33 replies to this topic

[Juls]

I recently had a chance to have a play with the 9887,
In the past i've owned and used 9815,9833,9835, 9853,9855R and 9965E
and know my way around all of the eclipse top end units as well as owning various units (8053, 8454,8455,CD7000,CD7100)

First impressions,
not up to scratch with Quality of the old units, the new face system just feels cheap,
and the navigation doesn't hold a candle to the older systems, It's far more complicated, less easy to understand and it's alot slower and fiddly too.

The lack of motorized face is reflected in the price, but it's enough to put me off, however the Eclipses offering which is motorized is pointless anyway because it doesn't
offer angled display like the older Eclipse and Alpine units did.
I think this has been dropped from both a reliability and cost point of view however.
and since the competition doesn't offer anything better it's a mute point, unless you
can get your hands on one of the older units!

The X/over Function is basically the same as previous versions of Bass Engine Pro
when used in 3 way mode, as is the 5 band PEQ which is Band Limited (with what appears to be 1-2 octaves from each other) which is annoying, the eclipse offering doesn't have this issue.

The Time alignment is a huge step backward. Not only have they dropped the MS settings in favor of a Centimetre setup, but they also Changed the high output to "rear" and mid output to "front"

In the past the Front was always high, and Rear was mid, and sub is sub.. that makes sense. But the new system of Front is Mid, Rear is tweeter and sub is sub, is a bit strange. To make matters worse, when set in 3 way mode, (Sub, Mid, High) the Time alignment still refers to the outputs as front/Rear/Sub, yet the x/over refers to them as low,mid,high. The inverting of the front and rear output in 3 way mode would be less confusing if the references to there usage was consistant across all the functions of the headunit.

The changing from MS to CM or Inch may not be a big deal to some, But it actually makes less sense than using the normal Millisecond rules.

You see they didn't make it so simple as you might think, you might be thinking that CM is easier to understand than milliseconds right? So you just measure how far away the drivers are and punch in the number... errr.. No. Thats not how it works.

You see to get the right Time alignment delay, you have to Measure all your speakers, then take the speaker your adjustings distance from the furtherest aways speakers distance.

IE: Subwoofer is 200cm away, left mid is 150cm away, Delay is 50cm.
well thats easier than MS right? well yes.. but all you need to do to get the MS is
take the resulting 50cm and divide by 34 on your calculator, So the delay is 1.47ms.
IE: 200cm - 150cm = 50cm / 34 =1.47ms.

We know that the further away the speaker is, the longer the delay is before we hear it, this being the case. we know that should we want to electronically shift the speaker further away to shift the focal or staging point, then we just have to increase the delay. IE: Add a bit of ms delay. The opposite if we want to move it closer then we decrease the delay, or increase the delay on the opposing speaker.

When your dealing in cm, it's somewhat more confusing to make instant shifts in delay.

Say in the case of the right hand speaker being the closest, in order to shift it further away and shift the image more left (centre), with MS we add delay, with CM you have to reduce the delay. While that doesn't sound complicated, everythings a bit blurry when your talking large numbers, you never really know exactly what it is that it's doing.
Shifting speakers in cm makes less sense than simply delaying them.

I realise this is probably a attempt to simplify things, in this case simply removing the ability for the human to type Divide by 34 in a calculator, cause thats the only difference, that the head unit does that calculation for you, but in it's automation process it takes some of the control and understanding out of using and controlling the sound in itself, and if your a purist like me more automation is not better it just works
against you.

I see no good reason for Alpine to have shifted the High to the rear and the mid to the front and the Milliseconds to CM, when all there old units, there processors, there alpine F1, and Competing Eclipse units are using traditional easily understood setups. My only guess is that this headunit was designed to comply with the requirements of the imprint sound processor which was designed by different people than those that who designed the original bass engine pro systems. Rather than building the processor to comply with
the exsisting standard.

Overall though, the unit is solid for it's price, and offers a mass of tuning functions and
good sound, at a amazing pricepoint, nothing less than great value for money.

But if your considering this unit up against the CD7200, and your intent is high end
audio sound, or competition, the CD7200 is a no brainer at on a few hundred bucks more.

my 2 cents and a rant :-)
Juls

[peaandham]

Just got my Alpine 9887 and can notice a major difference without any tuning so far ! Cant wait till i correct the time alignment !

[D34M0N.inc]

Sounds like a good unit. I have a Pioneer 9650 would this unit be much of an upgrade?

Some Specs of the 9650

Audio Features
MOSFET 50 Watts x 4 high power
Rotary Volume Control
Built-in DSP (Digital Signal Processor, replaces EEQ)
13-band digital graphic equalizer
Preset Equalizer (5 settings), Custom x 2 settings
Auto EQ and Auto Time Alignment (mic. supplied)
BBE digital signal enhancement
Digital LPS (Listening position Selector)
HPF (High Pass Filter) and LPF (subwoofer) -F/R Selectable
Subwoofer Phase Selection (+/-)
Selectable Loudness Control
BMX (BiMetric Equalizer)
ASL (Auto Sound Levelizer)
Electronic Volume / Balance / Fader controls
3 x RCA Preouts (Front, Rear and subwoofer)
6.5 Volts RCA Preout Level
3-Way Digital Network selectable
Spectrum Analyzer
Level Indicator
Cellular Mute / Attenuate
SLA (Source Level Adjuster)
AUX IN capable via CD-RB20 or CD-RB10

[jaysin]

Yeah, I have one of these, too. Bought from someone on here.

I'm generally happy with it. Sounds fine, even using its internal amp only.

My minor complaint is the lack of motorisation (it sometimes gets stuck when opening). The menus are a bit annoying, but I'm used to them, and the TA is fine for me, beside the already-mentioned front == mid and rear == high on the loom.