Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #281   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default The lowdown

Eddie Runner wrote:

Nousaine wrote:


Tom,
if you look at my graphs
http://www.installer.com/tech/aiming2.html

you will see that in the Dodge NEON there is a
27db difference at 100Hz
26db difference ar 95Hz
10db difference at 90Hz
5db difference t 75Hz


Are you blind? Or just stupid? In the Neon the sound pressure distribution

is
equally 'different" at all frequencies below 100 Hz. So exactly ''how" does
that woofer system have 'reflections' that cancel equally at every

frequency?


So explain how they 'smoothly' transition to equal magnitude at lower
frequencies? Just look at your traces. If aligned for level (areas where the
traces have the same shape) on a light box, which always happens when nothing
more than a level shift is involved (which IS what happens when there is NO
more acoustic energy being produced) than it's apparent that there is not
significant deviation below about 80 Hz.

And IF the woofer IS NOT producing more SPL and IF there are not any wavelength
dependent 'cancellations' (which should be be obvious like the 100+ Hz 'notch')
then there cannot be a general improvement in SPL. Reflection/cancellation
artifacts which are independent of wavelength just don't occur acoustically in
air equally at ALL frequencies in a given bandwidth at omnidirectional
frequencies.

Anechoically of course there will be a 6-dB loss with every doubling of
distance. But this situation is in a bounded but leaky space. So IF there were
a distance effect the woofer closer to the listener would have a slight
advantage. NOT the one farther away.

Now there may be some system tuning advantage to close-boundary driver-face
placement, especially in larger spaces but I've not seen that to make any
significant difference in cars because, for the most part the cabin-transfer
function already provides the advantage.

Have you checked the impedance/system resonance with both locations? I've not
found a significant difference.

For everyone else. If you measure a woofer low passed at 60 Hz in a anechoic
space you'll find that the SPL will measure equally at any given distance in
any direction; (front/back/left/right/up/down.)

Now introduce a boundary (floor, for example) and you'll get an apparent
reinforcement because the sound pressure that was formerly just disspating off
as a propagtaing wave will be retained. Add another boundary and you get some
more SPL back. Add 6 boundaries, such as an enclosed space like your living
room or your car or a phone booth, for that matter, and you'll retain most of
the SPL (some will be absorbed by the walls or surface of the enclosure and
some will escape through leaks) but you'll also cause uneven sound pressure
because standing waves will develop between every 2 sets of opposing surfaces
(there will also be other less strong effects between multiple wall surface
reflections) at wavelengths related to the boundary distances.

Below the 1/2 wavelength distance of the longest ecnlosure dimension the
displacement of the driver/port output just pressurizes the entire space.

Standing waves occur at every frequency between opposing walls; play a 1 kHz
tone in your car or your listening room and you can hear the sound change when
you move your head. But, because the wavelength is about 1 foot you get exactly
the same effect every where you sit in the room.

At 100 Hz you'll get a change in sound pressure that changes over a much larger
area. But if the room is much smaller (like closed back headphones) there is no
change in SPL with head position no matter what frequency you play.

Your listening room and your car fall in-between. In your listening room the
standing wave region generally falls between 30 and 300 Hz. In your car it's
shifted an octave upward (60-600 Hz.)

This means 2 things. First you get the pressure effect (12 dB reinforcement as
frequency falls from about 30Hz in a typical listening room; and 60Hz in a
smaller car); below this frequency there ARE no standing wave cancellation
effects because the wavelengths are quite long compared the ineterior
dimensions.

Second; because the wavelengths involved are large compared to the radiating
area of the source (woofer displacement) the sound is radiating equally in all
directions and orientation is irrelevant (at the frequencies of interest.)


1) the SPL is lower with the woofer aimed forward... Can you see that on the
chart?



And why would it be" It's closer to the microphone so IF we're not in the
pressure zone in the car why wouldn't it be LOUDER?



2) you dont believe the chart because you think there cannot be a
difference.


It has nothing to do with my (or your) beliefs. Physics tell us that you cannot
increase average SPL with driver orientation in an enclosed space at omni
frequencies.

3) I say since the woofer has not changed its output at the cone, ANY change
in
spl must be caused by replections that cancel or reinforce the original
sound.
(WHAT ELSE COULD IT BE???????)



Some operating error on your part. Are you now telling us that average SPL in
an enclosed space at omnidirectional frequencies is affected by source
direction? How can this be?



4) The reflections have changed because the woofer location has changed.


But is the woofer location constantly adjusting it's location for every
frequency equally? How does it manage to do this at 21.5, 34 and 43 Hz
simultanously? These ARE reflection/standing wave effects aren't they?



5) Since you dont believe any of this that explains why you kept on and on
about
the woofer knowing when to turn itself up..?? Pretty funny....

6) Im just sharing some graphs, you dont believe they are real, you even
question

my integrity as to creating the graphs fraudulently... I even posted
names of

witnesses to the tests...

7) I cant prove it to you unless you come on down here or you do your own
tests.
you have been in audio for a long time, you cant teach an old dog new
tricks
unless they wanna learn... If you would rather believe I made the
graphs in
photoshop I dont see any amount of argueing with you that can change
your
mind if you wont listen....


Oh I'm listening.



8) I have invited anyone that wants to show up to stop by and witness the
tests.

9) everytime I post something relevant, you hold your hands on your ears and
sing very loudly " LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA"


We'll I cajoled you into actually doing measurements. Now it seems that either
you will accept measurements that don't exactly fit with the laws of physics or
acoustics or you won't discuss fair questions about why your results have
things about them that fit.



  #282   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default The lowdown

Nousaine wrote:

Eddie Runner wrote:

Tom,
if you look at my graphs
http://www.installer.com/tech/aiming2.html

you will see that in the Dodge NEON there is a
27db difference at 100Hz
26db difference ar 95Hz
10db difference at 90Hz
5db difference t 75Hz



So explain how they 'smoothly' transition to equal magnitude at lower
frequencies?


Why?
You are claiming I made the whole thing up!!
Any amount of explaining just seems to fall on deaf ears.

Just look at your traces. If aligned for level (areas where the
traces have the same shape) on a light box, which always happens when nothing
more than a level shift is involved (which IS what happens when there is NO
more acoustic energy being produced) than it's apparent that there is not
significant deviation below about 80 Hz.


The fact is one trace is significanly lower SPL than the
other trace... I know you want them to be more SPIKED
so that my theory about standing waves would be realized.

And your trying to say the traces (although one is lower) are
not spiked....

I see your point there Tom...

But fact remains that one trace is still lower even though there
are no spikes... That lower difference can only be cancalation!!

Since the box output is the same and the only difference is the
speaker location... It can ONLY BE cancellation, the NODE
(standing wave) is more pronounced in the listening area!

Have you checked the impedance/system resonance with both locations? I've not
found a significant difference.


No but I can do it easily... I couldnt imagine it being much different by
location alone.

1) the SPL is lower with the woofer aimed forward... Can you see that on the
chart?


And why would it be" It's closer to the microphone so IF we're not in the
pressure zone in the car why wouldn't it be LOUDER?


because of cancelations that occur....




2) you dont believe the chart because you think there cannot be a
difference.


It has nothing to do with my (or your) beliefs. Physics tell us that you cannot
increase average SPL with driver orientation in an enclosed space at omni
frequencies.


my sweeps show otherwise!



3) I say since the woofer has not changed its output at the cone, ANY change
in
spl must be caused by replections that cancel or reinforce the original
sound.
(WHAT ELSE COULD IT BE???????)


Some operating error on your part. Are you now telling us that average SPL in
an enclosed space at omnidirectional frequencies is affected by source
direction? How can this be?


Not source DIRECTION but instead SOURCE LOCATION!!




4) The reflections have changed because the woofer location has changed.


But is the woofer location constantly adjusting it's location for every
frequency equally? How does it manage to do this at 21.5, 34 and 43 Hz
simultanously? These ARE reflection/standing wave effects aren't they?


I dont see how it can constantly adjust its location(?)



We'll I cajoled you into actually doing measurements. Now it seems that either
you will accept measurements that don't exactly fit with the laws of physics or
acoustics or you won't discuss fair questions about why your results have
things about them that fit.



  #283   Report Post  
John Durbin
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

I'm still looking for the first admission that you learned something,
then :-)

JD
he thought he was wrong once, but he was mistaken

Eddie Runner wrote:

John Durbin wrote:



I never said it was a bad thing... just that you shouldn't be mistaken
for a salesman :-)



I know, I know,..... I am at the far other end of the spectrum
that any salesman I have ever known...

A salesman CONS the customer into buying something.
On the other hand the customer begs to pay me. And they always
want my neat **** that I dont wanna sell.... (If I sell it then I gotta
order me another, what a drag)...



no lie on the other stuff... some parts of the country have had a lot
of stores close down this year that were way prettier than yours!



thats for sure.. I see em closing up nearly everyday. I used to have a

federated right across the street from me, they are gone, who woulda
thought?
they were huge!... I still have a best buy a few blocks away.... I
like
em there!



JD
Is your wife is the only one that ever gets away with telling you
you're wrong?



Anyone can tell me, its just that I rarely am wrong.... I dont make a
point of
talking about the stuff I dont already know... And when I am wrong,
great!
Then I learned something!!

Its win win for me...

Except with DRUNK *******s that wont even look at the graphs....


Eddie Runner




  #284   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default The lowdown

Eddie Runner wrote:

Nousaine wrote:

Eddie Runner
wrote:

Tom,
if you look at my graphs
http://www.installer.com/tech/aiming2.html

you will see that in the Dodge NEON there is a
27db difference at 100Hz
26db difference ar 95Hz
10db difference at 90Hz
5db difference t 75Hz



So explain how they 'smoothly' transition to equal magnitude at lower
frequencies?


Why?
You are claiming I made the whole thing up!!
Any amount of explaining just seems to fall on deaf ears.

Just look at your traces. If aligned for level (areas where the
traces have the same shape) on a light box, which always happens when

nothing
more than a level shift is involved (which IS what happens when there is NO
more acoustic energy being produced) than it's apparent that there is not
significant deviation below about 80 Hz.


The fact is one trace is significanly lower SPL than the
other trace... I know you want them to be more SPIKED
so that my theory about standing waves would be realized.


If they were standing waves, tied to wavelength/distance then they would HAVE
to be frequency related and would NOT be evenly distributed.

And your trying to say the traces (although one is lower) are
not spiked....

I see your point there Tom...

But fact remains that one trace is still lower even though there
are no spikes... That lower difference can only be cancalation!!


No; they CANNOT be 'cancellations' or they would be unevenly distributed. The
only other acoustical sound pressure losses are distance (the closer enclosure
would be louder) and absorption (how would the vehicle absorb more low
frequency energy at any given frequency in the omnidirectional range with any
given orientation?)

Those exhaust the physical/acoustical possibilities.

What's left ....??? You tellme.

One thing for sure it isn't "cancellations". If you don't want to accept that
study Baranek some more.


Since the box output is the same and the only difference is the
speaker location... It can ONLY BE cancellation, the NODE
(standing wave) is more pronounced in the listening area!


But it CAN'T be, at these frequencies, where sound is being radiated equally in
all directions. If it WERE a standing wave it would have to be
wavelength/frequency related.


Have you checked the impedance/system resonance with both locations? I've

not
found a significant difference.


No but I can do it easily... I couldnt imagine it being much different by
location alone.


But it will tell you if there's a related effect regarding system tuning. Of
course, there's not but you haven't exhausted up-stream possible causes. We
already know it's not an acoustical effect.


1) the SPL is lower with the woofer aimed forward... Can you see that on

the
chart?


And why would it be" It's closer to the microphone so IF we're not in the
pressure zone in the car why wouldn't it be LOUDER?


because of cancelations that occur....


What 'cancellations'?

2) you dont believe the chart because you think there cannot be a
difference.


It has nothing to do with my (or your) beliefs. Physics tell us that you

cannot
increase average SPL with driver orientation in an enclosed space at omni
frequencies.


my sweeps show otherwise!


And you'll say that the other laws of physical acoustics still work their
normal way? But, in this case you've superceded them?


3) I say since the woofer has not changed its output at the cone, ANY

change
in
spl must be caused by replections that cancel or reinforce the

original
sound.
(WHAT ELSE COULD IT BE???????)


It's not standing wave activity. You tell me? I have a good idea but apparently
you don't.

Some operating error on your part. Are you now telling us that average SPL

in
an enclosed space at omnidirectional frequencies is affected by source
direction? How can this be?


Not source DIRECTION but instead SOURCE LOCATION!!


Same thing at these frequencies.

4) The reflections have changed because the woofer location has changed.


But is the woofer location constantly adjusting it's location for every
frequency equally? How does it manage to do this at 21.5, 34 and 43 Hz
simultanously? These ARE reflection/standing wave effects aren't they?


I dont see how it can constantly adjust its location(?)


Of course you don't because it can't and your results are contaminated by some
non-acoustical cause.

We'll I cajoled you into actually doing measurements. Now it seems that

either
you will accept measurements that don't exactly fit with the laws of

physics or
acoustics or you won't discuss fair questions about why your results have
things about them that fit.



  #285   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

I learn stuff all the time.
I learned that you dont have anythng better todo than
hassle me!

John Durbin wrote:

I'm still looking for the first admission that you learned something,
then :-)

JD
he thought he was wrong once, but he was mistaken

Eddie Runner wrote:

John Durbin wrote:


I never said it was a bad thing... just that you shouldn't be
mistaken
for a salesman :-)

I know, I know,..... I am at the far other end of the spectrum
that any salesman I have ever known...

A salesman CONS the customer into buying something.
On the other hand the customer begs to pay me. And they always
want my neat **** that I dont wanna sell.... (If I sell it then I
gotta
order me another, what a drag)...


no lie on the other stuff... some parts of the country have had a
lot
of stores close down this year that were way prettier than yours!

thats for sure.. I see em closing up nearly everyday. I used to
have a

federated right across the street from me, they are gone, who woulda
thought?
they were huge!... I still have a best buy a few blocks away.... I
like
em there!


JD
Is your wife is the only one that ever gets away with telling you
you're wrong?

Anyone can tell me, its just that I rarely am wrong.... I dont make
a
point of
talking about the stuff I dont already know... And when I am
wrong,
great!
Then I learned something!!

Its win win for me...

Except with DRUNK *******s that wont even look at the graphs....


Eddie Runner





  #286   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default The lowdown

Nousaine wrote:


The fact is one trace is significanly lower SPL than the
other trace... I know you want them to be more SPIKED
so that my theory about standing waves would be realized.


If they were standing waves, tied to wavelength/distance then they would HAVE
to be frequency related and would NOT be evenly distributed.


You keep saying that over and over and over....
Your saying that to prove my graphs are wrong!
But Tom, my graphs are real and undoctored...

I have an explanation for whats happening....
http://www.installer.com/tech/aiming.html
http://www.installer.com/tech/aiming2.html

You on the other hand claim
1) my graphs are wrong, maybe I just made them with photoshop!
2) my explanation is wrong because it CANT HAPPEN!

OK, I think it can, and I have submitted evedence ....
YOU think it cannot happen but you havent done any
sweeps to show your side of the story...

We are at an IMPASSE....

I understand your arguements, but they just dont match up to my
experements... Are your arguements just a part of your perception
of how you interperate the physics involved or can you show us some
actuall data to back up your position?

You say READ BARANEK but you dont mention the page number
or chapter and how it pertains to your point!

But fact remains that one trace is still lower even though there
are no spikes... That lower difference can only be cancalation!!


No; they CANNOT be 'cancellations' or they would be unevenly distributed. The
only other acoustical sound pressure losses are distance (the closer enclosure
would be louder) and absorption (how would the vehicle absorb more low
frequency energy at any given frequency in the omnidirectional range with any
given orientation?)


There is not enough distance for distance to be the factor.
Besides its Further and Louder so distance could nto be it.

it has to be REFLECTIONS!!
I cant think of anything else that could be it.

Same thing when the bass gets louder as you open the trunk
(sometimes on some cars)
You claim it DOESNT HAPPEN but many folks know it
does happen....

HOW CAN IT? Were lettting sound get away!!
Well, the fact is the sound going away was sound that reflected back
into the cabin out of phase with some other sounds so it CAUSED
cancelation, when we open a trunk we lessen the cancellations....

Just like turning the box around
I CAN HEAR THE DIFFERENCE!!!
I CAN MEASURE THE DIFFERENCE!!!

For you just to say it doesnt happen at all is not really helping us out...

Those exhaust the physical/acoustical possibilities.
What's left ....??? You tellme.


I have told you
http://www.installer.com/tech/aiming.html

If you dont like my explanation then YOU TELL US!!!!!
I mean real data not just generalities like when you say to
READ BANECHEKS BOOK or whatever.. (I misspelled that
on purpose BTW, remember Banachek TV show? (Just trying
to give your sense of humor a little boost))...

One thing for sure it isn't "cancellations". If you don't want to accept that
study Baranek some more.


Can you explain why you believe it cant be cancellations???
Or do we just have to take your word for it??
I dont see where Baranek supports your side...
Baranek does get into the resonant MODES in enclosed spaces but
I dont think you really understand the uderlying causes of the
resonances.

Resonances are not the same as standing waves by the way!
Resonances are identified by MODES
Standing waves are identified by NODES and ANTINODES.

Since the box output is the same and the only difference is the
speaker location... It can ONLY BE cancellation, the NODE
(standing wave) is more pronounced in the listening area!


But it CAN'T be, at these frequencies, where sound is being radiated equally in
all directions. If it WERE a standing wave it would have to be
wavelength/frequency related.


And it is!
since sound comes out of the box in all directions, some of the sound goes
directly to the listening area and some goes to the back of the vehicle, the
sound going to the back of the vehicle has some of it reflected forward to
the listeing area, that sound that bounced off the back of the car is out of
phase by the extra distance that it traveled when compared to the wave that
went (and is still coming from the speaker) directly up to the listing area..

A distance to the reflector and back could be 2 or 3 feet or more each
way, so thats about 4 to 6ft in many cars.... for the reflected wave to be
180degrees out of phase with the direct wave the frequency would be about
120 to 90 Hz.....

But, lets take the 90Hz example...... at that distance where it is out of phase
180degrees at 90 Hz, how much (degrees) out pf phase would it be at 80Hz?
70Hz, 60Hz, 50Hz, 40Hz?????

At 40 Hz, it would still be close to 90 degrees out of phase!!!!
Would that cause cancelation at 45Hz????
It would nt cause complete cancelation but would STILL drag down the
original sound to a slightly lesser SPL....!!!

Think about this Tom..... What happens if we have 100dB of SPL
on one sine wave and we introduce a like Sine wave 90Degrees out
of phase with the first????

In my graphs, cancellation occured like I predicted at slightly below
100Hz.... But it happened also below 100Hz because there is still
some interactions that are not completely in phase with each other!


But it will tell you if there's a related effect regarding system tuning. Of
course, there's not but you haven't exhausted up-stream possible causes. We
already know it's not an acoustical effect.


You mean we already know IT IS AN Accoustical effect!
CANCELLATION !!!

my sweeps show otherwise!


And you'll say that the other laws of physical acoustics still work their
normal way? But, in this case you've superceded them?


No, you just dont seem to understand the physics involved... To say its
a law doesnt have any meaning unlesss it actually is...

Alof of folks think they are going to jail if they tear the tags off thier
mattresses but YOU WONT!!! Alot of folks missunderstand that law
and I think you misunderstand the laws of accoustics and cancelations.

The Barencheck book might not be the best book for you to
use to read more about cancelations.... Is it the only book you
have???

I have a huge library of physics and accoustics books, its fairly common
to see more than one take on a phenomonon from one book to another,
most of them only briefly skim the cancelations and standing wave theory.

For one book to different than another doesnt mean one of them
breaks the laws of physics! Some books on standing waves for instance
talk about particle velocity instead of SPL which is NOT the same!
Someone trying to inteperet the particle velocity as SPL could make
some errors...... Alot of books are not real plain on this for the average
reader and I have seen folks with the missinterpretation to make errors..

Are you making these types of errors in your theory? I dont know !
I suspect so, but I dont know for sure.... If you had some actual
experementation to look at to back up your theory it might be a more
fruitfull engagement....

(WHAT ELSE COULD IT BE???????)


It's not standing wave activity. You tell me? I have a good idea but apparently
you don't.


I am telling you!
http://www.installer.com/tech/aiming.html

you keep saying, THATS WRONG!
Then you ask me to TELL YOU AGAIN!!

Whats wrong with you???

Not source DIRECTION but instead SOURCE LOCATION!!


Same thing at these frequencies.


is 90 to 180 degrees out of phase the same thing????

NO IT IS NOT!!

Do me a favor, read what I typed here at least twice and
think about it Tom before you reply!

Eddie Runner
tryin to be nice


  #287   Report Post  
thelizman
 
Posts: n/a
Default The lowdown

Nousaine wrote:

snip

Okay smartass, so explain how you can have cancelations of standing
standing dictators in a seven foot hole? It CANT BE DONE! Some of my
former colleagues performed just such an experiment saturday night.

--
Lizard
Should have cancelled his ass with a 5.56 FMJ through the head...
  #288   Report Post  
Warbleed
 
Posts: n/a
Default Actual tests - aiming woofer boxes

I would have to say that for the most part I agree that rear firin
works better than front firing, but I do have a question.

Eddie, I find that front firing with the woofer totally isolated fro
the trunk (firing ONLY into the front cabin, directly), tends to hav
the best sound of all. Anyway you can throw up a quick test of that
Curious to see how the graphs come out.

Just by looking at the graphs, I don't see a very big difference in LO
frequency performance, although certainly a difference in high bas
performance (which I would never let a subwoofer play anyway).

As far as the trunk open test, you get a steady loss in low frequenc
output, and a peak in the 50hz range, that's pretty much what To
seemed to say you'd expect to see.

Not really sure why all these kids are trying to call Tom a "noob
though, just makes them sound like imbicels
-
Warblee
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...threadid=16759

  #289   Report Post  
msmith
 
Posts: n/a
Default Actual tests - aiming woofer boxes

Tom... In this particular case, it's not fair to dismiss Eddie as
silly, uneducated, myth-propagating dummy.

Anyone who has installed more than a few real-world car subwoofer
knows that subwoofer orientation/loading has an effect on the qualit
and quantity of perceived bass at the listening position. Th
significance of the effect varies from car to car, but it is definitel
an important factor.

In fact, one of the primary "tuning" aspects of designing Stealthbo
systems (vehicle specific subwoofers) here at JL Audio revolves aroun
finding an optimum location, orientation and loading for the woofer.
wish it were as simple as just picking any spot in the car for the sub
but it isn't. Sometimes a location that is more practical or desirabl
doesn't sound as good as another.

Quoting Beranek, or citing physics that contradict these observation
is like saying that a rainbow does not actually have multiple colors i
it.

A car is not a square room, nor is it a uniform pressure vessel..
orientation and proximity to boundaries (loading) has an effect on th
acoustical impedance matching between the woofer and the listenin
environment... Partially sealed trunks act as resonant chambers whic
often cancel out desirable bass energy... small, semi-captive volume
of air between a rear-firing sub and a rear hatch affect the acoustica
impedance match as well... the relationship between the listenin
position and the front and back boundaries of the cabin also plays
role... the vehicle is lossy at very low freuqencies... etc. etc. etc
It should also be noted that 99.9% of car audio customers listen t
bass at louder levels than you find comfortable... I'm not sure if tha
fact has any effect on the whole equation.

As far as I know, nobody has been able to accurately model a car'
transfer function based on pure measurements with any degree o
precision... one can measure it, but it is devilishly complicated t
predict. Maybe some of your OEM buddies think they have the answer, bu
I have my doubts.

Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc
-
msmit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...threadid=16759

  #290   Report Post  
Warbleed
 
Posts: n/a
Default THE PROOF IS IN! Facing subs towards driver or away

Eddie Runner wrote:
*Are you guessing or do you have measurements to share with us?

delvryboy wrote:

now....face that driver into the cabin in a trunked car....and sea

off
the baffle completely...trunk/cabin

whole different monster
--
delvryboy *


Come now Eddie, that should be beneath you. You're pressuring a fa
smaller volume of air. Of course it'll be louder, and the standing wav
issues you speak of with the woofer firing forward in the trunk don'
happen
-
Warblee
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...threadid=16758



  #291   Report Post  
Warbleed
 
Posts: n/a
Default Smack smack

thelizman wrote:
*Tom Nutstain Wrote:


Eddie; as far as I can tell there's no body more "dirty" that yo

save real car
salesman. Actually they seem to make people like you the first folk

to avoid.


Hey lets talk about dirty stinking lies people who lack ethics tell
The
following scenario is based on a true story. The names have bee
changed
to protect the royally screwed.


Tell everyone about that time you compared two subs, one from GLOVE
AUDIO and the other from DIE. You let the manufacturer of the GLOVE
woofer send you a box custom made that was precisely tuned (likel
using
HARRY GLOVENERS own vette) to sound good in your test. But the
manufactuer of DIE woofers got the anal-probe, because their sub was
dropped in a box that wasn't even optimum.

Coincidentally, GLOVE AUDIO was buying tens of thousands of dollar
in
ads in the magazine the review appeared in.

There's nothing slimier than a hack audiophile who sells out hi
opinion.

--
Lizard *


Better to be an alleged "hack audiophile" than a crybaby that froths a
the mouth at the very mention of said hack's name. L-O-S-E-R. :
-
Warblee
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...threadid=16856

  #292   Report Post  
Warbleed
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hick UP!

Ouch, looks like John took a bite out of poor Eddie.
--
Warbleed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...hreadid=168456

  #293   Report Post  
delvryboy
 
Posts: n/a
Default THE PROOF IS IN! Facing subs towards driver or away

Eddie Runner wrote:
*Are you guessing or do you have measurements to share with us?

delvryboy wrote:

now....face that driver into the cabin in a trunked car....and sea

off
the baffle completely...trunk/cabin

whole different monster
--
delvryboy * nothing technical


143.5 with the sub rearward 6" from the back bumper
142.1 with the sub facing forward
144.9 with sub facing forward with the baffle sealed off from th
trunk

all tests on the same linX mic

the loss when simply turning the sub box around comes from th
cancellation shown in the tech paper
-
delvrybo
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...threadid=16758

  #294   Report Post  
Paul Vina
 
Posts: n/a
Default The lowdown

I would have used a 30MM HEI from an A-10 myself.



Paul Vina



"thelizman" thelizman1221.yahoo@com wrote in message
...
Nousaine wrote:

snip

Okay smartass, so explain how you can have cancelations of standing
standing dictators in a seven foot hole? It CANT BE DONE! Some of my
former colleagues performed just such an experiment saturday night.

--
Lizard
Should have cancelled his ass with a 5.56 FMJ through the head...



  #295   Report Post  
John Durbin
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

you shouldn't mistake a driveby as hassling ... sometimes it's just fun
to point it at something and pull the trigger!

JD
and face it, you're a pretty good-sized target

Eddie Runner wrote:

I learn stuff all the time.
I learned that you dont have anythng better todo than
hassle me!

John Durbin wrote:

I'm still looking for the first admission that you learned something,
then :-)

JD
he thought he was wrong once, but he was mistaken

Eddie Runner wrote:

John Durbin wrote:



I never said it was a bad thing... just that you shouldn't be mistaken
for a salesman :-)


I know, I know,..... I am at the far other end of the spectrum
that any salesman I have ever known...

A salesman CONS the customer into buying something.
On the other hand the customer begs to pay me. And they always
want my neat **** that I dont wanna sell.... (If I sell it then I gotta
order me another, what a drag)...



no lie on the other stuff... some parts of the country have had a lot
of stores close down this year that were way prettier than yours!


thats for sure.. I see em closing up nearly everyday. I used to have a

federated right across the street from me, they are gone, who woulda
thought?
they were huge!... I still have a best buy a few blocks away.... I
like
em there!



JD
Is your wife is the only one that ever gets away with telling you
you're wrong?


Anyone can tell me, its just that I rarely am wrong.... I dont make a
point of
talking about the stuff I dont already know... And when I am wrong,
great!
Then I learned something!!

Its win win for me...

Except with DRUNK *******s that wont even look at the graphs....


Eddie Runner






  #296   Report Post  
John Durbin
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hick UP!

Naah, he knows it's true... he even filled in the rest of the conversation!

JD

Warbleed wrote:

Ouch, looks like John took a bite out of poor Eddie.
--
Warbleed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...hreadid=168456




  #297   Report Post  
thelizman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Smack smack

Warbleed wrote:
thelizman wrote:


Better to be an alleged "hack audiophile" than a crybaby that froths at
the mouth at the very mention of said hack's name. L-O-S-E-R.
--
Warbleed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...hreadid=168561


You have to use a web-based newsreader, 'cause you can't comprehend how
to access usenet otherwise. Whose the 10053r now, bitch.

--
Lizard

  #298   Report Post  
thelizman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hick UP!

Warbleed wrote:
Ouch, looks like John took a bite out of poor Eddie.
--
Warbleed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...hreadid=168456


Ouch, looks like Assbleed doesn't know how to quote in accordance with
usenet etiquette.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: These dumbasses at
caraudioforum.com are the lates aol/webtv scourge of usenet.

--
Lizard
Too stupid to configure a newsreader? Use a web based forum.
  #299   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

You liberals in LA think drive bys are the answer....

Morons try that in Texas and they will wind up with a
couple of pick up trucks full of rednecks chasin them down
and havin a little fun with the bad guys at the end of a deer rifle.

ever notice the drive bys happen most often where there are
the stricktest gun control laws... (Shooters know its unlikely to
get shot back at.)

here in Texas where EVERYONE has a gun, idiots are a little less
likely to be waving one around foolishly....

Mark Twain said, "an armed society is a polite society!"

John Durbin wrote:

you shouldn't mistake a driveby as hassling ... sometimes it's just
fun to point it at something and pull the trigger!

JD
and face it, you're a pretty good-sized target


Dont forget I have been targeted before...
Ed = 1 Badguy = 0

  #300   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Actual tests - aiming woofer boxes

Warbleed wrote:

Eddie, I find that front firing with the woofer totally isolated from
the trunk (firing ONLY into the front cabin, directly), tends to have
the best sound of all. Anyway you can throw up a quick test of that?
Curious to see how the graphs come out.


Totally isolated?
You mean with a floor to ceiling wall ?

And wall or not you may be right... Even with the cancelation and
less bass by firing the woofers forward, I have created some of my
favorite SQ (sound Quality) car systems that way in the past...

Nowdays everyone wants bass, bass and more bass, so it would
probably not be the best choice to aim the woofers forward for
most customers. Besides, too much bass can always be turned
down but not enough bass may not be able to be turned up...

I ALWAYS SAY, listen for yourself and choose the way you
like it best... I ALWAYS SAY dont take my word for it or
anyone elses word for it, DO THE TESTS YOURSELF !

Just by looking at the graphs, I don't see a very big difference in LOW
frequency performance, although certainly a difference in high bass
performance (which I would never let a subwoofer play anyway).


Very big?
3dB is like doubling your amp power.... Sounds pretty big to me!
The BIG differences you see on my graphs are really HUGE GIANT
SIZED!!

As far as the trunk open test, you get a steady loss in low frequency
output, and a peak in the 50hz range, that's pretty much what Tom
seemed to say you'd expect to see.


Most folks percieve te best bass around 50Hz... The hump there
would be desireable to most folks...

Not really sure why all these kids are trying to call Tom a "noob"
though, just makes them sound like imbicels.


The kids, in fact just about everyone into car audio knows that turning
a woofer box can make a dramtic difference... Tom still insists the
only difference would be midrange and some possible port noise.
Everyone knows Tom is wrong so they call him names....

Eddie Runner



  #301   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Actual tests - aiming woofer boxes

msmith wrote:

Tom... In this particular case, it's not fair to dismiss Eddie as a
silly, uneducated, myth-propagating dummy.


I've never done that Manville if you've been following the thread you'll have
noticed that this started when Eddie attacked me, quite impolitely, for
pointing out that his 'explantation' of low frequency acoustics in a car didn't
fit with acoustical reality. But he's respomnded in exactly the way you
describe above.


Anyone who has installed more than a few real-world car subwoofers
knows that subwoofer orientation/loading has an effect on the quality
and quantity of perceived bass at the listening position.


Boundary loading is a different issue and Eddie doesn't seem to recognize or
discuss it. As far a orinetation goes this is a function of vehicle size and
frequency range.


The
significance of the effect varies from car to car, but it is definitely
an important factor.


Depending on frequency range. The 'idea that opening a hatch "increases" bass
in the car, when it may introduce a peak but radically reduce lower frequency
sound pressure in the cabin, is largely a myth and that woofer-face direction
changes frequency response below the lowest modal frequency in the cabin is
another.

Be that as it may location/orientation is a useful tool but we need to
understand how and why. Eddie has a simplistic veiw that he won't let go of no
matter what.

So instead of discussing things rationally he simply blusters.

In fact, one of the primary "tuning" aspects of designing Stealthbox
systems (vehicle specific subwoofers) here at JL Audio revolves around
finding an optimum location, orientation and loading for the woofer. I
wish it were as simple as just picking any spot in the car for the sub,
but it isn't. Sometimes a location that is more practical or desirable
doesn't sound as good as another.


Of course; but if you'll recall in 1999 I tested 4 vehicle specific subwoofer
systems (one of which was a JL) in a '99 Sierra for Car Stereo Review and 4
different systems with different woofer face orientation in 2 differing
radiating locations showed that below 60 Hz the cabin transfer function was
identical.

That's the only question here.

Quoting Beranek, or citing physics that contradict these observations
is like saying that a rainbow does not actually have multiple colors in
it.


This came from an earlier discussion where Eddie claimed that his single wall
'cartoon' was a standing wave phenomenon when in fact it was just a single
boundary interference which wouldn't occur at the input frequency but well
above it.


A car is not a square room, nor is it a uniform pressure vessel...
orientation and proximity to boundaries (loading) has an effect on the
acoustical impedance matching between the woofer and the listening
environment... Partially sealed trunks act as resonant chambers which
often cancel out desirable bass energy...

small, semi-captive volumes
of air between a rear-firing sub and a rear hatch affect the acoustical
impedance match as well... the relationship between the listening
position and the front and back boundaries of the cabin also plays a
role... the vehicle is lossy at very low freuqencies... etc. etc. etc.


So? The possible problems that are encountered in any given situation do not
affect the acoustical issues here. Of course there are a multitude of possible
effects BUT simply moving a woofer to a diferent location is not a end-all
solution. And it's very misleading to insist that it has any effect below the
modal range in a car.

An understanding of what, how and why is useful. But Eddie simply wants to hurl
insults for the most part or offer misguided discussion about what happens and
why.


It should also be noted that 99.9% of car audio customers listen to
bass at louder levels than you find comfortable... I'm not sure if that
fact has any effect on the whole equation.


Bass at louder levels is not an issue. Louder SPL at higher frequencies is.

As far as I know, nobody has been able to accurately model a car's
transfer function based on pure measurements with any degree of
precision... one can measure it, but it is devilishly complicated to
predict.


Depends on the frequency range in question. I can measure the low frequency
transfer function at frequencies below the lowest modal frequency with great
reliability. It's true that there is great variation above this frequency (60
Hz in a Corvette or Sierra X-cab, for example) but in the pressure zone it's
quite reliably measured if not predictable in advance.

This is not the issue here. I've never said that location/orientation isn't
important. I'm just trying to outline how and where it can be used to benefit.

But Eddie just wants to defend his web-site and hopefully discredit anyone who
might show he's wrong about some things.


Maybe some of your OEM buddies think they have the answer, but
I have my doubts.

Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc.


I agree that no one that I know can model an acoustical transfer fucntion prior
to manufacturing a cabin. But nobody even tries. The audio system comes after
and is adapted to the car just as a home audio system is adapted to the room in
which it will be used.

But, on the whole, Eddie is not advancing the discussion on helping everyone
make better sounding car audio systems.

  #302   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Actual tests - aiming woofer boxes

Let him have it Manville!!!

Tom has been saying woofer location makes no difference whatsoever.
Now he seems to be backpedaling pretty quickly trying to get himself
out of this mess...

He accused me of doctoring my graphs because he says it is a
physical impossibility...

I guess Tom thinks Im just some punk kid...
Now that your here he sure does seem to be trying to make
excuses....

ha ha ha
reminds me of the good ol days....



msmith wrote:

Tom... In this particular case, it's not fair to dismiss Eddie as a
silly, uneducated, myth-propagating dummy.



  #303   Report Post  
John Durbin
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

I guess it works better if you hit what you're aiming at... present
company excepted, I know you got skills.

JD
damn drunk Texans are probably lucky to hit water if they fall out of a
boat... we're talking about a state that until recently was ok with
drive-through liquor stores

Eddie Runner wrote:

You liberals in LA think drive bys are the answer....

Morons try that in Texas and they will wind up with a
couple of pick up trucks full of rednecks chasin them down
and havin a little fun with the bad guys at the end of a deer rifle.

ever notice the drive bys happen most often where there are
the stricktest gun control laws... (Shooters know its unlikely to
get shot back at.)

here in Texas where EVERYONE has a gun, idiots are a little less
likely to be waving one around foolishly....

Mark Twain said, "an armed society is a polite society!"

John Durbin wrote:



you shouldn't mistake a driveby as hassling ... sometimes it's just
fun to point it at something and pull the trigger!

JD
and face it, you're a pretty good-sized target




Dont forget I have been targeted before...
Ed = 1 Badguy = 0




  #304   Report Post  
John Durbin
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hick UP!

ironically, I've had problems posting to forums lately - every time I
try to post or reply to a post it tells me to log in first... so I log
in (again), and same thing happens all over.

JD

thelizman wrote:

Warbleed wrote:

Ouch, looks like John took a bite out of poor Eddie.
--
Warbleed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread:
http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...hreadid=168456



Ouch, looks like Assbleed doesn't know how to quote in accordance with
usenet etiquette.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: These dumbasses at
caraudioforum.com are the lates aol/webtv scourge of usenet.

--
Lizard
Too stupid to configure a newsreader? Use a web based forum.


  #305   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

John Durbin wrote:

I guess it works better if you hit what you're aiming at... present
company excepted, I know you got skills.


I used to shoot at least twice a week withmy trust .45 auto
but lately I seem to runnin outa bad guys to shoot at.
Might be gettin a little rusty.

JD
damn drunk Texans are probably lucky to hit water if they fall out of
a boat...


I may be a Texan but I dont drink.

we're talking about a state that until recently was ok with
drive-through liquor stores


Whats wrong with that?
There is a law here that you cant drink on the premisses of a liqour
store.
So it would be logical to DRIVE home before you drink....

Actually the few drive throughs were more of a novely and were not
low priced... Most folks only used the drive throughs for large sales
like cases of beer or Kegs......

Just to buy a couple of beers the average corner store was way cheaper
and the drive throughs didnt do so well... (IMO)

I still know of one, I dont think they are illegal or anything...

Of course the liberals in LA prolly think it is a contributor to drunk
driving
or something.... No, I dont think so, and probably way less than the
normal
corner stores that we have and you have in LA....

The drive throughs are not like Jack in the Box where you drive in for
one.
they are more like a place you drive a truck into and a forklift sets a
pallet
of beer in the back for you.... You can get a single beer but it is
not seved
up like Jack in the box or like you appearantly think ...

Eddie.

Eddie Runner wrote:

You liberals in LA think drive bys are the answer....

Morons try that in Texas and they will wind up with a
couple of pick up trucks full of rednecks chasin them down
and havin a little fun with the bad guys at the end of a deer rifle.

ever notice the drive bys happen most often where there are
the stricktest gun control laws... (Shooters know its unlikely to
get shot back at.)

here in Texas where EVERYONE has a gun, idiots are a little less
likely to be waving one around foolishly....

Mark Twain said, "an armed society is a polite society!"

John Durbin wrote:


you shouldn't mistake a driveby as hassling ... sometimes it's just
fun to point it at something and pull the trigger!

JD
and face it, you're a pretty good-sized target


Dont forget I have been targeted before...
Ed = 1 Badguy = 0





  #306   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hick UP!

did someone BITE ME AGAIN???

I musta missed it....

John Durbin wrote:

ironically, I've had problems posting to forums lately - every time I
try to post or reply to a post it tells me to log in first... so I log
in (again), and same thing happens all over.

JD

thelizman wrote:

Warbleed wrote:

Ouch, looks like John took a bite out of poor Eddie.
--
Warbleed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread:
http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...hreadid=168456



Ouch, looks like Assbleed doesn't know how to quote in accordance with
usenet etiquette.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: These dumbasses at
caraudioforum.com are the lates aol/webtv scourge of usenet.

--
Lizard
Too stupid to configure a newsreader? Use a web based forum.


  #307   Report Post  
John Durbin
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

You put way more effort into that response than my not-so-subtle sniping
warranted...

JD
I win!

Eddie Runner wrote:

John Durbin wrote:

I guess it works better if you hit what you're aiming at... present
company excepted, I know you got skills.


I used to shoot at least twice a week withmy trust .45 auto
but lately I seem to runnin outa bad guys to shoot at.
Might be gettin a little rusty.

JD
damn drunk Texans are probably lucky to hit water if they fall out of
a boat...


I may be a Texan but I dont drink.

we're talking about a state that until recently was ok with
drive-through liquor stores


Whats wrong with that?
There is a law here that you cant drink on the premisses of a liqour
store.
So it would be logical to DRIVE home before you drink....

Actually the few drive throughs were more of a novely and were not
low priced... Most folks only used the drive throughs for large sales
like cases of beer or Kegs......

Just to buy a couple of beers the average corner store was way cheaper
and the drive throughs didnt do so well... (IMO)

I still know of one, I dont think they are illegal or anything...

Of course the liberals in LA prolly think it is a contributor to drunk
driving
or something.... No, I dont think so, and probably way less than the
normal
corner stores that we have and you have in LA....

The drive throughs are not like Jack in the Box where you drive in for
one.
they are more like a place you drive a truck into and a forklift sets
a pallet
of beer in the back for you.... You can get a single beer but it is
not seved
up like Jack in the box or like you appearantly think ...

Eddie.

Eddie Runner wrote:

You liberals in LA think drive bys are the answer....

Morons try that in Texas and they will wind up with a
couple of pick up trucks full of rednecks chasin them down
and havin a little fun with the bad guys at the end of a deer rifle.

ever notice the drive bys happen most often where there are
the stricktest gun control laws... (Shooters know its unlikely to
get shot back at.)

here in Texas where EVERYONE has a gun, idiots are a little less
likely to be waving one around foolishly....

Mark Twain said, "an armed society is a polite society!"

John Durbin wrote:



you shouldn't mistake a driveby as hassling ... sometimes it's just
fun to point it at something and pull the trigger!

JD
and face it, you're a pretty good-sized target



Dont forget I have been targeted before...
Ed = 1 Badguy = 0




  #308   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

no, I win!

John Durbin wrote:

You put way more effort into that response than my not-so-subtle
sniping warranted...

JD
I win!

Eddie Runner wrote:

John Durbin wrote:

I guess it works better if you hit what you're aiming at... present
company excepted, I know you got skills.


I used to shoot at least twice a week withmy trust .45 auto
but lately I seem to runnin outa bad guys to shoot at.
Might be gettin a little rusty.

JD
damn drunk Texans are probably lucky to hit water if they fall out
of a boat...


I may be a Texan but I dont drink.

we're talking about a state that until recently was ok with
drive-through liquor stores


Whats wrong with that?
There is a law here that you cant drink on the premisses of a liqour
store.
So it would be logical to DRIVE home before you drink....

Actually the few drive throughs were more of a novely and were not
low priced... Most folks only used the drive throughs for large
sales
like cases of beer or Kegs......

Just to buy a couple of beers the average corner store was way
cheaper
and the drive throughs didnt do so well... (IMO)

I still know of one, I dont think they are illegal or anything...

Of course the liberals in LA prolly think it is a contributor to
drunk driving
or something.... No, I dont think so, and probably way less than the
normal
corner stores that we have and you have in LA....

The drive throughs are not like Jack in the Box where you drive in
for one.
they are more like a place you drive a truck into and a forklift
sets a pallet
of beer in the back for you.... You can get a single beer but it
is not seved
up like Jack in the box or like you appearantly think ...

Eddie.

Eddie Runner wrote:

You liberals in LA think drive bys are the answer....

Morons try that in Texas and they will wind up with a
couple of pick up trucks full of rednecks chasin them down
and havin a little fun with the bad guys at the end of a deer rifle.

ever notice the drive bys happen most often where there are
the stricktest gun control laws... (Shooters know its unlikely to
get shot back at.)

here in Texas where EVERYONE has a gun, idiots are a little less
likely to be waving one around foolishly....

Mark Twain said, "an armed society is a polite society!"

John Durbin wrote:


you shouldn't mistake a driveby as hassling ... sometimes it's just
fun to point it at something and pull the trigger!

JD
and face it, you're a pretty good-sized target


Dont forget I have been targeted before...
Ed = 1 Badguy = 0



  #309   Report Post  
bassfreak
 
Posts: n/a
Default The lowdown

eddy why not try ported? BTW that response is pretty nast
-
bassfrea
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...threadid=16901

  #310   Report Post  
John Durbin
 
Posts: n/a
Default Ed's Biz

me

Eddie Runner wrote:

no, I win!

John Durbin wrote:

You put way more effort into that response than my not-so-subtle
sniping warranted...

JD
I win!

Eddie Runner wrote:

John Durbin wrote:

I guess it works better if you hit what you're aiming at... present
company excepted, I know you got skills.

I used to shoot at least twice a week withmy trust .45 auto
but lately I seem to runnin outa bad guys to shoot at.
Might be gettin a little rusty.

JD
damn drunk Texans are probably lucky to hit water if they fall out
of a boat...

I may be a Texan but I dont drink.

we're talking about a state that until recently was ok with
drive-through liquor stores

Whats wrong with that?
There is a law here that you cant drink on the premisses of a liqour
store.
So it would be logical to DRIVE home before you drink....

Actually the few drive throughs were more of a novely and were not
low priced... Most folks only used the drive throughs for large sales
like cases of beer or Kegs......

Just to buy a couple of beers the average corner store was way cheaper
and the drive throughs didnt do so well... (IMO)

I still know of one, I dont think they are illegal or anything...

Of course the liberals in LA prolly think it is a contributor to
drunk driving
or something.... No, I dont think so, and probably way less than the
normal
corner stores that we have and you have in LA....

The drive throughs are not like Jack in the Box where you drive in
for one.
they are more like a place you drive a truck into and a forklift
sets a pallet
of beer in the back for you.... You can get a single beer but it
is not seved
up like Jack in the box or like you appearantly think ...

Eddie.

Eddie Runner wrote:

You liberals in LA think drive bys are the answer....

Morons try that in Texas and they will wind up with a
couple of pick up trucks full of rednecks chasin them down
and havin a little fun with the bad guys at the end of a deer rifle.

ever notice the drive bys happen most often where there are
the stricktest gun control laws... (Shooters know its unlikely to
get shot back at.)

here in Texas where EVERYONE has a gun, idiots are a little less
likely to be waving one around foolishly....

Mark Twain said, "an armed society is a polite society!"

John Durbin wrote:



you shouldn't mistake a driveby as hassling ... sometimes it's just
fun to point it at something and pull the trigger!

JD
and face it, you're a pretty good-sized target



Dont forget I have been targeted before...
Ed = 1 Badguy = 0






  #311   Report Post  
eidsvikDM
 
Posts: n/a
Default THE PROOF IS IN! Facing subs towards driver or away

Now, I'm fairly new to car audio and my family budget often hold me
back from getting some of the top line products but I'm learning alot
from reading these forums. I too have been experimenting with my 2
12's and placement. I found this thread to be of interest. Just from
looking at the pictures here it appears that this single sub when
faced toward the front is crammed up against the back of the rear
seat. Seems that, with my limited knowledge, that this type of
placement guarantees the rear firing sub to win. How can a bass note
develop in the little bit of air traped between the cone and the back
of the seat. Always reading here wanting to learn more but sometimes
hit something like this and get confused. Did somebody just spend
ALOT of time with this test just to muddy the water around this
debate?
  #312   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default THE PROOF IS IN! Facing subs towards driver or away

dont take anyones word for it.
try it for yourself, its easy and you may hear
a difference, alot of folks do...

Eddie Runner

eidsvikDM wrote:

Now, I'm fairly new to car audio and my family budget often hold me
back from getting some of the top line products but I'm learning alot
from reading these forums. I too have been experimenting with my 2
12's and placement. I found this thread to be of interest. Just from
looking at the pictures here it appears that this single sub when
faced toward the front is crammed up against the back of the rear
seat. Seems that, with my limited knowledge, that this type of
placement guarantees the rear firing sub to win. How can a bass note
develop in the little bit of air traped between the cone and the back
of the seat. Always reading here wanting to learn more but sometimes
hit something like this and get confused. Did somebody just spend
ALOT of time with this test just to muddy the water around this
debate?


  #313   Report Post  
thelizman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Toms ****ed now!

jksandwell wrote:
Alright Alright, I've been viewing this spit fight for awhile.


snip

If you had, you'd also have noticed the spit fight over CAF users who
don't quote. You need to quote the text of the message to which you are
replying.

You also need to get the concept of paragraphs down.

--
thelizman "I didn't steal the FAQ either"

Before you ask a question, check the FAQs for this newsgroup at
http://www.mobileaudio.com/rac-faq. It contains over a decade and
a half of knowledge.

teamROCS Car Audio Forums http://www.teamrocs.com/caraudio/
teamROCS Car Audio News http://www.teamrocs.com/news/
"It's about the music, stupid"

This post is Copyright (C) 2004. Reproduction of its content anywhere
other than usenet without the express written permission of the author
is forbidden.
  #314   Report Post  
jksandwell
 
Posts: n/a
Default Toms ****ed now!

Alright Alright, I've been viewing this spit fight for awhile. I've seen
the arguments on both sides but this last comment made me kind of
****ed. I am going to try and put this in simple form for those not
following along. I have to say Tom is right, there are no cancellations
(or so few and small that it is negligible) under the 60 hz line on ALL
test cars and 80 hz for most of them. There is a decrease in SPL and he
never said there wasn't or at least I haven't seen it, a loss in SPL
does not necessarily mean a cancellation there are as we know (many
many many factors). But Eddie is right in what he has said. LOL yes
they are both right. If your hunting for that extra bit of SPL and want
to raise it by a few decibels at the least, aim the box backwards. His
graphs look legit to me and I don't think anyone has denied it just put
words in Tom's mouth. Tom is being a bit of a tongue twister by not
exactly lying but antagonizing the hell out of Eddie. And Eddie is
being defensive because he feels there is an assault on his methods and
test equipment (who wouldn't be?). There, now all you extra 3rd party
members who want to contribute and try to call either of these two
swear words are not helping the situation. Tom there is a time when you
do need to spit out that it is louder, but there are no cancellations
under a certain level. Eddie just cool it, we all know your tests are
legit and Tom is being well a prick w/ flowery words. We understand the
point your tring to drive and yes louder is better to most of us and we
all learned something. Thank you
--
jksandwell
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...hreadid=168379

  #315   Report Post  
fhlh002
 
Posts: n/a
Default Toms ****ed now!

learn to post the the newsgroup like a real man, and we'll value your
opinion... until then, kindly go **** yourself..
--
fhlh.....
this post was intended for usenet, if you are reading this post on a
webforum it is because someone has STOLEN it to use as content to draw
traffic to his site... please acquire a proper newsreader if you want to
access rec.audio.car and rethink your patronage of said site...
THIS SIG WAS STOLEN FROM SANCHO... **** it!


"jksandwell" wrote in
message s.com...
Alright Alright, I've been viewing this spit fight for awhile. I've seen
the arguments on both sides but this last comment made me kind of
****ed. I am going to try and put this in simple form for those not
following along. I have to say Tom is right, there are no cancellations
(or so few and small that it is negligible) under the 60 hz line on ALL
test cars and 80 hz for most of them. There is a decrease in SPL and he
never said there wasn't or at least I haven't seen it, a loss in SPL
does not necessarily mean a cancellation there are as we know (many
many many factors). But Eddie is right in what he has said. LOL yes
they are both right. If your hunting for that extra bit of SPL and want
to raise it by a few decibels at the least, aim the box backwards. His
graphs look legit to me and I don't think anyone has denied it just put
words in Tom's mouth. Tom is being a bit of a tongue twister by not
exactly lying but antagonizing the hell out of Eddie. And Eddie is
being defensive because he feels there is an assault on his methods and
test equipment (who wouldn't be?). There, now all you extra 3rd party
members who want to contribute and try to call either of these two
swear words are not helping the situation. Tom there is a time when you
do need to spit out that it is louder, but there are no cancellations
under a certain level. Eddie just cool it, we all know your tests are
legit and Tom is being well a prick w/ flowery words. We understand the
point your tring to drive and yes louder is better to most of us and we
all learned something. Thank you
--
jksandwell
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread:

http://www.caraudioforum.com/showthr...hreadid=168379





  #316   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Toms ****ed now!

This guy posts from the FORUM and not only does he not quote
so I dont know exactly what posts he is refering to, but also he is
replying to a thread that has been over for a couple of months at least!!!
WOW.... I wish these Forum guys would come on over to RAC
and learn to post with the appropriate ettiquette....

jksandwell wrote:

Alright Alright, I've been viewing this spit fight for awhile.


you mean a WHILE AGO... this thread has been dead for
months....

I've seen
the arguments on both sides but this last comment made me kind of
****ed.


If you had quoted we would know which comment you are
refering to.

I am going to try and put this in simple form for those not
following along. I have to say Tom is right, there are no cancellations
(or so few and small that it is negligible) under the 60 hz line on ALL
test cars and 80 hz for most of them.


the graphs are there for all to see... Originally TOm had said there
were no cancellations under 120Hz (a typical xover freq)
Then he changed to 100Hz, now that I published my graphs
he says 60Hz... ha ha ha kinda cracks me up......
Why is it that your ****ed about this?

There is a decrease in SPL and he
never said there wasn't or at least I haven't seen it,


he has said that woofer location in a car is not important...
In fact he wrote an article saying the exact same thing that
was published in a car audio magazine years ago...

a loss in SPL
does not necessarily mean a cancellation there are as we know (many
many many factors).


Not a cancellation? How do you explain it then?

But Eddie is right in what he has said. LOL yes
they are both right. If your hunting for that extra bit of SPL and want
to raise it by a few decibels at the least, aim the box backwards. His
graphs look legit to me and I don't think anyone has denied it just put
words in Tom's mouth. Tom is being a bit of a tongue twister by not
exactly lying but antagonizing the hell out of Eddie.


hmm....

And Eddie is
being defensive because he feels there is an assault on his methods and
test equipment (who wouldn't be?).


hmmm.... Arent you missing something???
my graphs are good ones, everyone seems to agree my methods are sound.
It is TOM thats being defensive because he wrote an article
years ago and feels my graphs make him look like a dummy....

Maybe you missed the biginning of this thread...

Eddie just cool it, we all know your tests are
legit and Tom is being well a prick w/ flowery words.


ha ha ha

We understand the
point your tring to drive and yes louder is better to most of us and we
all learned something. Thank you


Your welcome....

Eddie Runner
http://www.teamrocs.com

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Boston 8" subs enclosures Challenger Car Audio 2 November 22nd 03 07:47 AM
Any Home diyers looking for a "DREAM" 12" Seas Excel like low distortion/transparency driver with FR-2khz??? Mike Car Audio 0 September 12th 03 08:27 PM
Alpine deck blew my subs! Indiglow Car Audio 9 August 16th 03 01:46 AM
Best 8" subs? Sam Carleton Car Audio 7 August 15th 03 04:25 AM
Subwoofer direction Doobie-Doo Car Audio 108 August 13th 03 04:15 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:16 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"