Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
Hi All,
I was comparing the 3 HU... Alpine CDA-9853, 9855 and Pioneer DEH-P880PRS.... Between Alpine 9853 and 9855, the only difference is the display and preout voltage (9855 have multi color display and 4v preout)... would this 4v preout matter? coz this is going to an amplifier which have an input sesitivity adjustment anyways... And for Pioneer, it have L/R independant 16 band Graphic equalizer but lacks the subwoofer control that alpine set have. (it also plays aac file format...)... (Did I miss any other important info?).... So could you guys put in your inputs as to which is the best among these 2 brands? I am from India, and these models are not yet available in India... so if i want to get one, i need to get it from abroad and once i get it, there is no way i can return it back.... SO I need both Advantages (or features) (what does it mean in terms of sound quality... coz i read the features on net, and i dont know how it would sound...) and Disadvantages of both the systems.... Regards, Antony. |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
"anToNIcHeN" wrote in message ups.com... Hi All, I was comparing the 3 HU... Alpine CDA-9853, 9855 and Pioneer DEH-P880PRS.... Between Alpine 9853 and 9855, the only difference is the display and preout voltage (9855 have multi color display and 4v preout)... would this 4v preout matter? coz this is going to an amplifier which have an input sesitivity adjustment anyways... OK, I have a lot of experience here. First off, I have the 9853 and I LOVE IT!!! It is certainly the best deck I have ever owned and I have used three Alpine's, two Kenwoods, a Pioneer, and a Sony (for my wife's car). I used to own the Alpine 7939 which HAD a 4 volt output and I don't notice ANY difference between a 2 volt output and a 4 volt output. I suspect much of this is simply marketing, a feature that those who don't know better will assume makes the HU a better unit. HOWEVER, that being said, I do believe that if you were to have some kind of induced noise (like a ground-loop producing alternator whine), it might be possible to mask some of that noise with a higher pre-out voltage. That would be the ONLY benefit, IMHO. But to me, that is really only a band-aid for a problem that really should be dealt with, and can almost ALWAYS be erradicated (alternator whine) by working through the problem. And again, a 4 volt output WOULD NOT completely cover-up a noise problem, just make it less noticable. Anyway, I have not had alternator-noise problems with my systems and I just don't feel that 2 volts vs. 4 volts makes any difference sound quality wise. The 9855 does have a fancier display, but all the sound shaping options are the same (Bass Engine Pro). I believe the Alpine is superior to the Pioneer because of the parametric EQ. With the Alpine, you have 32 bands to choose from (a full 1/3 octive) as well as a Q adjustment. Again, I have been more than happy with my 9853. You can see pictures of my car at: http://www428.pair.com/mosfet/mtx.html and at: http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2359697 MOSFET And for Pioneer, it have L/R independant 16 band Graphic equalizer but lacks the subwoofer control that alpine set have. (it also plays aac file format...)... (Did I miss any other important info?).... So could you guys put in your inputs as to which is the best among these 2 brands? I am from India, and these models are not yet available in India... so if i want to get one, i need to get it from abroad and once i get it, there is no way i can return it back.... SO I need both Advantages (or features) (what does it mean in terms of sound quality... coz i read the features on net, and i dont know how it would sound...) and Disadvantages of both the systems.... Regards, Antony. |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
Since 4v pre-out is not needed and multi-color display is just a personal
liking. So 9855 is out of the picture (for me). And independent eq curves for the L/R channel is not needed (again for me). Anyways alpine has parametric eq (better than graphic eq). Thus 9853 is the ideal choice (not for long read below) But I doubt if this is available in the market since this has been taken back by alpine. Another thing to consider is warranty. If you take it to another country and the system breaks. I don't think 9853 is so cheap. If buying high end unit then I suggest to buy the ones which are supported locally. Hard earned money. "anToNIcHeN" wrote in message ups.com... | Hi All, | I was comparing the 3 HU... | Alpine CDA-9853, 9855 and Pioneer DEH-P880PRS.... | | Between Alpine 9853 and 9855, the only difference is the display and | preout voltage (9855 have multi color display and 4v preout)... would | this 4v preout matter? coz this is going to an amplifier which have an | input sesitivity adjustment anyways... | | And for Pioneer, it have L/R independant 16 band Graphic equalizer but | lacks the subwoofer control that alpine set have. (it also plays aac | file format...)... | (Did I miss any other important info?).... | | So could you guys put in your inputs as to which is the best among | these 2 brands? | I am from India, and these models are not yet available in India... so | if i want to get one, i need to get it from abroad and once i get it, | there is no way i can return it back.... | SO I need both Advantages (or features) (what does it mean in terms of | sound quality... coz i read the features on net, and i dont know how it | would sound...) and Disadvantages of both the systems.... | | Regards, | Antony. | |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
The 9855 does not have a color display, you can change the button color but
the display is black and white. I have a 9855 and love it. They are on sale at best buy now for 300 bones. The display is very readable in the sunlight, it sounds great and the i-Personalize is a wonderful feature. If you have to change batteries, do work and disconnect battery, etc the settings can be restored with a CD. I use mine in a 3 way active rig. Here's a pic. http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...ardashshot.jpg http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...t=HPIM2327.jpg http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...t=HPIM2342.jpg I canot comment on the Pioneer, many love them, I've never been a Pioneer fan though so I am biased Best of luck! Chad "anToNIcHeN" wrote in message ups.com... Hi All, I was comparing the 3 HU... Alpine CDA-9853, 9855 and Pioneer DEH-P880PRS.... Between Alpine 9853 and 9855, the only difference is the display and preout voltage (9855 have multi color display and 4v preout)... would this 4v preout matter? coz this is going to an amplifier which have an input sesitivity adjustment anyways... And for Pioneer, it have L/R independant 16 band Graphic equalizer but lacks the subwoofer control that alpine set have. (it also plays aac file format...)... (Did I miss any other important info?).... So could you guys put in your inputs as to which is the best among these 2 brands? I am from India, and these models are not yet available in India... so if i want to get one, i need to get it from abroad and once i get it, there is no way i can return it back.... SO I need both Advantages (or features) (what does it mean in terms of sound quality... coz i read the features on net, and i dont know how it would sound...) and Disadvantages of both the systems.... Regards, Antony. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
Hi all,
Thanks guys for the inputs... But that takes me to another set of questions..... 1. What is the difference between a parameteric EQ and a Graphic EQ...or what makes parametric EQ better? 2. how would I have 32 bands to choose from?... they just have a 5 band parametric EQ right? 3. Isnt no of bands in the EQ always good? (like 16 in Pioneer) ".Bass Focus maximises bass sound where you want it the most. ..Lots of other subwoofer and speaker tuning capabilities. " MOSFET.. above 2 lines i just copied from http://www.alpine-europe.com/content...A-RECEIVER.htm can you elaborate on the same?... I also read somewhere that these systems had CD eject problems... MOSFET, i have seen your system long before.... its just too much for me.... some thing i can only dream about.... ... Vivek, these modles are available in India... and the grey market prices are around $350 equivalent.... (That is costly!!..) Chad Wahls wrote: The 9855 does not have a color display, you can change the button color but the display is black and white. I have a 9855 and love it. They are on sale at best buy now for 300 bones. The display is very readable in the sunlight, it sounds great and the i-Personalize is a wonderful feature. If you have to change batteries, do work and disconnect battery, etc the settings can be restored with a CD. I use mine in a 3 way active rig. Here's a pic. http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...ardashshot.jpg http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...t=HPIM2327.jpg http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...t=HPIM2342.jpg I canot comment on the Pioneer, many love them, I've never been a Pioneer fan though so I am biased Best of luck! Chad |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
I prefer parametric EQ, I sometimes think I can do more with it than a
standard graphic. Wide cuts do not invoke as much phase shift. Parameetric allows you to chose the frequency of the boost/cut, the amount of boost/cut and the width of the curve, also called Q. The alpine allows you to use either graphic OR parametric. The CD Eject and Glide touch problems were corrected in the early runs, later models are not reported to have these problems. The time allignment works well for me and really helps my image. EQ is alright but not as professional as I'm used to but my Pro parametric EQ alone costs 6 times the amount of a CDA9855 If you can play with one then try it out, it's a little different than the standard alpine operation at first but not bad at all. It does sound AWESOME, Mine has never skipped once and I have a fairly taught suspension and some REALLY old CD's. It will interface with an iPod. You can use sat radio with it AND an external input too. I have AM/FM/SAT/CD/AUX for my iRiver. If you can find one for the sale price of 300 bucks i believe you cannot go wrong! last affodable models with Bass Engine Pro too! Chad anToNIcHeN wrote: Hi all, Thanks guys for the inputs... But that takes me to another set of questions..... 1. What is the difference between a parameteric EQ and a Graphic EQ...or what makes parametric EQ better? 2. how would I have 32 bands to choose from?... they just have a 5 band parametric EQ right? 3. Isnt no of bands in the EQ always good? (like 16 in Pioneer) ".Bass Focus maximises bass sound where you want it the most. .Lots of other subwoofer and speaker tuning capabilities. " MOSFET.. above 2 lines i just copied from http://www.alpine-europe.com/content...A-RECEIVER.htm can you elaborate on the same?... I also read somewhere that these systems had CD eject problems... MOSFET, i have seen your system long before.... its just too much for me.... some thing i can only dream about.... ... Vivek, these modles are available in India... and the grey market prices are around $350 equivalent.... (That is costly!!..) Chad Wahls wrote: The 9855 does not have a color display, you can change the button color but the display is black and white. I have a 9855 and love it. They are on sale at best buy now for 300 bones. The display is very readable in the sunlight, it sounds great and the i-Personalize is a wonderful feature. If you have to change batteries, do work and disconnect battery, etc the settings can be restored with a CD. I use mine in a 3 way active rig. Here's a pic. http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...ardashshot.jpg http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...t=HPIM2327.jpg http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y23...t=HPIM2342.jpg I canot comment on the Pioneer, many love them, I've never been a Pioneer fan though so I am biased Best of luck! Chad |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
i'd go with the alpine with 4v outs..32 band i think that has both sides
16 perside. left-n-right. But 16 is great but i think awaste.. 9-11 eq per side is all any1 would every need..NO1 can tell 11band from a 16 band.a computer might. Its more important haveing less thd than 16 or more bands, just the Kings opinion... |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
mosfet mosfet moafet, i was starting to have alil respect for you until
that ''i notice no difference 2v to 4v outs'',,,lollll.... I went 3v to 5v.IT CHANGED MY LIFE....... I'll NEVER buy below 4v AGAIN..... |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
"bob wald" wrote in message ... i'd go with the alpine with 4v outs..32 band i think that has both sides 16 perside. left-n-right. But 16 is great but i think awaste.. 9-11 eq per side is all any1 would every need..NO1 can tell 11band from a 16 band.a computer might. Its more important haveing less thd than 16 or more bands, just the Kings opinion... It can make quite a difference in an electrically noisy car. It allows you to have the gains set way back, double the voltage and gain 3 dB, this effectively lowers your noise floor 3dB. The 9855 also has a different converter output scheme than the 9853. I BELIEVE it has 6 separate DA units as opposed to 2 in the 9855. The predecessors of the line 9813/9815/9833/9835 all had 6 DA's too. If you can find a NOS of any if these units they have the same functionality processor wise and sound equally wonderful. the 9813/9815 are cult faves for some reason. Chad |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
2. how would I have 32 bands to choose from?... they just have a 5 band
parametric EQ right? OK, the way a parametric EQ like the Alpine's works is that although you have 32 frequencies to choose from, you may only adjust 5 of them at a time (you choose which 5). The reason is that in any car cabin, you will have strange acoustic anomalies that are usually not present in a typical room. Things like all the glass, the seats, the strange angles the speakers are at, the fact that most systems have the subwoofers in the rear, etc., create very peculiar frequency response curves because you will have cancellation effects and unusual boost effects at certain frequencies. Generally speaking, there will only be three or four frequency areas where you will have these unusually huge peaks or valleys (again, caused by cancellation effects, standing waves, etc.). Once you identify where these (three, four or five) peaks and valleys are, you can use a parametric EQ to smooth-out your frequency response. BTW, a relatively flat (no huge dips or peaks) frequency response is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL if you wish to create a realistic soundstage. To correctly set 32 band (1/3 octave) graphic EQ OR a 5 band EQ (where you have 32 bands to choose from) you will need special equipment. This IS NOT something that can be done by ear unless you are VERY, VERY experienced at this. The best device is what's called an RTA (Real Time Analyzer) which will give you a computerized graphic representation of your frequency response (you play pink noise through your system which sounds like radio static and contains every frequency in the audible audio spectrum at equal volumes). By looking at the peaks and valleys on the RTA graph, you can set your EQ. RTA's are VERY expensive (even used ones are usually over $1,000), but you can rent the use of one at some stereo shops. Even then, it takes some know how just to operate an RTA. For a price, some shops will use their RTA and EQ your system for you (this can be pricey). Of course, there is the poor man's way (aka MOSFET'S way). What you do is get your hands on a test disc that contains test tones at 1/3 octave increments (so it will sound 32 tones, each tone about 5 seconds long). Sheffield Labs makes a disc called "My Disc" that contains this series of tones and this is what I use. You must also have an SPL meter (it measures decibel levels) and these devices can be had at Radio Shack for $30. By playing this disc and noting the SPL on each tone, you can plot your own frequency response curve, just like an RTA. Yes, it's time consuming, but it will yield accurate results. You can find out more about EQ's and how to set them on this group's FAQ at http://www.mobileaudio.com/rac-faq/ You can learn TONS there, I would definitely check it out. MOSFET |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
"BTW, a relatively flat (no huge dips or peaks)
frequency response is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL if you wish to create a realistic soundstage." This is something that has puzzled me for the 40 or so years I have dabbled in audio. There is no such thing as a flat response. Live music does not have a flat response, studio recordings are not made with a flat response, and CD's sold to the consumer were not made with a flat response in mind. Most artists do not strive for a flat response in their recordings. But consumers receiving the end product have this huge misconception that they must make the respose flat. In home audio it is by not using any EQ or tone controls at all (and don't get me started on this) and in car audio it does a 360 by people using RTA's and such. Of course it is completely ludicrous and has nothing to do with how good something sounds or how it meets one's particular tastes, let alone it being "critical" to a realistic soundstage. It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense. -RG |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
RG wrote: "BTW, a relatively flat (no huge dips or peaks) frequency response is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL if you wish to create a realistic soundstage." This is something that has puzzled me for the 40 or so years I have dabbled in audio. There is no such thing as a flat response. Live music does not have a flat response, studio recordings are not made with a flat response, and CD's sold to the consumer were not made with a flat response in mind. Most artists do not strive for a flat response in their recordings. But consumers receiving the end product have this huge misconception that they must make the respose flat. In home audio it is by not using any EQ or tone controls at all (and don't get me started on this) and in car audio it does a 360 by people using RTA's and such. Of course it is completely ludicrous and has nothing to do with how good something sounds or how it meets one's particular tastes, let alone it being "critical" to a realistic soundstage. It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense. -RG Some like a flat system like myself. It will drive most people nuts! I work as an audio enigner though. NOW, to I make my live rigs flat... HELL NO! Do I mix an album flat and dry? HELL NO. But I DO need some sort of reference. Now y'all know how I can get by with a single 10" in a car But I use 18" subs in TL enclosures and an incredible amoount of power in a small mastering room Chad |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
You are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!! By all means, I CERTAINLY DO NOT strive for a
flat response curve in my car. In fact, a flat response curve sounds ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE (too much treble, WAY, WAY TOO LITTLE BASS). What I should have said, is that although you are not striving for a perfectly flat frequency response, what you DON'T WANT are huge NARROW deviations (either up or down) at certain frequencies. In other words, your overall curve may have slopes, but what you don't want are sudden large spikes either up or down at certain frequencies (usually caused by standing waves or cancellation effects). This is where a parametric EQ or a 1/3 octave graphic EQ can be helpful. And like I said before, eliminating (or at least minimizing) these types of HUGE NARROW peaks and valleys is necessary for realistic sound reproduction. Otherwise, what you get is that some instruments, voices, or other sounds are unrealistically loud while others seem to drop out of the soundstage. MOSFET "RG" wrote in message ... "BTW, a relatively flat (no huge dips or peaks) frequency response is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL if you wish to create a realistic soundstage." This is something that has puzzled me for the 40 or so years I have dabbled in audio. There is no such thing as a flat response. Live music does not have a flat response, studio recordings are not made with a flat response, and CD's sold to the consumer were not made with a flat response in mind. Most artists do not strive for a flat response in their recordings. But consumers receiving the end product have this huge misconception that they must make the respose flat. In home audio it is by not using any EQ or tone controls at all (and don't get me started on this) and in car audio it does a 360 by people using RTA's and such. Of course it is completely ludicrous and has nothing to do with how good something sounds or how it meets one's particular tastes, let alone it being "critical" to a realistic soundstage. It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense. -RG |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ
competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense. -RG After rereading your post I just have to take issue with your views on RTA's and the importance of tweaking the frequency response in a car. First off, this ONLY applies to cars. I would NEVER use an EQ on my home system. My Michael Green Rev 80 speakers with my Denon 3600 sound perfect to me and I would not DARE mess with the frequency response of my home system. But in a car, you get all kinds of weird things going on and many strange peaks and valleys in the frequency response, many of which you won't even notice UNLESS YOU HAPPEN TO PLAY A PIECE OF MUSIC THAT HAS THAT PARTICULAR PROBLEM FREQUENCY! This is why RTA's can be so useful. You may listen to a song and say, you know, there's something missing in the upper treble region, but you have no idea precisely what the center frequency of the problem region is or how big the "Q" is. Unless you are an expert at hearing a sound and knowing what frequency it is, this absolutely requires the use of special equipment. But, you know, the proof is in the pudding. With EVERY system I have ever built, once I adjust it using either an RTA or test tones, it ALWAYS sounds better. Like I said before, I AM NOT going for a flat line. What I AM trying to do is take out those large peaks and valleys that are ALMOST ALWAYS caused by the nature of a car's cabin (the glass, the upholstery, etc.). Also, know that when I adjust a 1/3 octave EQ (for instance), I am not going for a radical change in the sound, in fact it would concern me if the sound were somehow radically different. It is STRICTLY to correct problems. And again, these problems ARE NOTICEABLE, but are difficult to pinpoint without special equipment. MOSFET |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
Thanks Guys.... This indeed was really informative....
MOSFET wrote: It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense. -RG After rereading your post I just have to take issue with your views on RTA's and the importance of tweaking the frequency response in a car. First off, this ONLY applies to cars. I would NEVER use an EQ on my home system. My Michael Green Rev 80 speakers with my Denon 3600 sound perfect to me and I would not DARE mess with the frequency response of my home system. But in a car, you get all kinds of weird things going on and many strange peaks and valleys in the frequency response, many of which you won't even notice UNLESS YOU HAPPEN TO PLAY A PIECE OF MUSIC THAT HAS THAT PARTICULAR PROBLEM FREQUENCY! This is why RTA's can be so useful. You may listen to a song and say, you know, there's something missing in the upper treble region, but you have no idea precisely what the center frequency of the problem region is or how big the "Q" is. Unless you are an expert at hearing a sound and knowing what frequency it is, this absolutely requires the use of special equipment. But, you know, the proof is in the pudding. With EVERY system I have ever built, once I adjust it using either an RTA or test tones, it ALWAYS sounds better. Like I said before, I AM NOT going for a flat line. What I AM trying to do is take out those large peaks and valleys that are ALMOST ALWAYS caused by the nature of a car's cabin (the glass, the upholstery, etc.). Also, know that when I adjust a 1/3 octave EQ (for instance), I am not going for a radical change in the sound, in fact it would concern me if the sound were somehow radically different. It is STRICTLY to correct problems. And again, these problems ARE NOTICEABLE, but are difficult to pinpoint without special equipment. MOSFET |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
"anToNIcHeN" wrote in message oups.com... Thanks Guys.... This indeed was really informative.... MOSFET wrote: It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense. -RG After rereading your post I just have to take issue with your views on RTA's and the importance of tweaking the frequency response in a car. First off, this ONLY applies to cars. I would NEVER use an EQ on my home system. My Michael Green Rev 80 speakers with my Denon 3600 sound perfect to me and I would not DARE mess with the frequency response of my home system. But in a car, you get all kinds of weird things going on and many strange peaks and valleys in the frequency response, many of which you won't even notice UNLESS YOU HAPPEN TO PLAY A PIECE OF MUSIC THAT HAS THAT PARTICULAR PROBLEM FREQUENCY! This is why RTA's can be so useful. You may listen to a song and say, you know, there's something missing in the upper treble region, but you have no idea precisely what the center frequency of the problem region is or how big the "Q" is. Unless you are an expert at hearing a sound and knowing what frequency it is, this absolutely requires the use of special equipment. But, you know, the proof is in the pudding. With EVERY system I have ever built, once I adjust it using either an RTA or test tones, it ALWAYS sounds better. Like I said before, I AM NOT going for a flat line. What I AM trying to do is take out those large peaks and valleys that are ALMOST ALWAYS caused by the nature of a car's cabin (the glass, the upholstery, etc.). Also, know that when I adjust a 1/3 octave EQ (for instance), I am not going for a radical change in the sound, in fact it would concern me if the sound were somehow radically different. It is STRICTLY to correct problems. And again, these problems ARE NOTICEABLE, but are difficult to pinpoint without special equipment. The correct cliché is "the proof of the pudding is in the eating." Make an effort please. PD |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.car
|
|||
|
|||
Best HU among the 3....
The correct cliché is "the proof of the pudding is in the eating." Make
an effort please. PD Well (done with Steve Martin immitation), EXCUSE ME. MOSFET |