to use the HU volume control instead of the remote. Most music is listened to between 35-50 (50 is rocking). Talk radio is usually between 30-40. 

PROBLEM: The power kept dropping at the H650 and this problem became more frequent over time. I checked and double checked all connections. I ran a new power wire to the battery and changed the ground as well. Problem kept progressing. I finally pulled the H650 and sent it to Alpine under warranty.

PROBLEM 2: I reconnected the stereo *without *the H650 or the 300/4 amp, and you know what ? .... The system sounds really, really great. In this case I think at least 70% of the improvement came from new speakers and the sound proofing and sound deadening. I miss the perfect staging with the H650 but my wife can't tell the difference (and it's her car after all). It sounds plenty good but not as perfectly clean and detailed at very loud volumes. I would be curious to listen to the differences with the 300/4 and not the H650 and vice versa. 

Hopefully the fixed or replaced H650 will not have any problems.


----------



## t3sn4f2

noshortcuts said:


> I think this is my first post. Below I describe a bit about my first DIY car audio adventure.
> 
> I installed the H650 on my wife's 07' Prius with "Premium JBL" system and bluetooth and navigation. The JBL premium system on the Prius is widely known to sound really bad. The front speaker outputs are heavily altered depending on volume, the soundstage is awful, and the sound lacks lows and lacks definition. I needed a solution that would sum the front channels, clean up the sound, and well.... sound great.
> 
> My solution:
> Soundproofing / deadening in the floor and doors,
> JL-Audio ZR-650s in the front (personally, I wouldn't pay retail for speakers this expensive for a car, but I got them cheap from someone),
> PXE-H650 (installed after the stock JBL amplifier)
> JL-Audio 300/4 amplifier.
> 
> Having never done anything like this before, it took a lot of study and a leap of faith. Amazingly, it all worked out and sounds awesome.
> 
> I did the Auto-Tune sequence (H650) but have not yet played with manual settings. The soundstage is incredible after the autotune. Really unbelievable what a difference it makes.
> 
> I think I should be able to get a bit more range out of the 6.5" ZR-650s. It seems they should go lower. I'm sure this can be solved with manual settings on the HR650 and/or the crossover controls on the 300/4, but I haven't played with it yet.
> 
> I set the 300/4 to "low input voltage" and set the Input Sensitivity most all the way up. I set the Prius HU volume at 40 (out of 60) for the autotune. I find that it works well to use the HU volume control instead of the remote. Most music is listened to between 35-50 (50 is rocking). Talk radio is usually between 30-40.
> 
> PROBLEM: The power kept dropping at the H650 and this problem became more frequent over time. I checked and double checked all connections. I ran a new power wire to the battery and changed the ground as well. Problem kept progressing. I finally pulled the H650 and sent it to Alpine under warranty.
> 
> PROBLEM 2: I reconnected the stereo *without *the H650 or the 300/4 amp, and you know what ? .... The system sounds really, really great. In this case I think at least 70% of the improvement came from new speakers and the sound proofing and sound deadening. I miss the perfect staging with the H650 but my wife can't tell the difference (and it's her car after all). It sounds plenty good but not as perfectly clean and detailed at very loud volumes. I would be curious to listen to the differences with the 300/4 and not the H650 and vice versa.
> 
> Hopefully the fixed or replaced H650 will not have any problems.


Its not a good idea to change out the speakers on a factory amp, especially an upgraaded one that is even more tailored to the stock speakers connected to it. Differences in impedance could be stressing out the amp. Even if they are both say 4 ohms it doesn't mean that at some frequencies they don't drop below that and put your factory amp in an unstable mode. 

Go _VERY_ easy on the volume till you get the H650 back.


----------



## Babs

I'm hearing about too many of these PXE's having some kind of issue/defect.. Cause for concern.


----------



## monkeyboy

Babs said:


> I'm hearing about too many of these PXE's having some kind of issue/defect.. Cause for concern.


Exactly what I was thinking...


----------



## Babs

M ...S ...- ...8

.... if they ever get the stupid thing to market.


----------



## invicticus123

I thought the Auto-ranging input is supposed to be able to accept anything as low as .6vlts.....maybe not but I'm pretty sure if you talk with Alpine they will tell you it does. Anyway, the Alpine field tech, while in contact with Alpine Engineering in California, seemed to think the connection to the unit is good, however, I'm still interested in trying what you guys are saying.

Problem is that I'm not sure how to do it because there are 3 pairs of wires being used for input: Front speakers, Rear speakers, and Subwoofer. Is there a way to modify those 3 wire sets to two RCA's jacks?? Thanks


----------



## noshortcuts

invicticus123 said:


> I thought the Auto-ranging input is supposed to be able to accept anything as low as .6vlts.....maybe not but I'm pretty sure if you talk with Alpine they will tell you it does. Anyway, the Alpine field tech, while in contact with Alpine Engineering in California, seemed to think the connection to the unit is good, however, I'm still interested in trying what you guys are saying.
> 
> Problem is that I'm not sure how to do it because there are 3 pairs of wires being used for input: Front speakers, Rear speakers, and Subwoofer. Is there a way to modify those 3 wire sets to two RCA's jacks?? Thanks


I don't know if going to the RCAs is right in your case. But I think I can explain why having too many outputs is no problem. All the PXE650 needs is a full range of input. My stock amplifier has 12 (?) wires outputting: front high, front low, rear high and low, center channel, and woofer outputs, but the PXE650 only needs the front high and the front low to properly sum, mix, and send the resulting signals to the added amplifier.


----------



## monkeyboy

Babs said:


> M ...S ...- ...8
> 
> .... if they ever get the stupid thing to market.


End of summer according to Andy... I emailed him this week.


----------



## rsvchad

monkeyboy said:


> End of summer according to Andy... I emailed him this week.


I think everyone should email AW and ask about this product. He's been hyping people up on the message boards for a year + now. Did he say what the hold-up was? I hear software problems.


----------



## dbiegel

Where did you connect the "remote in" wire on the H650 to? You need this connected. I could not get the "auto sense power" feature to work very well in my setup either, and I seem to have very low voltage out from my factory head unit too. At first I thought I had a defective unit, but once I hooked up the remote in wire (to the fuse box, where it receives power only when the key is turned), not a problem ever since.

For what its worth, I love the imaging improvements the H650 gave me. The processor has certain features that manual tuning equipment simply does not offer (512 band independent left/right eq, frequency dependent time/phase correction). IMO, those features make up for the processor's flaws.


----------



## bwana

I too am quite suspiicious of 'automagic' correction. Audyssey multiEQ in my NADT175 is underwhelming. Manual correction with speaker distances measured with a tape measure is what time/phase correction is all about. Resonances are not easily corrected with this device and sound deadening is far more effective. I imagine the same would hold true for an auto. 

That being said, which device allows manual correction of time/phase correction as well as parametric eq correction? Tnx.

sorry if this is hijacking the thread. i think i should post a new topic so mr. moderator, please delete this post.


----------



## npdang

Carputer solution, running something like Audiolense etc. which I've used will allow you far greater flexibility in terms of measurement and room correction options.

If you just need simple time and phase correction, the Behringer dcx2496 will allow you to adjust time alignment in fractions of a ms, and phase in 1 degree steps.


----------



## rsvchad

bwana said:


> I too am quite suspiicious of 'automagic' correction. Audyssey multiEQ in my NADT175 is underwhelming. Manual correction with speaker distances measured with a tape measure is what time/phase correction is all about. Resonances are not easily corrected with this device and sound deadening is far more effective. I imagine the same would hold true for an auto.
> 
> That being said, which device allows manual correction of time/phase correction as well as parametric eq correction? Tnx.
> 
> sorry if this is hijacking the thread. i think i should post a new topic so mr. moderator, please delete this post.


This works very well in the car. No manual tuning device will give you the same level of control over the sound, even though you aren't the one controlling it. In a home theater where you are dealing with optimal positioning to start with I can see where this product may be underwhelming, although I've seen plenty of instances of Audyssey working quite well in the home enviornment. In the car where the listening enviornment is awful, this product makes a marked improvement in stage height, width and tonality even with sub-optimal speaker placement. 
Is it a cure all? No. Can it do better than professional? Perhaps. Can it do it quicker than a pro? WAY WAY quicker. I would say 90+% of the people participating on this board could not equal the final results of this product. I would guess that a true pro would have a tough time besting it quicker than a couple of days. Even two days of a professional's time could be very expensive. The question comes down to how much experience do you have tuning cars, how much time do you have and/or how much money are you willing to spend? I know I'd personally rather spend my time listening to a really nice sounding car stereo instead of trying to make a really nice sounding car stereo.


----------



## bwana

I read somewhere that npdang wrote about the 'unusual' hookup of this device. the front1 is sent to the tweets and the front2 sent to the woofs. Does that mean this device only allows active crossover and therefore requires 4 amplification channels for the 4 front speakers?


----------



## dbiegel

bwana said:


> I read somewhere that npdang wrote about the 'unusual' hookup of this device. the front1 is sent to the tweets and the front2 sent to the woofs. Does that mean this device only allows active crossover and therefore requires 4 amplification channels for the 4 front speakers?


No. When you set it up it asks you if you have a 2-WAY OUTPUT Y/N. Choose N if you are using a passive crossover on the fronts.


----------



## bwana

tnx. i am still on the fence between this device, the audio control dql-8, the rf 360.2. obviously, the last 2 would require a rta to check the audio response because my ears are still too new.


----------



## Babs

The PXE is one of the more versatile because you have the extra channels for fronts if you should need them. 

If Audio Control would have at least one OEM integration or other processor with time-alignment, regardless of any auto-tuning, that'd be a cool item.


----------



## noshortcuts

I'm frustrated.

Got my PXE H650 back from Alpine/California quickly after needing warranty repairs because it would randomly power off. The repair ticket says: "remove short circuit, signal processing section, switch". 

After all that time to uninstall it, fix up the radio to work with out it, and then ship it to Alpine and re-install after I got it back.... the damn thing started powering off (again) after only a few days of use. 

This time I'm going to demand a new and tested unit and hope it works well this time. 

When I ship it in, I'm going to replace it with a $30 Scoshe FAI-3A to sum the channels back to the 300/4 amplifier to keep it all running while I wait again.


----------



## Babs

Makes me think.. Alternative... A good inexpensive channel summing and De-Eq'ing (I guess cleansweep, but it's not exactly inexpensive.. JL is pretty proud of their stuff)... Then process via the KAC-X4R kenwood amp.. Then you're set. Or just go 3sixty.2 into conventional amps.

The PXE isn't showing itself to be made very well it appears... I'll bet the guys at JBL are seeing an opportunity if they can get that MS-8 to the shelves.. Last I heard they're working on the packaging design now, so hopefully they've got the product and production design and implementation done.


----------



## kaigoss69

Hey guys, I have a CDA-7995 head unit and I want to have my system tuned for a flat response plus have the time correction done. I can do the time correction on my head unit but there are almost no option for EQ. Question is, would I be better off with an add-on processor (but I do want to retain the volume control on the head unit) or a completely new head unit like the CDA-9887? Thanks.


----------



## noshortcuts

I'm done with Alpine. 

Sent my H650 in for the second repair. The trouble was exact as the first time. It would spontaneously lose power and the frequency would progress. The first time they claimed to find and fix "short circuit"s. This time they shipped it back, "No Trouble Found". 

It takes serious time to install, uninstall, ship, and reinstall. There is no way I will reinstall it this time, knowing they didn't fix it. $320 down the drain. It's garbage.

By the way, the $30 Schoshe FAI-3A I put in it's place does a fine job. It sums the front channels to my JL Audio Amp and allows me run the amp, JL crossowvers, and to keep all stock controls (except front front/rear fade) including bluetooth.


----------



## Q-Authority

I have a question for those of you with a bit of experience with the H650. Is there anything to prevent a person from using the HU volume control, if a) the H650 volume was turned up to its allowable max, after normal tuning procedures had been followed, and b) you then turned the HU volume down for normal listening?

If not, would there be any possible audible effects from using the unit this way?

I read the earlier workaround for using the HU volume control, via the aux inputs, but this seemed much easier.

Would there be a difference if one used the standard inputs, vs the auxiliary inputs, to try this? The reason for wanting to use the standard inputs would only be for trying it with multi-channel sources.

Additionally, do you see any issues, with what I have previously stated, if I converted the standard line input connections to rca and connected them to a multi-channel head unit? Not optimal I am sure, but I love the home Audyssey version and am trying to figure out how to possibly implement the H650 in some manner with multi-channel use. Worst case scenario, I would consider using it only for the subs, if the unit will allow that, as the low end will be the most difficult to tune, in my case, and I know the home version can do an absolutely great job.

Thanks


----------



## noshortcuts

Q-Authority said:


> I have a question for those of you with a bit of experience with the H650. Is there anything to prevent a person from using the HU volume control, if a) the H650 volume was turned up to its allowable max, after normal tuning procedures had been followed, and b) you then turned the HU volume down for normal listening?
> 
> If not, would there be any possible audible effects from using the unit this way?
> 
> I read the earlier workaround for using the HU volume control, via the aux inputs, but this seemed much easier.
> 
> Would there be a difference if one used the standard inputs, vs the auxiliary inputs, to try this? The reason for wanting to use the standard inputs would only be for trying it with multi-channel sources.
> 
> Additionally, do you see any issues, with what I have previously stated, if I converted the standard line input connections to rca and connected them to a multi-channel head unit? Not optimal I am sure, but I love the home Audyssey version and am trying to figure out how to possibly implement the H650 in some manner with multi-channel use. Worst case scenario, I would consider using it only for the subs, if the unit will allow that, as the low end will be the most difficult to tune, in my case, and I know the home version can do an absolutely great job.
> 
> Thanks


I don't totally follow your questions but I think I can help some.
I found no issues using the HU volume control with the H650 installed. 

For installing and tuning the H650 and the added amplifier I set the HU volume at 40 (of 60). I believe the reason Alpine recommends using the volume control of the H650 is because some HUs (including mine) change their equalization based on HU volume. The H650 is optimally correcting the HU equalization only at the volume used to set it all up. However, the HU does not make drastic changes except at low volumes. In the normal listening range (30-50 on mine) the HU will not significantly change the signal being processed by the H650. Certainly to my ears, there is no problem using the HU volume if your gains are set up properly (HU at about 2/3rds full volume, H650 at full volume or near it, and Amplifier at appropriate levels for listening and not clipping). 

The rest of your question is less clear to me. My car had full range speakers in the back and crossed over pairs of speakers in the front. I ran the front speakers through the standard inputs on the H650. No rears inputed but they were connected to the outputs of the amplifier. All controls from the car continued to work including front/back fading, bluetooth voice from the front left door, etc.


----------



## Q-Authority

noshortcuts said:


> I don't totally follow your questions but I think I can help some.
> I found no issues using the HU volume control with the H650 installed.
> 
> For installing and tuning the H650 and the added amplifier I set the HU volume at 40 (of 60). I believe the reason Alpine recommends using the volume control of the H650 is because some HUs (including mine) change their equalization based on HU volume. The H650 is optimally correcting the HU equalization only at the volume used to set it all up. However, the HU does not make drastic changes except at low volumes. In the normal listening range (30-50 on mine) the HU will not significantly change the signal being processed by the H650. Certainly to my ears, there is no problem using the HU volume if your gains are set up properly (HU at about 2/3rds full volume, H650 at full volume or near it, and Amplifier at appropriate levels for listening and not clipping).
> 
> The rest of your question is less clear to me. My car had full range speakers in the back and crossed over pairs of speakers in the front. I ran the front speakers through the standard inputs on the H650. No rears inputed but they were connected to the outputs of the amplifier. All controls from the car continued to work including front/back fading, bluetooth voice from the front left door, etc.


Thanks. I guess I could have clarified a little bit regarding the multi-channel use.

My idea regarding the volume is to use the head unit volume control after turning the H650 volume up to where it was at while MultEQ was run and then using the HU volume to lower or raise the volume afterwards (with of course expecting not to have to go above the volume at which MultEQ was run);

Yes, I realize that AntEQ works to control the HU volume eq, which some may or may not have. It just seems odd that they chose a volume point at which there is usually very little of it evident. And though I prefer HU's that do not have that irritating effect built-in to them, I don't consider it a huge issue at the lower volumes it is normally evident;

Regarding the multi-channel use: I was actually referring to use with a dvd-a/dd/dts head unit w/5.1 output. From my study of posts here and going through the Owner's Manual it looks like this can be done with the exception that I might have to run a center channel that bypasses the H650, but I could live with that I suppose;

Now that I have taken a second and closer look at the owner's manual I have found that many questions listed earlier on this thread appear to have been explained by the manual better than I had first thought. Although maybe it just seems easier to understand since I have gone through this thread completely.


----------



## Q-Authority

Whoops! Looks like I misinterpreted part of the manual. The hi-voltage inputs seem to be limited to mid and low frequency input (normal mode), or mid, high, and low input (2 channel mode) only. If the high frequency input had a lower HPF setting I could have used it for the rear speakers, but 200hz is too high.
I guess I'll have to wait till they come out with a revised version (damn!).


----------



## kaigoss69

OK so my head is spinning. I have read all thhe threads on this board regarding Alpine imprint technology. I am still not sure exactly what processor would be best for me. Perhaps I can give you guys an idea of what I intend my system to look like, those of you with enough experience can give me some recommendations?

Head unit: undecided.
Amps: (2) Eclipse XA-4000 (so 8 channels with 125W each)
Front doors:
Tweeter: Dynaudio MD100
Midrange: Rainbow MR 100 MK II
Woofer: Dynaudio MW 160
Rear doors: Dynaudio MW 160 (midbass only)
Subs: none for now, hoping I won't need them

So the front stage is 3-way and I will need a processor capable of handling that.

The rear is only for mid-bass, no voices.

What I want (since I know nothing about tuning) is a processor that does the tuning for me. From what I understand, I have the choice between the following models:

Alpine PXE-H650: 
The good: Flexibility with amount of channels and crossover points, some degree of adjustability after imprint was run.
The bad: Low level outputs (?), only 12 db/octave crossovers (what were they thinking?), have to trick it to keep volume control through HU

Alpine CDA-9887:
The good: multiple crossover points, 4V pre-outs
The bad: only three channels (tweeter, mid, sub) ,virtually no adjustability after imprint was run

IDA-X100 plus imprint kit: I would think this would have identical features to above setup.

So what do you guys think? - Please help me keep my sanity!

Thanks


----------



## Q-Authority

kaigoss69: I think the PXE-H650 might do the job for you, but I'd suggest taking a quick read of its owner's manual if I were you. After going through this thread and reading the manual again, I found that it was much more informative than some people let on.

Regarding the low level voltage and subsequent noise issue: I'm not sure it really exists. I've only heard the one complaint about it so far, and I'm wondering if it could have been a hook-up issue as someone else suggested.

Regarding the xover issue: It actually let's you pick 12 or 24db slopes for the subwoofer. It's the others that are only 12db and generally that's all you really need for mids and tweeters unless you have a rather unusual speaker arrangement.

Regarding volume control: I can see why they set it up the way they did (because they want to keep the output voltage form the head unit steady, which will help the H650 perform at its best), but I think the work around is reasonable.

If I was only going to run a two channel setup I wouldn't hesitate to use the H650, over the 9887, just for the after setup adjustability. I would also choose it over any of the other processors out here because I know what Audyssey/Imprint can do on the home system. No other processor out there comes close to the processing capabilities of the H650. Even audiophiles have stated how well the home professional version works and that’s saying something. The 512 filter sets (they are much more complicated than simple eq bands) all adjust for frequency, phase, time alignment, and gain. That's why people get such great staging. The only tricky part will be learning the correct microphone positions for your particular car. This just takes some patience and experimentation.


----------



## kaigoss69

Q, I appreciate the comments. I did read the manual on the PXE-H650 just now and I am even more confused: F1 would be say the tweeters, F2 the midranges, and that leaves "rear" for the woofers in the front doors but there is no HPF.... to cut off the mids and highs. I guess I could use the ones on my amps but then I think I may confuse imprint during setup, won't I? The other way to do it would be to hook up the sub output to the door woofers (front and back via splitter RCA's), so I would keep them "stereo" but would loose time correction between front and rear.........

Isn't there a simpler solution out there for me????????


----------



## Q-Authority

kaigoss69 said:


> Q, I appreciate the comments. I did read the manual on the PXE-H650 just now and I am even more confused: F1 would be say the tweeters, F2 the midranges, and that leaves "rear" for the woofers in the front doors but there is no HPF.... to cut off the mids and highs. I guess I could use the ones on my amps but then I think I may confuse imprint during setup, won't I? The other way to do it would be to hook up the sub output to the door woofers (front and back via splitter RCA's), so I would keep them "stereo" but would loose time correction between front and rear.........
> 
> Isn't there a simpler solution out there for me????????


You definitely are limited running a 3-way front set-up, but it can be done depending on the frequency ranges you want to run to them. It depends on where you really need the xovers set between your front woofers and midranges. If you can live with a xover down to only 200hz, between the front mids and woofers, than you are fine (to a point) and you will have bandpass control of the woofers. However, even if you can use the 200hz xover point between woofer and midrange you would still have to use a passive xover between the midranges and tweeters. Now that may not sound cool to some people now days, but a good passive xover is perfectly useable and virtually the only option in any of the best home systems, so I don't see it as a big deal. Plus, the H650 will still handle all phase and TA issues you might be concerned about from the passive xovers.
This set-up would allow you to use the rear outputs as usual and maintain H650 control of all speakers. The only remaining issue would be that you would not have a LPF xover to cut off the top end of the rear woofers. You would need to let them roll of naturally, or use a passive xover. Still not that big an issue imo.
If you need the front mid to woofer xover lower than 200hz you would have to be more creative. You could use the F2 HPF for the front woofers and use the rear HPF for the front midrange (also using a passive xover between the front mids and tweeters). However, you will lose bandpass capabilities for the front woofer and you will now also need a passive xover for the rear woofers, fed from a different set of HU line outs and the rear woofers would not be controlled by the H650.
The first option would definitely be your better choice. But remember that if you should choose the first option (H650 2-way set-up) and change xover points after having run Imprint, you will need to run Imprint again afterwards (just one of their little oddities I believe I read in the manual). But at least you will know that you will be getting the optimized set up for your selections.


----------



## VW_Johan

I got my Alpine PXE-H650 installed in my VW Passat today, and have a problem with getting the unit to power up. The unit is connected to the full range speaker level output of the OEM MFD2-DVD headunit. The problem is I cannot get this auto ranging input to switch on the power of the unit. If I pull & re-connect the power cord of the PXE, then it powers up and runs fine for 5 minutes, and then shuts off. Has anyone experienced this problem? Is my only solution to install a proper remote turn on-cable?

I did a very quick imprint calibration, and the results where encouraging. Now if I only got the unit to stay switched on then I could do some serious tuning....


----------



## noshortcuts

VW_Johan said:


> I got my Alpine PXE-H650 installed in my VW Passat today, and have a problem with getting the unit to power up. The unit is connected to the full range speaker level output of the OEM MFD2-DVD headunit. The problem is I cannot get this auto ranging input to switch on the power of the unit. If I pull & re-connect the power cord of the PXE, then it powers up and runs fine for 5 minutes, and then shuts off. Has anyone experienced this problem? Is my only solution to install a proper remote turn on-cable?
> 
> I did a very quick imprint calibration, and the results where encouraging. Now if I only got the unit to stay switched on then I could do some serious tuning....


Read my last posts. Same issue, just yours sounds worse. There must be shorts or the auto-ranging doesn't work right for some other reason. I shipped mine in twice. First time they "fixed" shorts. Second time they said they found nothing wrong. Now I'm stuck. I won't reinstall a unit I know still loses power. It's either going in the garbage, or I'll spend some time on the phone and see if someone will assure me a fix if I ship it in AGAIN. If you can still return it for another new unit, I'd do that. Good luck. Post if you learn anything.


----------



## VW_Johan

noshortcuts said:


> Read my last posts. Same issue, just yours sounds worse. There must be shorts or the auto-ranging doesn't work right for some other reason. I shipped mine in twice. First time they "fixed" shorts. Second time they said they found nothing wrong. Now I'm stuck. I won't reinstall a unit I know still loses power. It's either going in the garbage, or I'll spend some time on the phone and see if someone will assure me a fix if I ship it in AGAIN. If you can still return it for another new unit, I'd do that. Good luck. Post if you learn anything.


Well, I do not necessarily see this as a PXE-H650 problem, I see it more as an install issue. Ofcourse it would be nice if this auto sensing thing would work, but to be honest I was not expecting the auto-sensing to work that great, it is a compromise that at best can work OK. The real problem is the install, where you always should use a proper switched 12v as the remote trigger. I just found out that pin #10 on the CD-changer harness should work as remote out. As soon as I find time to re-visit my install, I will try again.

The manual even states (on page 9) "Remote ON (BLU/WHT) If the OEM head unit is not turning on the EQ using the AUTO RANGING INPUT, use this wire"....


----------



## noshortcuts

VW_Johan said:


> Well, I do not necessarily see this as a PXE-H650 problem, I see it more as an install issue. Ofcourse it would be nice if this auto sensing thing would work, but to be honest I was not expecting the auto-sensing to work that great, it is a compromise that at best can work OK. The real problem is the install, where you always should use a proper switched 12v as the remote trigger. I just found out that pin #10 on the CD-changer harness should work as remote out. As soon as I find time to re-visit my install, I will try again.
> 
> The manual even states (on page 9) "Remote ON (BLU/WHT) If the OEM head unit is not turning on the EQ using the AUTO RANGING INPUT, use this wire"....


That will be great if you can sort it out from the install. 

With mine, it worked for a couple of months before it started dropping power and all install points were checked and double checked before shipping for repairs and they did find shorts. The repaired unit only worked a few days before the same behavior started. I am using the remote-on wire.


----------



## VW_Johan

noshortcuts said:


> That will be great if you can sort it out from the install.
> 
> With mine, it worked for a couple of months before it started dropping power and all install points were checked and double checked before shipping for repairs and they did find shorts. The repaired unit only worked a few days before the same behavior started. I am using the remote-on wire.


OK, installed a proper remote cable from the OEM HU to the Alpine PXE-H650 and everything works fine. Unit switches on/off as it should. It seems that auto-sensing remote thingy doesnt really work, this is an easy fix anyway. 

Now its time to start the "tuning". I have both the speaker level outputs, as well as line level outputs connected. The SQ on the line-outs is noticably better, but I get some noise and hum on that one. Probably need an isolator on the line cable to cure the humming. And when I turn up the HU volume past 50%, I get distortion. Will need to check all level settings to see what can be done. There is also a possibility to switch off the internal amp of the OEM HU, will try that when I get my hands on a VAG-COM.

Overall I´m happy with this unit, apart from the auto-sensing turn on it does what I was expecting.


----------



## cypork

Hi all,

I've just got the H650 installed 2 days ago. My sound is still kinda screwed up cos I believe I have some cables connected wrongly. Need to find some time to trace all the cables esp the polarities. 

Anyway, I was just playing with the software but was having some problems using this unit with my laptop. I've already run the tuning just for testing a couple of times through the unit itself without the software. When I connect my laptop to the H650, I can't seem to see any of the settings that was done previously.

When I load the program, I see 2 options








If I go into AntEQ, it tells me AntEQ response not available and ask me to rerun.







If i go into MultEQ, it'll immediately ask me to recalibrate MultEQ instead of giving me an option to view what I've already done on the unit itself. I can't see where to do the custom tuning like xover pts, TA, etc...

Is the the normal behavior of the software? Anyone here face the same problem? I'm on WinXP SP2


----------



## fredridge

well, just read through this whole thread trying to figure out if I could do 4-way active and with some creativity I probably could, but seems this thing is more trouble than it is worth.... where is that JBL?


----------



## Hernan

npdang said:


> 2. The mic is of very high quality. I expect to see it soon on Pacparts at a steal of a price. The nice thing is you can even power it off most soundcard mic inputs. Easily worth $200 in my book.


http://www.alpine-usa.com/US-en/products/product_acc.php?model=KTX-H100

30 bucks?? too good to be true?


----------



## Hernan

Does this unit has low level inputs?
What do you think about using this autoEQ processor between a 701 and the amps? Minor tweeks can be make at the 701 after the auto correction.
What I am missing?


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98

i would like to know about the software that is included (since it is completely left out of the manual).

my main question is: are you able to tune the eq through the software. i ask because i may be using the h650 on my carputer build and adjusting the parametric eq via touchscreen would be a huge plus.


----------



## dejo

you get 3 bands of parametric. and xover and time alignment. not the whole lot that the unit is capable of. and it wont do it through the software that I know of. have to tune through the unit controls. to me it seemed as if it sounded better when I used the unit itself to program also.


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98

what i meant was is there a way to make the parametric eq adjustments after the initial set up, other than the controls on the unit.

i.e. run the auto correction, mount the unit in the trunk, and be able to adjust the parametric eq from in the cabin.


----------



## dejo

I didnt se anything in the software that would allow. the 650 is not as capable from the external software (via computer) as the h100 unit from my experience.


----------



## BLACKonBLACK98

ok thanks.


----------



## texmur

Hallo I have a question:

How is possible to manualy tune frequency curve at PXE650 only at one speaker? not at all speakers together
For example right front bass.

Thankś Tomas

Here is my wor at BMW X3:
http://picasaweb.google.cz/tomas.leba/X3Audio


----------



## npdang

Basically, the h650 doesn't support manual tuning of individual speakers.


----------



## texmur

Thanks, but is possible to tune frequency only on FRONT2 otput without influe REAR otput? I need to increase frequency about 150Hz only in front bass.
Bye Tomas


----------



## npdang

I don't believe so. IIRC, you can only tune mid, low, high for ALL outputs.


----------



## texmur

And have you any idea how increase kickbass? What about increase all RCA at 125HZ and cut rear speakers at 150HZ? In the trunk I have encl. 12" SW. Its cut al 80Hz and 24dB


----------



## Hernan

texmur said:


> Thanks, but is possible to tune frequency only on FRONT2 otput without influe REAR otput? I need to increase frequency about 150Hz only in front bass.
> Bye Tomas



Owners Manual. Page 16:

"Introduction
Each output of the PXE-H650 has a 3-Band, parametric equalizer, up to 10 ms of time
correction and customizable crossover points for High-pass, Low-pass and Subwoofer.
Experimentation with the sound is encouraged, as a simple press of the RESET button and
selecting "CLEAR SETTINGS" will return all settings back to their original, corrected
levels before customization began.
The following procedure explains the steps necessary to customize the Parametric EQ,
Time Delay and Crossover. Use the same procedure described below, for each of the
channels being modifi ed. Pressing "ENTER" gets you into the program screen mode,
which will allow current values to then be changed. Navigate to "SAVE SETTINGS"
screen and press ENTER to store changes in memory.
Parametric Equalizer
The Equalizer uses 3 Bands for each of the 7 channels to customize the tone of the music.
Each Source Input to the PXE-H650 has its own EQ. Each of the Bands (Bass, Mid and
Treble) is adjusted in a similar manner. The following steps use the Bass Band as an
example. Use the same steps to make changes to the Mid and Treble Bands as well."


----------



## texmur

Yes I have read it but i donť know how to do it. I only know how to tune EQ at AUX and at HU. In owner manual is only example how to tune all speaker together.
Do you know how to do it step by step?

Thank you very much for your help
Tomas


----------



## Hernan

texmur said:


> Yes I have read it but i donť know how to do it. I only know how to tune EQ at AUX and at HU. In owner manual is only example how to tune all speaker together.
> Do you know how to do it step by step?
> 
> Thank you very much for your help
> Tomas


I don't have the unit... yet.

The manual is not very well written.
The is a channel selection submenu at the XO an T/A menus. It is not clear that the channel selection submenu is at the EQaux or EQhu menu too, but it seems so.

"3. Crossover Adjustment
a) Use the ▼ or ▲ button to make the selection. In this example, "CROSSOVER"
b) The user can also use these buttons to select "TIME DELAY."
The following "FRONT 2" adjustment procedures will be similar in nature to
adjustments for the other channels. Just substitute "FRONT 1," "REAR," or
"SUBWOOFER," for "FRONT 2." The procedure is the same with only the
parameters slightly different, as shown at the end of this section.
4. Enter the Channel select mode by using the button. "FRONT 1" is displayed.
a) Use the ▼ or ▲ button to choose a channel. In this example, "FRONT 2." Note:
Use the same procedure to select any of the other channels.
b) User can also use the button to return to the previous level with "CROSSOVER"
or "TIME DELAY" selections.
c) Once the channel has been selected, Press "ENTER" to begin making the
adjustment."


----------



## texmur

I was try it but in menu FRONT2, is possible tune only Time delay and crossower. I don´t know how to tune EQ there .
Tomorrow I will try if the channel selection submenu is at the EQaux or EQhu menu too


----------



## X Ray

durwood said:


> I'm curious about mic. Why does it stand straight up? Is it supposed to help in figuring out what are reflections and what aren't?


No.

The little plastic pedestal is simply a stand for the mic element which just happens to point it straight up. This microphones pick up pattern (polar response) is omnidirectional, which means, it picks up sound evenly from every direction. 

In the real world, it's little stand blocks some sound arriving from the rear of the element, causing a slight flattening of the polar response. As a result, the true graphical representation of it's response would look like a circle with a little flat spot on one side (the side that represents it's pick up from the rear). This flattening effect can be minimized by keeping the diameter of the diaphragm as small as possible, which they did. That thing is tiny. Another way to help keep this effect to a minimum is by cutting small channels or grooves in the edge of the barrel around the mic elements perimeter. The Behringer ECM8000 measurement mic has these grooves.

Ok, enough about mics.


----------



## X Ray

Babs said:


> I still say with ALL of these units, they're only as good as the ability to output a nice clean un-grainy signal from it's OEM inputs, regardless of further processing. So the OEM head unit is the potential weak-link. Wonder how iPod lossless via the aux would do?


Currently, I'm only using mine with an iPod through the Aux inputs. And yes, I use lossless files, too. The newer 80gig iPod I use sounds nearly as good as my reference home CD player (Sony CX88ES). This doesn't make it any easier to get a good sound with the H650.


----------



## X Ray

There has been a lot of talk about low output issues with the H650. I ran into this problem myself, until I noticed you can adjust the gain settings, so here's how. 

If at any point, you get lost in the sub menu's, wait 30 seconds for it to reset to default which will display *ALPINE PXE-H650* on the screen. Then start over.

1) With the screen displaying *ALPINE PXE-H650*, press the *MODE* button twice. The screen should now say *CUSTOM TUNING* (if not, continue to press the *MODE* button until it does).

2) Press the ► button three times. The screen should now say *FRONT 1* with the selected crossover frequency displayed below it. 

3) Now press the ▼ button once. The screen should now say *FRONT 2* with three separate numbers listed below. 

4) Now press the *ENTER* button. The screen should now say *L GAIN* with *0dB* just below it. 

5) At this point, use the ▲ button to increase the gain in 1 dB increments, up to 15 dB. Use the ▼ button to decrease the gain. Note: This adjusts the gain of the *FRONT 1 (L)* and *FRONT 2 (L)* outputs simultaneously. 

6) After setting the gain for the front left outputs, press the ► button. The screen should now say *R GAIN* with *0dB* just below it. 

7) Once again, use the ▲ button to increase the gain in 1 dB increments, up to 15 dB. Use the ▼ button to decrease the gain. Note: This adjusts the gain of the *FRONT 1 (R)* and *FRONT 2 (R)* outputs simultaneously.

8) Once you've set the gain for the front outputs, hit the *ENTER* button. This will take you back to the screen displaying *FRONT 2*, but now with your new gain settings displayed below along with the high pass crossover frequency at the bottom right corner. 

9) Press the ▼ button. The screen should now say *REAR*. Press the *ENTER* button. The screen should now say *L GAIN*. 

10) Use the ▲ button to increase the gain of the rear left output in 1 dB increments, up to 15 dB. 

11) After setting the gain for the rear left output, press the ► button. The screen should now say *R GAIN*. 

12) Use the ▲ button to increase the gain of the rear right output in 1 dB increments, up to 15 dB. 

13) Once you've set the gain for both left and right rear outputs, hit the *ENTER* button. This will take you back to the screen displaying *REAR*, but now with your new gain settings displayed below along with the high pass crossover frequency at the bottom right corner. 

14) Press the ▼ button. The screen should now say *SUBWOOFER*. Press the *ENTER* button. The screen should now say *S GAIN*.

15) Use the ▲ button to increase the gain of the subwoofer output in 1 dB increments, up to 15 dB. 

16) Press the *ENTER* button. The screen should now say *SUBWOOFER* with your gain, crossover slope, and crossover frequency settings displayed below. 

17) Press the *MODE* button three times. The screen should say *SAVE SETTINGS?*. 

18) Press *ENTER*. The screen will say *SAVING* for two seconds and then default back to *ALPINE PXE-H650*.

You're done!!

If I goofed up on this anywhere, please PM me letting me know so I can go back and fix it. Thanks.


----------



## texmur

Thank you for your answer X-ray, but my problem isn´t to setup gain and crossower. I don´t know how adjust manualy at FRONT2 EQ. I need to increase 125Hz frequency only at FRONT2. Do you know how to do it?


----------



## X Ray

texmur said:


> Thank you for your answer X-ray, but my problem isn´t to setup gain and crossower. I don´t know how adjust manualy at FRONT2 EQ. I need to increase 125Hz frequency only at FRONT2. Do you know how to do it?


When you use the parametric eq (bass, middle, or treble) that boost or cut is applied to all 7 outputs. You can't adjust the EQ for a single output or for a set of outputs.

How do you have your stereo configured? Why do you need to boost 125Hz only on the FRONT2 outputs? Are you using the REAR outputs?


----------



## X Ray

kaigoss69 said:


> Alpine PXE-H650:
> 
> The bad: (1) Low level outputs (?), (2) only 12 db/octave crossovers (what were they thinking?), (3) have to trick it to keep volume control through HU


1) The output levels can be adjusted. (check my post above)

2) Guys, you don't NEED 24 db per octave (or higher) slopes for this thing to sound good. 24 db per octave is not "better" than a 12 db per octave slope, so get that out of your thought process. A crossover slope is a tool, and you have to use the correct tool for optimum results in a particular job. It depends on the application. For example, I've set the subwoofer low pass on my H650 to 12 db per octave as opposed to 24 db per octave. Why? Because a 12 db slope works better in my particular set up. So is a 12 db slope "better"? NO, it's not better, but in my application it's ideal. 12 db slopes in many cases usually work very well between a mid and a tweet, so don't freak out. 

3) You don't have to trick it. Having the ability to adjust the volume of the H650 by remote makes it more flexible. You can set volume control up to your liking.


----------



## X Ray

sqkev said:


> I agree that the lack of info on measuring might be the downfall of this kit. The room correction isn't that great if you didn't correct the uneven FR at the driver in anechoic (sp?).
> For example, take a seas metal cone driver. We all know it has at least 1 or 2 high level of cone resonances. When measured at a farfield, off axis, reflections, weird acoustic shapes of the car, the cone resonances will surely not show up. The other artifacts already masked the cone resonances. The DRC mode might be able to smooth out the responses, but the resonances are still there.





npdang said:


> Very true. It would be somewhat compromised to use the h650 with any driver like the Seas mag cones or the Dayton ref.


You can use this unit with metal cone drivers. You can suppress the resonance with a simple passive notch filter. In my opinion, a small price to pay to be able to use metal cone drivers.


----------



## texmur

X Ray said:


> When you use the parametric eq (bass, middle, or treble) that boost or cut is applied to all 7 outputs. You can't adjust the EQ for a single output or for a set of outputs.
> 
> How do you have your stereo configured? Why do you need to boost 125Hz only on the FRONT2 outputs? Are you using the REAR outputs?


I use original 8" speakers under seats. They have specific ship and it isn´t possible to change them. In the door I have 4" midrange and in triangle next to the mirror I have tweaters. Tweaters and midranges are connectet thru cossover to FRONT1 8" bass to FRONT2 and to REAR are connected the 4"mid and tweaters in rear door. 12" SW is inthe trunk.
My install photos are here:http://picasaweb.google.cz/tomas.leba/X3Audio

The original bass undr seat are not so sensitive to kick, and that is why I need to increese them about 125Hz


----------



## X Ray

texmur said:


> I use original 8" speakers under seats. They have specific ship and it isn´t possible to change them. In the door I have 4" midrange and in triangle next to the mirror I have tweaters. Tweaters and midranges are connectet thru cossover to FRONT1 8" bass to FRONT2 and to REAR are connected the 4"mid and tweaters in rear door. 12" SW is inthe trunk.
> My install photos are here:http://picasaweb.google.cz/tomas.leba/X3Audio
> 
> The original bass undr seat are not so sensitive to kick, and that is why I need to increese them about 125Hz


I just looked at your pictures. Nice job. I like those SEAS tweeters you have.

Okay, I'll assume the passive crossovers on your 4" Focal mids and 1" Seas tweeters are a typical two way. (A high pass to the tweets and a low pass to the mids at somewhere around 2.5K to 3K) 

1) What's the crossover point set at for FRONT1? 
2) What's the high pass crossover set at for FRONT2? 
3) What's the high pass crossover set at for REAR?

Because you can't set the H650's REAR high pass crossover higher than 200Hz, that boost at 125Hz will affect your rear mids with a wide Q setting of 0.5, but it won't affect them much. With a narrower Q setting of 1.5 or 2.0, it will be MUCH less noticeable. 

With your front mids, assuming they're crossed over above 200, (probably somewhere around 300Hz-500Hz) a boost at 125Hz shouldn't even affect them much, if at all. This is especially true if you're boosting at 125Hz with a narrow Q. 

So assuming your front mids (FRONT1) are high passed at 350, and your rear mids (REAR) are high passed at 200, a boost at 125 regardless of Q will only be very noticeable in your 8" speakers. Just as if that 125Hz boost is only going to the FRONT2 outputs. Just boost 125Hz with the H650 and see how you like it.


----------



## texmur

1. tweater SEAS and midrange Focal are connected to pasive crossower 3500Hz/12dB and are conected to FRONT1, which is on H650	set at 200Hz
2.Under seats ara two 8" woofers and are connecetd to FRONT2. LP is 60 Hz HP is 200Hz (=crossower point from 1.)
3. rear system it Two way component (the same as in front) but HP is 135Hz
4. SW is LP 80 HZ/24dB

Now I speculate about to replace 8" woofers under seats with 6" kickbass in the door. But it is very complicated to do it because it is necessary to cut inner door panel + cut round opening in door metal plate + close big openings in door metal plate with fibreglasses. Than I plane to cover all inner door metal plate with DYNAMAT EXTREME.
Before this big operation I want to get "last chance" to woofers under seats to see how they can play with EQ support


----------



## DS-21

FYI, there's a great thread about MultEQ XT in general here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=795421

Obviously, many of the receiver-specific questions aren't in there, but lots of other stuff about the mic design and measurement placement is.




X Ray said:


> 2) Guys, you don't NEED 24 db per octave (or higher) slopes for this thing to sound good. 24 db per octave is not "better" than a 12 db per octave slope, so get that out of your thought process.


Depends on your system design. If you're running drivers close to the edge of their performance envelope on either end, steeper slopes are always better. If you have more of a cushion, or your drivers are very well behaved past their nominal passbands, then it's less of an issue.


----------



## skinnyblike

Reading through all these posts and the wealth of info is great butto, some fundamental things people are doing during the setup are just wrong....

To get the full magic of multeq the Mic position and height is essential...

The best height we have found is around shoulder height using a tripod, balancing on headrests and seats is really no good at all and will produce less than optimum results..
When the Mic is too close to the roof you will end up with the reflection overpowering the direct sound, direct sound is what the process is listening to...

Pos 1 relates to preset 1 
Pos 2 relates to preset 2

So pos 1 is best in the driver position, shoulder height, no2 in between the two front seats.
This will give you the best for driver and a over all for when you have passengers....

Pos 3 passenger seat, pos 4 front edge of pass seat, pos 5 front edge of driver seat pos 6 between fronts but slightly more forward than the previous position in the centre....

7&8 you can do in the front again to the sides of the centre console or in the back seats on the left and right hand side... ether still gives good results...

Following this will achieve a sound stage that covers a wider area, lots of measurements in the same position is pointless because the logic used (the fuzzy kind) means that any measurements that have similar tonal character will be clustered together as one....

The point of multiple positions is to get a clear picture of the cabin environment not just a foot square on the driver seat...

Any direct questions regarding the H650 or any imprint equipment should be directed to Alpine…

They have a nice power point file about setting up of the 650 and other support presentation regarding H100 or 9887

They will be more than happy to send it out to you…

The install we did in a HK BMW 5 series Logic 7 system, used all the original speakers, killing the centre and the rear doors, just adding a 4 ch amp for the corners and a mono amp for the two woofers.
it had excellent results, the processor ironed out the nasty mid honk and gave staging far better than the standard system with centre channel on .


----------



## kaigoss69

skinnyblike said:


> The install we did in a HK BMW 5 series Logic 7 system, used all the original speakers, killing the centre and the rear doors, just adding a 4 ch amp for the corners and a mono amp for the two woofers.
> it had excellent results, the processor ironed out the nasty mid honk and gave staging far better than the standard system with centre channel on .


Appreciate you comments. I have been eyeing the H650 for quite some time now, just can't find myself to pull the trigger because of the volume control issue - the fact that you can't control volume through the HU, or can you???

I also have the L7 system in my e90 330i and I am pleased to hear that you were able to use the stock speakers and achieved good results. Can I ask what kind of amp you used and/or how power you gave those stock speakers? How did the stock subs sound with the extra power? How about the Alpine PDX-5 as a single amp for the whole system?

What I am a bit worried about is the midbass region, I mean it would have to come from under the seats and it would be a tall order for those drivers to play mid and sub bass at the same time and do it well and with authority.


----------



## donpisto

kaigoss69 said:


> Appreciate you comments. I have been eyeing the H650 for quite some time now, just can't find myself to pull the trigger because of the volume control issue - the fact that you can't control volume through the HU, or can you???
> 
> I also have the L7 system in my e90 330i and I am pleased to hear that you were able to use the stock speakers and achieved good results. Can I ask what kind of amp you used and/or how power you gave those stock speakers? How did the stock subs sound with the extra power? How about the Alpine PDX-5 as a single amp for the whole system?
> 
> What I am a bit worried about is the midbass region, I mean it would have to come from under the seats and it would be a tall order for those drivers to play mid and sub bass at the same time and do it well and with authority.


I believe in an earlier post npdang mentioned that you turn the volume or gain, whatever it is on the H650 all the way up and from there all you do is adjust the head unit's volume. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## npdang

Yep, that's exactly what you do.


----------



## kaigoss69

npdang said:


> Yep, that's exactly what you do.


OK, thanks. But what if my OEM head unit does not have a volume level indicator, does it matter? And what about noise, don't you raise the noise floor by raising the gain on the PXE to full blast?


----------



## noshortcuts

kaigoss69 said:


> OK, thanks. But what if my OEM head unit does not have a volume level indicator, does it matter? And what about noise, don't you raise the noise floor by raising the gain on the PXE to full blast?


With my system I have found that it is entirely possible finding a balance in gains that leads to good control with the HU volume control. I don't think it is necessary (or ideal) to raise the PXE levels to the top. There are also amp gains to contend with and I do more fine tuning at the amp.

While I've been happy previously, currently I'm noticing that if I use the HU volume near it's max, the bass gets out of control and distorted, but if I use the PXE's remote to raise the volume to the same level, it stays balanced. I may have settings different from the past and this is contributing, but I'm guessing that part of the problem is that the PXE only corrects the HU at the volume level that was used during set up. So when you use the HU volume at extremes, where the HUs' EQ changes dramatically per volume (on some systems), the PXE is no longer correcting the EQ properly.


----------



## texmur

in my X3 if I power off in maximum volume level the radio and power it ON back, it starts at tha same volume level - aprox 2/3 of maximum level. And that is vhat you need - Constant volume level. I Was calibrate PXE-H650 on this volume and using only volume control on remonte control of PXE-H650.


----------



## kaigoss69

texmur said:


> in my X3 if I power off in maximum volume level the radio and power it ON back, it starts at tha same volume level - aprox 2/3 of maximum level. And that is vhat you need - Constant volume level. I Was calibrate PXE-H650 on this volume and using only volume control on remonte control of PXE-H650.


How do you know you are at 2/3 volume level??? The X3 also does not have a level indicator, as far as I know.


----------



## texmur

2/3 is aprox. level. I Was try it vit Db metter. It is not necessary to have 2/3.
You mast have constant level signal without distortion, not to much thin. 

look for my instalation here: http://picasaweb.google.cz/tomas.leba/X3Audio

It sounds great! Trust me


----------



## JTanc39

Just went to get it installed after my RF360.2 died on me. I'll start with my setup. OEM HU with dyna Audio speakers, IDmax sub and pdx alpine amps (4.150 and 1.1000). 

After a good hour of connecting the processor to my system, the processor was ready to run. Unfortunately because of the new product, I find the installer really lacks the knowledge to work with PXE-H650. I actually did my own tuning there. HEre comes the first problem... There was no sub output. After checking the high level inputs, I really think the installer kinda wire it wrongly. He wire the OEM front to the tweeter input of the processor, rear to the mid.... which I thought according to the manual should just input the front channel... Anyway he did help me to get it to work finally with a little magic of tapping signal from the front input for the sub.... Lastly also don't understand why the processor only comes with 1 RCA out for sub. As my pdx1.1000 seems to need two rca input for one ch. Anyway pardon my confusing description and I'm really just a newbie.

Now here comes the next problem, I can't seem to get good sound stage let alone good sound. I keep hearing distortion from the tweeter when the vocal goes too high... Really frustrating for a new toy. Do you think my four year old speakers are dying and asking to be replaced or the PXE-H650 is just not installed properly.


----------



## JTanc39

Now I'm just thinking if I should:

1. redo the whole wiring from the OEM HU (8th Gen Civic) to the processor using high level inputs
2. Use a high low convertor and use the RCA input to the processor instead.
3. Change my speakers really can't stand the distortion of the high (last choice)

Doubts:
1. Should I install a Y splitter for the output to the 1.1000 PDX or just use 1 RCA out from the processor and 1 input to the amp
2. How to wire to the processor? Just input to the processor the Front left and right high level output from the HU and leave the rest unconnected? Or wire the front left and right and the rear to the sub input...cos my sub is really just not playing at all.
3. Connect straight from the OEM HU or the OEM amp to the processor?


----------



## noshortcuts

It should work well with your system and give an amazing sound stage. 

The install is likely all messed up. I'm not versed enough (or remembering the manual anymore) to pinpoint the problems for you, but I would redo the install and make sure it's all wired up optimally. 

Once you are convinced it is wired up correctly then the setup also has to be done correctly or Audyssey can give strange results.


----------



## noshortcuts

It should work well with your system and give an amazing sound stage. 

The install is likely all messed up. I'm not versed enough (or remembering the manual anymore) to pinpoint the problems for you, but I would redo the install and make sure it's all wired up optimally. 

Once you are convinced it is wired up correctly then the setup also has to be done correctly or Audyssey can give strange results.

You might try asking your connection questions to Alpine's support.


----------



## GaryEBell

JTanc39 said:


> .
> 
> Now here comes the next problem, I can't seem to get good sound stage let alone good sound. I keep hearing distortion from the tweeter when the vocal goes too high... Really frustrating for a new toy. Do you think my four year old speakers are dying and asking to be replaced or the PXE-H650 is just not installed properly.


It is not tapped into the factory system correctly, and or not tuned correctly. It sounds like the Anteq was set with the volume to low, and you are passing that volume on the head unit. This will distort the signal every time. There is good and bad to an auto-ranging input! Also there are a decent amount of tricks to getting the most out of one of these things....... The people who are knowledgeable and spend the time to learn this product seem to have amazing results.


----------



## JTanc39

I found one big misinterpretation of the manual on my side! When it say to set Y or N for two way output, it meant two way output from the factory HU... I thought was my aftermarket output which is two way.... 

Of course the output is two way otherwise who the hell will buy the processor! Will tune it tmr again!


----------



## JTanc39

10. "ADJUST XOVER + AMP LEVELS" - Make adjustments to match amp levels
Play Track 3 of the PXE-H650 Setup Disc in the Factory Head unit. This is a Pink
Noise signal to facilitate the trimming of the amplifi er level controls.
WARNING: Output of the PXE-H650 is not muted at this point. Make sure volume
levels are at reasonable levels.
While listening to the system, use the amp's level controls to match the output of each
of the speakers. Level matching does not have to be exact as the MultEQ processing
will make the fi nal tweaks to the system. Matching levels as closely as possible makes
MultEQ's job a little easier and faster. Typical coarse amp levels are:
12 o'clock (middle position on gain controls) for Front and Rear amp input levels, 3
o'clock (or 3/4 position) for Subwoofer amp input level.
11. After all adjustments have been made, press "ENTER" to continue to MultEQ
calibration.

What does the above actually meant? I know I need to adjust the gain but when do I stop or how I know I have adjusted correctly?


----------



## jfkaiser

Hi Guys,

I am coming out of a Kenwood DDX7019 DVD Receiver with the Kenwood Bluetooth module. I then run into the Aux IN on the pxe-h650 as recommended in the instructions.

What phone callers complain about is that when I use the pxe-h650 they can hear echoes of their own voice and the echoes are time delayed. Callers say this is VERY frustrating.

My Kenwood routes Bluetooth caller audio into either the Kenwood's FRONT L or FRONT R, or BOTH outputs. Because the pxe-h650 only allows a two-channel AUX IN.......the bluetooth audio gets "spread" all over the car.

I DO have the ability to send the KENWOOD's REAR channels to the PXE-H650 AUX IN (REAR channel signal contains NO bluetooth audio) and then I thought that I could possibly install some sort of relay or AV switch so that when a call comes in I could effectively "switch" the KENWOOD FRONT channel (with Bluetooth audio) over to my amps FRONT L/R INPUT so that effectively I bypass the pxe-h650 during a phone call.

Any thoughts?

I am surprised that no other pxe-h650 users have complained about the way it screws with your bluetooth functionality.

Thx,
Jon


----------



## releasedtruth

I think I'm just about ready to try out the H650 over other options. Anything I need to know beyond this delightful 8 page read? I have a Bose HU with DB outputs so will that bother the speaker level inouts? Right now I feel like my speakers have no soul and brutal sibilance, staging is pretty decent. Since it takes a constant 12v to hold memory, does that mean you have to start over if you ever disconnect the battery.... which can be often?

ID OEM/Neo Alum


----------



## DAT

anyone here ever use a RF 360.2 with the Alpine 9887? I heard someone did and liked it better than the imprint kit that you need to use with computer.

umm KTX-100EQ IMPRINT Sound Manager


----------



## jfkaiser

I will be selling my H650 if anyone is interested. I require Bluetooth and cannot have the H650 installed unless I come up with some major electronic bypass switch or such.......so it is for sale.

Thx,
Jon


----------



## arby

great review- helped me decide on my purchase.


----------



## t3sn4f2

nevermind


----------



## dsh2009

i'm currently looking at buying this unit - as this thread is a bit old i am wondering anythign has changed - for example, are there some superior alternative out there now?

thanks!

-d


----------



## Babs

Only the one that shall not be named that's been expected for a few years now from a large company that starts with "J".. don't hold your breath.

But the Bit-1 is out.. Audison product.. HUUUUUGE threads in here on it.. No auto-tuning, but a fairly serious processor.


----------



## dsh2009

Babs said:


> Only the one that shall not be named that's been expected for a few years now from a large company that starts with "J".. don't hold your breath.
> 
> But the Bit-1 is out.. Audison product.. HUUUUUGE threads in here on it.. No auto-tuning, but a fairly serious processor.


thanks for the tip - ya i've been made aware ofthe JBL peice - if there were any REAL timeline i might wait for that to come out and go that route. the UCS Pro i use now has a TON of tunability - it's really quite impressive- however the LACK of automated tuning makes a seperate RTA setup necessary and it's a huge PITA to tune therefore. i spent several weeks getting the thing to the response curve i wanted (actually quite proud of the result, within +/- 2 or 3dB all along my target curve).

now i am bored though and have a bug to re-vamp the system and i REALLY don't want to have to go through that all again - it seems having some automatic capability, along with the ability to manually tweak, and the inclusion of an integrated RTA and mic are things that i just have to have now.

-d


----------



## releasedtruth

I still need some serious help with tuning the Imprint. I followed both main tuning threads as closely as possible, but have 2 major problems:

Virtually no bass and distortion far too early. Can't get volume. Started with low amp gains and lowish aux knob set during calibration. Later turned up gains on amp/aux, but still distorts and even with the largest bass curve, almost no volume from the sub. Thoughts?

I'm using Aux in with H650 vol all the way up. Sound is great, but no low end and distortion at 21/31 on the HU. What positions should I have my AUX knob and amp gains at for a PDX-5 during calibration? I should try with them all set to 50% and see if anything changes.


----------



## releasedtruth

I guess I'll take things apart tomorrow evening if I don't hear any feedback. Seems like an easy fix, but I don't have a lot of experience with these alpine units.

One more note if it matters, I'm spliced into the factory Bose harness which outputs differential balanced.


----------



## npdang

First, are you using the correct outputs on the h650 (in accordance with whatever the selector switch is set to?)

Second, have you connected the volume remote to the h650 and turned it up? Seems like you have, but never hurts to double check. Also, IIRC you can adjust the level on the sub through the h650 as well. Usually though, it's already at 0db.

Weak bass is always going to be an issue with the h650, especially if you're used to much stronger output. It's been a few years for me since I've used the h650, but you may want to consider bypassing the h650 for the sub if you can't get substantial output. You could also use a line driver to increase the gain. I know, it doesn't make sense ... why else would you pay for auto tuning only to have to bypass it?


----------



## releasedtruth

I have it on AUX and have the vol tuned all the way up. The Sub is +3 and nearly 2/3 gain on the amp with almost no cone movement at all. The mids pound by comparison. I will try it without the sub connected and see how it works, but I didn't think the PDXs would take DB inputs. 

Think it'll matter if I calibrate this time with all the gains and AUX knob up before I start? Worth a shot because I can't get any volume so far. Thanks again, I'll likely have something to report soon.


----------



## npdang

You are using the PDX amps? What sensitivity switch are you using? Make sure to use the higher one .1-1v, not 1v-10v.

I believe there is also a switch for 2-way or 3-way? I forgot...


----------



## releasedtruth

I'm using a PDX-5, but I don't think there are any sensitivity switch on the amp or H650, just a switch for 'Aux Primary Source' and a knob for 'Aux Input Level' 

The amp just has gains on each channel, but no voltage switches.

My setup is:
- Bose HU with DB input to H650 in Aux
- ID OEM
- Seas Neo Alum
- Dayton HF 10
- PDX-5

I'll recalibrate tonight. Right now the Aux knob is near pegged and amp gains are pretty high as well, getting a touch of noise. Aux volume raised to max via remote as well.


----------



## releasedtruth

I hate Cox. Just typed a message, lost.

Took trunk apart and swapped RCAs from ghetto to Knu just for peace of mind. Turn to Acc and noise from all speakers with HU off. Unplug chan 1/2 RCA, no noise, other speakers play. Switch to ghetto cable, same result. WTF? Amp and H650 are a few weeks old. Is chan 1/2 dead somehow?


----------



## ernperkins

Has anybody used the PXE-H650 mic with other measurement software? I've been looking at Room EQ Wizard, True RTA and Liberty Praxis (the free versions to start with). I'm wondering if the PXE mic can be used with any of these, especially without a mic calibration file.

Cheers


----------



## releasedtruth

I'm also curious. I've got other equipment, but not a mic of this type other than my Imprint mic.


----------



## hc_TK

This threads become pretty huge. so ill ask instead. 
Does it work running as 3-way? With tweetes on front1, mids on front 2 and midbass on rear?
Would suck with tweets/mids without T/A or mono midbass!


----------



## t3sn4f2

hc_TK said:


> This threads become pretty huge. so ill ask instead.
> Does it work running as 3-way? With tweetes on front1, mids on front 2 and midbass on rear?
> Would suck with tweets/mids without T/A or mono midbass!


Good question, I'd like to know too.....

Hopefully that keep the rear processing algorithm stupid enough to make it plain stereo and not some ambient type of thing.


----------



## hc_TK

got mine running today but the sound was REALY disorted. Why could this be? it didnt sound disorted when i run the sweeps.


----------



## hc_TK

anyone?


----------



## Audiopile

This would have to be the biggest nightmare piece of rubbish on this side of Siberia.
My Dremel does a better job than this thing. Buy a decent Parametric and go for it, let your ears do the tuning. It lasted all but one hour in my car.


----------



## Audiopile

Just to be clear on the issue. I had a hard time getting any sort of output from this unit, gains up on the amps and it would take up to 6db out and left me with no output.
Gains down and it would not detect and of the speakers, maybe i am not patient enough, i don't know. As far as sub output goes, it had a ton of bass, no problem there.

My cousin purchased two of these and gave me one on the proviso that i do the install on hers for free. Well i fitted mine and now i have one for sale, a bit to fiddly for me. This is not going to be for everyone i suppose, i had better results with a parametric eq.


----------



## t3sn4f2

egoxrt said:


> Just to be clear on the issue. *I had a hard time getting any sort of output from this unit,* gains up on the amps and it would take up to 6db out and left me with no output.
> Gains down and it would not detect and of the speakers, maybe i am not patient enough, i don't know. As far as sub output goes, it had a ton of bass, no problem there.
> 
> My cousin purchased two of these and gave me one on the proviso that i do the install on hers for free. Well i fitted mine and now i have one for sale, a bit to fiddly for me. This is not going to be for everyone i suppose, i had better results with a parametric eq.


Did you turn the master volume up on the remote?


----------



## Audiopile

All the way. You also have to be carefull turning up the Aux gain, it clips quite easily.
Not my cup of tea.


----------



## kaigoss69

OK, so I have read through this and other threads many times now and still have a question regarding the volume control:

If I use the speaker level inputs from my OEM HU, can I set the volume level on the H650 to max (or just below) and control the system volume through the HU? I realize that AntEQ will only work off of the initial HU volume setting but I am willing to live with the potential minute differences in the HU output with varying volume levels. (Previously it was mentioned that you have to use the aux input to bypass the H650 volume control, but I believe I have since read comments suggesting you can do the same using the speaker level inputs).

Thanks.


----------



## turbo5upra

feel free.... it will work.




kaigoss69 said:


> OK, so I have read through this and other threads many times now and still have a question regarding the volume control:
> 
> If I use the speaker level inputs from my OEM HU, can I set the volume level on the H650 to max (or just below) and control the system volume through the HU? I realize that AntEQ will only work off of the initial HU volume setting but I am willing to live with the potential minute differences in the HU output with varying volume levels. (Previously it was mentioned that you have to use the aux input to bypass the H650 volume control, but I believe I have since read comments suggesting you can do the same using the speaker level inputs).
> 
> Thanks.


----------



## texmur

Can you anybody please upload to rapidshare new version of software PXE-H650?
Thank´s


----------



## kaigoss69

There's a lot of good info on this thread and some others I have seen. However, I am still not 100% clear on how to set this up correctly with the OEM HU speaker level inputs. I wish someone who has used this unit before could create a "H650 for dummies" thread !


----------



## arby

sorry, i'm no help to you there! i do have my own question though- the manual states it needs a permanent 12V feed to maintain processor memory. seriously? so every time the battery's temporarily disconnected you need to re-run the complete setup? is there any way to save these settings on a laptop?


----------



## releasedtruth

Well, I've been using the H650 for months now and I can tell you that it's pretty good in my experience, but I never quite got it tuned perfectly. Make take an expert to assist, but I got it 80% with no real training. It's a great concept and I think is tough to beat for the price. Not sure what else is new out there as a substitute.


----------



## HCWLSU101

I hope some of you long term H650 users can help a new user out. I have been trying to set it up and have a couple of questions:

1. When you set the input gain on the unit (I am using Aux), do you turn the volume on the remote up or just leave it at the factory level. When I set it up, I left the volume down and I could not get the H650 to clip.

2. When you run the Sweeps should the volume on the remote be all the way up or does it matter.


----------



## DS-21

Mine came with the volume practically all the way down. In fact, at first I thought it just had crap output voltage, because my system was so quiet. (I had not intended to connect the remote eye because I can do everything I want except the volume from the unit itself.) I first turned it all the way up with the remote, turned the gain all the way down, and then turned up the HU until I heard things go to pot. (I wonder if the '660 lets one adjust volume from the unit.)

I left the volume thusly set-up for the pings.


----------



## Q-Authority

DS-21 said:


> (I wonder if the '660 lets one adjust volume from the unit.)


The inability to use the head unit volume control was the main thing I disliked about the original version.

I don't know if it's accurate, but Crutchfield had the following in their description of the new unit:

"Like to tweak it yourself? No problem — you'll find a built-in 3-band parametric equalizer, manual crossover controls, and manual time-correction controls built in as well. *You'll retain the use of your factory stereo's volume knob for on-the-fly adjustments*."


----------



## dbiegel

I always just used the radio volume control (both factory and aftermarket) with the H650 with no problems.


----------



## t3sn4f2

Q-Authority said:


> *The inability to use the head unit volume control was the main thing I disliked about the original version.*
> I don't know if it's accurate, but Crutchfield had the following in their description of the new unit:
> 
> "Like to tweak it yourself? No problem — you'll find a built-in 3-band parametric equalizer, manual crossover controls, and manual time-correction controls built in as well. *You'll retain the use of your factory stereo's volume knob for on-the-fly adjustments*."


----------



## DS-21

dbiegel said:


> I always just used the radio volume control (both factory and aftermarket) with the H650 with no problems.


This is true, but was yours _initially_ set at very low volume, requiring use of the remote eye and remote to bring it up to a useable level? Mine was.

After initially setting the volume, I've never used the remote again. My HU controls the volume.


----------



## dbiegel

DS-21 said:


> This is true, but was yours _initially_ set at very low volume, requiring use of the remote eye and remote to bring it up to a useable level? Mine was.
> 
> After initially setting the volume, I've never used the remote again. My HU controls the volume.


Yup, exactly. Whenever I calibrate, I max out the volume using the remote (and then drop it back 3 clicks just in case, to ensure adequate headroom) when the screen says ADJUST AMP + XOVER LEVELS. 

Then the remote goes into my glove box, usually not to be seen again until the next calibration


----------



## HCWLSU101

Sorry for all the questions guys, but I have another. I have ran the auto EQ on my Alpine H650 several times and I am very pleased with the unit, but I feel the sound could be even better. It seems the unit tunes the sound to be very midbass strong and low in treble and bass regions. What EQ bands should I adjust to fix this problem? Also, what do the treble, mid, and bass buttons represent on the remote? Is this just another way to adjust the parametric EQ or is it something completely different. Thanks again.


----------



## dbiegel

HCWLSU101 said:


> Sorry for all the questions guys, but I have another. I have ran the auto EQ on my Alpine H650 several times and I am very pleased with the unit, but I feel the sound could be even better. It seems the unit tunes the sound to be very midbass strong and low in treble and bass regions. What EQ bands should I adjust to fix this problem? Also, what do the treble, mid, and bass buttons represent on the remote? Is this just another way to adjust the parametric EQ or is it something completely different. Thanks again.


Those represent the parametric bands. However, I don't recommend using the EQ at all. I find the H650 works best if you can get it to calibrate to your liking, and then not touch EQ. There are ways to make it do that, but it's a bit tricky. Tell us about your system setup (speakers and amps, and how everything is wired) and maybe we can figure out a way to do it. Which target curve did you use?

Dd you calibrate using a laptop or the built-in screen? It works much better using a laptop.


----------



## HCWLSU101

My equipment is as follows:

2008 4runner
headunit: aftermarket 2v outputs
front: pioneer ts-d1720c 6.75 comps
rear: pioneer tsd series not comps
sub: jl audio 8 inch pro wedge
(HO108RG-W3V3)
amp: alpine pdx-5

zero noise RCA's from headunit to aux on h650. I could not get the h650 to clip. Maybe I should max headunit volume? I went with 3/4 volume. I did five measurements at the drivers seat (ear level on a tripod). One at center, one far left, one far right, and the other two between center and the two far right and left positions. Gains on amp: 1/4 for sub and 1/4 for front and rear. Volume all the way up on the h650.


----------



## texmur

Hallo please which version of driver PXE H650 are you using? With some older drivers were problems with freezing during calibration. What is the latest version- anybody know?


----------



## HCWLSU101

Should be the latest version, I just bought it from crutchfield. It has never froze during calibration to my knowledge.


----------



## HCWLSU101

Also, I have been using the bass3 + aud curve.


----------



## texmur

And which version do you have?


----------



## HCWLSU101

Version 2.2.8


----------



## dbiegel

I just got a brand new H650 as a warranty replacement [props to Al & Ed's Autosound for taking care of me], and it's version 2.2.8 as well.

Try using the Bass 2 + Flat curve. It seems to give me the best results most of the time. I think you'll hear a huge positive difference as the midbass will be more tamed and the treble will be enhanced. I find it's best not to worry too much about sub bass when calibrating. Get the midbass through treble right. Subbass can be set up to your liking later using gain and crossover settings.

Also, if you post your MultEQ before/after result graph picture, we can see more of what's going on to give better suggestions.


----------



## HCWLSU101

Ok, based on dbiegel's suggestion I re-ran MultEq and selected the Bass2 + Flat Curve. I will say that it is better, but it may be a little bright. I may try again tomorrow and choose the same curve with a treble compensation. I will listen more tomorrow and see. I tried different microphone positions this time as suggested by an Alpine Tech in the Crutchfield forums:

1. Middle of drivers seat
2. Middle of the two rear seats
3. Middle front passenger seat
4. Drivers seat near the door
5. drivers seat as close to the center console as possible

dbiegel, where did you place the microphone for your measurements?

I have attached the latest graphs.


----------



## dbiegel

HCWLSU101 said:


> Ok, based on dbiegel's suggestion I re-ran MultEq and selected the Bass2 + Flat Curve. I will say that it is better, but it may be a little bright. I may try again tomorrow and choose the same curve with a treble compensation. I will listen more tomorrow and see. I tried different microphone positions this time as suggested by an Alpine Tech in the Crutchfield forums:
> 
> 1. Middle of drivers seat
> 2. Middle of the two rear seats
> 3. Middle front passenger seat
> 4. Drivers seat near the door
> 5. drivers seat as close to the center console as possible
> 
> dbiegel, where did you place the microphone for your measurements?


Each install I've had seems to benefit from somewhat different locations... you can tweak the results quite a a lot with different measurement spots and experimentation is key to maximizing the results for your setup, but I'd recommend you start with:
1. Middle of where front part of driver head would be located
2. Middle of where back part of driver head would be located
3. Where driver's right ear would be located
4. Where driver's left ear would be located
5. 3 inches right of driver's right ear
6. 3 inches left of driver's left ear

Take no measurements in the passenger seat or rear seat areas etc.



> I have attached the latest graphs.


Ok here are some things I think might help.

1) Try disconnecting your rear speakers from the unit. The h650 doesn't have surround or channel steering so running rears will only cause negative effects. It's possible to make rears sound good, but you really need something like Pro Logic II to make it worthwhile. Your rears are also causing the h650 to drastically cut the gains on the front and increase them on the rears to make up for 10 db difference.

If you must run the rears, then at the very least increase your rear amp gains to get them more even. After calibration, you can use the fader control on the h650 remote to then attenuate the rears to the desired lower level.

2) You seem to have a high pass crossover set on your mids at the amp. I find that best results come when you disable all amp and external crossovers and only use the ones on the h650. If you want peace of mind, you can leave your midbass high pass crossover at 40hz and your sub high pass (or infrasonic filter) at 20hz. You're not using the passive crossovers that came with your component set are you?

3) When it says adjust amp gains and xovers, turn the volume all the way up using the h650 remote but then decrease it by 3-4 clicks. You don't need very loud levels to calibrate properly, but:

4) Make sure there is no ambient noise during calibration and for best results, do it with your engine off. If I hear even a bird chirp, I cancel and remeasure the position. Having no rears connected makes this much faster.

5) After calibration, set your sub x-over to 40 on the h650 and raise the sub level by 10-12 db on the h650.


----------



## PhoenixGoldFan

Taking this thread back from the grave, Im using an 660.
Actually, until now I could not set it up properly, once Ive lost my Setup CD.
Would like to ask for some good soul to Upload the CD to filesonic, 4shared or wherever to help me hooking up my unit. 
Ive asked a new CD from Alpine, and they said they will provide a new one for me. Dunno why, after 50 days, did not receive it yet. Im from Brazil and Iam a regular buyer from USA market, did never see something take so long to arrive for me.
I turned my on using a 100Hz signal wave to determine maximum volume Head Unit, and the intial part from an acoustic show that I have here and the weird thing its that the unit is working, obviously unproperly. Its sounding like its inside a bottle.
The strange thing is that Ive used a White Noise signal to run MultEQ, and the device showed Full Frequecy Missing error, but worked with the 10 beggining seconds on the song the I said before.

Ive learned a LOT with this thread, and will be glad if someone upload thid Setup CD to help me and some guys out...
Now Ill try to set it up with some techniques that you guys teached here...


----------



## jim walter

PhoenixGoldFan said:


> Taking this thread back from the grave, Im using an 660.
> Actually, until now I could not set it up properly, once Ive lost my Setup CD.
> Would like to ask for some good soul to Upload the CD to filesonic, 4shared or wherever to help me hooking up my unit.
> Ive asked a new CD from Alpine, and they said they will provide a new one for me. Dunno why, after 50 days, did not receive it yet. Im from Brazil and Iam a regular buyer from USA market, did never see something take so long to arrive for me.
> I turned my on using a 100Hz signal wave to determine maximum volume Head Unit, and the intial part from an acoustic show that I have here and the weird thing its that the unit is working, obviously unproperly. Its sounding like its inside a bottle.
> The strange thing is that Ive used a White Noise signal to run MultEQ, and the device showed Full Frequecy Missing error, but worked with the 10 beggining seconds on the song the I said before.
> 
> Ive learned a LOT with this thread, and will be glad if someone upload thid Setup CD to help me and some guys out...
> Now Ill try to set it up with some techniques that you guys teached here...


I'll get you a disc. Pm me your info. 

Jim


----------



## PhoenixGoldFan

Thanks Jim!
Just sent you a PM with my adress.
Just forgot to put the country; Brazil.
Any issue, please tell me...
Thanks again,
Marco Tulio Helou.


----------



## wtneo

digging up a old thread, but does the h660/650 work better with components with passive crossover or bi-amping the tweeters and midrange separately?


----------



## releasedtruth

I only have experience running active with the h650, which is where it shines. Being able to set your crossover digitally is an important feature for me. If you're concerned about staging and light tuning capability, it would work for passive as well.


----------



## hawkfan

wtneo said:


> digging up a old thread, but does the h660/650 work better with components with passive crossover or bi-amping the tweeters and midrange separately?


Bump. This is a good question. I'm looking at using the h660 instead of the much more expensive MS-8. I'm looking to go active with a factory system in the future while retaining the factory volume controls. The h660 is the only processor that 'claims' to be able to be used with the factory HU volume control.


----------



## hawkfan

*Balance output to Alpine pxe-h660?*

I noticed that a few users here of the h650 connected their +/- (balanced or differential) line level output from their OEM headunits to the h650. How did you do this? Did you just connect bare wire to the h650's speaker level wire harness? Or did you solder RCA connectors to the +/- wire coming from the OEM deck and connect them to the 'AUX' input on the h650? I'm looking to buy the h660 and want to know the best way to connect it to a Mazda6 Bose headunit, which puts out a flat 2v +/- signal to an external amp. The amp itself does all of the Bose 'equalization', so I'd like to avoid the speaker level outputs if possible and just use the h660 for the Audyssey. A little help?


----------



## xprime4

I bought a brand new pxe-h650 (actually the last one on crutchfield at a great price too) and installed it an i already put some time on it....

first, it did come with a 3 tracks cd that let you complete the instal setup. So i'm doing it using focal 165kp2 in passive with 320watt coming of an arc audio amp. The unit didn't come with a TUNING cd!!! there's not alot of option on the pxeh-650 itself, i can choose crossover freq and time delay in a simple way that's all 

alpine wasn't really helpful with the cd either... that is bad 

i tried few way of tuning so far and i wasn't really impress any of the measurement i made. it would help if i could have more info. that doens't mean it sound bad, but with stock setting that i can't really correct, it seems like the left speaker is almost muted and the soundstge ain't where i want it to be

sorry for digging that thread, but it's full of wonderful info and you guy seems to know it better 

thanks in advance


----------



## xprime4

no one has the pxe-h650 no more? any idea where i could find the imprint software for the H650?


----------

