audio control
Thread Starter
Goalie Man
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,412
just purchased a new audio control dqxs, and will be receiving it mid feb from da factory. hope this thing is as good as they are saying it is or i will be kicking myself as i originally wanted the alpine 700, peice, i will keep you informed on its performance as soon as i get it and test it out on my sine wave generater and scope.
Guest
Posts: n/a
have used both many times, the 700 annihilates a dqxs in every conceivable catagory, but thats just one guys opinion who has used both on many occasions, half the time removing ac pieces for pxah700's and so on. as a matter of fact i think that the guy above me here is making a similar change
2000 Watt CAFz'r
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,406
Something Richard Clark told me once was..............if you can default your processing and there is a noticible difference..................you've done something wrong...................fix your sound and your install..........then tweak it with the processing.............
2000 Watt CAFz'r
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,406
IMO the only processing that you can never avoid is in that nasty natural vehicle range of 200hz.........almost anything else can be fixed with location and design................
BTW I don't always consider active crossovers processing cause you are not modifing the sound in the form of boost/cut, DT or other things.............
XO points and phasing can make a world of difference and IMO not adjusted by most people..............
EQing should be a last resort.......
BTW I don't always consider active crossovers processing cause you are not modifing the sound in the form of boost/cut, DT or other things.............
XO points and phasing can make a world of difference and IMO not adjusted by most people..............
EQing should be a last resort.......
