I'm curious how a competitor with home-made equipment would be categorised at a
competition? Any judges out there that can tell me if my home made amps and
processors would be allowed to run? Is there more than one sanctioning body,
each with different rules?

Someone recently posted that it would be fun to compete with Pyle gear
(inexpensive) and match the high-end (expensive) gear with a great install. I'd
like to try it once with home made stuff, just for fun.

Interesting question. Yeah, I was the one talking about competing with the
inexpensive gear. On second thought, I could always try to put some Pyle
amps in some "high end" cases, faking the judges into thinking that it's
high end gear. It would be a good experiment to not only demonstrate that
"low-end" gear is not as low-end as some may think, and also to evaluate how
much bias exists in these competitions. Any collaborators?

PS - What do you have for home-made gear?

I'm curious how a competitor with home-made equipment would be categorised
at a
competition? Any judges out there that can tell me if my home made amps
and
processors would be allowed to run? Is there more than one sanctioning
body,
each with different rules?

Someone recently posted that it would be fun to compete with Pyle gear
(inexpensive) and match the high-end (expensive) gear with a great
install. I'd
like to try it once with home made stuff, just for fun.

In article ,
pam says...
Interesting question. Yeah, I was the one talking about competing with the
inexpensive gear. On second thought, I could always try to put some Pyle
amps in some "high end" cases, faking the judges into thinking that it's
high end gear. It would be a good experiment to not only demonstrate that
"low-end" gear is not as low-end as some may think, and also to evaluate how
much bias exists in these competitions. Any collaborators?

PS - What do you have for home-made gear?

I'm curious how a competitor with home-made equipment would be categorised
at a
competition? Any judges out there that can tell me if my home made amps
and
processors would be allowed to run? Is there more than one sanctioning
body,
each with different rules?

Someone recently posted that it would be fun to compete with Pyle gear
(inexpensive) and match the high-end (expensive) gear with a great
install. I'd
like to try it once with home made stuff, just for fun.





Here is one organization:

http://www.iasca.com/index2.php

--
I.Care
Address fake until
the spam goes away.

I'm game. I'd also like to see high-end stuff put into a low-end chassis to see
if the scores drop. I was looking at the website for the IASCA and they specify
retail equipment for several classes. Here is a quote from the STREET SMART
class rules: "...available to all entry-level competitors who have obtained his
or her mobile electronic systems through standard retail channels..." There are
other classes which do not mention equipment origin but I think it may be
implied to be retail. Hopefully someone out there who is familiar with the nitty
gritty rules can enlighten me.

My home-made gear includes two large amps and two electronic crossovers with
development of a DAC underway. The amps are two channel jobs stuffed into old
amplifier chassis and cooled by fans on a thermostat. One was a Jensen and the
other a Pioneer I think. I media blasted the logos off and had them black
anodized for better cooling. I've been toying with the idea of screening my own
logos on for fun. They are capable of 400 watts RMS per channel into 4 ohms and
should be capable of around 700 at 2 ohms. It's huge overkill, I just built
them for fun. The cost per channel was CDN$50 plus PSU, which I'd guess at
CDN$40 (with some scavenged parts). They'll run circles around "high-end" gear
on the instruments.

One crossover is a three way op-amp type with independently variable frequency,
independently switchable slopes(12/24), phase select (0/180) and independent
level control. The other is made from discrete components and is a two way,
24dB/octave, variable frequency, with independent level control.

I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for volume
control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for volume
or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby Digital
decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will
automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I decide
to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC.

I've considered putting a PC in my car and using the SPDIF output (like you were
interested in doing) but decided I didn't want something that would take time to
boot and might be a fussy install. An HU with a jack added on the back seemed
elegant. I could move my amps into one chassis along with the DAC circuit for a
nice clean install. Admittedly it will be large but I don't care.

The flexibility options are limited only to my overactive imagination, which is
what's preventing me from finishing the project. I need to draw a line and say,
"ok, this is what it will do... nothing more." By the time I'm done everyone
will be able to buy a DVD HU with 5.1 output for $100.


"MZ" wrote in message
...
Interesting question. Yeah, I was the one talking about competing with the
inexpensive gear. On second thought, I could always try to put some Pyle
amps in some "high end" cases, faking the judges into thinking that it's
high end gear. It would be a good experiment to not only demonstrate that
"low-end" gear is not as low-end as some may think, and also to evaluate how
much bias exists in these competitions. Any collaborators?

PS - What do you have for home-made gear?

I'm curious how a competitor with home-made equipment would be categorised
at a
competition? Any judges out there that can tell me if my home made amps
and
processors would be allowed to run? Is there more than one sanctioning
body,
each with different rules?

Someone recently posted that it would be fun to compete with Pyle gear
(inexpensive) and match the high-end (expensive) gear with a great
install. I'd
like to try it once with home made stuff, just for fun.

I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for
volume
control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for
volume
or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby
Digital
decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will
automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I
decide
to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC.

I was interested in doing something similar a while back. I've since canned
those plans because of the computer. Now I'm thinking more along the lines
of writing some code to add some massive signal processing capabilities,
probably through a digital I/O card. I think the ultimate goal will be to
have independently adjustable channels for each of my speakers (my front
setup is triamped, my rears biamped, and my sub - so that's 11 channels) -
same signal, different processing signals. We'll see where that goes. The
signal processing part is relatively easy...it's the recipient circuitry
(decoding the control signals and running everything through DACs - in real
time) that's a pain.

Yes a PC gives you lots of flexibility with software. The problem with designing
my own DAC is I'll be programming in a language with next to no built-in
routines for my purpose. I plan to use a PIC microcontroller so I can upgrade my
code at any time. Perhaps to interface with an RTA for real-time equalisation or
even installing a mic into the interior of the car for stand alone calibration.
My system could then calibrate itself flat for competition. I could store
pre-set curves and run demo routines too.
My biggest problem so far is keeping the radio operational. I can easily patch
the CD data stream out to a DAC, but the radio is all analog and would require I
keep the analog side operating (not to mention volume control issues). Texas
Instruments sampled me some nice delta sigma A2Ds which I could use to digitise
the radio output. Then it would only be a matter of selecting the source. It's
so easy to get carried away...


"MZ" wrote in message
...
I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for
volume
control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for
volume
or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby
Digital
decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will
automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I
decide
to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC.

I was interested in doing something similar a while back. I've since canned
those plans because of the computer. Now I'm thinking more along the lines
of writing some code to add some massive signal processing capabilities,
probably through a digital I/O card. I think the ultimate goal will be to
have independently adjustable channels for each of my speakers (my front
setup is triamped, my rears biamped, and my sub - so that's 11 channels) -
same signal, different processing signals. We'll see where that goes. The
signal processing part is relatively easy...it's the recipient circuitry
(decoding the control signals and running everything through DACs - in real
time) that's a pain.

In article KjEdc.54074$Bk31.2175
@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this}
says...
Yes a PC gives you lots of flexibility with software. The problem with designing
my own DAC is I'll be programming in a language with next to no built-in
routines for my purpose. I plan to use a PIC microcontroller so I can upgrade my
code at any time. Perhaps to interface with an RTA for real-time equalisation or
even installing a mic into the interior of the car for stand alone calibration.
My system could then calibrate itself flat for competition. I could store
pre-set curves and run demo routines too.
My biggest problem so far is keeping the radio operational. I can easily patch
the CD data stream out to a DAC, but the radio is all analog and would require I
keep the analog side operating (not to mention volume control issues). Texas
Instruments sampled me some nice delta sigma A2Ds which I could use to digitise
the radio output. Then it would only be a matter of selecting the source. It's
so easy to get carried away...


"MZ" wrote in message
...
I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for
volume
control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for
volume
or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby
Digital
decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will
automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I
decide
to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC.

I was interested in doing something similar a while back. I've since canned
those plans because of the computer. Now I'm thinking more along the lines
of writing some code to add some massive signal processing capabilities,
probably through a digital I/O card. I think the ultimate goal will be to
have independently adjustable channels for each of my speakers (my front
setup is triamped, my rears biamped, and my sub - so that's 11 channels) -
same signal, different processing signals. We'll see where that goes. The
signal processing part is relatively easy...it's the recipient circuitry
(decoding the control signals and running everything through DACs - in real
time) that's a pain.





Try the links on this page for more competition organizations:

http://www.caraudiohelp.com/car_audi...udio_shows.htm

--
I.Care
Address fake until
the spam goes away.

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:50:31 GMT, "Kevin Murray"
wrote:


I've considered putting a PC in my car and using the SPDIF output (like you were
interested in doing) but decided I didn't want something that would take time to
boot and might be a fussy install. An HU with a jack added on the back seemed
elegant. I could move my amps into one chassis along with the DAC circuit for a
nice clean install. Admittedly it will be large but I don't care.

Have you considered a notebook for the job? Powering one in a
vehicle is straightforward and they are robust enough to take all but
the most extreme driving conditions. A couple of hours of
modification to bypass the auto power down interlock when the lid is
closed, and adding a remote power on/reset switch. I use the TV out
feed to run a small LCD panel that I mount on my dash when needed.

Interesting idea. My only concern would be controls for PLAY FWD etc. I'd
rather not fiddle with a keyboard while driving. I definitely love the idea of
having a laptop in the car though. With that amount of processing power it could
provide GPS navigation, interface with the car's electronics for systems
monitoring and allow for custom software for whatever else the imagination cooks
up.

"Ian W" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:50:31 GMT, "Kevin Murray"
wrote:


I've considered putting a PC in my car and using the SPDIF output (like you
were
interested in doing) but decided I didn't want something that would take time
to
boot and might be a fussy install. An HU with a jack added on the back seemed
elegant. I could move my amps into one chassis along with the DAC circuit for
a
nice clean install. Admittedly it will be large but I don't care.

Have you considered a notebook for the job? Powering one in a
vehicle is straightforward and they are robust enough to take all but
the most extreme driving conditions. A couple of hours of
modification to bypass the auto power down interlock when the lid is
closed, and adding a remote power on/reset switch. I use the TV out
feed to run a small LCD panel that I mount on my dash when needed.

Interesting idea. My only concern would be controls for PLAY FWD etc.
I'd
rather not fiddle with a keyboard while driving.

Remote control and/or touchscreen LCD alleviates this problem. I use both.

Cool, what make/model LCD did you use? How does it interface with the PC? Was it
meant for this purpose or did you have to write drivers?

"MZ" wrote in message
...
Interesting idea. My only concern would be controls for PLAY FWD etc.
I'd
rather not fiddle with a keyboard while driving.

Remote control and/or touchscreen LCD alleviates this problem. I use both.

I'm wondering, in competitions where the installation is not taken into account,
and RTA is only used to break a tie, how is the car judged? Does a judge simply
sit in the car and listen? It sounds very subjective if you ask me.
The links to these organisations are definitely helpful but not quite enough.
Competitors please share your experience. Winter is just ending here so the
competition season is probably a few months off. I'll have to wait a while to
check one out.

Kevin Murray


"I.Care" wrote in message
t...
In article KjEdc.54074$Bk31.2175
@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this}
says...
Yes a PC gives you lots of flexibility with software. The problem with
designing
my own DAC is I'll be programming in a language with next to no built-in
routines for my purpose. I plan to use a PIC microcontroller so I can
upgrade my
code at any time. Perhaps to interface with an RTA for real-time
equalisation or
even installing a mic into the interior of the car for stand alone
calibration.
My system could then calibrate itself flat for competition. I could store
pre-set curves and run demo routines too.
My biggest problem so far is keeping the radio operational. I can easily
patch
the CD data stream out to a DAC, but the radio is all analog and would
require I
keep the analog side operating (not to mention volume control issues). Texas
Instruments sampled me some nice delta sigma A2Ds which I could use to
digitise
the radio output. Then it would only be a matter of selecting the source.
It's
so easy to get carried away...


"MZ" wrote in message
...
I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for
volume
control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal
for
volume
or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby
Digital
decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will
automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If
I
decide
to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC.

I was interested in doing something similar a while back. I've since
canned
those plans because of the computer. Now I'm thinking more along the
lines
of writing some code to add some massive signal processing capabilities,
probably through a digital I/O card. I think the ultimate goal will be to
have independently adjustable channels for each of my speakers (my front
setup is triamped, my rears biamped, and my sub - so that's 11 channels) -
same signal, different processing signals. We'll see where that goes.
The
signal processing part is relatively easy...it's the recipient circuitry
(decoding the control signals and running everything through DACs - in
real
time) that's a pain.





Try the links on this page for more competition organizations:

http://www.caraudiohelp.com/car_audi...udio_shows.htm

--
I.Care
Address fake until
the spam goes away.

Cool, what make/model LCD did you use? How does it interface with the PC?
Was it
meant for this purpose or did you have to write drivers?

I used a xenarc touchscreen LCD. It was a bit pricey (I think $350 or
something), but it's a 7" and uses VGA - two features that were important to
me. The touchscreen part is run by a USB connection. And compared with
other LCDs, it does surprisingly well in the sunlight. Also has front panel
brightness controls. Another good feature is that it starts the computer
when the LCD is turned on, so I didn't have to mount a separate switch and
then integrate it into the computer. It came with its own drivers. The
screen is mounted in the double-din space in my dash, replacing my radio. I
still need to make a shroud for it though.

When driving, it's even easier to just use the credit card size remote for
basic functions. The receiver just plugs into a serial port, and it comes
with its own software compatible with winamp.

I'll have pictures of everything up by next weekend.


"MZ" wrote in message
...
Interesting idea. My only concern would be controls for PLAY FWD
etc.
I'd
rather not fiddle with a keyboard while driving.

Remote control and/or touchscreen LCD alleviates this problem. I use
both.

In article Rigec.89924$Bk31.48484
@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this}
says...
I'm wondering, in competitions where the installation is not taken into account,
and RTA is only used to break a tie, how is the car judged? Does a judge simply
sit in the car and listen? It sounds very subjective if you ask me.
The links to these organisations are definitely helpful but not quite enough.
Competitors please share your experience. Winter is just ending here so the
competition season is probably a few months off. I'll have to wait a while to
check one out.

Kevin Murray



snip

It's been awhile since I competed. Last time was 1995 IASCA World
Finals in Dallas, TX. The rules keep changing, I know the competition
classes have changed. At the time I competed I was Amatuer Class 151-
300 watts SQ, no SPL. I have a Pioneer ODR system in a 93 Probe and was
in the top 10 in my class that year at world finals. If my bass had
been adjusted slightly louder and received scores like mids and high end
did I would have been 4th or 5th, it was that close.

Judging was done in several phases, two of them subjective.

Generally installation was judged first. (Mostly Subjective)

This was where you gave your 5min max speech about your system. Not
what brand names you had, but why did you use a particular piece of gear
in that way. What theme were you trying to present? All screws had to
be the same and turned the same direction, all wires with lettering had
to have the lettering terminate the same distance from the connector,
panels/mounting had to have the same gap on all sides. Vinyl had to
match including grain pattern etc. Were cables protected by a gromet
where they went through metal, was the system fused within a certain
distance from the battery, was everything safe and secure, were aux
batteries vented to the outside?

Sound quality was judged next. (Mostly Subjective)

Two judges who sat in your car and listened to an IASCA judging disk,
not just the same named disk, the same copy also. Some people were
alleged to have custom made disks to compensate their systems then try
to use them during competition. Yes it's subjective. Your system was
compared to other systems in your class for the competition. That's why
no one got max points. If the first car judged was given max points and
the next system was better what score would you give? Things judged:
Imaging, staging, left right balance, how well does it reproduce what
would be heard at a live concert? SQ is not boom boom, is the frequency
response balanced to accurately reproduce the music? The best way to
tune your ears was to listen to the IASCA Judging Disk on a high-end
home stereo system and tune your car system to match.

The last step RTA. (Objective with a good RTA Operator)

A microphone was placed on a stand in a specific position on the drivers
seat and connected to an RTA (Real Time Analyzer). Points were deducted
if any frequency differed by more than 3db from the adjacent 1/3 octave
frequency, while playing a Pink Noise track on the CD. In other words
the response had to be smooth from 20hz to 20khz.

Hope that gives you some idea of what it was like when I competed, I did
not cover everything.

Why did I stop competing?

I couldn't see spending another $10-20k changing the install by putting
in waterfalls, fish tanks or other non-sound related stuff. Motorized
amp racks, OK. I was in it for Sound Quality not show and flash.

It was amazing to me that competitors would spend mega bucks $50k+ on
flashy installs, rebuild all the panels in their cars to integrate the
system components, then refuse to allow spectators or competitors to
look at any time on competition day. They thought a competitor in their
class was going to modify their install while in the judging lanes
waiting their turn based on what they saw? The car in front of me
during finals kept color coordinated vinyl covering their windows so
nobody could look inside, removed the one on the windshield long enough
to move up a spot then replace.

--
I.Care
Address fake until
the spam goes away.

That's some interesting reading. Thanks very much. I had no idea things actually
got that silly.


"I.Care" wrote in message
t...
In article Rigec.89924$Bk31.48484
@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this}
says...
I'm wondering, in competitions where the installation is not taken into
account,
and RTA is only used to break a tie, how is the car judged? Does a judge
simply
sit in the car and listen? It sounds very subjective if you ask me.
The links to these organisations are definitely helpful but not quite
enough.
Competitors please share your experience. Winter is just ending here so the
competition season is probably a few months off. I'll have to wait a while
to
check one out.

Kevin Murray



snip

It's been awhile since I competed. Last time was 1995 IASCA World
Finals in Dallas, TX. The rules keep changing, I know the competition
classes have changed. At the time I competed I was Amatuer Class 151-
300 watts SQ, no SPL. I have a Pioneer ODR system in a 93 Probe and was
in the top 10 in my class that year at world finals. If my bass had
been adjusted slightly louder and received scores like mids and high end
did I would have been 4th or 5th, it was that close.

Judging was done in several phases, two of them subjective.

Generally installation was judged first. (Mostly Subjective)

This was where you gave your 5min max speech about your system. Not
what brand names you had, but why did you use a particular piece of gear
in that way. What theme were you trying to present? All screws had to
be the same and turned the same direction, all wires with lettering had
to have the lettering terminate the same distance from the connector,
panels/mounting had to have the same gap on all sides. Vinyl had to
match including grain pattern etc. Were cables protected by a gromet
where they went through metal, was the system fused within a certain
distance from the battery, was everything safe and secure, were aux
batteries vented to the outside?

Sound quality was judged next. (Mostly Subjective)

Two judges who sat in your car and listened to an IASCA judging disk,
not just the same named disk, the same copy also. Some people were
alleged to have custom made disks to compensate their systems then try
to use them during competition. Yes it's subjective. Your system was
compared to other systems in your class for the competition. That's why
no one got max points. If the first car judged was given max points and
the next system was better what score would you give? Things judged:
Imaging, staging, left right balance, how well does it reproduce what
would be heard at a live concert? SQ is not boom boom, is the frequency
response balanced to accurately reproduce the music? The best way to
tune your ears was to listen to the IASCA Judging Disk on a high-end
home stereo system and tune your car system to match.

The last step RTA. (Objective with a good RTA Operator)

A microphone was placed on a stand in a specific position on the drivers
seat and connected to an RTA (Real Time Analyzer). Points were deducted
if any frequency differed by more than 3db from the adjacent 1/3 octave
frequency, while playing a Pink Noise track on the CD. In other words
the response had to be smooth from 20hz to 20khz.

Hope that gives you some idea of what it was like when I competed, I did
not cover everything.

Why did I stop competing?

I couldn't see spending another $10-20k changing the install by putting
in waterfalls, fish tanks or other non-sound related stuff. Motorized
amp racks, OK. I was in it for Sound Quality not show and flash.

It was amazing to me that competitors would spend mega bucks $50k+ on
flashy installs, rebuild all the panels in their cars to integrate the
system components, then refuse to allow spectators or competitors to
look at any time on competition day. They thought a competitor in their
class was going to modify their install while in the judging lanes
waiting their turn based on what they saw? The car in front of me
during finals kept color coordinated vinyl covering their windows so
nobody could look inside, removed the one on the windshield long enough
to move up a spot then replace.

--
I.Care
Address fake until
the spam goes away.

It's a silly masturbatory endeavor, and a lame attempt to get it to resemble
a "sport". The people who sink that much money into that kind of stupid
crap deserve to be shot.

But aside from that, I have no strong feelings on the matter.

--
Mark
remove "remove" and "spam" to reply


"I.Care" wrote in message
t...
In article Rigec.89924$Bk31.48484
@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this}
says...
I'm wondering, in competitions where the installation is not taken into
account,
and RTA is only used to break a tie, how is the car judged? Does a judge
simply
sit in the car and listen? It sounds very subjective if you ask me.
The links to these organisations are definitely helpful but not quite
enough.
Competitors please share your experience. Winter is just ending here so
the
competition season is probably a few months off. I'll have to wait a
while to
check one out.

Kevin Murray



snip

It's been awhile since I competed. Last time was 1995 IASCA World
Finals in Dallas, TX. The rules keep changing, I know the competition
classes have changed. At the time I competed I was Amatuer Class 151-
300 watts SQ, no SPL. I have a Pioneer ODR system in a 93 Probe and was
in the top 10 in my class that year at world finals. If my bass had
been adjusted slightly louder and received scores like mids and high end
did I would have been 4th or 5th, it was that close.

Judging was done in several phases, two of them subjective.

Generally installation was judged first. (Mostly Subjective)

This was where you gave your 5min max speech about your system. Not
what brand names you had, but why did you use a particular piece of gear
in that way. What theme were you trying to present? All screws had to
be the same and turned the same direction, all wires with lettering had
to have the lettering terminate the same distance from the connector,
panels/mounting had to have the same gap on all sides. Vinyl had to
match including grain pattern etc. Were cables protected by a gromet
where they went through metal, was the system fused within a certain
distance from the battery, was everything safe and secure, were aux
batteries vented to the outside?

Sound quality was judged next. (Mostly Subjective)

Two judges who sat in your car and listened to an IASCA judging disk,
not just the same named disk, the same copy also. Some people were
alleged to have custom made disks to compensate their systems then try
to use them during competition. Yes it's subjective. Your system was
compared to other systems in your class for the competition. That's why
no one got max points. If the first car judged was given max points and
the next system was better what score would you give? Things judged:
Imaging, staging, left right balance, how well does it reproduce what
would be heard at a live concert? SQ is not boom boom, is the frequency
response balanced to accurately reproduce the music? The best way to
tune your ears was to listen to the IASCA Judging Disk on a high-end
home stereo system and tune your car system to match.

The last step RTA. (Objective with a good RTA Operator)

A microphone was placed on a stand in a specific position on the drivers
seat and connected to an RTA (Real Time Analyzer). Points were deducted
if any frequency differed by more than 3db from the adjacent 1/3 octave
frequency, while playing a Pink Noise track on the CD. In other words
the response had to be smooth from 20hz to 20khz.

Hope that gives you some idea of what it was like when I competed, I did
not cover everything.

Why did I stop competing?

I couldn't see spending another $10-20k changing the install by putting
in waterfalls, fish tanks or other non-sound related stuff. Motorized
amp racks, OK. I was in it for Sound Quality not show and flash.

It was amazing to me that competitors would spend mega bucks $50k+ on
flashy installs, rebuild all the panels in their cars to integrate the
system components, then refuse to allow spectators or competitors to
look at any time on competition day. They thought a competitor in their
class was going to modify their install while in the judging lanes
waiting their turn based on what they saw? The car in front of me
during finals kept color coordinated vinyl covering their windows so
nobody could look inside, removed the one on the windshield long enough
to move up a spot then replace.

--
I.Care
Address fake until
the spam goes away.

In article ,
pam says...
It's a silly masturbatory endeavor, and a lame attempt to get it to resemble
a "sport". The people who sink that much money into that kind of stupid
crap deserve to be shot.

But aside from that, I have no strong feelings on the matter.


Maybe so. But it did get alot of car audio people together to talk, got
me lots of trips to various cities in various states and Canada.

It also kept a lot of businesses and car stereo installers employed :-)

I think that last item was the reason the competition programs existed.
Created a competitive atmosphere so Car Audio manufactures and their
dealer networks could sell more and more high priced equipment and
services. Just my opinion.

--
I.Care
Address fake until
the spam goes away.

It's a silly masturbatory endeavor, and a lame attempt to get it to
resemble
a "sport". The people who sink that much money into that kind of stupid
crap deserve to be shot.

But aside from that, I have no strong feelings on the matter.


Maybe so. But it did get alot of car audio people together to talk, got
me lots of trips to various cities in various states and Canada.

It also kept a lot of businesses and car stereo installers employed :-)

I think that last item was the reason the competition programs existed.
Created a competitive atmosphere so Car Audio manufactures and their
dealer networks could sell more and more high priced equipment and
services. Just my opinion.

Yeah, that's almost certainly the case. There are a lot of benefits to
doing it. I just don't see the appeal to people who don't have a financial
interest in the matter.