I'm a real happy man. Wow.

Jack from Indo

The last 2 weeks, for the first time in my life, I been riding around in an audiophile quality system. Started out not knowing dick about anything. Until the last 3 months, I though good quality meant Sony, or Pioneer, and woah, you had an external amp. F**** was I ignorant.

McLeod, Greg, and some of the other guys here have helped me a lot. I did my homework tracked down the components, dynamated, built the boxes, tweaked, listened to pros, thought it was never gonns end. I spent the kind a money that yer wife goes and says: You spent HOW much? For THAT?

But today, today, during a long drive, this whole project brought fricking tears to my eyes, honest, and I'm normally a pretty macho kind a butthead. I am hearing things I NEVER HEARD BEFORE in music I have listened to all my life.

I can't BELIEVE, and never had a clue music can sound this good.

I'm hooked, I'm stoked, I'm a changed human being. All I wanna do is go out there an sit in my damn car and turn the **** on.

I'm glad to be alive, and I think I'm having a religious experience. I'm not making this up.

Thanks everyone for all you help.

MacLeod

LOL!! Im glad you got it all put together.

Just goes to show, money spent on quality gear is well worth it!

ntculenuff

when that happens to me i tend to waste a lot of gas finding reasons to just drive and listen
taking stacks of cd's with me each time and rarely making it through a full song always wanting to see if such and such cd sounds better or worse

beardog03

Right on !

Been there...hope to be there again when I upgrade with all the gear that I have aquired...

The truck and the car need to be re-done....




Enjoy !

lpreston

I love to see when someone finds "Audio Enlightenment".

Greg Peters

I hear you, man. Glad it worked out. Now if I just got a "carputer" I could sit in my Jeep, listening to my system, while surfing Club Polk .

MacLeod

Just wait til you get an EQ and start tuning.

I just spent 3.5 HOURS sitting in my truck tuning trying to work out the details.

Its a wild feeling too! You dont realize how long youve been in there. I go in and its 5:30. You notice its dark but dont pay much attention. Then you look at your watch and its 9:00!!

ntculenuff

MacLeod wrote:

Just wait til you get an EQ and start tuning.

I just spent 3.5 HOURS sitting in my truck tuning trying to work out the details.

Its a wild feeling too! You dont realize how long youve been in there. I go in and its 5:30. You notice its dark but dont pay much attention. Then you look at your watch and its 9:00!!

i hate and love my EQ just for that reason
i tossed in an epicenter and a spatial processor just for more tweaking fun too:p

Jack from Indo

Wait till I get an EQ? Bro, already been down yesterday to the shop looking at the Alpine H701, mostly cause of a post of yours sometime back recommending it.

BUT:

I am having a very hard time believing that when sound travels at 1080 ft per second, or whatever it is, the 10 in difference between one speaker and the other is gonna frickin matter, time delay wise.

Go ahead, let er rip, I know you have something to say about this.......lol

1996blackmax

I've been telling people about the great advantages of time alignment since I started using it back in the 90's. Back then it was only available in certain processors that cost a good deal of money at the time. Pretty cool to see HU's incorporating it into their processring duties now. It can make a substantial difference in a vehicle. It is a nice feeling you get when listening to some good tunes and having the singer's voice right smack in the middle of the dash and all the instruments all around them. I feel like going for a drive now .......

MacLeod

I was a TA doubter back as little as a couple years ago but have seen the light and relaized its importance. Its still better to have proper speaker placement but once you have that, TA is a perfect tool to tie up the loose ends and focus everything up better.

As for pathlenght difference, if youve only got 10" difference between your speakers, then you probably dont need TA. Anything under 12" is usually ok. Now my truck for instance, with the speakers in the doors, the PTL was over 20"! Even with my mids in the kicks, my PTL is 14".

I can also assure you that you will be able to tell the difference between as little as .05 ms delay! If you get the 701, stick on an AM talk radio station and adjust the TA and listen to the voice move all over the place. Even with as little as .05 ms delay.

ntculenuff

i have been asked numerous times if i have a center channel in my jeep because of the time alignment

sometimes i will turn it off just to remind my self there is a difference

Jack from Indo

****, you guys, just when I though I spent all the money I need to. Haha.

But I do have lot's more than 10" PTL in fact, and besides, where I live, we get Alpine stuff a fair bit cheaper than in the U.S. I understand what you guys are saying, and will probably put one in this week.

Pioneer something or other
Focal K2p
Steg 200.1
JL 500.1
JL W6v10

If I could get Polk down here, I would, but so far distributor only carries the Home stuff.

PoweredByDodge

time alignment = yes
eq = no

if you have equipment of the proper caliber, you should be able to leave everything "flat" and only correct for driver listening position.

.... and no i'm not hinting that mac doesn't have high grade equipment - i know what he has, and its more than 'plenty' to get the job done.

1996blackmax

The thing is that glass and other materials inside the car will either absorb or reflect sound, creating peaks in your frequency response, an EQ can help tame these issues.

I use my EQ to try to get a flatter response than what the acoustics inside my car will allow, even with the setting all flat. My HU throws out white noise over the speakers and measures it, takes a picture of the frequency response and shows me the problem areas. Leaving the EQ on the flat setting would not help me correct these issues.

Jack from Indo

This brings up a question: In this, other systems I have installed previously (which were not as good) no way a flat setting gave me enough mid bass. Not even close.

I have now dynamated, I got kick panels, I got Focal K2p's which everybody else says has perfectly fine midbass, plenty of good clean power, but unless I use the bass boost, or the EQ on the head unit, not enough midbass. I find it very hard to believe that I have not got the right components, or the speakers not in the right place. Believe me they are sealed in those doors tighter than a, well, you know.........:)

I'm pretty sure I got everything right.

but PoweredbyDodge is not the only person to say this.

Somebody please explain to me why when I set everything to flat, I got no midbass to speak of, and why this is necessarily a bad sign of something

Greg Peters

Jack from Indo wrote:

This brings up a question: In this, other systems I have installed previously (which were not as good) no way a flat setting gave me enough mid bass. Not even close.

I have now dynamated, I got kick panels, I got Focal K2p's which everybody else says has perfectly fine midbass, plenty of good clean power, but unless I use the bass boost, or the EQ on the head unit, not enough midbass. I find it very hard to believe that I have not got the right components, or the speakers not in the right place. Believe me they are sealed in those doors tighter than a, well, you know.........:)

I'm pretty sure I got everything right.

but PoweredbyDodge is not the only person to say this.

Somebody please explain to me why when I set everything to flat, I got no midbass to speak of, and why this is necessarily a bad sign of something

Well...the human ear doesn't necessarily hear a "flat" frequency response as being balanced, and personal preference has a lot to do with this as well.

The average listener will probably say a frequency response with slight boosts in the top and bottom frequencies sounds better- think graphic EQ with the bands on both left and right boosted, bands in the middle cut or flat, the shape of the overall curve resembling a banana. That's not to say that's what you should strive for by any means, just what may sound pleasing to the non-audiophile.

Lower frequencies require the most amplifier power (and usually a designated subwoofer) to reproduce, and it's common that lesser systems are lacking in the lowest registers. The highest frequencies are the ones most likely to suffer if the listener has experienced any degree of hearing loss, and also another part of the spectrum that's not likely to be reproduced well by a stock or mediocre system. The highest and lowest frequencies are often boosted/cranked up in a bid to compensate by non-audiophiles as a result, as this represents something their previous stock system was incapable of providing.

I personally have to boost a little bit on the top end of the spectrum (thanks to a previous career as a metal sawyer ) but have the rest of my EQ curve consisting of flat, or slight cuts to some midrange frequencies. With the settings I use, I can play almost any genre of music without fiddling around with EQ settings because there isn't really anything offensive in any particular part of the frequency response. This is tailored to my ears in my vehicle, and as such wouldn't necessarily sound right to you, Mac, or anyone else on the forum.

Those Focals are certainly nice speakers. If I remember back to when I last demo'd them, their frequency response rolls of fairly high compared to some (65 hz??) and they require a crossover point near that. You won't find them playing below that point with any kind of authority if run full range. Without knowing what your sub(s) are crossed over at, you may want to raise the sub's LP crossover point slightly towards the HP crossover point of your components. Keep in mind doing so can pull the bass image rearward. The reason I suggest this (as an experiment) is because some vehicles seem to swallow part of the frequency response, and if the system lacks midbass it could possibly be due in part to design of the vehicle.

PoweredByDodge

What Greg has stated is absolutely true. Personal preference does play a huge part in it all, and variances in one human's ability to hear versus another's are unavoidable.

However, I do believe that with enough dynamat, proper speaker placement, and enough power, 'flat' is the way to go... or at least what to strive for.

A 30 band parametric EQ is a great tool, when used properly. If you have + or - 12 db for each EQ band, that doesn't mean you're supposed to use + or - 12. Rather... + or - 0.5 or 1 may be just enough to fix any little tiny issues. Do it properly, and you can make a good system into a great system. But more often than not, someone gets an EQ and starts making radical settings, which only serve to screw everything up and produce an unnatural and innacurate sound.

The first key -- before ever getting an EQ (or at least before installing it) -- is to make your system sound damn near great with only one or two ticks on the old bass and trebble settings (loudness controls and such just completely fly in the face of all of this effort).

Jack from Indo

I am a professional musician. (was for many years, currently in business)

I have had plenty of studio time, and have an ample amount of recording experience. Here is one thing I can say with authority about flat frequency response:

If the engineers and producers who were responsible for mixing your favorite music were to get into your car, they would immediately want to EQ it. I guarantee you that.

Why?

Because the final mix that gets pressed is ALWAYS a compromise between what they would have mixed had they known you were gonna play it on audiophile equipment, and what they HAD to mix because they knew how many consumers are going to be playing it on IPODS and boom boxes and other rift raft doo dads.

And furthermore, they almost never agree with the musicians themselves, who argue and **** with the engineers and producers over what THEY think the mix should should like.

The point?

Worshiping flat frequency response because "That's the way the sound engineer wanted it to sound" is meaningless, and akin to worshiping a God that simply does not exist. The only way to get "what the engineer intended" is to get that sound engineer back into your car, and guess what (!?) have him EQ your system for THAT particular track.

Nothing "wrong" with EQ folks, it's what those musicians want you to do, trust me. I'm one of them.

MacLeod

I hear ya Vinny but I fimly believe that no matter what you do or how perfectly you place your speakers, youll still need an EQ because a car is the worst environment imaginable for SQ. Youre always going to be closer to one speaker than the other, there is always going to be a ton of not only reflective surfaces such as hard dashes and glass but also a ton of absorbant material as well like carpet and cloth seats. And dont forget that each car will have its own certain frequency that it likes to resonate at which will screw up the sound as well. With my beloved Dodge, its in the 60-80 Hz range.

I believe a 31 band GEQ, independant for all channels, is the most valuable tool you can have.

I also compete in RTA competitons now and then and Im here to tell you that a flat response curve sounds like ****!!

Jack from Indo

Greg Peters wrote:

Those Focals are certainly nice speakers. If I remember back to when I last demo'd them, their frequency response rolls of fairly high compared to some (65 hz??) and they require a crossover point near that. You won't find them playing below that point with any kind of authority if run full range. Without knowing what your sub(s) are crossed over at, you may want to raise the sub's LP crossover point slightly towards the HP crossover point of your components.

OK, uh, waitaminute:

Shouldn't the crossover for the sub and the splits overlap a bit? Otherwise there is going to be a frequency band in which neither speaker reproduces, no? I remember MacLeod you once something about crossing your sub at 45 and SR6500s at 60, (or something), to make a Pink Floyd track sound good. What about the 15 points between the two?

Also, my Focals range is down to 70hz, not 65. Is that not far enough? Seems like it ought to be, if your using a good sub (JL 6Wv10), no? but I notice many woofers will go to 40 or 50.

Please advise, somebody

MacLeod

Cutting off a speaker at a certain frequency doesnt mean it wont play anything on the other side of that.

A crossover works by attenuating the volume beyond a certain frequency by so many db per octave and thats the slope. So if you high pass at say 1000 Hz with a 12 db/oct slope, that means that it will start cutting down the volume and 2000 Hz will be 12 db lower than 1000 Hz and 4000 Hz will be 24 db lower.

So my midbasses are high passed at 60 Hz and my sub at 40 but since my midbasses are cut off with a 18 db slope, theyre playing down lower. However my sub is cut off with a 30 db slope so its being cut off pretty quick.

Jack from Indo

OK, got it thanks, now, could you comment on my front speakers only going down to 70hz?

Other wise I love them, but I seem to need to boost the midbass lots via EQ, and they should be broken in by now. I very much see a benefit of getting the most from the front speakers first, before crossing down to the sub, as you have obviously done, but my speakers are not rated for that low.

The frequency response graph that Focal publishes shows a very flat response from 70 to 25,000

Appreciate your comments on this, MacLeod, or anybody else.

Greg Peters

Jack from Indo wrote:

OK, uh, waitaminute:

Shouldn't the crossover for the sub and the splits overlap a bit? Otherwise there is going to be a frequency band in which neither speaker reproduces, no? I remember MacLeod you once something about crossing your sub at 45 and SR6500s at 60, (or something), to make a Pink Floyd track sound good. What about the 15 points between the two?

Also, my Focals range is down to 70hz, not 65. Is that not far enough? Seems like it ought to be, if your using a good sub (JL 6Wv10), no? but I notice many woofers will go to 40 or 50.

Please advise, somebody

That was a guess at 65hz. You'll find electric/acoustic bass puts out a fair bit of information below that mark, as well as fundamentals from kick (bass) drums as well.

I demo'd the Focals at a local authorized dealer and quite liked what I heard up and down the product line. The dealer had most models in stand alone fiberglass displays with an integrated Focal subwoofer playing along for each. He was very surprised when I requested to hear the comps by themselves, and he had to pull the RCAs on the (Audison?) amp feeding the Focal subs to accomodate that request. I noticed the Focal comps were cut off with a surprisingly high HPF during the audition (higher than most everything else I was comparing when shopping around) when played without a sub. This wasn't apparent at all when played with the sub. I suspect the LP xover in the display was very close to the HP for the comps.

I didn't bring up the relatively high frequency response of the Focals to suggest that it is a weakness, but rather that it's a system parameter you'll have to be aware of when tuning your system. The suggestion to play with your sub xover point (and I should have included slope as well) was an attempt at getting you some more lower midbass output that the Focals would be unable to provide.

As far as having an overlap or a gap between xover points for subs and components, the vehicle plays a big part in this. Some cars (like Mac's Ram) reinforce energy in a certain midbass range while others seem to eat that up. It really depends on a number of things- xover points, slopes, resonant frequency, and listening taste, so unfortunately there isn't really a hard and fast universal rule for tuning all systems.

I have my 5 1/4" SR comps crossed over at 50hz (believe it or not) with an 18 db/octave slope. I find with most music I get no midbass breakup- the drivers seem to play well, and roll off frequencies they can't play without drama. With a few tracks I'll bump up the slope to 24 db/octave for insurance. My sub is crossed over pretty high for the application at 80hz, 12 db/octave. This is for a couple of reasons- my front stage speakers aren't midbass monsters and a little help from the sub (overlap) doesn't mess with SQ too badly in this particular vehicle. I actually like the sound with a little reinforcement in this frequency range for most tracks, but with something really bass heavy I'll turn down the sub level a notch or two. Lowering the LP xover of the sub to 63hz tightens things up a bunch but the overall impact of the system diminishes.

If I were to swap my system into a new vehicle, all bets would be off and I'd have to start from scratch in tuning all the same equipment for best SQ in a different vehicle. Each install presents it's own unique set of challenges and bonuses, so the trick is getting the most out of what you have with tuning. It took many months to get everything I've installed in this system to play nice with everything else and sound it's best. You'll probably have to play with all variables available to you for a while to get things where you want them.

PoweredByDodge

... the 'crossover point' is the -3db point, assuming non-cascaded filters. that being said, two identical speakers with two identical power streams running into them, one with a (any value but let's say) 100 Hz low pass, and one with a 100 Hz high pass.

Their total response, together, will be identical to that of one single speaker (identical to the two used) with the same power.

fuzzy math ... -3 + -3 = 0 ... -12 + -12 = 0 ... etc ... etc.

since we're assuming both speakers being crossed over are using the same slope crossover (say 6, 12, 18, or 24 db) high pass or low pass... and we're also assuming the same caps and inductors are used in both the high and low pass, simply flip flopped. ... the two response curves will overlap constructively, such that you get 'flat' out. ('flat' in this post does not refer to the use of 'flat' previously in this discussion).