Am i wrong here?

[djphilly 11]

Actually no. My whole point is that at lower volumes an amplifier WILL NOT make one damn bit of difference. Yes, at higher volumes, an amp will allow you to have better sq. My hu with paper components will go louder than I want to listen to them before it starts "producing mad noise." Sources vary, so while mine is capable of doing this (clarion), another hu (sony xplode or OEM unit) with the same exact speakers cannot. Based on your logic, you would get the same sq no matter what source you were using as long as you were externally amplifying the system. This is not true.

As far as your comment eggy, you are blindly following people on here without real understanding of what is going on.

So for the poster on the other site with a Crower stage 3 wanting a little more out of his headunit you truly think this is the case?

Let's look at this objectively. That car is going to have a noise floor in the 85dB range. In order to have ANY acoustic separation you need to be 10dB > than the background noise. This puts us at 95dB which will be a level that is not "more" per his request, but either way we'll use it. A normal set of speakers is around 88dB efficient. To reach 95dB we will need to be putting >4w to the speakers to get them there. So at this "low" volume you really think that a h/u will sound just like an amplifier? Obviously not. Go to Best Buy and listen to a $200 boombox at 4w and then listen to a $200 amp at 4w and tell me there is no difference.

No where did I even come close to saying that there would be NO improvement with a different source, just that it fundamentally isn't the reason for sounding bad. The amplifiers in h/u's are a complete joke, and this isn't at all about output but about quality. Dynamic capability, headroom, components that don't color the sound, and a decent power supply are all required for "SQ" but with your experience this should really be obvious to you already...that is unless you've never done a comparison and are blindly recommending what you have and not what you have experienced.

Eggy may not understand, but at least he is trying to by actually reading things from people that do. I can't say the same about you.

I would like to know in what events did mrd act as a "judge"? hard to believe he was ever involved in anything SQ

[mrd 0]

Actually no. My whole point is that at lower volumes an amplifier WILL NOT make one damn bit of difference. Yes, at higher volumes, an amp will allow you to have better sq. My hu with paper components will go louder than I want to listen to them before it starts "producing mad noise." Sources vary, so while mine is capable of doing this (clarion), another hu (sony xplode or OEM unit) with the same exact speakers cannot. Based on your logic, you would get the same sq no matter what source you were using as long as you were externally amplifying the system. This is not true.

As far as your comment eggy, you are blindly following people on here without real understanding of what is going on.

So for the poster on the other site with a Crower stage 3 wanting a little more out of his headunit you truly think this is the case?

Let's look at this objectively. That car is going to have a noise floor in the 85dB range. In order to have ANY acoustic separation you need to be 10dB > than the background noise. This puts us at 95dB which will be a level that is not "more" per his request, but either way we'll use it. A normal set of speakers is around 88dB efficient. To reach 95dB we will need to be putting >4w to the speakers to get them there. So at this "low" volume you really think that a h/u will sound just like an amplifier? Obviously not. Go to Best Buy and listen to a $200 boombox at 4w and then listen to a $200 amp at 4w and tell me there is no difference.

No where did I even come close to saying that there would be NO improvement with a different source, just that it fundamentally isn't the reason for sounding bad. The amplifiers in h/u's are a complete joke, and this isn't at all about output but about quality. Dynamic capability, headroom, components that don't color the sound, and a decent power supply are all required for "SQ" but with your experience this should really be obvious to you already...that is unless you've never done a comparison and are blindly recommending what you have and not what you have experienced.

Eggy may not understand, but at least he is trying to by actually reading things from people that do. I can't say the same about you.

I would like to know in what events did mrd act as a "judge"? hard to believe he was ever involved in anything SQ

I was never a judge. That was the other guy.

The point is sq CAN be achieved without using an external amp. That is the only point we were trying to make, not specifically in regards to the op on ht, but merely because eggy said it was impossible to achieve sq WITHOUT an external amp. Either you don't know what the exact argument is, or you've never tried it. One of the two...

[///M5 2,833]

Actually the point was to recommend to the person making the thread what he should do. SQ or not. Amusing to have an SQ discussion without talking about installation and deadening, because no matter what there is no way in hell to achieve without focusing your energy in that domain. I've never heard a "good sounding" system with just the headunit either. I have a pretty good headunit and you can come listen to mine with and without the amps at the same output and you'll cringe at the difference, in particular over 95dB. My headunit is one of the few that will let you run active with either the outputs or the rca's so the comparison is easy to do. Huge difference.

[mrd 0]

Actually the point was to recommend to the person making the thread what he should do. SQ or not. Amusing to have an SQ discussion without talking about installation and deadening, because no matter what there is no way in hell to achieve without focusing your energy in that domain. I've never heard a "good sounding" system with just the headunit either. I have a pretty good headunit and you can come listen to mine with and without the amps at the same output and you'll cringe at the difference, in particular over 95dB. My headunit is one of the few that will let you run active with either the outputs or the rca's so the comparison is easy to do. Huge difference.

We got off topic when eggy said sq not possible.

We were only discussing the aspect of the amp. If you'll read fcm's post he stated that you can achieve sq without an amp, but with properly installed speakers, a good hu and sd. That is when eggy said basically that you would never get sq without an amp. You said huge difference "over 95dB." If you look at the dB chart, 95dB is equivalent to a hand circular saw at three feet. According to the same table 80dB is VERY LOUD road traffic. 95dB is much louder than I like to listen to my music. I'm not arguing that it doesn't make a difference at 95dB, it does, but I don't listen to my music that loud anyway. In my car, I upgraded my hu first. This made a ridiculous difference over the stock unit. I have a real hard time believing that if I amplified the stock signal I would have better sound than I do now. I then amplified my system. This only made a difference at higher volumes, much higher volumes, but now I don't have to turn my hu up as loud for the same "listening" volume and the sq is still the same when the settings are the same however, I now have the ability to change the frequencies that only the rear channel puts out easier.

[eggyhustles 33]

Actually the point was to recommend to the person making the thread what he should do. SQ or not. Amusing to have an SQ discussion without talking about installation and deadening, because no matter what there is no way in hell to achieve without focusing your energy in that domain. I've never heard a "good sounding" system with just the headunit either. I have a pretty good headunit and you can come listen to mine with and without the amps at the same output and you'll cringe at the difference, in particular over 95dB. My headunit is one of the few that will let you run active with either the outputs or the rca's so the comparison is easy to do. Huge difference.

We got off topic when eggy said sq not possible.

We were only discussing the aspect of the amp. If you'll read fcm's post he stated that you can achieve sq without an amp, but with properly installed speakers, a good hu and sd. That is when eggy said basically that you would never get sq without an amp. You said huge difference "over 95dB." If you look at the dB chart, 95dB is equivalent to a hand circular saw at three feet. According to the same table 80dB is VERY LOUD road traffic. 95dB is much louder than I like to listen to my music. I'm not arguing that it doesn't make a difference at 95dB, it does, but I don't listen to my music that loud anyway. In my car, I upgraded my hu first. This made a ridiculous difference over the stock unit. I have a real hard time believing that if I amplified the stock signal I would have better sound than I do now. I then amplified my system. This only made a difference at higher volumes, much higher volumes, but now I don't have to turn my hu up as loud for the same "listening" volume and the sq is still the same when the settings are the same however, I now have the ability to change the frequencies that only the rear channel puts out easier.

dude you said you could have a sq system with coaxials all around. how many sq systems are ampless? how many use rear fill? how many are passive? come on..

[mrd 0]

Actually the point was to recommend to the person making the thread what he should do. SQ or not. Amusing to have an SQ discussion without talking about installation and deadening, because no matter what there is no way in hell to achieve without focusing your energy in that domain. I've never heard a "good sounding" system with just the headunit either. I have a pretty good headunit and you can come listen to mine with and without the amps at the same output and you'll cringe at the difference, in particular over 95dB. My headunit is one of the few that will let you run active with either the outputs or the rca's so the comparison is easy to do. Huge difference.

We got off topic when eggy said sq not possible.

We were only discussing the aspect of the amp. If you'll read fcm's post he stated that you can achieve sq without an amp, but with properly installed speakers, a good hu and sd. That is when eggy said basically that you would never get sq without an amp. You said huge difference "over 95dB." If you look at the dB chart, 95dB is equivalent to a hand circular saw at three feet. According to the same table 80dB is VERY LOUD road traffic. 95dB is much louder than I like to listen to my music. I'm not arguing that it doesn't make a difference at 95dB, it does, but I don't listen to my music that loud anyway. In my car, I upgraded my hu first. This made a ridiculous difference over the stock unit. I have a real hard time believing that if I amplified the stock signal I would have better sound than I do now. I then amplified my system. This only made a difference at higher volumes, much higher volumes, but now I don't have to turn my hu up as loud for the same "listening" volume and the sq is still the same when the settings are the same however, I now have the ability to change the frequencies that only the rear channel puts out easier.

dude you said you could have a sq system with coaxials all around. how many sq systems are ampless? how many use rear fill? how many are passive? come on..

Why can't you? The point is it CAN be done and it is done. You even suggested coaxials to the op to run for better sq... all those 2-ways and 3-ways you were suggesting are coaxials...

Edited October 17, 2009 by mrd

[eggyhustles 33]

No

I suggested that he go with the rsd comps, a 2 channel amp, and sound deadening...you and fcm kept making an argument that he needed rear speakers..

Remember this?

This guy is an idiot. If you have a good front stage, you're really not going to hear the rear speakers anyways. Also you get imaging issues, time delay issues if you want to get technical... more money, more power.. etc etc... once you hear a car with a great front stage, you'd understand.

Rear speakers take alot away from your imaging. First there is the time delay issue but more importantly, your sound is supposed to "appear" as though the singer is on the dash. This means that the majority of sound needs to come from in front of you. If you have a bunch of sound coming from behind you, it adds NOTHING and only takes away from the goal. It makes it that much harder to achieve.

Stock speaker locations are not there for audiophiles. If auto manufacturers ever get into SQ competitions then you won't need to replace a single speaker and you can be happy with the factory locations. It makes no sense to accept that you need to replace the factory speaker because it's crappy but believe the location it was placed in is superior in some way.

Dumbass, your not supposed to hear the rear speakers, wiring them in series will cut output by 50%, [3dB], wired in mono will remove any left/right definition from the rear, no highs from rear will remove directionality, rear fill in a car will bring the front staging up by eliminating left/right bias.

If you think a good sound stage and imaging is the singer "appearing" to come from the dash you need to go back the audio school.

If you looked you would know the Alpine CDA-9887/86 both have 6ch time correction so "time delay" is not an issue, if you could read you would know there is no "bunch of sound" coming from the rear, and the solution to a good sounding system is not "more money more power etc etc...", you may think you know what your doing, it is becoming more and more obvious that you know shit, or to be kind, you know very little. 94

I may not know alot about car audio, but you 2 guys are idiots....there's no other nice way to put it.

Edited October 17, 2009 by eggyhustles

[///M5 2,833]

Why can't you? The point is it CAN be done and it is done. You even suggested coaxials to the op to run for better sq... all those 2-ways and 3-ways you were suggesting are coaxials...

LOL, that is funny. Good coaxials is as much of an oxymoron as a headunit amplifier. ROFL.

[chopper79 1]

I do like these coaxial drivers ....

[mrd 0]

No

I suggested that he go with the rsd comps, a 2 channel amp, and sound deadening...you and fcm kept making an argument that he needed rear speakers..

Remember this?

This guy is an idiot. If you have a good front stage, you're really not going to hear the rear speakers anyways. Also you get imaging issues, time delay issues if you want to get technical... more money, more power.. etc etc... once you hear a car with a great front stage, you'd understand.

Rear speakers take alot away from your imaging. First there is the time delay issue but more importantly, your sound is supposed to "appear" as though the singer is on the dash. This means that the majority of sound needs to come from in front of you. If you have a bunch of sound coming from behind you, it adds NOTHING and only takes away from the goal. It makes it that much harder to achieve.

Stock speaker locations are not there for audiophiles. If auto manufacturers ever get into SQ competitions then you won't need to replace a single speaker and you can be happy with the factory locations. It makes no sense to accept that you need to replace the factory speaker because it's crappy but believe the location it was placed in is superior in some way.

Dumbass, your not supposed to hear the rear speakers, wiring them in series will cut output by 50%, [3dB], wired in mono will remove any left/right definition from the rear, no highs from rear will remove directionality, rear fill in a car will bring the front staging up by eliminating left/right bias.

If you think a good sound stage and imaging is the singer "appearing" to come from the dash you need to go back the audio school.

If you looked you would know the Alpine CDA-9887/86 both have 6ch time correction so "time delay" is not an issue, if you could read you would know there is no "bunch of sound" coming from the rear, and the solution to a good sounding system is not "more money more power etc etc...", you may think you know what your doing, it is becoming more and more obvious that you know shit, or to be kind, you know very little. 94

I may not know alot about car audio, but you 2 guys are idiots....there's no other nice way to put it.

In another topic you suggested coaxials...

If you have rear speakers set up in the way fcm suggested it sounds much much much better than running only the fronts. I prefer "rear fill", you may not. Speakers you think sound good, I may think sound like shit and vice versa. Theoretically for optimum sq, the tweeter should be placed as close as possible to the midbass, in a coax, they are directly in line so you have zero delay issues... probably not noticeable to 99.99percent of people anyway...

[KU40 173]

Except in a coaxial there is a large hole in the center of the midbass and 95% of them don't allow for separation of signal prior to the speaker. Which means the mid and tweet can't get the individual crossovers they need other than the pathetic -6db capacitor some manufacturers put on the tweeter.

[///M5 2,833]

No

I suggested that he go with the rsd comps, a 2 channel amp, and sound deadening...you and fcm kept making an argument that he needed rear speakers..

Remember this?

This guy is an idiot. If you have a good front stage, you're really not going to hear the rear speakers anyways. Also you get imaging issues, time delay issues if you want to get technical... more money, more power.. etc etc... once you hear a car with a great front stage, you'd understand.

Rear speakers take alot away from your imaging. First there is the time delay issue but more importantly, your sound is supposed to "appear" as though the singer is on the dash. This means that the majority of sound needs to come from in front of you. If you have a bunch of sound coming from behind you, it adds NOTHING and only takes away from the goal. It makes it that much harder to achieve.

Stock speaker locations are not there for audiophiles. If auto manufacturers ever get into SQ competitions then you won't need to replace a single speaker and you can be happy with the factory locations. It makes no sense to accept that you need to replace the factory speaker because it's crappy but believe the location it was placed in is superior in some way.

Dumbass, your not supposed to hear the rear speakers, wiring them in series will cut output by 50%, [3dB], wired in mono will remove any left/right definition from the rear, no highs from rear will remove directionality, rear fill in a car will bring the front staging up by eliminating left/right bias.

If you think a good sound stage and imaging is the singer "appearing" to come from the dash you need to go back the audio school.

If you looked you would know the Alpine CDA-9887/86 both have 6ch time correction so "time delay" is not an issue, if you could read you would know there is no "bunch of sound" coming from the rear, and the solution to a good sounding system is not "more money more power etc etc...", you may think you know what your doing, it is becoming more and more obvious that you know shit, or to be kind, you know very little. 94

I may not know alot about car audio, but you 2 guys are idiots....there's no other nice way to put it.

In another topic you suggested coaxials...

If you have rear speakers set up in the way fcm suggested it sounds much much much better than running only the fronts. I prefer "rear fill", you may not. Speakers you think sound good, I may think sound like shit and vice versa. Theoretically for optimum sq, the tweeter should be placed as close as possible to the midbass, in a coax, they are directly in line so you have zero delay issues... probably not noticeable to 99.99percent of people anyway...

Wrong again. You still have delay issues as the driving point of the drivers is not aligned (ie the motors). Having them on the same axis does something else, but since you know everything I don't have to tell you what it is.

I feel sorry for you, you claim to like rear fill which obviously means you have never heard an SQ setup. Sure I realize that for some effects you can achieve this with rears, but instead of making it easy for you I'll just assume like everything else you know nothing about them.

I do have a question though, what are the 0.01% of people going to notice? ie what will be different? You don't have to answer as I know you don't know the answer, but that's okay. I understand the internet.

[mrd 0]

No

I suggested that he go with the rsd comps, a 2 channel amp, and sound deadening...you and fcm kept making an argument that he needed rear speakers..

Remember this?

This guy is an idiot. If you have a good front stage, you're really not going to hear the rear speakers anyways. Also you get imaging issues, time delay issues if you want to get technical... more money, more power.. etc etc... once you hear a car with a great front stage, you'd understand.

Rear speakers take alot away from your imaging. First there is the time delay issue but more importantly, your sound is supposed to "appear" as though the singer is on the dash. This means that the majority of sound needs to come from in front of you. If you have a bunch of sound coming from behind you, it adds NOTHING and only takes away from the goal. It makes it that much harder to achieve.

Stock speaker locations are not there for audiophiles. If auto manufacturers ever get into SQ competitions then you won't need to replace a single speaker and you can be happy with the factory locations. It makes no sense to accept that you need to replace the factory speaker because it's crappy but believe the location it was placed in is superior in some way.

Dumbass, your not supposed to hear the rear speakers, wiring them in series will cut output by 50%, [3dB], wired in mono will remove any left/right definition from the rear, no highs from rear will remove directionality, rear fill in a car will bring the front staging up by eliminating left/right bias.

If you think a good sound stage and imaging is the singer "appearing" to come from the dash you need to go back the audio school.

If you looked you would know the Alpine CDA-9887/86 both have 6ch time correction so "time delay" is not an issue, if you could read you would know there is no "bunch of sound" coming from the rear, and the solution to a good sounding system is not "more money more power etc etc...", you may think you know what your doing, it is becoming more and more obvious that you know shit, or to be kind, you know very little. 94

I may not know alot about car audio, but you 2 guys are idiots....there's no other nice way to put it.

In another topic you suggested coaxials...

If you have rear speakers set up in the way fcm suggested it sounds much much much better than running only the fronts. I prefer "rear fill", you may not. Speakers you think sound good, I may think sound like shit and vice versa. Theoretically for optimum sq, the tweeter should be placed as close as possible to the midbass, in a coax, they are directly in line so you have zero delay issues... probably not noticeable to 99.99percent of people anyway...

Wrong again. You still have delay issues as the driving point of the drivers is not aligned (ie the motors). Having them on the same axis does something else, but since you know everything I don't have to tell you what it is.

I feel sorry for you, you claim to like rear fill which obviously means you have never heard an SQ setup. Sure I realize that for some effects you can achieve this with rears, but instead of making it easy for you I'll just assume like everything else you know nothing about them.

I do have a question though, what are the 0.01% of people going to notice? ie what will be different? You don't have to answer as I know you don't know the answer, but that's okay. I understand the internet.

Here you go.

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diy-mobile-audio-sq-forum/62850-tweeter-alignment-critical.html

Rear speakers can = 5.1 or 7.1 if you hu is capable.

But of course, I don't have to tell you any of this shit because you already know it. Because you know everything. It's ok. I understand. It's the internet.

Edited October 18, 2009 by mrd

[///M5 2,833]

No

I suggested that he go with the rsd comps, a 2 channel amp, and sound deadening...you and fcm kept making an argument that he needed rear speakers..

Remember this?

This guy is an idiot. If you have a good front stage, you're really not going to hear the rear speakers anyways. Also you get imaging issues, time delay issues if you want to get technical... more money, more power.. etc etc... once you hear a car with a great front stage, you'd understand.

Rear speakers take alot away from your imaging. First there is the time delay issue but more importantly, your sound is supposed to "appear" as though the singer is on the dash. This means that the majority of sound needs to come from in front of you. If you have a bunch of sound coming from behind you, it adds NOTHING and only takes away from the goal. It makes it that much harder to achieve.

Stock speaker locations are not there for audiophiles. If auto manufacturers ever get into SQ competitions then you won't need to replace a single speaker and you can be happy with the factory locations. It makes no sense to accept that you need to replace the factory speaker because it's crappy but believe the location it was placed in is superior in some way.

Dumbass, your not supposed to hear the rear speakers, wiring them in series will cut output by 50%, [3dB], wired in mono will remove any left/right definition from the rear, no highs from rear will remove directionality, rear fill in a car will bring the front staging up by eliminating left/right bias.

If you think a good sound stage and imaging is the singer "appearing" to come from the dash you need to go back the audio school.

If you looked you would know the Alpine CDA-9887/86 both have 6ch time correction so "time delay" is not an issue, if you could read you would know there is no "bunch of sound" coming from the rear, and the solution to a good sounding system is not "more money more power etc etc...", you may think you know what your doing, it is becoming more and more obvious that you know shit, or to be kind, you know very little. 94

I may not know alot about car audio, but you 2 guys are idiots....there's no other nice way to put it.

In another topic you suggested coaxials...

If you have rear speakers set up in the way fcm suggested it sounds much much much better than running only the fronts. I prefer "rear fill", you may not. Speakers you think sound good, I may think sound like shit and vice versa. Theoretically for optimum sq, the tweeter should be placed as close as possible to the midbass, in a coax, they are directly in line so you have zero delay issues... probably not noticeable to 99.99percent of people anyway...

Wrong again. You still have delay issues as the driving point of the drivers is not aligned (ie the motors). Having them on the same axis does something else, but since you know everything I don't have to tell you what it is.

I feel sorry for you, you claim to like rear fill which obviously means you have never heard an SQ setup. Sure I realize that for some effects you can achieve this with rears, but instead of making it easy for you I'll just assume like everything else you know nothing about them.

I do have a question though, what are the 0.01% of people going to notice? ie what will be different? You don't have to answer as I know you don't know the answer, but that's okay. I understand the internet.

Here you go.

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diy-mobile-audio-sq-forum/62850-tweeter-alignment-critical.html

Rear speakers can = 5.1 or 7.1 if you hu is capable.

But of course, I don't have to tell you any of this shit because you already know it. Because you know everything. It's ok. I understand. It's the internet.

Seriously you give me that link, LOL. So you can't answer, what a surprise instead you look for reference information and then can't even summarize and instead have to link. The focus of that thread is aiming btw and how to deal with time alignment which is not the same as having the drivers from the same radiating point. I'll give you a hint, go look at the reasoning behind slanted baffle designs and then you'll understand the rest of the trade-offs.

So you have 5.1 music you listen to in your car? Again, NOT at all what rear fill is for but I knew you couldn't answer that.

You can continue to expose the fact that you really don't have any real background in audio if you like or you can search, misunderstand and cite sources from elsewhere if you want to continue to amuse. Either way is fine with me.

[johnecon2001 82]

I'm just going to interject for a quick moment to mention that all good sound comes down to source. I'll bring up yet again, the man that WON the SQ world championships (2001-2002ish?) in a Volkswagen GTI with the stock 3-way paper cone components. The only things he added was the Pioneer P9 combo and a set of older Boston Acoustics amplifiers.

Let me reiterate the stock speakers part. Processing people. That what it's all about. That is the first step to SQ. It contains your equalizer, your time alignment and your crossovers.

[mrd 0]

I'm just going to interject for a quick moment to mention that all good sound comes down to source. I'll bring up yet again, the man that WON the SQ world championships (2001-2002ish?) in a Volkswagen GTI with the stock 3-way paper cone components. The only things he added was the Pioneer P9 combo and a set of older Boston Acoustics amplifiers.

Let me reiterate the stock speakers part. Processing people. That what it's all about. That is the first step to SQ. It contains your equalizer, your time alignment and your crossovers.

But apparently not because m5 is telling everyone else otherwise...

BTW m5, I just copied and pasted that link from my bookmarks page. Let's see, I can either copy and paste it or type out a synopsis... Let me think... You can go to hell. :ebeer:

Certain cars come with 5.1 systems in them from the factory... but everyone says rear speakers make the whole system sound like shit... oh noes! What you people really don't understand is a case by case basis. You learn one thing and apply it to everything, which just isn't how it works...

Maybe if you didn't think you were God of the car audio industry and actually think once in a while you might start to finally get it through your head what I am trying to tell you. But I guess I can't be that smart to challenge m5!

Do you even know the reason that there are no rear speakers in concert halls? The reason that all the sound comes from the front?

[chopper79 1]

This is getting interesting, to say the least. I personally have seen very well sounding systems with nothing more then head unit power. They have been low volume for judging like I posted earlier. I also have a buddy of mine that has gone on to win a few few SQ world championships with coaxial style drivers in the front. I personally don't run rear fill but it is a good tool to use for helping your sound stage if it is low. Just like I stated in my earlier post , the signal starts at the source... crap in = crap out, You need a good source. Also how did this get so far from the original discussion??? I must have missed something along the way.... I will stay here and eat some more

[///M5 2,833]

I'm just going to interject for a quick moment to mention that all good sound comes down to source. I'll bring up yet again, the man that WON the SQ world championships (2001-2002ish?) in a Volkswagen GTI with the stock 3-way paper cone components. The only things he added was the Pioneer P9 combo and a set of older Boston Acoustics amplifiers.

Let me reiterate the stock speakers part. Processing people. That what it's all about. That is the first step to SQ. It contains your equalizer, your time alignment and your crossovers.

But apparently not because m5 is telling everyone else otherwise...

BTW m5, I just copied and pasted that link from my bookmarks page. Let's see, I can either copy and paste it or type out a synopsis... Let me think... You can go to hell. :ebeer:

Certain cars come with 5.1 systems in them from the factory... but everyone says rear speakers make the whole system sound like shit... oh noes! What you people really don't understand is a case by case basis. You learn one thing and apply it to everything, which just isn't how it works...

Maybe if you didn't think you were God of the car audio industry and actually think once in a while you might start to finally get it through your head what I am trying to tell you. But I guess I can't be that smart to challenge m5!

Do you even know the reason that there are no rear speakers in concert halls? The reason that all the sound comes from the front?

No need to get pissy and take this personal, not my fault you are a complete noob. As for myself, I am not a god, still learning. Lots to go.

And the 5.1 systems in those cars was a MARKETING GIMIC. Answer the question, do you have ANY 5.1 recordings you listen to in your car? If not, why would you want a 5.1?

How are you asking me about concert halls with fronts only when you promote rears?

You also misjudge John's comment. He didn't say the headunit made the difference, but the processing in it. Perhaps you know of a "budget" headunit that has the processing power of the P9? Completely different beast. In this case that tuning potential is part of the install which I said the OP in the thread we are discussing needs to focus on and not waste his money on a headunit.

[mrd 0]

I'm just going to interject for a quick moment to mention that all good sound comes down to source. I'll bring up yet again, the man that WON the SQ world championships (2001-2002ish?) in a Volkswagen GTI with the stock 3-way paper cone components. The only things he added was the Pioneer P9 combo and a set of older Boston Acoustics amplifiers.

Let me reiterate the stock speakers part. Processing people. That what it's all about. That is the first step to SQ. It contains your equalizer, your time alignment and your crossovers.

But apparently not because m5 is telling everyone else otherwise...

BTW m5, I just copied and pasted that link from my bookmarks page. Let's see, I can either copy and paste it or type out a synopsis... Let me think... You can go to hell. :ebeer:

Certain cars come with 5.1 systems in them from the factory... but everyone says rear speakers make the whole system sound like shit... oh noes! What you people really don't understand is a case by case basis. You learn one thing and apply it to everything, which just isn't how it works...

Maybe if you didn't think you were God of the car audio industry and actually think once in a while you might start to finally get it through your head what I am trying to tell you. But I guess I can't be that smart to challenge m5!

Do you even know the reason that there are no rear speakers in concert halls? The reason that all the sound comes from the front?

No need to get pissy and take this personal, not my fault you are a complete noob. As for myself, I am not a god, still learning. Lots to go.

And the 5.1 systems in those cars was a MARKETING GIMIC. Answer the question, do you have ANY 5.1 recordings you listen to in your car? If not, why would you want a 5.1?

How are you asking me about concert halls with fronts only when you promote rears?

You also misjudge John's comment. He didn't say the headunit made the difference, but the processing in it. Perhaps you know of a "budget" headunit that has the processing power of the P9? Completely different beast. In this case that tuning potential is part of the install which I said the OP in the thread we are discussing needs to focus on and not waste his money on a headunit.

Actually yes, I do have 5.1 recordings that I listen to... They are dvd audio. And it is not a gimic. It is legitimately awesome. How can the processing in a hu make a difference but not the hu itself? Different hu's have different levels of processing in them...

I'm guessing the reason you never answered my question is because you don't know...

[Impious 1,476]

I'm just going to interject for a quick moment to mention that all good sound comes down to source. I'll bring up yet again, the man that WON the SQ world championships (2001-2002ish?) in a Volkswagen GTI with the stock 3-way paper cone components. The only things he added was the Pioneer P9 combo and a set of older Boston Acoustics amplifiers.

Let me reiterate the stock speakers part. Processing people. That what it's all about. That is the first step to SQ. It contains your equalizer, your time alignment and your crossovers.

He was a world champion, but he didn't win his world championship with that setup. It was a single show, that he only entered because he didn't want to miss the show and miss out on points. So this wasn't his real competition setup. It was a one time thing. His name was Jason Ewing. He was at one time a member of Team Image Dynamics and according to those who know him, one of the most knowledgeable alarm install guys in the country. He was also on Pimp My Ride for a short period of time. Don't ask me why I remember so much about this guy, because I really don't know. I guess it's from the years he was a prominent member of ECA, back when I was first getting "hard core" into the SQ side of things and spent a shit load of time there...it was at that time that he won the show with the stock VW speakers.

But to the point you are making; It's not necessarily the source, it's the processing and more importantly the proper tools and knowledge to use it correctly. Processing is still worthless if you don't know how to properly use it or the proper tools to utilize it.

[///M5 2,833]

Actually yes, I do have 5.1 recordings that I listen to... They are dvd audio. And it is not a gimic. It is legitimately awesome. How can the processing in a hu make a difference but not the hu itself? Different hu's have different levels of processing in them...

I'm guessing the reason you never answered my question is because you don't know...

What 5.1 recordings?

The P9 has an offboard processor. Not part of the h/u

[mrd 0]

Actually yes, I do have 5.1 recordings that I listen to... They are dvd audio. And it is not a gimic. It is legitimately awesome. How can the processing in a hu make a difference but not the hu itself? Different hu's have different levels of processing in them...

I'm guessing the reason you never answered my question is because you don't know...

What 5.1 recordings?

The P9 has an offboard processor. Not part of the h/u

There is a dvd audio cd that came with the car that has kiss from rose and I don't remember what else is on it, but it has both the 5.1 recordings on it and regular cd recordings so you can listen to the difference back to back. I'm about to order the complex from blue man group though... it should be awesome.

Usually the processing is done inside the hu which is why crappy hus produce crappy sound.

[eggyhustles 33]

[///M5 2,833]

Actually yes, I do have 5.1 recordings that I listen to... They are dvd audio. And it is not a gimic. It is legitimately awesome. How can the processing in a hu make a difference but not the hu itself? Different hu's have different levels of processing in them...

I'm guessing the reason you never answered my question is because you don't know...

What 5.1 recordings?

The P9 has an offboard processor. Not part of the h/u

There is a dvd audio cd that came with the car that has kiss from rose and I don't remember what else is on it, but it has both the 5.1 recordings on it and regular cd recordings so you can listen to the difference back to back. I'm about to order the complex from blue man group though... it should be awesome.

Usually the processing is done inside the hu which is why crappy hus produce crappy sound.

So you are proposing rear fill and 5.1 for ONE cd? And its a demo. Nice logic.

[mrd 0]

Actually yes, I do have 5.1 recordings that I listen to... They are dvd audio. And it is not a gimic. It is legitimately awesome. How can the processing in a hu make a difference but not the hu itself? Different hu's have different levels of processing in them...

I'm guessing the reason you never answered my question is because you don't know...

What 5.1 recordings?

The P9 has an offboard processor. Not part of the h/u

There is a dvd audio cd that came with the car that has kiss from rose and I don't remember what else is on it, but it has both the 5.1 recordings on it and regular cd recordings so you can listen to the difference back to back. I'm about to order the complex from blue man group though... it should be awesome.

Usually the processing is done inside the hu which is why crappy hus produce crappy sound.

So you are proposing rear fill and 5.1 for ONE cd? And its a demo. Nice logic.

No I am not. I am proposing rear fill for cd and 5.1 for dvd audio or sacd.

You still haven't answered my question... which furthers my belief that you truly don't know...

If you would actually READ about dvd audio and sacd maybe you would understand that it is not a gimic. Because obviously you still think I'm an idiot.