27 replies to this topic

[Big_Valven]

Impressive.

quite ugly.
quite impractical.

I would much rather see drivers like that installed properly - in some nice big cabinets in my listening room.

[shizzle]

I think his only saving grace is the people around him are more ignorant than him.

If he pulled up to an MEA SQ event, methinks he would leave a bit depressed

[br85]

I Agree with Muzzy. It's possible those midbass' are AP sealed (which could be made to sound GREAT since the doors could easily be silenced), but the rest is an eyesore and probably an earsore as well. If you absolutely MUST do something that stupid, the least you could do is flush mount the mids so there's not screws and mounting flanges poking out everywhere. Yuck.

[Luke352]

The mids look like Hustler Audio, which are supposedly very nice, the ribbon could also be a Hustler Audio Ribbon as well. But unfortunately that doesn't save any of it from some of the worst positioning possible.

http://www.hustleraudio.com/about.html

[Fury♫]

Love how you guys critique how a car sounds without listening to it.
Why do we even bother with our ears in the first place?

[muzzy66]

fury, on May 15 2009, 12:36 AM, said:

Love how you guys critique how a car sounds without listening to it.
Why do we even bother with our ears in the first place?

Do you need to drive a 3 tonne truck with an 85kw, 160nm motor in order to know it will be slow?

Do you need jump off the top of Centrepiont tower to decide that the impact with the road below probably won't be good for you?

I think we can safely answer no to both of those questions, because our knowledge of science makes us confident enough that we dont really need (or in those cases want) to try it and find out.

Sound is also a science, and sometimes we can just look at a system and say "that is a bad design".

That's not to say that it WILL sound horrible - it's possible that it may sound absolutely stunning in the flesh - but the design concept is flawed. If that car does sound good, it's most likely because of either strange freak of nature, or due to the fact that the owner has processed the living crap out of it until (most) of the flaws could be overcome.

Of course it's great to use your ears, but that doesn't mean we can't also use our brain

Edited by muzzy66, 15 May 2009 - 12:56 PM.

[Fury♫]

Nice edit, lucky my web browswer screwed up, i had an essay lined up for you.

muzzy66, on May 15 2009, 12:48 PM, said:

Do you need to drive a 3 tonne truck with an 85kw, 160nm motor in order to know it will be slow?

Do you need jump off the top of Centrepiont tower to decide that the impact with the road below probably won't be good for you?

I think we can safely answer no to both of those questions, because our knowledge of science makes us confident enough that we dont really need (or in those cases want) to try it and find out.

Sound is also a science, and sometimes we can just look at a system and say "that is a bad design".

That's not to say that it WILL sound horrible - it's possible that it may sound absolutely stunning in the flesh - but the design concept is flawed. If that car does sound good, it's most likely because of either strange freak of nature, or due to the fact that the owner has processed the living crap out of it until (most) of the flaws could be overcome.

Why is the design concept flawed?
Do you understand the science behind what he has done (even if he doesn't)?
Do you understand the acoustics of the environment?
Do you know the polar response of the drivers (or any other measurements for that matter)?
Do you know what processing he has in use (if any at all)?

The examples you give are very clear cut and straight forward. The acoustics in a car, are not.
Not to mention we are only given a few pictures of the finished design. No technical specs, no design documentation.

Rear speakers (which you edited out of your post - you stated they do not help SQ), can infact help SQ.
They can add ambience and even assist with staging (depth and width) of an SQ system. Why? Acoustics (and possibly processing to assist this).
I won't go into it here, as it's sliding off topic, but Google Haas effect, VBAP, quadrophonics, etc...

Arrays (which you also edited out) can and do work! Yes his design might be a bit abnormal, does this mean it won't work?
Perhaps he has set his drivers on specific axis' to give a specified polar response? Bessel arrays can give you an exceptional sweet spot (for imaging/staging), and requires no processing, only special wiring of the drivers. There are also more simple arrays like Joe D'Appolito's infamous MTM array, which are designed to control the disperson of the driver... controlling dispersion... and working like a waveguide? OMG! Could it actually work?

muzzy66, on May 15 2009, 12:48 PM, said:

Of course it's great to use your ears, but that doesn't mean we can't also use our brain

Could also say the same for your mouth (or fingers if you prefer)



And in terms of visual appearance (also which you edited out), i have no doubt that he was concious of how his install would look when he designed it. But there is also no doubt that he has put in a lot of work to make the visual appearance look good. Does this mean he hasn't designed it to sound good? Does this mean it can't sound good too?
Not at all, and I certainly wouldn't write the car off without hearing it first.

[HEKYEH]

Different strokes for different folks. The driver may love the way it sounds...so for him it may be SQ nirvana...

Very much overkill tho and rather impractical...But props to him for trying

[Matt VIP]

muzzy???

are you answering your essay-posts again?

whats going on?

[RoVer™]

Muzzy, the car was intended for show, yet is placed in the SQ section and raved about. I'd doubt he'd compete at an SQ event, that would be pretty much like you rockin' up to the drags. Just sayin'

[muzzy66]

fury, on May 15 2009, 03:22 AM, said:

Why is the design concept flawed?

I already explained why.

Quote

Do you understand the science behind what he has done (even if he doesn't)?

Yes I do - throw as many speakers as you possibly can wherever/however they fit in order to get lots of 'wows' from people who look at it.

Quote

Do you understand the acoustics of the environment?

Yes I do - it's a sedan, with nice, shiny painted surfaces and TV screens that get lots of 'wows' from people who look at it, while also causing ramdomised sound reflections all over the interior of the car.

Quote

Do you know the polar response of the drivers (or any other measurements for that matter)?

No, and looking at the install, I'd imagine he probably doesn't either.

Quote

Do you know what processing he has in use (if any at all)?

No, but to make that install sound good, I think you'd need a lot of it - probably too much for humble me to keep track of.

Quote

Not to mention we are only given a few pictures of the finished design. No technical specs, no design documentation.

I'd imagine the most important 'technical spec' for the owner of that car is the amount of photo's people take of his install, followed by the number of speakers he managed to squeeze into his car.

Quote

Rear speakers (which you edited out of your post - you stated they do not help SQ), can infact help SQ.
They can add ambience and even assist with staging (depth and width) of an SQ system. Why? Acoustics (and possibly processing to assist this).

I see - I'll be sure to redicule my friends next time I see them, for not having rear speakers in their recording studios.

Quote

Arrays (which you also edited out) can and do work! Yes his design might be a bit abnormal, does this mean it won't work?
Perhaps he has set his drivers on specific axis' to give a specified polar response? Bessel arrays can give you an exceptional sweet spot (for imaging/staging), and requires no processing, only special wiring of the drivers. There are also more simple arrays like Joe D'Appolito's infamous MTM array, which are designed to control the disperson of the driver... controlling dispersion... and working like a waveguide? OMG! Could it actually work?

I didn't say that arrays don't work, I actually stated that vertical arrays can work, when they are designed properly. Horizontal arrays of randomly positioned drivers however, is another story altogether.

All I stated is that arrays (such as MTM's) have flaws (which they do) - I didn't suggest anywhere that they don't have potential benefits.

Quote

Could also say the same for your mouth (or fingers if you prefer)

Hence why I use both my brain, and my mouth

Quote

And in terms of visual appearance (also which you edited out), i have no doubt that he was concious of how his install would look when he designed it. But there is also no doubt that he has put in a lot of work to make the visual appearance look good. Does this mean he hasn't designed it to sound good? Does this mean it can't sound good too?
Not at all, and I certainly wouldn't write the car off without hearing it first.

I'm sure he has put a lot of time into making it look good (or at least his interpretation of good, which is fine since it's his car). Does a good looking install mean a bad sounding install? Of course not.

However, in this case I would suggest that the thought that went into the appearance of the install far exceeds the thought that went into the accoustics of the install.

If you look at the comments on the actual local forum where the link was posted (I think Germany?) you'll find that approx 90% of the comments made are consistent with my own.

Still, you don't have to agree with me - this is purely my own interpretation of the install. If you feel that randomly throwing a thousand drivers around a car interior and painting everythign in sight with glossy paint is good acoustics then that's fine - I have no problem with that. That's the beauty of the human race - we're all different.


P.s.
My reason for editing out the other sections wasn't because I changed my view, but because I decided I'd be a little more fair / polite towards the guy, and because I wanted to try to avoid writing an overly long response...which I've now had to do anyway *sigh*

Edited by muzzy66, 15 May 2009 - 09:33 PM.

[Cide]

ahhh you SQ chaps are funny. get a few more ego's swinging in here and some childish name calling and we've got the old SPL section. god i miss that place, it's boring these days

[pigphama]

Cide, on May 15 2009, 03:47 PM, said:

ahhh you SQ chaps are funny. get a few more ego's swinging in here and some childish name calling and we've got the old SPL section. god i miss that place, it's boring these days

????????????

Thanks mate!

pigphama