EQ choice
10-20-2005, 07:40 PM
#21
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 884
^That is obvious the best way to go! [img]graemlins/thumb.gif[/img] I believe a true high-end audio installation should not need an EQ to make corrections. Once you alter the frequency with EQ.... your line signal is no longer linear..... which defeats the purpose of running high-end HU all together IMO.
10-20-2005, 08:45 PM
#22
Rare is the winning IASCA expert car without EQ's, if even very slightly used. I think the reality that a car is just not the same as a listening room leads most people to using some form of EQing.
10-20-2005, 09:51 PM
#23
Originally posted by Sassmaster:
I scored a 27 on the RTA without any EQing at all, how many people can say that?
I scored a 27 on the RTA without any EQing at all, how many people can say that?
Even now in my truck, I find I get better results adjusting my 4-way crossover than I do with my 7 band fully-parametric eq.
10-20-2005, 10:25 PM
#24
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 884
Newb
It is indeed rare...... But I'm sure you'll be seeing more and more in the future. [img]smile.gif[/img]
One of the reason its been real popular is because its easier to dial in the soundstage with EQ then without.
For example: without the EQ... the soundstage could be low, center could be left or right bias (cannot be corrected with the balance or amp gain)or the system just sound flat. And by using 1/3 octave or parametric EQ, you could fix these problems to some degree. But the potential of the system is limited..... in dynamic, tonally, liveliness,etc.. not to mention signal degradetion and noise.(not applied to F-1)
Another reason why EQ has been so popular...
For one: Competition in the pass.. You get the high score if RTA is flat(20-20K). (nothing to do with sound as RTA is time blind.) For two: It started in the early 90s. As the top winning cars had Waveguides speakers.... to run these speakers you need extreme correction from EQs to work. I remember their early Waveguide 5.0 needs about 22db of boost just to get 20K flat!
[ October 20, 2005, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: SweetnLow91SC ]
It is indeed rare...... But I'm sure you'll be seeing more and more in the future. [img]smile.gif[/img]
One of the reason its been real popular is because its easier to dial in the soundstage with EQ then without.
For example: without the EQ... the soundstage could be low, center could be left or right bias (cannot be corrected with the balance or amp gain)or the system just sound flat. And by using 1/3 octave or parametric EQ, you could fix these problems to some degree. But the potential of the system is limited..... in dynamic, tonally, liveliness,etc.. not to mention signal degradetion and noise.(not applied to F-1)
Another reason why EQ has been so popular...
For one: Competition in the pass.. You get the high score if RTA is flat(20-20K). (nothing to do with sound as RTA is time blind.) For two: It started in the early 90s. As the top winning cars had Waveguides speakers.... to run these speakers you need extreme correction from EQs to work. I remember their early Waveguide 5.0 needs about 22db of boost just to get 20K flat!
[ October 20, 2005, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: SweetnLow91SC ]
10-21-2005, 07:17 AM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
you dont need an eq to be competitive, but every car can benefit from it, some more than others. now im not saying that you shouldnt spend the time to experiment and try new ideas, i assume that is understood already. the cars that all won at finals this year had and used eqalization of some form, btw a good rta score means less than nothing as to how good a car stereo will sound. you can all try to reinvent the wheel and take 14 years to build your stereo like joe [img]tongue.gif[/img] , but a more sensible way is to use 2 or 3 bands of parametric eq used inteliigently to save yourself a ton of time and achieve 99.9% the same sound that 99.9% of the people, the .1 being joe, could ever hear the difference between. before you go getting all your undies in a bunch joe, this is a comment to your listening abilities, i think you can hear a fly fart 
[img]tongue.gif[/img] , notice smiley faces
[ October 21, 2005, 08:22 AM: Message edited by: defro13 ]
[img]tongue.gif[/img] , notice smiley faces[ October 21, 2005, 08:22 AM: Message edited by: defro13 ]
10-21-2005, 08:53 AM
#27
Originally posted by goalie 35:
ya i had almost 18db of gain on my guides and still i was down 12db at 20k, just couldnt get those guides to hit the really high notes
ya i had almost 18db of gain on my guides and still i was down 12db at 20k, just couldnt get those guides to hit the really high notes
10-21-2005, 10:57 AM
#28
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 884
Defro13
Where did you get such a rediculous figure.... 14 yrs?
My first system took three month to build..... thats with Rane 1/3 octave eq & x-over mods (dc-dc converter, opamp upgrades, lineamp mods) It has a tuned wood/fiberglass midbass cabinet for the tens, Custom AP box for 15" subs, USD waveguide, Alpine 7909 & 3/3545 in custom rack and subfloor,etc. also including complete interior/body panels sound deadening, system tuning. That system is extremely dynamic even to this day. But my current system is way more musical..... and image & sounds good in both seats.
BTW: Are you sure flys have gas? you need gas to fart right? [img]graemlins/thumb.gif[/img]
[ October 21, 2005, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: SweetnLow91SC ]
Where did you get such a rediculous figure.... 14 yrs?
My first system took three month to build..... thats with Rane 1/3 octave eq & x-over mods (dc-dc converter, opamp upgrades, lineamp mods) It has a tuned wood/fiberglass midbass cabinet for the tens, Custom AP box for 15" subs, USD waveguide, Alpine 7909 & 3/3545 in custom rack and subfloor,etc. also including complete interior/body panels sound deadening, system tuning. That system is extremely dynamic even to this day. But my current system is way more musical..... and image & sounds good in both seats.
BTW: Are you sure flys have gas? you need gas to fart right?
[img]graemlins/thumb.gif[/img][ October 21, 2005, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: SweetnLow91SC ]
