PXA-H100, H650 and H701 performance differences

[larryboy2911]

So I tried searching on the comparisons between these models and I couldn't come up with any results. So from a performance standpoint (not functional, I know the 100 integrates with imprint-ready units, the h650 is standalone and the h701 is 5.1) how much control does each one give you in running an active 3-way setup, EQing ability, xo points, and most importantly do any of them sound better than another? I'm very curious if the $180 H100 can compare SQ w/ the H701 and if the H650 is any better than the H100.

[shadowfactory]

The models numbers show how much they suck, i.e. the h100 sucks, while the h701 is the only choice I would personally consider, as its the only one that actually gives you control over a real EQ and 4 way crossover .

[kyheng]

Upto certain extend, if 1 were to wanted to use Alpine gears, guess H900 will be the best(even it is old scholl and expensive). Atleast important parts like ICs can be change. H701's IC no more support.

[HIS4]

When looking at the features, I always felt tha the H100 and H650 were geared more toward factory integration while the H701 was more full featured digital signal processor.

[williambrea]

The h100 doesn't seem to bad, can you hook those other units up to the iDA-x100 or the 9886?

[avences]

Originally Posted by shadowfactory

the h701 is the only choice I would personally consider, as its the only one that actually gives you control ....4 way crossover .

3 way directly from the unit, you need to do tricks with an internal x-over from an amp to get 4 way x-over but won`t have total control from this unit in a 4 way system

[avences]

easy.... h100 is crap, Alpine took away from their HU's all the processors that the old ones have them and now sell them separately, that's why i personally think that 50's series and 30's series are the last ones that were really good units.

H650.....oem integration....but it is unflexible, setting are fixed, you can not play.

h701....OMG....welcome to the jungle!!!!!! ready to play, very very flexible, by most goes beyond those 2 models.

[brianlin87]

H701 > *

[Riveted1]

Originally Posted by avences

3 way directly from the unit, you need to do tricks with an internal x-over from an amp to get 4 way x-over but won`t have total control from this unit in a 4 way system

You may be alluding to the fact that it is 2-way up front w/rear, center and a sub. But since most of us don't run rear drivers, it is absolutely 4-way ready right out of the box! No tricks with amp x-overs.

To the OP, I've only heard/used the H701. But for control of a 3-way front stage, it gives you just about everything and the kitchen sink. I'm still getting used to the "digitalness" of it, but the same thing happened when we started using digital consoles and processors in live sound. It's just a bit "different", mainly when concerned with EQ's. You don't hear the phase-shift you get with an analog EQ, so at first, it sounds like nothing is happening.

[minibox]

h650 and imprint is not for audiophiles, it is for the unwashed masses who don't know true SQ and don't know how to tune. No question, go for the H701 or better yet just get a bit one.

[89grand]

Well I guess I'm not an audiophile, don't know how to tune and don't know true SQ, because the H650 is what I'm going to run.

It's the best method for integrating my stock head unit, with a 3 way crossover, t/a and eq.

Getting the H650 right takes time, but if you understand it, it can work really well. Npdang tested one and found that it's auto tuning is better than what most good experienced tuners can do without spending weeks doing it.

Time will tell, but it's definitely not a plug in, let it do it's magic and your done processor.

[minibox]

Originally Posted by 89grand

Well I guess I'm not an audiophile, don't know how to tune and don't know true SQ, because the H650 is what I'm going to run.

It's the best method for integrating my stock head unit, with a 3 way crossover, t/a and eq.

Getting the H650 right takes time, but if you understand it, it can work really well. Npdang tested one and found that it's auto tuning is better than what most good experienced tuners can do without spending weeks doing it.

Time will tell, but it's definitely not a plug in, let it do it's magic and your done processor.

I doubt it. There's got to be something better out there, you're just not trying hard enough.
I'm sure I'll be reading your rebuttal in a few minutes.

[89grand]

Originally Posted by minibox

I doubt it. There's got to be something better out there, you're just not trying hard enough.
I'm sure I'll be reading your rebuttal in a few minutes.

Well it's simple. DON'T RUN ONE!

If I don't like it, I'll sell it, but until I use it myself, opinions on it are meaningless since they are all over the map as far as whether the unit is any good or not. Npdang which is well respected here thought it tuned really good, although it needed tweaking afterwards, you, which I don't know, says it sucks.

Besides, I've researched and read about this unit for many many hours, that's trying hard enough to me.

[minibox]

Originally Posted by 89grand

Well it's simple. DON'T RUN ONE!

If I don't like it, I'll sell it, but until I use it myself, opinions on it are meaningless since they are all over the map as far as whether the unit is any good or not. Npdang which is well respected here thought it tuned really good, although it needed tweaking afterwards, you, which I don't know, says it sucks.

Besides, I've researched and read about this unit for many many hours, that's trying hard enough to me.

Fair enough. Good luck with it.

[cvjoint]

I think the Imprint is the way to go if you don't have RTA/WinMLS or other forms of testing and you don't know how to use them. Notice you can still misuse the Imprint by placing the microphone in the wrong location. I think there are plenty of audiophiles on board, meaning we all love music but there is a very small amount than know how to tune.

I can safely say that the first 6 months of tunning with all the right equipment was actually detrimental in retrospect to my setup compared to the no EQ I had in all previous setups.

I encourage everybody to get the H701 and testing software but be aware that it takes patience and skill to get any improvement. Id does however offer benefits for a 4 way setup right off the bat in terms of TA and crossovers, get it but don't touch the EQ.

[dbiegel]

IMO the H650 is the one of the most significant car audio innovations ever. 512 band logarithmically spaced independent left/right FIR eq and most importantly, 512 band impulse response based independent L/R time correction. Automatic spatial average weighted and clustered measurements using Audyssey's tried and true MultEQ Pro algorithms and an included high quality calibrated microphone with a special manufacturing process to get +-2db from 20hz-20khz unit to unit consistency. Automatic time alignment measurements accurate to about 1/4". 7 Channel active crossovers (2 channels bandpassed, other 5 high or low pass, subsonic built in), time alignment and independent L/R level settings.

Yeah, it has a couple OEM integration features too (AntEQ and speaker level inputs) but those just icing on the cake IMO. Plus the ability to use it as a highly accurate spatially averaged RTA.

Sure it has few manual post-calibration tweaking options, but there are many ways you can influence the end result to get it how you want it without negatively affecting the time correction. I don't think the automatic calibration is a negative. Who would want to go through and set left/right eq and phase for 512 bands manually anyway?? And do you really think you can tune phase and eq at each of these points better than Audyssey's algorithm?

Compare this to the H701, for example -- it has what, 31 bands of IIR eq and no time correction? That's the same technology we had 20 years ago, in a nicer digital package. The H650 is not even comparable in my opinion, these features are a breakthrough for us that normally require a sophisticated carputer with hundreds if not thousands of dollars of software alone. Its just a matter of learning its quirks and how to influence the calculations to your liking.

Then again, thats just my view on this and some people think I'm crazy

[cvjoint]

Originally Posted by dbiegel

IMO the H650 is the one of the most significant car audio innovations ever. 512 band logarithmically spaced independent left/right FIR eq and most importantly, 512 band impulse response based independent L/R time correction. Automatic spatial average weighted and clustered measurements using Audyssey's tried and true MultEQ Pro algorithms and an included high quality calibrated microphone with a special manufacturing process to get +-2db from 20hz-20khz unit to unit consistency. Automatic time alignment measurements accurate to about 1/4". 7 Channel active crossovers (2 channels bandpassed, other 5 high or low pass, subsonic built in), time alignment and independent L/R level settings.

Yeah, it has a couple OEM integration features too (AntEQ and speaker level inputs) but those just icing on the cake IMO. Plus the ability to use it as a highly accurate spatially averaged RTA.

Sure it has few manual post-calibration tweaking options, but there are many ways you can influence the end result to get it how you want it without negatively affecting the time correction. I don't think the automatic calibration is a negative. Who would want to go through and set left/right eq and phase for 512 bands manually anyway?? And do you really think you can tune phase and eq at each of these points better than Audyssey's algorithm?

Compare this to the H701, for example -- it has what, 31 bands of IIR eq and no time correction? That's the same technology we had 20 years ago, in a nicer digital package. The H650 is not even comparable in my opinion, these features are a breakthrough for us that normally require a sophisticated carputer with hundreds if not thousands of dollars of software alone. Its just a matter of learning its quirks and how to influence the calculations to your liking.

Then again, thats just my view on this and some people think I'm crazy

That is not just Danny's view I vouch for what is said here. I've heard his car and it's darn near perfectly balanced. That's not to say the H650 is perfect, I think there are still tricks that a manual set H701 can do and the H650 falls short.

Here is a scenario: we have a door mounted 7 inch midbass. We can use independent software and test the speaker free air to get a feel for unrestricted frequency response. Once mounted in door ie. on a baffle we can test again with a mic right in front and see how the door acts as a baffle by testing again without a door panel. If the door is too small than we should get some unwanted gain and boominess at low frequecies. Replace driver with one that requires lower enclosure volumes. We might get very low output at low frequencies. Replace baffle with a sturdy baffle. Test again, in MLS you can superimposed FRs to see the difference. Assuming we have the right driver in the right enclosure with the right baffle we slap on the door panel and test again right in front of the panel. Now we notice the frequency response rolls off too early compared to free air. Maybe the door panel is too restrictive etc.

Ideally we don't want to EQ any of these FR disruptions but fix them by working on the physical install. With a 650 where we let it do its thing the FR is flattened but we cannot run manual tests on every little thing, overlap graphs etc The H650 doesn't know why the FR is not flat, it just flattens it! With a bit of skill and good software we can troubleshoot the install and get fewer resonances regardless of volume, position etc and even improve output by troubleshooting baffle imperfections.

Now what is this carputer software that you mention?

[dkm201]

Originally Posted by dbiegel

Compare this to the H701, for example -- it has what, 31 bands of IIR eq and no time correction? That's the same technology we had 20 years ago, in a nicer digital package.

The 701 has time correction... And parametric equalizer... and you can run 4-way... or 5.1... etc etc etc.

[larryboy2911]

This is a good discussion! I myself am a Pro Sound contractor so I do use a dual FFT based measurement platform to tune systems. I was also planning on using a Rane RPM 26 as my processor, so manual tuning doesn't scare me. I just didn't have any reference to where these products sit compared to a true pro audio DSP. I also wasn't sure how the 100 & 650 compared with manual adjustments and EQ.

[BeatsDownLow]

Originally Posted by dbiegel

IMO the H650 is the one of the most significant car audio innovations ever. 512 band logarithmically spaced independent left/right FIR eq and most importantly, 512 band impulse response based independent L/R time correction. Automatic spatial average weighted and clustered measurements using Audyssey's tried and true MultEQ Pro algorithms and an included high quality calibrated microphone with a special manufacturing process to get +-2db from 20hz-20khz unit to unit consistency. Automatic time alignment measurements accurate to about 1/4". 7 Channel active crossovers (2 channels bandpassed, other 5 high or low pass, subsonic built in), time alignment and independent L/R level settings.

Yeah, it has a couple OEM integration features too (AntEQ and speaker level inputs) but those just icing on the cake IMO. Plus the ability to use it as a highly accurate spatially averaged RTA.

Sure it has few manual post-calibration tweaking options, but there are many ways you can influence the end result to get it how you want it without negatively affecting the time correction. I don't think the automatic calibration is a negative. Who would want to go through and set left/right eq and phase for 512 bands manually anyway?? And do you really think you can tune phase and eq at each of these points better than Audyssey's algorithm?

Compare this to the H701, for example -- it has what, 31 bands of IIR eq and no time correction? That's the same technology we had 20 years ago, in a nicer digital package. The H650 is not even comparable in my opinion, these features are a breakthrough for us that normally require a sophisticated carputer with hundreds if not thousands of dollars of software alone. Its just a matter of learning its quirks and how to influence the calculations to your liking.

Then again, thats just my view on this and some people think I'm crazy

who told you this????????????? It has T/A

[dbiegel]

Time Alignment and Time Correction are two very different things. The H650 has both, the 701 only has time alignment.

IMO most of the problems we have in car audio are actually in the time domain, but we typically focus on the frequency domain. That is a two dimensional solution to a three dimensional problem. In a car you have all sorts of phase and time problems at various frequencies -- from reflections, absorptions, sound waves reaching yours ears misaligned from different drivers, crossover phase distortion, etc. -- that manifest themselves as "ringing" or "smearing". In most cases it just causes certain instruments, vocals, or tracks (which happen to have important content at those out-of-phase frequencies) to sound unrealistic or like something is suddenly off.

Time alignment simply applies a delay to each channel. It doesn't fix the various time domain issues at different frequencies like time correction does, I guess one way to think of it is it just "shifts" the entire time dimension of each driver so that the first impulse from each speaker reaches your ear at approximately the same time. Some of the time domain problems shift with it, some are fixed by shifting it, and it can create new time domain problems as well.

The other problem is that IIR parametric and graphic eq's (like those in H701, H900's, and pretty much any other car audio product) cause phase distortion, whereas FIR filters (like in the H650) don't. This is part of the reason that a flat frequency response might not sound good, and one reason why normal EQing is such a bad bad thing to be avoided if possible. Each time you gain or boost a frequency with an IIR filter, you affect the phase around that frequency. When the H650 boosts or gains a frequency, it has FIR filters which don't screw up the phase/time domain, plus it also goes ahead and corrects time/phase at 512 different taps per channel.

The H650 is far, far from perfect. It's a quirky, buggy, poorly produced piece of equipment. Even worse, it's a relatively complicated and sophisticated system designed to be set up by home theatre acoustics experts (MultEQ Pro), quickly thrown into a box with no real documentation or support and marketed as an easy plug and play system for cars. After almost 200 calibrations, I'm still learning more and getting better results as I try to figure it out. BUT it brings some amazing state of the art technology, to a car audio world saturated with decades old technology that is simply repackaged in cooler looking interfaces every few years. Just by playing around with it for the first time, taking 5 quick measurements on his headrest, npdang got "better results than most people could achieve on their own, and would take an expert a long time". If thats not a huge breakthrough I don't know what is.

If a quick test calibration on a headrest was simply better than what most people could achieve on their own, and would take an expert a long time to achieve, think about what might be possible if we really figured out how to harness more of the potential of this technology. I'm trying to learn as much as I can, but IMO it kind of sucks that such an amazing product is out there for us and very few others are bothering with it. I've been sticking with it as I think the potential is enormous. Think what might be possible, for example, if we were able to hack the software to allow true manual control, custom target curves and settings, loading/saving calibrations, etc. (actually looks pretty easy to do from what I've messed with the files so far)

[dbiegel]

Originally Posted by cvjoint

Here is a scenario: we have a door mounted 7 inch midbass. We can use independent software and test the speaker free air to get a feel for unrestricted frequency response. Once mounted in door ie. on a baffle we can test again with a mic right in front and see how the door acts as a baffle by testing again without a door panel. If the door is too small than we should get some unwanted gain and boominess at low frequecies. Replace driver with one that requires lower enclosure volumes. We might get very low output at low frequencies. Replace baffle with a sturdy baffle. Test again, in MLS you can superimposed FRs to see the difference. Assuming we have the right driver in the right enclosure with the right baffle we slap on the door panel and test again right in front of the panel. Now we notice the frequency response rolls off too early compared to free air. Maybe the door panel is too restrictive etc.

Ideally we don't want to EQ any of these FR disruptions but fix them by working on the physical install. With a 650 where we let it do its thing the FR is flattened but we cannot run manual tests on every little thing, overlap graphs etc The H650 doesn't know why the FR is not flat, it just flattens it! With a bit of skill and good software we can troubleshoot the install and get fewer resonances regardless of volume, position etc and even improve output by troubleshooting baffle imperfections.

I totally agree. However, you don't necessarily need MLS -- perhaps my favorite thing about the H650 is that it is actually a very capable RTA and impulse response measurement tool in itself. It only takes like 5 minutes to get accurate, spatially averaged RTA responses and IR measurements! Most of the time I spend using it is actually just to measure FR and IR after making changes and figure out major problems and how I can try to improve things. It sure made it a hell of a lot easier to figure out how to get my horns sounding decent as they sounded absolutely terrible for the first few days when I first put them in, even after a number of calibrations.

One thing is for sure -- awesome technology or not, it's still 70% install, maybe even more. I try to tell people who listen to my car that they're not listening to the sound of Imprint, they're listening to my install tuned by Imprint. Small install changes can make things sound completely different even post-Imprint. It's just a tuning tool after all. If they come out with an H651 that has automatic optimization of the install too, I'll be a very happy camper!

Now what is this carputer software that you mention?

There's a ton of software you can use in a carputer... FIR filters, crossovers, you name it, there's software out there for it. Last I checked they were all pretty expensive though. I don't know what's out there now. Npdang knows a hell of a lot more about this stuff than I do.

[cvjoint]

I see so you can test FR just like you would with any other software, perhaps you can't overlap them but that's very nice. How do you get the readout? USB?

I went back and checked Npdang's review. The unit is as nice as I always thought. The volume controls seems to be a bit troublesome however. I'm also a bit confused on why it only has a bandpass, perhaps a solid 3 way processor but rather too simple 4 way instrument. Am I correct in assuming you can still modify xovers wherever you want? Overlap, underlap? Also once you EQ a bit the output all that nice correction you've done works no more I think.

I think getting the sound flat is 50% of the work, in setups where you have a great 3 way install I think the 650 will do a better job.

However, the other 50% is shaping the curve to your liking, to adjust for roadnoise, recordings etc. If you want to set sub, midbass levels individually the H701 is hard to beat, I can simply use my front back fader to put midbass up or down.

I've always wondered, are our tunning jobs stationary? Do they only work that well at one output at which we test? I figure the higher the output, the more it takes sound waves to stop bouncing in the cabin. Do we get different reflections at different output levels?

I'll start another thread for the carputer, I think I'm sold on that idea.

[larryboy2911]

Interesting about the H650. How does it compare with the H100 in capability/Tuning? Are there some things lacking in the H100?

[cmusic]

Originally Posted by dbiegel

.....

The H650 is far, far from perfect. It's a quirky, buggy, poorly produced piece of equipment. Even worse, it's a relatively complicated and sophisticated system designed to be set up by home theatre acoustics experts (MultEQ Pro), quickly thrown into a box with no real documentation or support and marketed as an easy plug and play system for cars. After almost 200 calibrations, I'm still learning more and getting better results as I try to figure it out. BUT it brings some amazing state of the art technology, to a car audio world saturated with decades old technology that is simply repackaged in cooler looking interfaces every few years. Just by playing around with it for the first time, taking 5 quick measurements on his headrest, npdang got "better results than most people could achieve on their own, and would take an expert a long time". If thats not a huge breakthrough I don't know what is.

You should have seen the granddaddy of the H650, the H600, when it came out in 1998. Its phase correction only worked up to 200 Hz and it required the sub to have a unobstructed path to the mic (sorry if you put the sub in the trunk). The sub also had to play up to 200 Hz and no low pass crossovers after the H600 could be used. Like the H650, the H600 instructions were made so basic because Alpine did not think the average installer would understand what it is doing. If the system was not setup like the instructions said, it would end up sounding horrible. Heck, my own Alpine regional rep that had a training class on the H600 and still did not know how it worked. I ended up telling him more about the H600 than he learned in the class. I found a bunch of info on the unit from Alpine of Australia's web site that was much better at explaining the H600 that what the Alpine dealers and sale reps got here in the states. Unfortunately the H600 was an advanced product that was too advanced for most people. Too bad because once I figured how to correctly use the H600 (different from what the instructions said) it was an amazing piece of electronics.

BTW I had the same problems with the autotuning process with the H600 as you have said you have with the H650. I got the best results by actually taking the mic autosetup process while I was driving the car down a deserted road. This allowed the mic to pick up road and engine noise and the effects of my body on the sound.