Now only one HU with time correction? Pioneer doing the same thing.
What gives?

Body Roll wrote:
What is time correction?


Time Correction
A processing circuit found in some receivers that compensates for the
uneven distances between left and right car speakers and listeners'
ears. Time correction delays signals from the closest speaker(s), so
that all the sound arrives at your off-center listening position at the
same time. You'll get a more accurate, lifelike stereo image.

In article .com,
wrote:

Now only one HU with time correction? Pioneer doing the same thing.
What gives?


Too bad and I hadn't known, bet there's more blinky lights and/or
brighter colored face plate though.

--
Cyrus

*coughcasaucedoprodigynetcough*

I just checked the Alpine website and Crutchfield and you're right. What a
SHAME!

Looks like I bought my 9853 at the right time! Bass Engine Pro is soon to
be a thing of the past!

I'm afraid we are seeing in action what those snobby Audiophile have been
moaning about for years: as a society, consumers are moving away from SQ in
favor of convience, compatability and multi-formats. You'll notice that
some of those new decks have Bluetooth compatibility, USB connections, etc.

Now it appears the name of the game is to squeeze as many formats as
possible into a HU, never mind the sound quality.

MOSFET

That's because time correction is not needed in car. Like I said in the past
post regarding this issue, Time correction is Alpine's sick joke on those
that don't know any better.


In article .com,
wrote:
Now only one HU with time correction? Pioneer doing the same thing.
What gives?

Oh... then, could it be because the wives have complained? :^)

Agreed ... and FWIW, in my experience, BBE is much superior.

-RG

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...
That's because time correction is not needed in car. Like I said in the
past
post regarding this issue, Time correction is Alpine's sick joke on those
that don't know any better.


In article .com,
wrote:
Now only one HU with time correction? Pioneer doing the same thing.
What gives?

"Body Roll" wrote in message
oups.com...
Oh... then, could it be because the wives have complained? :^)

LOL LOL LOL

SO TRUE!!!!!

That's because time correction is not needed in car. Like I said in the
past
post regarding this issue, Time correction is Alpine's sick joke on those
that don't know any better.

BULL ****!!!

Sure, maybe if you have horns or kick-panels, but Howdy, I WISH you could
listen to my car. It is STUNNING the difference with TC in vs. TC out.
With TC, I have a solid center image. Without TC, my center image is blurry
and floats around. EVEN MY WIFE can hear a very clear difference. I wish
you could hear my car.

MOSFET

BBE is nice (I had it on my Alpine 7863), but it is no substitute to TC.
And frankly, BBE seems to be mostly a bass boost (as is most of those
"special enhancer" circuits). I know, I know, BBE widens the soundstage by
boosting left/right differences, but most of the time I had my BBE off.

MOSFET

"RG" wrote in message
...
Agreed ... and FWIW, in my experience, BBE is much superior.

-RG

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...
That's because time correction is not needed in car. Like I said in the
past
post regarding this issue, Time correction is Alpine's sick joke on
those
that don't know any better.


In article .com,
wrote:
Now only one HU with time correction? Pioneer doing the same thing.
What gives?

Huh ??

-RG

"MOSFET" wrote in message
...
BBE is nice (I had it on my Alpine 7863), but it is no substitute to TC.
And frankly, BBE seems to be mostly a bass boost (as is most of those
"special enhancer" circuits). I know, I know, BBE widens the soundstage
by boosting left/right differences, but most of the time I had my BBE off.

MOSFET

"RG" wrote in message
...
Agreed ... and FWIW, in my experience, BBE is much superior.

-RG

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...
That's because time correction is not needed in car. Like I said in the
past
post regarding this issue, Time correction is Alpine's sick joke on
those
that don't know any better.


In article .com,
wrote:
Now only one HU with time correction? Pioneer doing the same thing.
What gives?

TC worked very well when I competed in IASCA with my Pioneer ODR system.
My center image improved and the rear subs sounded like they were on
*stage* in front like a live concert. When was the last time you heard
bass guitar or drums at the back of the concert hall?


EXACTLY. It was during the heyday of IASCA that TC really took off.
Serious competitors realized they could gain a significant advantage if they
could digitally equalize path lengths. This WAS NOT something Alpine
dreamed up as some new gimmick (as Howdy suggests), it was driven by the
demands of serious competitors and audiophiles.

MOSFET

Excuse me, I was thinking of something else, a "Sonic Maximizer". BBE works
in a completely different way by using subtle phase shifts and a delay of
low frequencies to correct for phase errors. But, it does boost high and
low frequencies as I mentioned, like a supped up "loudness" function.

MOSFET

"RG" wrote in message
...
Huh ??

-RG

"MOSFET" wrote in message
...
BBE is nice (I had it on my Alpine 7863), but it is no substitute to TC.
And frankly, BBE seems to be mostly a bass boost (as is most of those
"special enhancer" circuits). I know, I know, BBE widens the soundstage
by boosting left/right differences, but most of the time I had my BBE
off.

MOSFET

"RG" wrote in message
...
Agreed ... and FWIW, in my experience, BBE is much superior.

-RG

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...
That's because time correction is not needed in car. Like I said in
the past
post regarding this issue, Time correction is Alpine's sick joke on
those
that don't know any better.


In article .com,
wrote:
Now only one HU with time correction? Pioneer doing the same thing.
What gives?

This can all be corrected with fader, balance, gain and speaker placement.

BULL ****!!!

Sure, maybe if you have horns or kick-panels, but Howdy, I WISH you could
listen to my car. It is STUNNING the difference with TC in vs. TC out.
With TC, I have a solid center image. Without TC, my center image is blurry
and floats around. EVEN MY WIFE can hear a very clear difference. I wish
you could hear my car.

MOSFET

Your bass shouldn't sound directional, what's up with that?


TC worked very well when I competed in IASCA with my Pioneer ODR system.
My center image improved and the rear subs sounded like they were on
*stage* in front like a live concert. When was the last time you heard
bass guitar or drums at the back of the concert hall?

When I was competing people were mounting their subs under the front
floors or firewalls of their vehicles to solve the delay/position
problem.

No audiophile would use time correction or and other processor, hell most
audiophile can't even stand the idea of EQ's or anything that colors sound. If
it was an IASCA must have AudioControl would have cashed in on it back in the
day.


EXACTLY. It was during the heyday of IASCA that TC really took off.
Serious competitors realized they could gain a significant advantage if they
could digitally equalize path lengths. This WAS NOT something Alpine
dreamed up as some new gimmick (as Howdy suggests), it was driven by the
demands of serious competitors and audiophiles.

MOSFET

Captain Howdy wrote:
No audiophile would use time correction or and other processor, hell most
audiophile can't even stand the idea of EQ's or anything that colors sound. If
it was an IASCA must have AudioControl would have cashed in on it back in the
day.


EXACTLY. It was during the heyday of IASCA that TC really took off.
Serious competitors realized they could gain a significant advantage if they
could digitally equalize path lengths. This WAS NOT something Alpine
dreamed up as some new gimmick (as Howdy suggests), it was driven by the
demands of serious competitors and audiophiles.

MOSFET



Most audiophioles spend every day till they sell their home positioning
speakers "correctly" We are in a car and unfortunately things are
limited. TA DOES make a big difference. And yes Audiophiles DO use TA
but a crude form like all pass filters to adjust phase relatioships of
drivers, etc. Big time TA came from Pro Audio and is now a staple in
that area.

Chad

TA keeps your bass up front. Wihtout allignemnt it is MUCH easier to
localize the low frequency information. We are creatures that are
designed to hunt and protect. We are naturally fine tuned for
localization via a time domain. My dog probably would not notice the
difference

Chad

Jesus Dude you really do live in the stone ages.... In other areas of
audio you can make Subs Cardioid as opposed to omnidirectional. You
can STEER columns of speakers. Frequency response can be corrected due
to the fact that speakers have different planar relationships.
With..... You guessed it, time domain DSP.

What you just said it soooo wrong it's not even funny. We do 90% of
our localazation based on time domain not inherent volume. There have
been countless studies done on this. But i digress... To each his own.
You twiddle with the balance knob.... I'll stick with DSP, both on my
car and at my job.

Chad

Jesus Dude you really do live in the stone ages.... In other areas of
audio you can make Subs Cardioid as opposed to omnidirectional. You
can STEER columns of speakers. Frequency response can be corrected due
to the fact that speakers have different planar relationships.
With..... You guessed it, time domain DSP.

What you just said it soooo wrong it's not even funny. We do 90% of
our localazation based on time domain not inherent volume. There have
been countless studies done on this. But i digress... To each his own.
You twiddle with the balance knob.... I'll stick with DSP, both on my
car and at my job.

Chad

Jesus Dude you really do live in the stone ages.... In other areas of
audio you can make Subs Cardioid as opposed to omnidirectional. You
can STEER columns of speakers. Frequency response can be corrected due
to the fact that speakers have different planar relationships.
With..... You guessed it, time domain DSP.

What you just said it soooo wrong it's not even funny. We do 90% of
our localazation based on time domain not inherent volume. There have
been countless studies done on this. But i digress... To each his own.
You twiddle with the balance knob.... I'll stick with DSP, both on my
car and at my job.

Chad

"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
oups.com...
TA keeps your bass up front. Wihtout allignemnt it is MUCH easier to
localize the low frequency information. We are creatures that are
designed to hunt and protect. We are naturally fine tuned for
localization via a time domain. My dog probably would not notice the
difference

That's right. We zero-in on the sounds that come to us first. Again, this
is why in most typical systems it sounds like the bass is coming from the
rear, it is because the bass is hitting our ears a little late. My TC
corrects for this, and my bass does seem to be much more "up-front".
Another cool use for TC is with rear-fill. I delay my rear-fill 9.3 ms.
With this much delay, I can turn my rear-fill up quite loud, yet my stage is
still firmly in front of me. The reason is that my ears hear the sound of
my front speakers first and my brain tells me that is where the sound is
coming from, the rear-fill just adds ambience.

It is true that back in the days of IASCA many competitors who used time
correction borrowed heavily from the pro audio world. I saw many cars with
professional digital-delay units. There was TONS of rack-mountable gear
around I remember.

MOSFET

WELL SAID, CHAD!

That was such a good point it DESERVED to be posted three times! Well done!

MOSFET

So what you are saying is that you delay your rear-fill 9.3 ms to make the
rears sound even further (unless you are tuning your system front the back
seat) then you compensate the delay difference by cranking up the rears
louder. Shouldn't you delay the fronts and not the rears

In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:

"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
roups.com...
TA keeps your bass up front. Wihtout allignemnt it is MUCH easier to
localize the low frequency information. We are creatures that are
designed to hunt and protect. We are naturally fine tuned for
localization via a time domain. My dog probably would not notice the
difference

That's right. We zero-in on the sounds that come to us first. Again, this
is why in most typical systems it sounds like the bass is coming from the
rear, it is because the bass is hitting our ears a little late. My TC
corrects for this, and my bass does seem to be much more "up-front".
Another cool use for TC is with rear-fill. I delay my rear-fill 9.3 ms.
With this much delay, I can turn my rear-fill up quite loud, yet my stage is
still firmly in front of me. The reason is that my ears hear the sound of
my front speakers first and my brain tells me that is where the sound is
coming from, the rear-fill just adds ambience.

It is true that back in the days of IASCA many competitors who used time
correction borrowed heavily from the pro audio world. I saw many cars with
professional digital-delay units. There was TONS of rack-mountable gear
around I remember.

MOSFET

I delay both the fronts and the rears, the only speakers that are not
delayed are the subs.


"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...

So what you are saying is that you delay your rear-fill 9.3 ms to make the
rears sound even further (unless you are tuning your system front the back
seat) then you compensate the delay difference by cranking up the rears
louder. Shouldn't you delay the fronts and not the rears

In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:

"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
groups.com...
TA keeps your bass up front. Wihtout allignemnt it is MUCH easier to
localize the low frequency information. We are creatures that are
designed to hunt and protect. We are naturally fine tuned for
localization via a time domain. My dog probably would not notice the
difference

That's right. We zero-in on the sounds that come to us first. Again,
this
is why in most typical systems it sounds like the bass is coming from the
rear, it is because the bass is hitting our ears a little late. My TC
corrects for this, and my bass does seem to be much more "up-front".
Another cool use for TC is with rear-fill. I delay my rear-fill 9.3 ms.
With this much delay, I can turn my rear-fill up quite loud, yet my stage
is
still firmly in front of me. The reason is that my ears hear the sound of
my front speakers first and my brain tells me that is where the sound is
coming from, the rear-fill just adds ambience.

It is true that back in the days of IASCA many competitors who used time
correction borrowed heavily from the pro audio world. I saw many cars
with
professional digital-delay units. There was TONS of rack-mountable gear
around I remember.

MOSFET

Howdy, this is TRULY not meant as an insult, but instead of trying to create
the wheel here and start at square one, I would invite you to check out the
writings of Richard Clark and David Navone (both acoustic and electrical
engineers), two pioneers (might I say gods) in the area of hi-fi in the car.
They have written EXTENSIVELY on the benefits of DSP, time correction,
rear-fill and how it should be used, and many other aspects of high-end car
audio. Now, if you have no idea who these guys are and could care less, OR
think you know more than they do then I guess we have little more to
discuss.

MOSFET

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...

So what you are saying is that you delay your rear-fill 9.3 ms to make the
rears sound even further (unless you are tuning your system front the back
seat) then you compensate the delay difference by cranking up the rears
louder. Shouldn't you delay the fronts and not the rears

In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:

"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
groups.com...
TA keeps your bass up front. Wihtout allignemnt it is MUCH easier to
localize the low frequency information. We are creatures that are
designed to hunt and protect. We are naturally fine tuned for
localization via a time domain. My dog probably would not notice the
difference

That's right. We zero-in on the sounds that come to us first. Again,
this
is why in most typical systems it sounds like the bass is coming from the
rear, it is because the bass is hitting our ears a little late. My TC
corrects for this, and my bass does seem to be much more "up-front".
Another cool use for TC is with rear-fill. I delay my rear-fill 9.3 ms.
With this much delay, I can turn my rear-fill up quite loud, yet my stage
is
still firmly in front of me. The reason is that my ears hear the sound of
my front speakers first and my brain tells me that is where the sound is
coming from, the rear-fill just adds ambience.

It is true that back in the days of IASCA many competitors who used time
correction borrowed heavily from the pro audio world. I saw many cars
with
professional digital-delay units. There was TONS of rack-mountable gear
around I remember.

MOSFET

MOSFET wrote:
WELL SAID, CHAD!

That was such a good point it DESERVED to be posted three times! Well done!

MOSFET

Damn google groups

Chad

Bingo. Tweets in sail panels have the longest delay. I have no rear
speakers... But so do very few audiophiles in their listening rooms

Sub has 0Ms of delay.

Chad

Richard Clark a god, LOL ... That's a good one, hahah. And what did he
pioneer ? Or more to the point, what did he say he pioneered ?

-RG

"MOSFET" wrote in message
...
Howdy, this is TRULY not meant as an insult, but instead of trying to
create the wheel here and start at square one, I would invite you to check
out the writings of Richard Clark and David Navone (both acoustic and
electrical engineers), two pioneers (might I say gods) in the area of
hi-fi in the car. They have written EXTENSIVELY on the benefits of DSP,
time correction, rear-fill and how it should be used, and many other
aspects of high-end car audio. Now, if you have no idea who these guys
are and could care less, OR think you know more than they do then I guess
we have little more to discuss.

MOSFET

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...

So what you are saying is that you delay your rear-fill 9.3 ms to make
the
rears sound even further (unless you are tuning your system front the
back
seat) then you compensate the delay difference by cranking up the rears
louder. Shouldn't you delay the fronts and not the rears

In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:

"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
egroups.com...
TA keeps your bass up front. Wihtout allignemnt it is MUCH easier to
localize the low frequency information. We are creatures that are
designed to hunt and protect. We are naturally fine tuned for
localization via a time domain. My dog probably would not notice the
difference

That's right. We zero-in on the sounds that come to us first. Again,
this
is why in most typical systems it sounds like the bass is coming from the
rear, it is because the bass is hitting our ears a little late. My TC
corrects for this, and my bass does seem to be much more "up-front".
Another cool use for TC is with rear-fill. I delay my rear-fill 9.3 ms.
With this much delay, I can turn my rear-fill up quite loud, yet my stage
is
still firmly in front of me. The reason is that my ears hear the sound
of
my front speakers first and my brain tells me that is where the sound is
coming from, the rear-fill just adds ambience.

It is true that back in the days of IASCA many competitors who used time
correction borrowed heavily from the pro audio world. I saw many cars
with
professional digital-delay units. There was TONS of rack-mountable gear
around I remember.

MOSFET

Richard Clark a god, LOL ... That's a good one, hahah. And what did he
pioneer ? Or more to the point, what did he say he pioneered ?

-RG

How about horn loaded drivers to start. He may not have invented the idea,
but his Buick single-handedly ushered in an entirely new class of car audio
speaker (the horn-loaded driver). He also helped develop the first
stiffening capacitors used for car audio applications. David Navone
developed the first twisted-pair interconnects for car audio applications.

Is this enough for you? I COULD go on and on.

MOSFET

You don't really believe this ... do you, LOL ????

Yes, please go on and on as this is hilarious.

-RG

"MOSFET" wrote in message
...
Richard Clark a god, LOL ... That's a good one, hahah. And what did he
pioneer ? Or more to the point, what did he say he pioneered ?

-RG

How about horn loaded drivers to start. He may not have invented the
idea, but his Buick single-handedly ushered in an entirely new class of
car audio speaker (the horn-loaded driver). He also helped develop the
first stiffening capacitors used for car audio applications. David Navone
developed the first twisted-pair interconnects for car audio applications.

Is this enough for you? I COULD go on and on.

MOSFET

I wonder if his $10,000 all amplifiers sound alike contest is still going LOL


In article , "RG"
wrote:
Richard Clark a god, LOL ... That's a good one, hahah. And what did he
pioneer ? Or more to the point, what did he say he pioneered ?

-RG

No insult taken, I don't need DSP unit's to get my sound stage right, in fact
I don't even need an EQ. Richard Clark is a pioneer of nothing, and a noob of
all. The funny thing about Richard Clark was that everytime he opened his
mouth there was always someone there to prove him dumb.


In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:
Howdy, this is TRULY not meant as an insult, but instead of trying to create
the wheel here and start at square one, I would invite you to check out the
writings of Richard Clark and David Navone (both acoustic and electrical
engineers), two pioneers (might I say gods) in the area of hi-fi in the car.
They have written EXTENSIVELY on the benefits of DSP, time correction,
rear-fill and how it should be used, and many other aspects of high-end car
audio. Now, if you have no idea who these guys are and could care less, OR
think you know more than they do then I guess we have little more to
discuss.

MOSFET

"RG" wrote in message
...
You don't really believe this ... do you, LOL ????

Yes, please go on and on as this is hilarious.

-RG

I'm sure your accomplishments FAR outweigh theirs. Their success must all
be a complete fluke, right? Do I detect a little jealousy?

I actually know David Navone (well, I've spoken to him on the phone several
times) and he is a REALLY bright guy, and a hell of a nice guy too (he'll
talk your ear off if you let him!). So slam him all you like, he will be
laughing all the way to the bank.

MOSFET

I don't know how old you are Howdy, or you RG, but one thing both of you
CANNOT dispute (if you are at least around 40 years old) is that Richard
Clark and David Navone were instrumental in bring car audio out of the "dark
ages" of the eighties (EQ boosters, full-range subwoofer boxes, etc.) and
helped bring about a the "car audio renaissance" of the early nineties where
SQ became the driving force in the industry (as was the creation of IASCA).

Regardless of what they did or did not actually "invent" themselves, their
promotion of high-end autosound completely changed the industry. THAT IS
UNDISPUTABLE!

Trust me, without those two men, the industry WOULD look very different
today, IMHO.

MOSFET

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...
No insult taken, I don't need DSP unit's to get my sound stage right, in
fact
I don't even need an EQ. Richard Clark is a pioneer of nothing, and a noob
of
all. The funny thing about Richard Clark was that everytime he opened his
mouth there was always someone there to prove him dumb.


In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:
Howdy, this is TRULY not meant as an insult, but instead of trying to
create
the wheel here and start at square one, I would invite you to check out
the
writings of Richard Clark and David Navone (both acoustic and electrical
engineers), two pioneers (might I say gods) in the area of hi-fi in the
car.
They have written EXTENSIVELY on the benefits of DSP, time correction,
rear-fill and how it should be used, and many other aspects of high-end
car
audio. Now, if you have no idea who these guys are and could care less,
OR
think you know more than they do then I guess we have little more to
discuss.

MOSFET

That's funny, Oil filled capacitors have been around since the days of Nikola
Tesla, nothing about the car audio capacitor is deferent in car audio other
then the sticker that's on the outside of it.

What's different about the technology of twisted-pair interconnects of car
audio vs. the technology of twisted-pair cabling that was invented in the
1880's for wiring up the early telephone systems?


But I do see where you're going with this, I invented blue led's in cell
phones, My phone had blue led's 2 good year years before any manufacture used
them in their phones. That was back in the day of the Nokia's 5160. I have
also used blue power led's in my amplifiers long before alpine. Should I go on
about my ultra violet led lighting in the car?



In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:
Richard Clark a god, LOL ... That's a good one, hahah. And what did he
pioneer ? Or more to the point, what did he say he pioneered ?

-RG

How about horn loaded drivers to start. He may not have invented the idea,
but his Buick single-handedly ushered in an entirely new class of car audio
speaker (the horn-loaded driver). He also helped develop the first
stiffening capacitors used for car audio applications. David Navone
developed the first twisted-pair interconnects for car audio applications.

Is this enough for you? I COULD go on and on.

MOSFET

Yes, we could debate for days who invented what. My point throughout this
WHOLE little thread has been that these two men PROMOTED these things for
use in the autosound industry. OF COURSE THEY DIDN'T INVENT THE CAPACITOR,
THE LYDON-JAR WAS ESSENTIALLY A CAPACITOR INVENTED HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO!

But Navone and Clark promoted the use of the Lydon-Jar for car audio
applications.

MOSFET

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...
That's funny, Oil filled capacitors have been around since the days of
Nikola
Tesla, nothing about the car audio capacitor is deferent in car audio
other
then the sticker that's on the outside of it.

What's different about the technology of twisted-pair interconnects of car
audio vs. the technology of twisted-pair cabling that was invented in the
1880's for wiring up the early telephone systems?


But I do see where you're going with this, I invented blue led's in cell
phones, My phone had blue led's 2 good year years before any manufacture
used
them in their phones. That was back in the day of the Nokia's 5160. I have
also used blue power led's in my amplifiers long before alpine. Should I
go on
about my ultra violet led lighting in the car?



In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:
Richard Clark a god, LOL ... That's a good one, hahah. And what did he
pioneer ? Or more to the point, what did he say he pioneered ?

-RG

How about horn loaded drivers to start. He may not have invented the
idea,
but his Buick single-handedly ushered in an entirely new class of car
audio
speaker (the horn-loaded driver). He also helped develop the first
stiffening capacitors used for car audio applications. David Navone
developed the first twisted-pair interconnects for car audio applications.

Is this enough for you? I COULD go on and on.

MOSFET

How does that response vindicate your assertions about their pioneering
prowess, LOL ? In other words, you did not answer the question or provide
proof for what you said.

-RG

"MOSFET" wrote in message
...

"RG" wrote in message
...
You don't really believe this ... do you, LOL ????

Yes, please go on and on as this is hilarious.

-RG

I'm sure your accomplishments FAR outweigh theirs. Their success must all
be a complete fluke, right? Do I detect a little jealousy?

I actually know David Navone (well, I've spoken to him on the phone
several times) and he is a REALLY bright guy, and a hell of a nice guy too
(he'll talk your ear off if you let him!). So slam him all you like, he
will be laughing all the way to the bank.

MOSFET

.... you're not serious are you ? ... say it ain't so.

-RG

"MOSFET" wrote in message
m...
I don't know how old you are Howdy, or you RG, but one thing both of you
CANNOT dispute (if you are at least around 40 years old) is that Richard
Clark and David Navone were instrumental in bring car audio out of the
"dark ages" of the eighties (EQ boosters, full-range subwoofer boxes, etc.)
and helped bring about a the "car audio renaissance" of the early nineties
where SQ became the driving force in the industry (as was the creation of
IASCA).

Regardless of what they did or did not actually "invent" themselves, their
promotion of high-end autosound completely changed the industry. THAT IS
UNDISPUTABLE!

Trust me, without those two men, the industry WOULD look very different
today, IMHO.

MOSFET

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...
No insult taken, I don't need DSP unit's to get my sound stage right, in
fact
I don't even need an EQ. Richard Clark is a pioneer of nothing, and a
noob of
all. The funny thing about Richard Clark was that everytime he opened his
mouth there was always someone there to prove him dumb.


In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:
Howdy, this is TRULY not meant as an insult, but instead of trying to
create
the wheel here and start at square one, I would invite you to check out
the
writings of Richard Clark and David Navone (both acoustic and electrical
engineers), two pioneers (might I say gods) in the area of hi-fi in the
car.
They have written EXTENSIVELY on the benefits of DSP, time correction,
rear-fill and how it should be used, and many other aspects of high-end
car
audio. Now, if you have no idea who these guys are and could care less,
OR
think you know more than they do then I guess we have little more to
discuss.

MOSFET

RG, I have absolutely no idea what your beef with these two guys are, but
frankly, it seems like it's personal or something.

Clark and Navone were instrumental in helping develop the rules and
standards for IASCA, which in turn influenced COUNTLESS car audio
manufacturers. I have spoken to COUNTLESS competitors who were influenced
by their ideas.

I have already provided examples of their contributions and all you can say
is " you're wrong, you must be joking, what a laugh " WITH NO PROOF OF YOUR
OWN! Who the hell are you that I should accept what you say without any
evidence, yet I need to provide extensive documentation and evidence because
you say "you must be joking"? You have a hell of an ego, mister!

MOSFET

"RG" wrote in message
...
... you're not serious are you ? ... say it ain't so.

-RG

"MOSFET" wrote in message
m...
I don't know how old you are Howdy, or you RG, but one thing both of you
CANNOT dispute (if you are at least around 40 years old) is that Richard
Clark and David Navone were instrumental in bring car audio out of the
"dark ages" of the eighties (EQ boosters, full-range subwoofer boxes,
etc.) and helped bring about a the "car audio renaissance" of the early
nineties where SQ became the driving force in the industry (as was the
creation of IASCA).

Regardless of what they did or did not actually "invent" themselves,
their promotion of high-end autosound completely changed the industry.
THAT IS UNDISPUTABLE!

Trust me, without those two men, the industry WOULD look very different
today, IMHO.

MOSFET

"Captain Howdy" wrote in message
...
No insult taken, I don't need DSP unit's to get my sound stage right, in
fact
I don't even need an EQ. Richard Clark is a pioneer of nothing, and a
noob of
all. The funny thing about Richard Clark was that everytime he opened
his
mouth there was always someone there to prove him dumb.


In article , "MOSFET"
wrote:
Howdy, this is TRULY not meant as an insult, but instead of trying to
create
the wheel here and start at square one, I would invite you to check out
the
writings of Richard Clark and David Navone (both acoustic and electrical
engineers), two pioneers (might I say gods) in the area of hi-fi in the
car.
They have written EXTENSIVELY on the benefits of DSP, time correction,
rear-fill and how it should be used, and many other aspects of high-end
car
audio. Now, if you have no idea who these guys are and could care less,
OR
think you know more than they do then I guess we have little more to
discuss.

MOSFET