define supra-bass frequencys... as I said I used a 60 hz test tone..
assuming the tone was clear.. then 60 hz should be the only frequency that
is being produced, which is the tone you are claiming this does not happen
at.
"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Lex" wrote:

Ok I guess it is time to voice in on the subject.
1. Just because the Interior volume of the Covette is the same is an
integ
hatch doesn't mean it shares the same acoustical properties. Fiberglass
body, differents angles in the trunk space, ect ect ect effect this too,
its
not like we are bouncing signal off of a solid wall.

Corvette's have a steel uni-body. So the internal acoustics are quite
similar
to other compact cars. The reason I know this is I've had a chance to
review
the transfer functions of 150 vehicles measured by an auto company AND
I've
owned both a Corvette and an Integra.


2. when it comes to what sounds good (not talking about spl/sq comps or
anything else) the best meter I am equiped wiith is my ears. Make a
system
run a flat line on an RTA and see what you think it sounds like..
considering a flat RTA would be considered perfect in many cases, but
most
would agree that it sounds like ****, and this goes into the same
principal.

Sure; this is a known deal. If you EQ a speaker flat in its direct field
it
will show a gradually falling response measured in the far-field or
listening
position.

We know this and it doesn't affect the issue here.

I hear more bass (and yes this is using a 60 hz test tone) in my system
with
the subs firing rearward than when they fire frontward, and the SPL tests
I
have done go to prove this.

Data please.

I also Notice more bass when I don't have my
equipment for work in my trunk, which effectively forms a big ass wall
acrossed the trunk. Maybe I will have to go down to the local shop and
get
a scope and an rta and all that other fancy **** out just to help prove
what
we all know... Moving the sub box can cause noticeable differences in
bass
output.

Only at supra-bass frequences.


"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Fat *******" wrote:

Tom, you keep saying you have tested this, and you say you are right
because
you tested it, but yet you have not PROVEN anything because you have
not
SHOWN us those tests. For them to be valid tests we would need
pictures,
documentation, and WITNESSES to each stage of your test. Otherwise,
your
words are just that, words.

So what is Eddie's argument except words. Its his claim. I see no data,
no
pictures, no witnessess, noreplication.

I simply conducted a short experiment and found different results.
Indeed
even
you posted something below that is in disagreement with his claim.

Words of a man proven wrong consistantly by
Eddie Runner. You say one thing, and argue it, and use obscure
references,
and then when Eddie shows you the error in your argument by posting
actual
pictures of the references you are using to prove your side, and
showing
that they support his argument, you immediately change your tune, and
start
arguing in another direction.

Actually the pictures from Baranek didn't support Eddies argument.



You can talk (argue) all you want, but you have not proven anything,
any
further than everyone else here has by merely SAYING that they've had
z
results from doing x test. Dozens of people have already stated that
they
have had significant increases in bass output when turning their
enclosures
around, but you say it doesn't happen. Are you calling everyone liars,
or
just saying that they are hearing things? They aren't making it up,
and
they
certainly didn't DREAM it (they weren't just hoping so much that it
would
increase that they imagined that it did, trust me), so how do you
explain
it? I guess maybe you define bass differently than the average
consumer.....

Dozens of people get abducted by Aliens everyday too. Many people have
seen
BigFoot. Many people believe that hot water freezes faster than cold
water. So
what?

In my explanation I define low bass as 10-62 Hz. The subwoofer region.
Some
will consider anything up to 200 Hz as bass. That's fine with me as
long
as you
specify the frequencies of interest.


Let's make up our minds already.

Although, I could care less what Tom Nuisance has to say

Next time supply some pictures and witnesses to verify your anecdote

But no one has to make up their minds. No one has supplied any data
that
reversing the woofer direction alone changes anything below the lowest
axial
mode in a car.

Also your SPL readings mentioned are pretty much frequency independent.
A
wide-open Sound Level Meter reading could simply be encompassing any
frequencies; they are not frequency specific unless the excitation
stimulus is.
For example when I test maximum SPL of a woofer system in the car I use
a
6.5-cycle ramped sine burst at 1/3 octave preferred frequencies and
measure
both distortion and SPL at those specific frequencies.

Isn't it interesting that neither this poster nor Eddie has anything BUT
anecdote to bolster their position?