[dragon breath]

i would just do the DMM thing. i am not trying to dog you man but i had
one of those things when i was in high school and they sound awful, and
imo you would be better off with just your headunit.


--
dragon breath
------------------------------------------------------------------------
dragon breath's Profile: 56384
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/vbb3/sh...d.php?t=290606
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over TWO million posts online!


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[[email protected]]

On Jan 11, 4:38 pm, dragon breath dragon.breath.331...@no-
mx.caraudioforum.com wrote:
i would just do the DMM thing. i am not trying to dog you man but i had
one of those things when i was in high school and they sound awful, and
imo you would be better off with just your headunit.

--
dragon breath
------------------------------------------------------------------------
dragon breath's Profile: 56384
View this thread:http://www.caraudioforum.com/vbb3/sh...d.php?t=290606
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over TWO million posts online!

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

Ok well lets say i scrap the thing...what EQ's would you guys suggest
that wont break the bank and are easy to use?

[Matt Ion]

wrote:
On Jan 11, 4:38 pm, dragon breath dragon.breath.331...@no-
mx.caraudioforum.com wrote:
i would just do the DMM thing. i am not trying to dog you man but i had
one of those things when i was in high school and they sound awful, and
imo you would be better off with just your headunit.

--
dragon breath
------------------------------------------------------------------------
dragon breath's Profile: 56384
View this thread:http://www.caraudioforum.com/vbb3/sh...d.php?t=290606
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over TWO million posts online!

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

Ok well lets say i scrap the thing...what EQ's would you guys suggest
that wont break the bank and are easy to use?

Question: Why do you feel you NEED an EQ? EQs are typically used either
as a band-aid to a poorly-designed system, or to fine-tune a high-end
system. Most setups in between don't need them and don't benefit from them.

[[email protected]]

On Jan 12, 5:43 pm, Matt Ion wrote:
wrote:
On Jan 11, 4:38 pm, dragon breath dragon.breath.331...@no-
mx.caraudioforum.com wrote:
i would just do the DMM thing. i am not trying to dog you man but i had
one of those things when i was in high school and they sound awful, and
imo you would be better off with just your headunit.

--
dragon breath
------------------------------------------------------------------------
dragon breath's Profile: 56384
View this thread:http://www.caraudioforum.com/vbb3/sh...d.php?t=290606
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over TWO million posts online!

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

Ok well lets say i scrap the thing...what EQ's would you guys suggest
that wont break the bank and are easy to use?

Question: Why do you feel you NEED an EQ? EQs are typically used either
as a band-aid to a poorly-designed system, or to fine-tune a high-end
system. Most setups in between don't need them and don't benefit from them.

Well i do have a pretty poorly designed system lol. Well i wouldnt say
that it is so much poorly designed its just that it is VERY cheap and
i am planning on adding a sub here pretty quick and i know i can get
bass blockers for my mids but i like the way an EQ boosts the power a
lil and if you need a lil bit more mid-range or treble all you have to
do is slide a slider. I know i could hook an amp up to them but i
would rather just have an EQ

[Matt Ion]

wrote:

Ok well lets say i scrap the thing...what EQ's would you guys suggest
that wont break the bank and are easy to use?
Question: Why do you feel you NEED an EQ? EQs are typically used either
as a band-aid to a poorly-designed system, or to fine-tune a high-end
system. Most setups in between don't need them and don't benefit from them.

Well i do have a pretty poorly designed system lol. Well i wouldnt say
that it is so much poorly designed its just that it is VERY cheap and
i am planning on adding a sub here pretty quick and i know i can get
bass blockers for my mids but i like the way an EQ boosts the power a
lil and if you need a lil bit more mid-range or treble all you have to
do is slide a slider. I know i could hook an amp up to them but i
would rather just have an EQ

If you're talking about an EQ with a built-in amp, then it's BARELY an
amp. You'll get more sound out of your speakers, alright... most of it
in the form of clipping and distortion, right up to the point that your
speakers fry. The amps in these things most certainly won't have the
current capacity to drive a subwoofer, regardless of how you tweak the
sliders. You're not "boosting power", you're simply making parts of the
sound more prominent.

A simple EQ also doesn't perform the same function as a bass-blocker.
Unless it also has a built-in crossover, you can't use the sliders to
determine which frequencies go to which speakers - it will still send
the full range to both door speakers and sub(s). Pushing up the mid and
treble will just send more of those frequencies to the sub as well as
everything else.

Your money would be better spent on even a basic, low-end mono sub amp,
and keep the rest of your system powered the way it is now (I assume,
from the head unit's built-in amp). You can then leave the bass on the
deck turned down a bit, and dial up the sub amp to fill it back in -
it's not the ideal method, but it will be far more effective than what
you're proposing.

[Matt Ion]

Just a suggestion: spend some time perusing www.bcae1.com and/or
www.the12volt.com to get a better idea of how all this works.

[[email protected]]

On Jan 14, 1:57*am, Matt Ion wrote:
Just a suggestion: spend some time perusingwww.bcae1.comand/orwww.the12volt.comto get a better idea of how all this works.

Well then could you suggest a good crossover? I want to get my system
so that my mids are just producing mid and treble. The crossover
doesnt have to have an option for the subwoofer. Or would you suggest
this? As most amps generally have a crossover built in dont they?

[Matt Ion]

wrote:
On Jan 14, 1:57 am, Matt Ion wrote:
Just a suggestion: spend some time perusing www.bcae1.com and/or www.the12volt.com to get a better idea of how all this works.

Well then could you suggest a good crossover?

Active or passive?

Active is one that operates at low-level, between your head unit and
your amp(s). Passive is one you put between the amp(s) and the
speaker(s). If you have two-way or three-way speakers, they'll already
have crossovers in the form of capacitors inline with the tweeters, to
block the lows from the tweeters.

I want to get my system
so that my mids are just producing mid and treble. The crossover
doesnt have to have an option for the subwoofer. Or would you suggest
this?

Definitely. You don't want your mids and highs going to your sub; you
want to limit it to receiving only the lows.

If you're going passive (ie. only one amp to run everything) then you
need something along these lines:
http://soundlive-china.en.alibaba.co...Car_HIFI_.html
(Note: this is NOT an endorsement of this unit or supplier, it's just
provided as an example).

By the way, googling "car audio passive crossover", the very first hit I
get points to this: http://www.the12volt.com/caraudio/cross.asp

As most amps generally have a crossover built in dont they?

Not necessarily... a two-channel amp MIGHT have a low-pass (passes low
frequencies, blocks highs) crossover built-in, for use strictly as a sub
amp. A few more might give the option of a high-pass as well (passes
mids and highs, blocks sub frequencies). The majority of four-channel
amps will probably have both.

In any case, if you're shopping for an amp, check for these things
first; don't assume it will have them.