[alphakenny1]

actually i've had that eca thread bookmarked for the longest time and have been really lazy to read, lol.

well at least you got some good results from the look of it. representing Team Noob Lotus and Team Kickbass well :blush:

 

[FoxPro5]

actually i've had that eca thread bookmarked for the longest time and have been really lazy to read, lol.

well at least you got some good results from the look of it. representing Team Noob Lotus and Team Kickbass well :blush:

I've had it too, but haven't had the AS2K disk until now which is very nice tool.

One major limitation here is that I really have no clue what my music is supposed to sound like. I try to use the Audionutz disks because he points out what to listen for. Tonality wise, I'm hosed. I can't say for sure. I guess I go by what sounds good to me???

 

[sqkev]

play tone.if you have a 31 band dual mono EQ, play, say, 2000 Hz. Then adjust your sliders for both left and right side at 2000 till it sounds centered. if the tone is too far right, cut right and boost left simultaneously and equally. if you just cut right till its centered, your tonality changes.

If this is exactly what Bsquad did, I'm afraid I see at least 2 flaws.

1. Without at least a SPL meter, you have no idea how high or low to adjust the tone. What if you have a null or a peak at that certain frequency? How will you know how to compensate for that? Not with your ears.
The final response curves will surely not be flat if you use your ears to adjust the whole way.

2. I'm with the pro-audio crowd saying no to boosting in EQ. A bit of dynamic EQ for the bottom end might get you by, since your ears probably cannot hear distortions from the lower frequencies. For the higher up octaves, you'd need amps that can swing the transient in music. Let's just say that you boost 3dB in a few spots, you need to at least double up the amp power.
There are some drivers that aren't friendly with any boost in EQ at all.


I can see some benefits to this method though, as Bsquad described. The focus is better now and staging improved. Yeup, this is what symmetry frequency responses from both sides do. That doesn't mean the FR curves from both sides are flat across the spectrum though.

 

[FoxPro5]

If this is exactly what Bsquad did, I'm afraid I see at least 2 flaws.

1. Without at least a SPL meter, you have no idea how high or low to adjust the tone. What if you have a null or a peak at that certain frequency? How will you know how to compensate for that? Not with your ears.
The final response curves will surely not be flat if you use your ears to adjust the whole way.

2. I'm with the pro-audio crowd saying no to boosting in EQ. A bit of dynamic EQ for the bottom end might get you by, since your ears probably cannot hear distortions from the lower frequencies. For the higher up octaves, you'd need amps that can swing the transient in music. Let's just say that you boost 3dB in a few spots, you need to at least double up the amp power.
There are some drivers that aren't friendly with any boost in EQ at all.


I can see some benefits to this method though, as Bsquad described. The focus is better now and staging improved. Yeup, this is what symmetry frequency responses from both sides do. That doesn't mean the FR curves from both sides are flat across the spectrum though.

Good points. I know exactly what you mean. RTA tells all.

In a nutshell, what I felt I've accomplished is brought a little bit more order to chaos. It's probably still a clusterfuck, but it way better sounding clusterfuck. Tomorrow is another day and I'll probably not notice a bit of difference anymore.

If I can take what I've got and really try to maximize it it's potential, I'm satisfied with that. No way have I fully explored the potential of the investment I've made in this damn hobby.

 

[Whiterabbit]

this method of EQ isnt designed to fix tonality. its designed to enhance focus. thats it. so we dont need an RTA or SPL meter to tell us relative volume levels. we dont care when using this method any more than we use an SPL meter to determine T/A values. if B-squad did this right, and his equipment did what we figure its supposed to do, his RTA will be just as screwed up as it was before he EQ'ed. In fact, it should look IDENTICAL!

never boosting? sorry. can't help you there.

 

[sqkev]

Good points. I know exactly what you mean. RTA tells all.

In a nutshell, what I felt I've accomplished is brought a little bit more order to chaos. It's probably still a clusterfuck, but it way better sounding clusterfuck. Tomorrow is another day and I'll probably not notice a bit of difference anymore.

If I can take what I've got and really try to maximize it it's potential, I'm satisfied with that. No way have I fully explored the potential of the investment I've made in this damn hobby.

Don't you have access to RTA? get on it

If you want it cheap and an improvement over what you have now, get a cheapie radioshack SPL meter, skim through the fletcher-munson curve a bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher-Munson_curves), graph out a few curves and get to work.

 

[FoxPro5]

this method of EQ isnt designed to fix tonality. its designed to enhance focus. thats it. so we dont need an RTA or SPL meter to tell us relative volume levels. we dont care when using this method any more than we use an SPL meter to determine T/A values. if B-squad did this right, and his equipment did what we figure its supposed to do, his RTA will be just as screwed up as it was before he EQ'ed. In fact, it should look IDENTICAL!

never boosting? sorry. can't help you there.

That's a relief to hear. Well if it's a focusing technique, it works wonders. Again...like 10 minutes was all the longer it took. People need to try it for themselves and see if they have any luck. I know Marv has told me that as little as a 2db swing at one point made a huge difference in depth. ****, i'll take that!!

As I said, when I was done my EQ looked completely jacked! I thought no way in hell this is going to sound good at all. Obviously this needs to be repeated a few times in order to have some reliability.

But thanks for the thoughts everyone. Hopefully everyone can learn something to take back to their car.

 

[FoxPro5]

Don't you have access to RTA? get on it

If you want it cheap and an improvement over what you have now, get a cheapie radioshack SPL meter, skim through the fletcher-munson curve a bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher-Munson_curves), graph out a few curves and get to work.

I have a MobliePre and Behringer 8000 mic sitting right next to me. :blush: I was waiting to finish off the kicks before I ran it. But since I'm constantly playing around, I thought I try some new tricks in the mean time.

 

[sqkev]

this method of EQ isnt designed to fix tonality. its designed to enhance focus. thats it. so we dont need an RTA or SPL meter to tell us relative volume levels. we dont care when using this method any more than we use an SPL meter to determine T/A values. if B-squad did this right, and his equipment did what we figure its supposed to do, his RTA will be just as screwed up as it was before he EQ'ed. In fact, it should look IDENTICAL!

never boosting? sorry. can't help you there.

As far as I know (from reading what you guys are telling me in this thread), all it does is matching/creating a symmetry responses from both sides (note that i said "symmetry", not to be confused with even responses). You can easily do that with your RTA or with a computer based measurement setup.

I'm just pointing out the flaws that I see in the said method, that's all.

 

[legend94]

are you telling me that you accomplished sound quality with a rockford amp

 

[low]

interesting thread thanks for sharing.

 

[FoxPro5]

are you telling me that you accomplished sound quality with a rockford amp

You missed my PM about NEVER mentioning that on this forum, didn't you!!



















Actually, I have my Xetec on the fronts right now. So a German engineered, China made amp runs Norweigan speakers and an American engineered, China made amps runs German and Norwegian made speakers. Ever had leutfisk and sauerkraut on your cow mein? Mmmmm, that's good SQ.

 

[legend94]

You missed my PM about NEVER mentioning that on this forum, didn't you!!

I couldn't let you spread your lies about getting "sq"

very good thread, and i may have to try it when i get bored

 

[t3sn4f2]

So basiclly this means that at the very least we have to take measurements with a mic that has 2 mics, one for each ears position exactly where they will be most of the time in the car to be able to come anywhere near these results?

 

[FoxPro5]

I couldn't let you spread your lies about getting "sq"

very good thread, and i may have to try it when i get bored

Oh I'm totally making a some bumper stickers. Something like "Honk if you have SQ amps" or "Friends don't let friends have non-SQ amps" or "Christ is risen, and he's running T03's in the Jesus mobile".

 

[FoxPro5]

So basiclly this means that at the very least we have to take measurements with a mic that has 2 mics, one for each ears position exactly where they will be most of the time in the car to be able to come anywhere near these results?

Eldridge says multiple: http://www.carsound.com/columns/eldridge/

I personally cannot answer that, though.

 

[unpredictableacts]

Bsquad what kind of EQ are you using?

 

[legend94]

Bsquad what kind of EQ are you using?

his ears

 

[FoxPro5]

Bsquad what kind of EQ are you using?

Ok here's my entire system in detail just so there's no confusion:

Pioneer DEX-P9 - -digi out - -DEQ-P9
Xetec 8G-1000 - - 83wrms - - Seas Lotus RM100 - - Seas Lotus RT27f
RF 'boner of the week' 25TL Punch75 (x2) - - 200wrms - - Rainbow Profi Kickbass - - 600wrms - - Seas Lotus SW300 in a 1.25 cu'ft sealed Marv-o wonder.

The DEQ P9 has a 31 band L/R graphic EQ.

 

[unpredictableacts]

can the DEQ-p9 only be used with certian pioneer HU?

just not formiliar with the pioneer Set ups.