Phase 1 Stero system complete :doors
05-25-2007, 07:17 PM
#191
Senior Members
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I finally setteled on a processor. I am doing the H990. I got a stupid deal on it and the headunit and the flipout monitor which I will more than likely sell. But I should have it in about 2 weeks. They cant order it till Tuesday since they are closed Monday. I am going to start my kicks tommorrow as well as my doors. Should be fun.
05-25-2007, 08:27 PM
#192
Contributors
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
My Ride: 2005 530i Silver Gray/ Gray Leather. SP,PP
Originally Posted by KU530' post='428413' date='May 25 2007, 11:17 PM
Well I finally setteled on a processor. I am doing the H990. I got a stupid deal on it and the headunit and the flipout monitor which I will more than likely sell. But I should have it in about 2 weeks. They cant order it till Tuesday since they are closed Monday. I am going to start my kicks tommorrow as well as my doors. Should be fun.
that procesoor is GORGEOUS. so you keeping the dvd-audio headunit and processor and selling the monitor?where are planning to install the headunit? man oh man, seriously think on dropping the wheels money on that processor.
what kind of deal you got? you had to get all 3.
remember to take lots of pics of the doors install
05-25-2007, 10:24 PM
#193
Contributors
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
My Ride: 2005 530i Silver Gray/ Gray Leather. SP,PP
i posted a question to the jbl product marketing manager on the differences between the h650 and the ms-8 heres what he wrote.
There are lots of differences. First, MS-8 is more expensive.
Some technical differences are:
1. MS-8 includes power for speakers.
2. MS-8 includes a center channel output and a matrix surround processor (Logic7), which is more about fixing the image for the passengers than about reproducing an audio equivalent to a roller-coaster ride. The Apine doesn't include a center output and doesn't include that image processing.
3. The MS-8's crossover is fully configurable. It'll support any system of 8 channels or fewer, including 7.1, 5.1, 3.1, or the standard car-audio 2-channel bi-amped or tri-amped front stage and a sub. anything is possible, since all the channels can be anything, but crossover setup is manual in MS-8. It's automatic in the Alpine, but it's less configurable. The outputs are fixed.
4. MS-8 includes an auxiliary input and a remote control and display which allows you to make some adjustments after setup and includs a volume control for those pesky OE systems that include dynamic "bass elimination" (many GM).
5. MS-8's subwoofer level control is a shelf that's applied to all the channels through the crossover and the bass management algorithm. It'll preserve the impact in the front of the car AND add bass.
6. The automatic equalizers are completely different. The Alpine uses a 512-tap filter, which also equalizes phase and sets time alignment. It also includes some spatial averaging for multiple microphone placements (6). When you equalize with the Alipine, the first microphone placement sets the time alignment and the rest of the placements are used to smooth the frequency response over most of the car's interior. Multitap filters that operate in real time are a relatively new possibility. In years past, multitap filters in real time were only a hope, since there weren't many microprocessors that could process all that information quickly enough. The benefits of usiing a multitap filter are that they can be very precise and they equalize phase as well as magnitude since they operate on the impulse response measurement. For one tiny point in space, they can also eliminate the sound of plenty of reflections, but their ability to do that accurately diminishes in larger listening areas, since the effects of reflections at high frequencies can be very different even a few inches away from the original microphone position. The other important thing to note about multitap filters is that the 512 "bands" are distributed in a linear fashion rather than logarithmically. That means the resolution is fixed across the audio band. 512 taps gives you roughly 40 Hz resolution. That means you get 2 adjustment bands between 20 and 100Hz and 25 bands between 10k and 20k. Multitap filters, by default place more adjustment possibilities in the high frequencies than in the low frequencies because of the linear distribution of those "bands". That's the only drawback. The Alipine allows you to select from several target curves for adjustment after the automatic setup.
One more note about multitap: They are the shiznit for headphone EQ, because the "listening space" is fixed. With multitap EQ, you can add the reflective properties of a completely different space and transform the listening area to a completely believable representation of a much larger space. With speakers, that isn't possible yet because both of your ears hear both speakers and moving your head helps you determine the location of sounds (just like when your dog cocks his head when he hears a sound he doesn't recognize--we do the same thing, it just doesn't look so ridiculous).
MS-8's EQ is different. We also use a spatial average, but we use a binaural measurement system and 3 mic positions PER LISTENING POSITION. That gives us 6 measurements per seat for each of the 8 channels plus a time alignment adjustment for each seat. Once the setup is done, you can choose an optimization for any seating position and switch between them. For frequency response EQ, we make standard frequency response measurements, eliminate the phase measurement, average the measurements), calculate the phase response of the average, turn the measurement into an impulse response measurement, apply 8 biquads (filters) to the impulse response according to the target curve and the crossover settings using a very complicated and sneaky algorithm that I can't divulge because we're applying for a patent. The result is a VERY powerful EQ that can be implemented on a relatively inexpensive DSP for each channel and leave plenty of space to use the same algorithm on the eletrical signal of the MS-8's input for flattening of the input signal. The distribution of the bands is logarithmic and makes a completely adjustable target curve easy to implement and accurate. Each speaker location is equalized separately and, because of the spatial average, the acoustic sum of the channels matches the target curve. Once setup is complete, you can fine tune the car using a 31-band drawing tool. You draw the curve you want to hear and the MS-8 implements it and allows you to audition your changes vs. no EQ and vs. the automatic implementation of the predefined target.
Both pieces of equipment are technological marvels and they both include input channel summing and signal conditioning, crossover and EQ). MS-8 includes more stuff (center channel, Logic7, amplifiers, a display and remote, equalization memory and multiple seat optimization, center channel output and automatic input configuration--MS-8 will figure out what you've connected to the input regardless of polarity), but it should. It's more expensive.
Which one sounds better? You'll have to be the judge.
One last note: Both of these products are super-important and may help to revive the industry and get new customers interested in making their cars sound great while preserving their factory user interfaces. They have both been long development processes with plenty of invention and innovation, software development hiccups and decisions about which features to implement. Both products will require some new thinking on the parts of installers and salespeople about how one implements great audio. Simple 2-channel audio isn't dead, but these kinds of advancements make better listening experiences possible using a new set of rules.
Kudos to Jason ad his team for beating us to market. The other difference is that MS-8 isn't quite finished yet-but it will be.
There are lots of differences. First, MS-8 is more expensive.
Some technical differences are:
1. MS-8 includes power for speakers.
2. MS-8 includes a center channel output and a matrix surround processor (Logic7), which is more about fixing the image for the passengers than about reproducing an audio equivalent to a roller-coaster ride. The Apine doesn't include a center output and doesn't include that image processing.
3. The MS-8's crossover is fully configurable. It'll support any system of 8 channels or fewer, including 7.1, 5.1, 3.1, or the standard car-audio 2-channel bi-amped or tri-amped front stage and a sub. anything is possible, since all the channels can be anything, but crossover setup is manual in MS-8. It's automatic in the Alpine, but it's less configurable. The outputs are fixed.
4. MS-8 includes an auxiliary input and a remote control and display which allows you to make some adjustments after setup and includs a volume control for those pesky OE systems that include dynamic "bass elimination" (many GM).
5. MS-8's subwoofer level control is a shelf that's applied to all the channels through the crossover and the bass management algorithm. It'll preserve the impact in the front of the car AND add bass.
6. The automatic equalizers are completely different. The Alpine uses a 512-tap filter, which also equalizes phase and sets time alignment. It also includes some spatial averaging for multiple microphone placements (6). When you equalize with the Alipine, the first microphone placement sets the time alignment and the rest of the placements are used to smooth the frequency response over most of the car's interior. Multitap filters that operate in real time are a relatively new possibility. In years past, multitap filters in real time were only a hope, since there weren't many microprocessors that could process all that information quickly enough. The benefits of usiing a multitap filter are that they can be very precise and they equalize phase as well as magnitude since they operate on the impulse response measurement. For one tiny point in space, they can also eliminate the sound of plenty of reflections, but their ability to do that accurately diminishes in larger listening areas, since the effects of reflections at high frequencies can be very different even a few inches away from the original microphone position. The other important thing to note about multitap filters is that the 512 "bands" are distributed in a linear fashion rather than logarithmically. That means the resolution is fixed across the audio band. 512 taps gives you roughly 40 Hz resolution. That means you get 2 adjustment bands between 20 and 100Hz and 25 bands between 10k and 20k. Multitap filters, by default place more adjustment possibilities in the high frequencies than in the low frequencies because of the linear distribution of those "bands". That's the only drawback. The Alipine allows you to select from several target curves for adjustment after the automatic setup.
One more note about multitap: They are the shiznit for headphone EQ, because the "listening space" is fixed. With multitap EQ, you can add the reflective properties of a completely different space and transform the listening area to a completely believable representation of a much larger space. With speakers, that isn't possible yet because both of your ears hear both speakers and moving your head helps you determine the location of sounds (just like when your dog cocks his head when he hears a sound he doesn't recognize--we do the same thing, it just doesn't look so ridiculous).
MS-8's EQ is different. We also use a spatial average, but we use a binaural measurement system and 3 mic positions PER LISTENING POSITION. That gives us 6 measurements per seat for each of the 8 channels plus a time alignment adjustment for each seat. Once the setup is done, you can choose an optimization for any seating position and switch between them. For frequency response EQ, we make standard frequency response measurements, eliminate the phase measurement, average the measurements), calculate the phase response of the average, turn the measurement into an impulse response measurement, apply 8 biquads (filters) to the impulse response according to the target curve and the crossover settings using a very complicated and sneaky algorithm that I can't divulge because we're applying for a patent. The result is a VERY powerful EQ that can be implemented on a relatively inexpensive DSP for each channel and leave plenty of space to use the same algorithm on the eletrical signal of the MS-8's input for flattening of the input signal. The distribution of the bands is logarithmic and makes a completely adjustable target curve easy to implement and accurate. Each speaker location is equalized separately and, because of the spatial average, the acoustic sum of the channels matches the target curve. Once setup is complete, you can fine tune the car using a 31-band drawing tool. You draw the curve you want to hear and the MS-8 implements it and allows you to audition your changes vs. no EQ and vs. the automatic implementation of the predefined target.
Both pieces of equipment are technological marvels and they both include input channel summing and signal conditioning, crossover and EQ). MS-8 includes more stuff (center channel, Logic7, amplifiers, a display and remote, equalization memory and multiple seat optimization, center channel output and automatic input configuration--MS-8 will figure out what you've connected to the input regardless of polarity), but it should. It's more expensive.
Which one sounds better? You'll have to be the judge.
One last note: Both of these products are super-important and may help to revive the industry and get new customers interested in making their cars sound great while preserving their factory user interfaces. They have both been long development processes with plenty of invention and innovation, software development hiccups and decisions about which features to implement. Both products will require some new thinking on the parts of installers and salespeople about how one implements great audio. Simple 2-channel audio isn't dead, but these kinds of advancements make better listening experiences possible using a new set of rules.
Kudos to Jason ad his team for beating us to market. The other difference is that MS-8 isn't quite finished yet-but it will be.
05-26-2007, 05:32 AM
#194
Senior Members
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nelson
good research there. I will tell you that the auto tuning feature on the alpine is a joke. Don't use it. Use your ears.........
They are both impressive that they are the best for oem intigration.
As for the processing I am back in a pickle. The guy with the H900 just called me after not hearing from him for a few days and he is ready to go. The 900 is going to be quite a bit cheaper than the H990 because I don't have to by the HU and Screen with the 900. I would be selling the screen and HU then it would be a wash. So it is a issue of old versus new, 11 channels vs 8 channels, controler vs having to use my laptop to tune. visually they look the same except the 900 is bigger it is bigger than a PDX amp by a few inches. What is one to do. first I had no choices now they are goming from everywhere. Uggggg!!!!
good research there. I will tell you that the auto tuning feature on the alpine is a joke. Don't use it. Use your ears.........
They are both impressive that they are the best for oem intigration.
As for the processing I am back in a pickle. The guy with the H900 just called me after not hearing from him for a few days and he is ready to go. The 900 is going to be quite a bit cheaper than the H990 because I don't have to by the HU and Screen with the 900. I would be selling the screen and HU then it would be a wash. So it is a issue of old versus new, 11 channels vs 8 channels, controler vs having to use my laptop to tune. visually they look the same except the 900 is bigger it is bigger than a PDX amp by a few inches. What is one to do. first I had no choices now they are goming from everywhere. Uggggg!!!!
05-27-2007, 08:41 PM
#197
Senior Members
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by nelson29' post='428963' date='May 27 2007, 08:53 PM
Excellent job brother
looks really good..can wait on the finish product
Was it easier than you taught to do it?
looks really good..can wait on the finish product
Was it easier than you taught to do it?
05-27-2007, 08:58 PM
#198
Contributors
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
My Ride: 2005 530i Silver Gray/ Gray Leather. SP,PP
Originally Posted by KU530' post='428971' date='May 28 2007, 12:41 AM
It was not as tough as I thought it would be. after my intial test fit on the door with the driver I did not have to build out as much as I did but better safe than sorry I say. I should have them glassed and duraglassed by tommorrow. I am about done with the kicks too. Once that is at a good stopping point it will be on the the baffle for my subs on Weds once I get my birch in. Then I can put the car back together for the most part till I start my amp rack and intial system testing to find any bugs in the system then I should have this all put to bed within the next 2 weeks I hope.
05-28-2007, 05:05 AM
#199
Senior Members
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by nelson29' post='428974' date='May 27 2007, 09:58 PM
so you gonna IB the midbasses right? they wont be sealed in the doors?
