Dukk

In fact you brought up price first, and the implication is there:
Really though, you have offered no reasons at all why F#1 stuff should be viewed superior to anything else (again usually higher priced stuff generally should be better) other than 'you like it'. You have stuck to trying to discredit my opinions rather than offer any sort of reasoning.

I guess we're back to opinions..

sawnicxs

It has to be said that there are all kinds of flexibility items offered in the Alpine stuff. Are there other options out there....sure. Are they going to be more expensive....perhaps. Alpine has done an awesome job in hand picking components and building one of the best lineups in the 12V industry to date. It would be my opinion, however, that if you took two guys with identical cars and gave one guy Alpine F#1 stuff and the other a high end comparative, it would still biol down to a few other items.

1) speaker location and true system design
2) car prep
3) tuning
4) subjective listening

There will always be the fans of certain products...we all have our favorites. Dave, Phil Petricca, and many others who use the F#1 will get terrific results along with the price tag that goes with it. However, guys like Gary Biggs, Scott Buwalda, and many others will use other product, pay less, and also do exceptionally well. Competition gets fueled by these rivalries all the time. Try to make your system beat the next guys! In the end, it is till going to be an opinion I think.

SUX 2BU

iTrader: (1)

Biggs especially and Buwalda have been consistent winners for many years. Biggs car seems to change every so often but he keeps it stunningly simple. And does it without F#1. He can beat people that use all F#1 systems so, to me, that means you CAN be BETTER than those that use all F#1. Would his car be 1st place even more often with F#1? Until he does so it's hard to say but until now it would seem that using F#1 does not make you a 1st place winner. It would seem you can do better with less(expensive) equipment.

I recall someone once saying to look at competitor results for (my own wording) indication of competitor skill or indication of product quality. Biggs, Himel, Petracca and Eldridge all compete IASCA and USAC. Buwalda, just IASCA. Petracca and Himel being the F#1 users (head and processor, dunno about the rest) and others do not. For IASCA, looking back to 2002, only at the 2005 finals did one of those users (Petracca) beat any of other non-F#1 users in any of their classes, if they were competing. Petracca did point-out in his class higher than Biggs.

For USAC, Biggs, Eldridge and Himel were riding high with respective 1st place finishes over the years and in the 04 season, Eldridge pointed-out higher than Himel did in their respective classes although Himel did beat Biggs and Eldridge in the Grand Master class (not sure what all encompasses that class though). Petracca pointed out a fair bit less than Biggs in the 05 season in the same class. In 03, Biggs was Grand Master.

So all that being said, the F#1 high-level competitors don't own the whole scene. They do well but it's not the end-all, be-all, must-have-it-to-win equipment. If guys like Petracca and Himel always, every-time beat guys like Biggs, Eldridge, etc. than yeah you could say you gotta have F#1 to win. But since they don't, one doesn't automotically need it. It's nice stuff though. I'd use it if someone gave it to me

sawnicxs

Quote "one thing that buwalda and biggs had in common besides not being best sq of show, no f#1......."

Would it be safe to assume that in the very class you contended in at finals, that every car that scored ahead of you had F#1 in it? For that matter, all classes were topped exclusively by F#1 followed by those who did not use the product? Best Sq at a finals event or any event is just that...an event (singular). Remember that at any given show, someone else could win best SQ whether it be SBN, regionals or ? When that is the case, that same winner will be able to say "one thing that the rest of the cars have in common besides not being best SQ of show, no (state your product)

Dukk

Interesting points...

SQ Civic

iTrader: (3)

I don't get the point of this thread... I understand that you (defro) would like to know how many people are running F1 gear, but over the last couple of years, every time this is discussed it always comes down to people saying that it's too expensive, and you saying that it's worth it...

The only thing that really changed was that in the last F1 thread you said it would make 100% of the systems out there sound better, and in this thread you only claim 99% to stop the arguments that the 100% statement brought on...

It just seems to me that nothing is being said of any importance except for you saying it's an (are) amazing piece(s) of electronics, and other people either agreeing, or saying it's heavily over priced... I have never used any of the F1 gear, and I'm sure if you have a budget for that selection of equipment, then I see no reason not to get it, even if it's just because you can, but I only ask what you are trying to achieve with this, and the other threads like this one???

If I knew what was going to happen after you asked this question, you surely had to..

best regards, Mark

JohnVroom

But if we don't have these threads how can we have these lovely public pissing contests?

I will take offense to anyone saying "you must use product X to win" that is silly

Also I know this is a top notch HU/ processor capable of great musical reproduction and control.... as are many other products on the market. some cost thousands some 200

Price does not make right (that is elitist)
Price does not make it wrong (that is called envy)
price is simply the appropriate level of profit for a certain piece (business)

SweetnLow91SC

O.k............. a few years ago I conducted a high end deck shoot out in the sound room at my old store. The decks we had were: Alpine 7990 F-1, Denon Z-1, Nakamichi CD-700.

The system consist of one pair of Spendors 3/5 book shelf speaker on stands, and the amplifier is a Milbert BAM-235. All cabling are WireWorld Reference level Eclipse III. power supply is Astron 65Amp unit. It is a highly resolving system.

I had three other customers which are either Audiophile & musician listener there for their opinions & inputs.

The CD we used were: Chesky Ultimate test disc, Norah Jones/ come away with me, Fim Audiophile Reference, Diana Krall/Love Scene, Red Rose Music/Vol:1 and Mcintosh Reference #8007.


Conclusion:

First place..... Nakamichi CD-700: was the best tonally, and present instrument at a life like realistic level, it was the best on the sax, piano and acoustic gitars with the Red Rose Music disc, Diana Krall. But the dynamic contrast & ultra low level details is not quite as good as the 7990 F-1 . otherwise it was the most musical out of the three.

Second place..... Alpine 7990 F-1: Was the best on dynamic contrast and low level detail. It presents a very accurate soundstage with good layering. But it is a bit analythical like, a bit tight on the instruments, lacking the bloom. other then that...... it was impressive on the violins on the Fim disc.

Third place..... Denon Z-1: was the most open and presents a large soundstage, but presents the instrument in a smaller scale. there's also a lacking in dynamic and tonally could be richer.


IMHO.. knowing the pro/cons characteristic of these decks is great, But it is up to a good installer to make any of these deck shine in the system. for example: the Z-1 is lack in the dynamic department. The deck has balanced out... run the system balanced will improve in that area. So the bottom line is.. the installation has the biggest contribution to the end result. Specially with high-end equipments........

installman

Yes, Yes Yes!! The install is everything! The F-1, Denon, Nakamichi even the Clarion 9255 are all amazing decks. It's how the entire system is set up that makes the difference. Just becuse you spend the most, doesn't mean you'll get the best.

Installman