Theoretically if there were no limits on price per feature what would
the ultimate car audio system consist of.

Would you prefer a stand alone deck with all the goodies, like the C90,
Eclipse, Clarion, Nak, McIntosh or something more elaborate like the
old XES system or the new Alpine F1 Status. And what specs would you
wants these units to have? Number and quality of DACs, type of chassis,
grade of capacitors, type of connections, type of amplification, power
supply section, grade of mosfets, transport mechanism, tuner section,
other internal cicutry, additional features like time correction, error
sampling?

If you have ideas on a complete system like the Alpine F1 Status, give
details for the processor, amps and speakers, such as the capability of
the procssor,RS232/USB customization, type of amplification, material
used for the heatsink, type of mosfets and capacitors, number of
channels, THD ratings, power ratings, types of material in the
speakers, kevlar, carbon fiber, titatium, digital connections,
fiberobtics, firewire?

Please be as detailed or general as you'd like. This is a customer
focus survey i'm conducting myself in hopes of submitting a proposal
for the slightest chance of creating such a product or products.
Thanks for any feedback!

I would start with the vehicle to find what is the largest airvolume I
can put in the front, and then find a midbass that would fit well, and
would probably be something like the Adire Extremis6 or maybe I could
get away with an 8". Then I'd get a good midrange, probably a dome
around 2-3" that could crossover at around 500hz and 4khz, where I
would put in maybe a scanspeak ring radiator.
The rears I would use the same drivers as before, but modified design
to accomidate for supposed less room.

Then I'd put in a center channel mounted in the dash if needed, such
that the front two speakers would not create a convincing stereo image.

I would actively triamp these with a digital crossover such as a dbx
driverack unit custom made into a car-audio friendly box (12volt etc).
My source would be a computer that I put in the trunk and a LCD in the
front console. The card would be a M-Audio Audiophile 2496. It would be
running Linux and BruteFIR (more on this later).

For amps, I'd use McIntosh, which are in my opinion some of the highest
SQ amps in the car/home audio world. I would use a JMLab Audiom 15"
woofer x-overed at 60hz, probably sealed alignment to minimize group
delay.

I'd have the entire thing measured with a measurement microphone and
delayed properly with the dbx driverack, and then I'd create a
correction filter for the car acoustics, and use BruteFIR to actievly
convolve the sound output to minimize reflections and create maximilly
flat response. I'd configure it to play DVD-A, SACD, FLAC, APE, and
whatever else you'd want to throw at it.

The biggest thing for me would be the speakers and convolved digitally
corrected sound though, everything else is moot. In a purely SQ system
I'd never even consider listening to FM, so I'd add it only as an
additional feature incase I wanted to check weather. I'd want only the
best polypropelene capacitors used, possibly AudioCap Theta KimberKap
or Solen.

I could go on forever but I have a date in 10 hours, and 9 hours of
sleep to go

Jcc39 wrote:
Theoretically if there were no limits on price per feature what would
the ultimate car audio system consist of.

Would you prefer a stand alone deck with all the goodies, like the C90,
Eclipse, Clarion, Nak, McIntosh or something more elaborate like the
old XES system or the new Alpine F1 Status. And what specs would you
wants these units to have? Number and quality of DACs, type of chassis,
grade of capacitors, type of connections, type of amplification, power
supply section, grade of mosfets, transport mechanism, tuner section,
other internal cicutry, additional features like time correction, error
sampling?

If you have ideas on a complete system like the Alpine F1 Status, give
details for the processor, amps and speakers, such as the capability of
the procssor,RS232/USB customization, type of amplification, material
used for the heatsink, type of mosfets and capacitors, number of
channels, THD ratings, power ratings, types of material in the
speakers, kevlar, carbon fiber, titatium, digital connections,
fiberobtics, firewire?

Please be as detailed or general as you'd like. This is a customer
focus survey i'm conducting myself in hopes of submitting a proposal
for the slightest chance of creating such a product or products.
Thanks for any feedback!

Theoretically if there were no limits on price per feature what would
the ultimate car audio system consist of.

Would you prefer a stand alone deck with all the goodies, like the C90,
Eclipse, Clarion, Nak, McIntosh or something more elaborate like the
old XES system or the new Alpine F1 Status.

None of the above. I'd use a computer with an LCD screen in the dash.

And what specs would you
wants these units to have? Number and quality of DACs, type of chassis,
grade of capacitors, type of connections, type of amplification, power
supply section, grade of mosfets, transport mechanism, tuner section,
other internal cicutry, additional features like time correction, error
sampling?

Yeah, it needs to have DACs, a chassis, and capacitors. It doesn't matter
much what they are. These days, most manufacturers are building decks
virtually indistinguishable in sound quality from one another, mostly
because cheap components are every bit as good as the more expensive
components. I remember how years ago it was all the rage to replace your op
amps in all your devices. What a waste of time that was. Anyway, it isn't
until you get into the amplification where differences start to pop up. But
if you had no limits, why would you stick your amplifier in the head unit?


If you have ideas on a complete system like the Alpine F1 Status, give
details for the processor, amps and speakers, such as the capability of
the procssor,RS232/USB customization, type of amplification, material
used for the heatsink, type of mosfets and capacitors, number of
channels, THD ratings, power ratings, types of material in the
speakers, kevlar, carbon fiber, titatium, digital connections,
fiberobtics, firewire?

Please be as detailed or general as you'd like. This is a customer
focus survey i'm conducting myself in hopes of submitting a proposal
for the slightest chance of creating such a product or products.
Thanks for any feedback!

If you're interested in creating products, you should try to be on the
ground floor of the wi-fi/bluetooth era. With the popularity of ipods these
days, I can't believe that more manufacturers aren't trying to go with hard
drive based decks, with full wireless capabilities - at an affordable price.
Also, it seems that some manufacturers aren't paying enough attention to the
tuner sections of head units. Too many are hit or miss. Really, there are
just a handful that are considered to be great tuners. And no, I don't
think satellite radio is going to take over the market.

"MZ" wrote in message
...
If you're interested in creating products, you should try to be on the
ground floor of the wi-fi/bluetooth era. With the popularity of ipods
these days, I can't believe that more manufacturers aren't trying to go
with hard drive based decks, with full wireless capabilities - at an
affordable price. Also, it seems that some manufacturers aren't paying
enough attention to the tuner sections of head units. Too many are hit or
miss. Really, there are just a handful that are considered to be great
tuners. And no, I don't think satellite radio is going to take over the
market.


I have to agree with the WiFi and hard drive solution. I would love, during
the evening, to be able to upload a playlist from the house into my car. Or
upload a full WAV version of a mastering project I am working on so I can
listen to it in the car in the morning when my ears are fresh. Screw
burning a CD and forgetting it on the kitchen counter in the morning to find
out later it sucks and have to run it thru the shredder. Hey, maybe
incorperate the diplay and BIOS to get along with outlook so I can get
reminders, etc in the morning. My pocket PC does well but a smack in the
head first off doesn't hurt

As for Sat radio and building better tuner sections...

I have to preface this by saying that I was a Broadcast Engineer for a
copperate radio conglomerate in my area. We had the #1,2 and 3 arbitron
stations in the geographic area out of the 5 stations we operated. This
job was a test to my morals. It was my job to get all but one of thse
stations so F-ing loud that it would peel your face off. No dynamics, and
lots of punch, why? because the common folk stop on the loudest thing they
hear, radio is for selling ad's not entertaining you, it's all economic. If
you stop on that station and stay then you put it in your little Arbitron
book and it's lots of free beer for me after books come out, big party!

I LOVE MY XM! I live in a some what rural area, a combined city total of
100,000 people in the middle of nowhere. If you don't like contemporary
adult, or country music you are screwed. We have one urban station playing
2003's music, one classical, one talk (I can get WLS out of Chicago also
(totally rocks for talk)) 2 christian and one comunity station. The
community station is great but you have to know when to tune in, I actually
volunteer my services to them to spite corporate radio now!
http://www.weftfm.org/

I've had my new head in my car for a month now and have yet to program one
radio preset, the XM presets are full. While touring I liked to be able to
listen to one thing forever, or be able to skip around without hearing the
same song over and over. With a good XM tuner the audio is better than FM
IMHO, although like FM some have extreme processing going on, not enough
station to station continuity, I guess that's good.

I think sat radio IS the new wave, while driving around do you see many TV
antenna's in the air? Everyone is cable and sat, why? They want choices.
Every skeptical person I have met who doesn't have sat radio and loves music
will usually reconsider after playing with one.

Before ending my rant I have to once again reinforce, I LIVE IN A RURAL
AREA, we have ****ty broadcast radio. If I lived in a huge city like LA,
Chicago, NY I may change my tune, But probably not

Chad

I have to agree with the WiFi and hard drive solution. I would love,
during
the evening, to be able to upload a playlist from the house into my car.
Or
upload a full WAV version of a mastering project I am working on so I can
listen to it in the car in the morning when my ears are fresh. Screw
burning a CD and forgetting it on the kitchen counter in the morning to
find
out later it sucks and have to run it thru the shredder. Hey, maybe
incorperate the diplay and BIOS to get along with outlook so I can get
reminders, etc in the morning. My pocket PC does well but a smack in the
head first off doesn't hurt

As for Sat radio and building better tuner sections...

I have to preface this by saying that I was a Broadcast Engineer for a
copperate radio conglomerate in my area. We had the #1,2 and 3 arbitron
stations in the geographic area out of the 5 stations we operated. This
job was a test to my morals. It was my job to get all but one of thse
stations so F-ing loud that it would peel your face off. No dynamics, and
lots of punch, why? because the common folk stop on the loudest thing they
hear, radio is for selling ad's not entertaining you, it's all economic.
If
you stop on that station and stay then you put it in your little Arbitron
book and it's lots of free beer for me after books come out, big party!

I LOVE MY XM! I live in a some what rural area, a combined city total of
100,000 people in the middle of nowhere. If you don't like contemporary
adult, or country music you are screwed. We have one urban station
playing
2003's music, one classical, one talk (I can get WLS out of Chicago also
(totally rocks for talk)) 2 christian and one comunity station. The
community station is great but you have to know when to tune in, I
actually
volunteer my services to them to spite corporate radio now!
http://www.weftfm.org/

I've had my new head in my car for a month now and have yet to program one
radio preset, the XM presets are full. While touring I liked to be able
to
listen to one thing forever, or be able to skip around without hearing the
same song over and over. With a good XM tuner the audio is better than FM
IMHO, although like FM some have extreme processing going on, not enough
station to station continuity, I guess that's good.

I think sat radio IS the new wave, while driving around do you see many TV
antenna's in the air? Everyone is cable and sat, why? They want choices.
Every skeptical person I have met who doesn't have sat radio and loves
music
will usually reconsider after playing with one.

Before ending my rant I have to once again reinforce, I LIVE IN A RURAL
AREA, we have ****ty broadcast radio. If I lived in a huge city like LA,
Chicago, NY I may change my tune, But probably not


Satellite radio is great, but I wouldn't invest in it. There are two
reasons I say this: first, it suffers from the same deal that sat tv
suffered from for years - no local content. There are way too many people
who want to listen to their favorite morning radio show, or afternoon talk
shows, etc. People grow used to it, and the inertia can be a bit much to
overcome - especially if you're not offering an attractive alternative.
Sure, you can use both sat and broadcast, but I think a lot of people won't
feel they'd be able to justify spending money on satellite radio if they're
still listening to broadcast radio a substantial portion of the time.

Second, I think as computer-like solutions become more common in the car,
which is where I think things are and will continue to be moving, internet
access may become more common if they can find an easier, cheaper, and
faster way of doing it. Speed will be the real issue here, because if
they're able to either develop more reliable/speedy transmission directly
via cell towers or some sort of satellite transmission for moving internet
access (don't ask me how either of those things work), then radios will
undoubtedly begin to incorporate the types of features we're seeing in home
media centers now - most notably, streaming radio.

Basically, I see the current incarnation of satellite radio as a stepping
stone to bigger and better things where ultimately full internet access ends
up taking over.

"MZ" wrote in message
...
Satellite radio is great, but I wouldn't invest in it. There are two
reasons I say this: first, it suffers from the same deal that sat tv
suffered from for years - no local content. There are way too many people
who want to listen to their favorite morning radio show, or afternoon talk
shows, etc. People grow used to it, and the inertia can be a bit much to
overcome - especially if you're not offering an attractive alternative.
Sure, you can use both sat and broadcast, but I think a lot of people
won't
feel they'd be able to justify spending money on satellite radio if
they're
still listening to broadcast radio a substantial portion of the time.


I do listen to both but mostly talk on broadcast, Art Bell is the best way
to stay up on a friday night drive, freakshows! Also Rowe Conn on WLS is a
hoot, but music still comes off XM as does the comedy channel XL replacing
the local morning show.

Second, I think as computer-like solutions become more common in the car,
which is where I think things are and will continue to be moving, internet
access may become more common if they can find an easier, cheaper, and
faster way of doing it. Speed will be the real issue here, because if
they're able to either develop more reliable/speedy transmission directly
via cell towers or some sort of satellite transmission for moving internet
access (don't ask me how either of those things work), then radios will
undoubtedly begin to incorporate the types of features we're seeing in
home
media centers now - most notably, streaming radio.

Basically, I see the current incarnation of satellite radio as a stepping
stone to bigger and better things where ultimately full internet access
ends
up taking over.



I now live 20 miles out of town in a metropolis of 150 people, needless to
say digital cable and DSL is out of the question. There IS high speed
internet popping up on cell towers, the cat called me last night to let me
know it was available in my area. I'll let you know speed specs but i DO
know it's less fast than cable and faster than DSL. Too bad i just signed a
dial up contract Murphy again!

Chad

Chad Wahls wrote:
I now live 20 miles out of town in a metropolis of 150 people, needless to
say digital cable and DSL is out of the question. There IS high speed
internet popping up on cell towers, the cat called me last night to let me
know it was available in my area. I'll let you know speed specs but i DO
know it's less fast than cable and faster than DSL. Too bad i just signed a
dial up contract Murphy again!

Chad

Too bad you don't live in Iowa. The towns of 150 people typically have
better high-speed and prices than the people in the cities. I guess
that's what you get when you have a state with the most independent
telephone companies all trying to one-up Qwest and Mediacom.

Brandonb