Rear fill was intended for passengers in the back seat. Are you planning on carrying passengers? and do you care if they have music to listen to?

 

Nope and nope. That was easy.

Thanks.

 

Rear fill ( unless heavily processed) will hurt the stereo image plain and simple.

 

Rear fill that is properly band passed, attenuated and delayed can in fact add ambience that does not at all detract from the front stage and that some peple very much enjoy. When done correctly, it can even widen the front stage.

 

I disconnected my rear fill and haven't missed it yet for the past 2 years. It boils down to personal preference. I would say experiment without it and see.

 

Loved the space it added. Also helped set my stage deep. I could steer the stage to just in front of my car. Very weird to experience

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

Do you compete? And /or are you going to Jasons GTG in North Carolina?

 

When having the rear fill debate it's very important to discuss the stereo illusion. The stereo illusion is something that (surprisingly) many people don't even understand. Part of that problem is because so much music is recorded so poorly that it's basically mono anyway, the other part is that most people listen to music passively, not actively. They put it on, but don't pay attention to anything more than the chorus, or the beat.

Stereo is designed to create a sense of space, much like 2 eyes are required for depth perception, 2 ears, and 2 channels of audio can create an illusion of space. This is where staging and imaging come into the mix. Put on a good pair of headphones, find some well recorded music, stop what you're doing, and listen.

The rear fill debate comes down to, how important are those stereo illusions to you? If they are important, rear speakers (unless heavily processed) will have a negative impact on that illusion. If staging and imaging are not important (in a car with all of the outside noise, and the fact that your attention should be on driving, not the music anyway, it's reasonable for even the most passionate audiophile to not care about proper stereo in a car) then rear speakers can add output and a more immersive experience.

Having a car stereo with or without rear fill is a matter of preference. If the stereo illusion is important in the car, then no rear fill or heavily processed rear fill is the way to go.

 

Excellent points. I for one, at this point in time, do not subscribe to the rear fill philosophy, because for me stereo imaging is what I'm interested in. However, some people have mentioned that if rear fill is done a certain way, ( with delay and low volume and whatever else ) it can add to the imaging in a positive way.

I would like to hear for myself.

 

To everyone saying no to rear fill, I highly suggest looking for a car with a proper rear fill set up and getting a listen. Some of the best competition cars use it. It does in no way detract from the stereo image, and even helps push the boundaries of the sound stage even further if done right.

To the op, you won't be able to do a proper rear fill set up with the twk processor

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

...To the op, you won't be able to do a proper rear fill set up with the twk processor

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

No worries. I was leaning in the other direction anyway but am liking the conversation about it. Lurning moar stuffs!!!

Edit: Pretty sure I saw a thread that talks about setting rear fill up recently. Took note of that one for when I set my car up. I have a DSP Pro for the car.

 

I have rears & will use them. Curious what is the typical band-pass area & how much attenuation is needed to add some fill, without distorting the image? This will be in a double cab Tundra for reference.

 

Really, anything above about 120hz will be localizable behind you. You'll want significant attenuation. Since you won't have L-R processing, time delay, and level matching to do it "correctly" you'll just have to see what level gives you the sound you like the best.

 

did my post and the OP's reply get deleted?

 

I was just about to ask the same thing.

The board has been acting up a little today.

 

well, i guess i'll do my best to remember what i said and repost it.

to anyone saying not to bother with rear fill, i highly suggest trying to find someone with a PROPER rear fill setup and taking a listen. little do many know, that some of the top scoring cars also use rear fill. it absolutely does not interfere with stereo imaging and also helps enlarge the soundstage if done right. that said, the twk isnt capable of doing proper rear fill

 

*LIKE*

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

Following suit...

I've pretty much decided to do just the front in the truck at this point anyway.

I saw a thread recently on how to set rear fill up on a DSP. I will be going that route when I set my car up. I'm using a DSP Pro on it.

 

Glad you spit that out. I felt like some recordings were extreme mono when I could have sworn they weren't


Edit: it was still great for a lot of music. Just don't care about it right now

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

Why L-R instead of R-L?

Why is it that only the noncommon signals are wanted?
Why not only the shared frequencies?
Why not full range?

If we're trying to duplicate the ambient reverb (or whatever) of an actuyal venue, why not the full range signal?

Couldn't I just place my rear speakers on axis with each other and let that remove the common signals through cancellation?

Can resistors be used to achieve the wanted delay?

what about full range but with reversed polarity to cancel out the waves which reach the rear to create an anechoic(sp?) effetc?

What about speaker placement?
Factory in the rear deck facing up
2 speakers placed centraly on the rear deck facing up, angled forward, rearward? angled to the rear?
OR on the Cpillars forward upward or rearward?

Why the limited ban width at all...

Anyway, that will give me a bit better understanding.

I've been reading all the post i could find for days now... I think I might be more confused now than when I started.

Thanks for any help.

 

When using rear fill you want it to sound like reflected sound. Nothing else.
The huge delay is to make it sound like there is a large room behind you.
The L-R or vise versa is to remove any mono or center content. Using this content will pull your ears to the rear.
In the end what you are trying to achieve is the simulation of hearing reflections on a much larger room than a vehicle and all the little things we do to process the rear fill are to eliminate the rears from sounding solid, but instead washed out and being reflected to you from a distance.
Have you ever been to a concert?
If you have you'll here the direct sound of the band coming from in front of you but you'll also hear the room the band is performing in.
It comes in lower in volume. It's basically an echo but continuous and much faster.
It's this sound we try to achieve with rear fill. Not to sound like the band had speakers at the back of the room which is what non processed rear fill does.

Also why band limited and not full range. Reflected sound looses high end and low end content pretty quickly. High end content especially gets duller faster over distance. The more high end content you remove the further away the back wall of the fake room we are trying to create will appear.

 

Are you saying don't run the rear mids in mono?
What bandpass range would you set ?

 

Copy and pasted from another thread.. PS, you dont need to ask the same question in multiple threads

Why L-R instead of R-L?

same thing

Why is it that only the noncommon signals are wanted?
Why not only the shared frequencies?

to create a sense of space

Why not full range?
If we're trying to duplicate the ambient reverb (or whatever) of an actuyal venue, why not the full range signal?

higher frequencies are easier to locate. lower frequencies arent needed as far as i know

Couldn't I just place my rear speakers on axis with each other and let that remove the common signals through cancellation?

thats not how sound/speakers work

Can resistors be used to achieve the wanted delay?

umm.. thats also not how that works

what about full range but with reversed polarity to cancel out the waves which reach the rear to create an anechoic(sp?) effetc?

That will also cause destructive cancellation with the front speakers. rear speakers with heavy delay will also cause cancellation with the front speakers, but not like this. they will just cause some comb filtering.

What about speaker placement?
Factory in the rear deck facing up
2 speakers placed centraly on the rear deck facing up, angled forward, rearward? angled to the rear?
OR on the Cpillars forward upward or rearward?

same as any speaker in a car.. ideally as deep and wide as possible

Why the limited ban width at all...

you asked that above

Anyway, that will give me a bit better understanding.

I've been reading all the post i could find for days now... I think I might be more confused now than when I started.

Thanks for any help.

hope that helps. someone correct me if im wrong

 

So funny how just a few months ago rear speakers was the devil.
Maybe I didn't have something right or just wasn't listening enough but I couldn't hear a difference with the MS-8 running rears with logic 7. But they where only low in the rear doors not far from my head.

 

Yeah the audiocontrol processor can't do left minus right. Hell, it doesn't even do left/right eq

Sent from my VS988 using Tapatalk

 

yup not yet at least. Ill be testing some of that beta software for them in a few weeks they said they should have it available. Still having some issues right now

 

Thanks Audi/Tony! Carlos from JL just got back to me as well and told me basically the exact same thing. Will give this a shot! Thanks again for the help as always!

 

Lol easy mistake.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Hey all, so I set up the +L -R in my truck and it sounds pretty cool but it is not very noticeable, even with level cranked up. Is it safe to assume it is because my rears are low in the rear doors (2108 GMC Sierra quad cab)? My front stage is pretty f-in loud so that also could be it

How do you even go about EQ-ing a setup like this? Just curious... or does it even matter? Thanks!

 

It's not supposed to be noticeable, if done right.

 

I'm planning on trying out some rear fill on my fresh install I'm working on for my 2000 Honda Insight. The hybrid battery has been removed and I'm doing a completely new trunk. Tiny hatchback... thinking about aiming the two rear speakers rearwards. I'd assume this is more preferred than, say, upfiring or forward firing? Or maybe put them in the rearmost of the trunk, forward firing?

 

And it’s just my opinion that L-R methods don’t sound good
It reminds me of the hirem effect in a matrix surround from the 60s


It sounds dumb and boring in my humbleness


Seems to me we need to see a rear processor that has some reverb , decay , detune , twotap echo , all user defined .


TLDR I’m not a proponent of L-R rear fail

 

Glad to hear all opinions! I am programming different rear fill options as presets and trying them all to see which I like best. Is there a configuration that you prefer that can be accomplished with a normal DSP? (I have a JL VXi) Thanks

 

I'm with oabeieo, I don't like rear fill, even when done "correctly". It's personal preference, but even if it's done L-R, bandpassed, delayed, attenuated, etc. it is still artificial. I listen to a lot of music with headphones and some decent stereo speakers at home, so my standard is stereo, hearing any rear fill sounds really off to me (and it is off).

I can appreciate why people like differential rear fill, but it's not for me.