Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
The Lizard
 
Posts: n/a
Default ha ha GOT HIM! Subwoofer direction

Nousaine wrote:

Let's see it's July 2003; my aol account has been active since 1990. That's
"nearly 15 years old" in my book. This is ignoring that i began using e-mail
professionally in 1985.


Do the math. 2003-1990 = 13 years. Unless you signed up on Jan 1, 1990,
then that e-mail address is "nearly 13 years old". Giving you some
handicap for your alzheimers, maybe "nearly 14 years old".

--
Lizard

teamROCS #007 / Technical Director / Founding Member *res derelicta*
http://www.teamrocs.com/
Save Farscape http://www.watchfarscape.com

  #42   Report Post  
The Lizard
 
Posts: n/a
Default EXAGERATIN TOM! Subwoofer direction

Eddie Runner wrote:

I had a BBS system that went online in 1982 and ran continuosly till 1993, of
course I was online much earlier than 82, and there were no EMail addresses
as we know them today...


Hey OLD GUY...what BBS software did you use? I found an old copy of XP
(Crosspoint) in a box of computer stuff I bought at an auction. I was
seriously thinking of hacking it to serve VPN connections.

--
Lizard

teamROCS #007 / Technical Director / Founding Member *res derelicta*
http://www.teamrocs.com/
Save Farscape http://www.watchfarscape.com

  #43   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default OLD BBS EXAGERATIN TOM! Subwoofer direction

I forget what the very first one I ran was... But I ran one
on the Atari called FoRuM which stood for friends of Ricky the Moose...
(dont aske me! there were some really nutty hacker types doing this
stuff back then, appearantly along with lots O drugs)....

When the PCs came about I ran the RBBS and some others..
(PCboard and some I cant rememeber now)

Eddie


The Lizard wrote:

Eddie Runner wrote:

I had a BBS system that went online in 1982 and ran continuosly till 1993, of
course I was online much earlier than 82, and there were no EMail addresses
as we know them today...


Hey OLD GUY...what BBS software did you use? I found an old copy of XP
(Crosspoint) in a box of computer stuff I bought at an auction. I was
seriously thinking of hacking it to serve VPN connections.

--
Lizard

teamROCS #007 / Technical Director / Founding Member *res derelicta*
http://www.teamrocs.com/
Save Farscape http://www.watchfarscape.com


  #44   Report Post  
ãÞ0çã|ÿÞs
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Have you done it with a sub crossed over at say 50hz low pass, with a steep
slope, say 24db per octave at least? So your sub is producing NOTHING but
below 60hz frequencies? 12bd slope would need to be crossed very low.

I'm going to give it a shot tomorrow with my car parked in the laneway and
see if it makes any difference with only 60hz or less going to the sub, then
with the crossover set to roughly 150Hz and compare.

I'm not disagreeing with you guys and agreeing with NOUSAINE, I think both
are correct (well, I'm not sure but I will try it myself).

I know you and Eddie and everyone have noticed the difference when you put
your sub tight against the back seat and face it out the trunk, in
comparison to turning it around and facing the back seat (towards the
listener). I know it makes a difference. I have heard it in my car, and many
others. But the sub has always been crossed over well above 60Hz (in my
case). In reality, most subs are crossed well above 60hz, correct? Or am I
wrong to say that? For most people, in most cases, its very impractical to
cross over that low, right?

Eddie, can you say honestly you have done it with a sub crossed really low,
50hz or even less and noticed the same difference?

I will find out tomorrow........ (car needs struts, can't drive it anyways,
gotta do somthin with the stereo :P)

"Soundfreak03" wrote in message
...
He is saying it will make no difference with bass below 60Hz or so! Why
don't you guys get a good 24 or 48db crossover, set it real low, and go

TEST
IT IN YOUR CAR! Move the sub around, face it towards the back seat, then

try
other positions!



Have you ever done this? I KNOW that it happens. I have done it in several
vehicles myself, Eddie has done it in several (probably hunderd) vehicles.

You
can argue that it cant happen but it does, It has been done and will

continue
to be done and no amount of fancy talk from Nousaine will change that. No
article in some crappy magazine will change that.


I don't see how you guys can argue NOUSAINE when you don't even

understand
what he is saying!


I think people understand clearly. I have understood the whole thread and

it is
blantanly obvious that he is wrong.
Why cant anyone argue with Nousaine? Because he writes for a magazine he

is
some audio expert? I dont think so. You should read some of the crap he

spouts
on other groups. He is a writer not an audio guru. Put down the magazine

and
maybe you will learn something.

Les




  #46   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default STANDing WAVEs Subwoofer direction

Eddie Runner wrote:

Nousaine wrote:

A standing wave will ONLY occur when you have two opposing walls or

surfaces.
Otherwise its a propagating wave.


In a car there ARE OPPOSING WALLS!


Of course. That's why we have standing waves. But they don't form below 50-60
Hz in most cars because that's in the pressure zone. Standing waves in the car
are shifted upward to roughly 60-600 Hz. In a living room they occur typically
between about 30-300 Hz.

but that is NOT needed to make a simple standing wave...

Find a definition of STANDING WAVE I thinkyou will find yourself WRONG!


There's a nice picture of a Kundt tube on page 2 of Everest's "The Master
Handbook of Acoustics" that describes how standing waves are formed with a
sound source at one end and a plug in the other end of the tube. You ought to
read this.


Standing waves are the result of interg\ferance. When two sets of waves
of
eaqual ampitude and wavelength pass through each other in opposite
directions
the waves are steadily in and out of phase with each other....


Ok how do they manage to travel in different directions unless there are two
sources? In your example, they are traveling in the same direction when they
interfere. That's not a standing wave.


this definition was from CONCEPTIAL PHYSICS seventh edition by Paul
Gittewitt.

Its one simple definition...

There is a MORE COMPLEX 2 wall and even a 6 wall defintion in the Sams
Handbook for Sound Engineers, but since Im not neccisarilly talking
about
more than one wall in my example (to keep it simple for the folks),


You have to keepit simple because it's quite clear you don't understand the
acoustics here. Your pictures describe an interference effect that occurs at
higher frequencies.

I
will
not use those definitions here unless I dcide to talk about more than
one wall..

Eddie Runner
http://www.installer.com/tech/

You don't get standing waves in rooms and cars without opposing surfaces.

  #47   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default STanDIng WAveS Subwoofer direction

Nousaine wrote:

Are you now admitting that turning the woofer box around backwards
CAN IMPROVE THE BASS???

Eddie Runner


No you idiot


Im the idiot?????

You need to get you a subwoofer box and test it for youself....

Eddie Runner




  #48   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

"=E3=DE0=E7=E3|=FF=DEs" wrote:

Eddie, can you say honestly you have done it with a sub crossed really =

low,
50hz or even less and noticed the same difference?


I have done it with a 50Hz test tone from an oscillator....

Eddie

  #49   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Personalities Subwoofer direction

are you saying I dont have an offensive personallity??

Eddie

daxe wrote:

"=E3=DE0=E7=E3|=FF=DEs" wrote in message
...
THAT IS NOT WHAT HE IS SAYING!


I don't see how you guys can argue NOUSAINE when you don't even under=

stand
what he is saying!


because smug, complacent, arrogant, marrow-minded people deserve to be
argued with, no matter if they are right or wrong. You know why this d=

oofus
hangs around on the internet? Because people like him get the **** kic=

ked
out of them on a regular basis in the real world as a byproduct of thei=

r
offensive personalities.

~daxe


  #50   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Tom is changing his story now! Subwoofer direction

Nousaine wrote:

In a car there ARE OPPOSING WALLS!


Of course. That's why we have standing waves. But they don't form below 50-60
Hz in most cars because that's in the pressure zone.


You WERE SAYING they cant happen in a car at 60HZ (thats what frequency
my paper is geared for) ....

NOW YOUR SAYING BELOW 50Hz!!

Are you changing your story a little TOM???


Eddie Runner



  #51   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default SHIFTED UPWARD?? Subwoofer direction

Nousaine wrote:

Standing waves in the car
are shifted upward to roughly 60-600 Hz. In a living room they occur typically
between about 30-300 Hz.


I use a 50Hz tone in a car and I DO HAVE standing waves.. if there were none
the sound pressure would be EQUAL everyplace in the car!

Using a 50Hz tone there is NO WAY my frequencies are SHIFTED UP!
Unless I tune my oscillator up... Is that what you want me to do???

DUH

Eddie RUnner






but that is NOT needed to make a simple standing wave...

Find a definition of STANDING WAVE I thinkyou will find yourself WRONG!


There's a nice picture of a Kundt tube on page 2 of Everest's "The Master
Handbook of Acoustics" that describes how standing waves are formed with a
sound source at one end and a plug in the other end of the tube. You ought to
read this.


Standing waves are the result of interg\ferance. When two sets of waves
of
eaqual ampitude and wavelength pass through each other in opposite
directions
the waves are steadily in and out of phase with each other....


Ok how do they manage to travel in different directions unless there are two
sources? In your example, they are traveling in the same direction when they
interfere. That's not a standing wave.


this definition was from CONCEPTIAL PHYSICS seventh edition by Paul
Gittewitt.

Its one simple definition...

There is a MORE COMPLEX 2 wall and even a 6 wall defintion in the Sams
Handbook for Sound Engineers, but since Im not neccisarilly talking
about
more than one wall in my example (to keep it simple for the folks),


You have to keepit simple because it's quite clear you don't understand the
acoustics here. Your pictures describe an interference effect that occurs at
higher frequencies.

I
will
not use those definitions here unless I dcide to talk about more than
one wall..

Eddie Runner
http://www.installer.com/tech/


You don't get standing waves in rooms and cars without opposing surfaces.


  #52   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Standing waves


What are standing waves and why do they appear to stand....


arguing with Tom is fun but for those of you that may want some
facts with out all the namecalling and fuss of trying to read the
good stuff in our parlay without being distracted by Toms exagerations
here is my view on it....


When two or more sound waves cross or compine with each other
something happens called superposition...This means they add together
changing the loudness..

If the waves are inphase with each other they add together 1+1=2
the sound is louder at this point...

if the waves are out of phase when they meet +1-1=0
the sound is softer at this point....

so basicly if the sounds are IN PHASE there is an increase in sound
and if the sounds are OUT OF PHASE there is a decrease in sound.

Phase is like a circle of 360degrees, if were out of phase we are 180
degrees different than the original ... The closer we get to OUT of phase
the more loss we have and the closer we get to IN phase the more gain
we have....

simple so far...

When a sound REFLECTS and bounces back crossing the original
sound wave there are points along the path of the moving soundwaves
where they are IN PHASE and points where the two waves are OUT
OF PHASE...

For instance, at 1/4 wavelength from the reflecting surface, the differnce
between the original wave and the reflected wave WILL ALWAYS BE
180degrees!

How can that be?
Simple,

if the original sound wave is at say 0 degrees of its cycle, the reflected wave
(being 1/2 wavelength away (1/4 to the reflector and 1/4 back to the spot))
must be at 180 degrees....

As the first wave changes to 1 degree (this happens real fast) the reflection
at that spot will be 181 degrees,,, still 180degree differnce!

first wave 2 reflection 182
first wave 5 reflection 185
first wave 10 reflection 190 still 180 degree differnce at that spot
first wave 180 reflection 0 still 180 degree difference

at that spot, there will ALWAYS be 180 degree difference, this causes
a DIP in loudness AT THAT SPOT!

Now, by the same token, at other spots like 1/2 wavelength from the
reflector, there will be peaks, because at that SPOT there will always
be 0 degrees of difference between the first wave and the reflected wave!!

If the first wave is 0
the reflected wave must travel 1/2 wave to the reflector (180) and 1/2
wave back (another 180) so the reflected wave is 360 (same as
zero)...

AND WE GET REINFORCEMENT
A PEAK that is ALWAYS THERE!

So with the DIPS and PEAKS that never change thier
location, the wave APPEARS to STAND STILL...

Even though waves are moveing both directions very fast, they are not
really standing still!

But because there are CONSTANT phse relationships
that DONT CHANGE, the waves APPEAR to stand still
and they call these STANDING WAVES....

This example is one speaker and one reflector....

It gets more fun when we have TWO reflectors
and even more fun when we have more reflectors...

Hope this helps anyone who doesnt want to try to keep up with
the mess in the other thread...

Eddie Runner
http://www.installer.com/tech/






  #54   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default CORVETTE too small to judge Subwoofer direction

Nousaine wrote:

Depends on the size of the car. The frequency freqeuncy of the lowest axial
mode is lower for larger cars and higher for smaller cars. In a car with the
interior volume of a Corvette or Integra the frequency is 60 Hz.


There ya go!

I have been telling folks your article was flawed
BECAUSE OF THE CORVETTE for years....

The corvette IS TOO SMALL!

You try to baffle us with the bull**** about the interior of the corvette
having ALMOST the same interior size as the HONDA but
YOUR EXAGERATING AGIAN!!

AND
the Honda has a trunk!
The trunk, since thats where the woofers are HAS TO BE
COUNTED AS INTERIOR SPACE!!

Your Corvette has NO TRUNK
thus MUCH much smaller space!!

Heck, a corvette is so small I dont see how you can move
yoru woofer box around much anyway... So how can you
claim moving the box wont make a difference when your
TEST CAR is FLAWED...?????

In-car response below 60 Hz in this vehicle is unchanged by subwoofer location
or direction.


there are 1000s of kids out there that KNOW your wrong!

Eddie


  #55   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default CORVETTE too small to judge Subwoofer direction

Eddie Runner blathered:

Nousaine wrote:

Depends on the size of the car. The frequency freqeuncy of the lowest axial
mode is lower for larger cars and higher for smaller cars. In a car with

the
interior volume of a Corvette or Integra the frequency is 60 Hz.


There ya go!

I have been telling folks your article was flawed
BECAUSE OF THE CORVETTE for years....

The corvette IS TOO SMALL!


What's wrong with that? Too much bass that way? Although the car is a 2-seater
it is also a hatchback with 25 cubic feet of open space to the rear. This makes
it acoustically the same size as my 4 door Integra hatchback.



You try to baffle us with the bull**** about the interior of the corvette
having ALMOST the same interior size as the HONDA but
YOUR EXAGERATING AGIAN!!

AND
the Honda has a trunk!
The trunk, since thats where the woofers are HAS TO BE
COUNTED AS INTERIOR SPACE!!


Oh ****; you've never heard of a hatchback? But anyway the trunk doesn't make
the body any bigger, now does it.


Your Corvette has NO TRUNK
thus MUCH much smaller space!!


That's right it has 25 cubic feet of open cargo area.


Heck, a corvette is so small I dont see how you can move
yoru woofer box around much anyway... So how can you
claim moving the box wont make a difference when your
TEST CAR is FLAWED...?????


You idiot. I knew you didn't know how tomake a transfer function measurement.
The cute trick is to put the woofer in the driver's seat and then take
measurements by moving the microphone. But even so the Corvette has 25-cubic
feet of open area in whch to put subwoofers.


In-car response below 60 Hz in this vehicle is unchanged by subwoofer

location
or direction.


there are 1000s of kids out there that KNOW your wrong!

Eddie


Well you're not one of them


  #56   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Moving the Mic!! Subwoofer direction

AH HA!

I was saving that for later....

With woofers ANYWHERE in the car, play a 50Hz tone and then
move the mic around the inside of the car!

IS IT THE SAME EVERYWHERE????

Of course not!

So, if as you say (correctly) that moving the box is the same
as moving the mic.... And as you say moving the box wont
change the SPL....

Then according to you the MIC wont change when you move
it throughout the vehicle...

EVERYONE KNOWS IT DOES CHANGE!

This is the basis of many of the SPL contest rules in fact!!

Eddie Runner
(trapped ya again didnt I tom?)

Nousaine wrote:

You idiot.
The cute trick is to put the woofer in the driver's seat and then take
measurements by moving the microphone.


  #57   Report Post  
scott johnson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

/snip/


But this is what people "hear" when they re-orient the woofer direction.


erm, no. in my experience i've seen noticable gains in the region from 30 -
50 hz just by turning around a sub enclosure. also, i was running 36
db/octave active filters,so i don't think it was a reduction of midrange
that i was perceiving as an increase in bass.


  #58   Report Post  
scott johnson
 
Posts: n/a
Default ha ha GOT HIM! Subwoofer direction




Let's see it's July 2003; my aol account has been active since 1990.

That's
"nearly 15 years old" in my book. This is ignoring that i began using

e-mail
professionally in 1985.



that's probably the only thing you've done professionally.


  #59   Report Post  
Luke Hague
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

The only changes made to my system at the time, was the fact I turned the
box around, I have 2 10" Infinity Reference subwooffers mounted in a sealed
box with .74cubic feet internal volume, powered by a Rockford Fosgate 500x
4-channel amp, bridged to 2 channels. I only used the crossover already on
the amp, which I don't know the specs on, but I've never changed it.
I consider bass, what I can feel and what any person would consider
"low" sounding tones.
I don't have any equipment to test the difference, but it is a very
noticable (audible) sound difference. Also bass is less prodominate outside
the car, where it is now more prodominate inside the car, being that more
can be heard and felt.
And once again no other changes were made except for physically tunring
the box around to face the rear of the car.
I would also like to add, I did this several times and noticed the
difference everytime.


"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Luke Hague"

Wow, you must be tone deaf, cause when I turned my speakers around in
the hatch of my '96 Escort LX, there was a HUGE difference, I went from

not
having any bass, to having more than enough bass. So in turn, I turned

my
amp down, so in the long run it also saved my speakers.


So what's your crossover frequency? What kind of woofer system is

employed?
What do you consider bass?
How did you verify the difference?
Were any other changes made at the same time?



  #60   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

"Luke Hague" wrote:

The only changes made to my system at the time, was the fact I turned the
box around, I have 2 10" Infinity Reference subwooffers mounted in a sealed
box with .74cubic feet internal volume, powered by a Rockford Fosgate 500x
4-channel amp, bridged to 2 channels. I only used the crossover already on
the amp, which I don't know the specs on, but I've never changed it.
I consider bass, what I can feel and what any person would consider
"low" sounding tones.
I don't have any equipment to test the difference, but it is a very
noticable (audible) sound difference. Also bass is less prodominate outside
the car, where it is now more prodominate inside the car, being that more
can be heard and felt.
And once again no other changes were made except for physically tunring
the box around to face the rear of the car.
I would also like to add, I did this several times and noticed the
difference everytime.


These anecdotal reports are quite common and are useful as far as they go. But
I performed this test with calibrated measurement systems and recorded the data
with conditions that can be duplicated by anybody.

Yours cannot because we really don't know the true conditions such as program
material, etc. That's fine but it doesn't really address the issue as to if
anything is really happening. For example did you control levels? Did you use
consistent programs, how did you assess the 'aubility' of what you thoght you
were hearing?

These issues are part of another subject (normal human listening bias) that
helps account for lots of Urban Legends in car. pro and home audio systems.

"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Luke Hague"


Wow, you must be tone deaf, cause when I turned my speakers around in
the hatch of my '96 Escort LX, there was a HUGE difference, I went from

not
having any bass, to having more than enough bass. So in turn, I turned

my
amp down, so in the long run it also saved my speakers.


So what's your crossover frequency? What kind of woofer system is

employed?
What do you consider bass?
How did you verify the difference?
Were any other changes made at the same time?




  #61   Report Post  
Luke Hague
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

You just keep referring to your test which I'm sure came out as true,
because of you're test environment, but for you to prove you're theory you
should try it in multiple vehicles.
What was the vehicle you were using to test this on? Because space is
what is the biggest factor in subwoofer direction, I may not be a
professional at car installation, but it doesn't take an expert to
understand that sound wave can be cancelled by two of the same sound waves
colliding, this can be show in a simple physics problem, such as force.
When two object traveling at the same speed, and that have the same mass,
collide, they cancel eachother out, meaning neither object moves. What
happens, as Eddie has explained on his, in where he used test equipment
(like you) and in an average everyday vehicle, is that the back of the box
produces the same waves as the front of the box, when these waves collide,
they cancel out. It's a very simple theory, and the only way it can be
proven is by testing. And in such I have, in my own vehicle, as I said
before, I changed NOTHING except the direction of my box.
As far as bias listening as you put it, I can't really object, except
only to remind you that I've done this many times in the same car, turning
the box back to the front, and then to the rear again, and each time I can
hear a greater amount of bass. I don't really understand how you can sit
there, and tell me that I am wrong when I know for a fact it's made a huge
difference. Perhaps it's something else that has occurred, but I know for a
FACT that the bass is greater with the box facing the rear.
This theory can also apply to home theater, or sound systems, in fact it
could be proven to you easier here than in a car. If you take the sub
woofer for the speaker system, and it has to be just the sub and it has to
be loud, take that sub and play a real low tone through it, then face it
against the wall, now move it back and forth against the wall, not like a
couple of inches either, I'm talking feet. You WILL notice a difference.
This is attributed to that simple physics problem that you really can
dispute.


"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Luke Hague" wrote:

The only changes made to my system at the time, was the fact I turned the
box around, I have 2 10" Infinity Reference subwooffers mounted in a

sealed
box with .74cubic feet internal volume, powered by a Rockford Fosgate

500x
4-channel amp, bridged to 2 channels. I only used the crossover already

on
the amp, which I don't know the specs on, but I've never changed it.
I consider bass, what I can feel and what any person would consider
"low" sounding tones.
I don't have any equipment to test the difference, but it is a very
noticable (audible) sound difference. Also bass is less prodominate

outside
the car, where it is now more prodominate inside the car, being that more
can be heard and felt.
And once again no other changes were made except for physically

tunring
the box around to face the rear of the car.
I would also like to add, I did this several times and noticed the
difference everytime.


These anecdotal reports are quite common and are useful as far as they go.

But
I performed this test with calibrated measurement systems and recorded the

data
with conditions that can be duplicated by anybody.

Yours cannot because we really don't know the true conditions such as

program
material, etc. That's fine but it doesn't really address the issue as to

if
anything is really happening. For example did you control levels? Did you

use
consistent programs, how did you assess the 'aubility' of what you thoght

you
were hearing?

These issues are part of another subject (normal human listening bias)

that
helps account for lots of Urban Legends in car. pro and home audio

systems.

"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Luke Hague"


Wow, you must be tone deaf, cause when I turned my speakers around in
the hatch of my '96 Escort LX, there was a HUGE difference, I went

from
not
having any bass, to having more than enough bass. So in turn, I

turned
my
amp down, so in the long run it also saved my speakers.


So what's your crossover frequency? What kind of woofer system is

employed?
What do you consider bass?
How did you verify the difference?
Were any other changes made at the same time?




  #62   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

"Luke Hague" wrote:

You just keep referring to your test which I'm sure came out as true,
because of you're test environment, but for you to prove you're theory you
should try it in multiple vehicles.
What was the vehicle you were using to test this on?


Corvette;but what difference should that make. Eddie's web-site uses NO car.

Because space is
what is the biggest factor in subwoofer direction, I may not be a
professional at car installation, but it doesn't take an expert to
understand that sound wave can be cancelled by two of the same sound waves
colliding, this can be show in a simple physics problem, such as force.
When two object traveling at the same speed, and that have the same mass,
collide, they cancel eachother out, meaning neither object moves.


Really? well how does the force get distributed and/or disappated? 2 vehicles
traveling at 50 mph in a head-on will simply stop and nothing else will happen?


Of course, you aren't but that's what you said.

What
happens, as Eddie has explained on his, in where he used test equipment
(like you) and in an average everyday vehicle, is that the back of the box
produces the same waves as the front of the box, when these waves collide,
they cancel out.


So if you put in a 60 Hz tone and they cancel out and you get no sound? If
that's true then why do you need a wall?

It's a very simple theory, and the only way it can be
proven is by testing. And in such I have, in my own vehicle, as I said
before, I changed NOTHING except the direction of my box.


I hear this all the time fromothers but every time I investigate i find that
other factors have not been controlled or documented.

As far as bias listening as you put it, I can't really object, except
only to remind you that I've done this many times in the same car, turning
the box back to the front, and then to the rear again, and each time I can
hear a greater amount of bass. I don't really understand how you can sit
there, and tell me that I am wrong when I know for a fact it's made a huge
difference. Perhaps it's something else that has occurred, but I know for a
FACT that the bass is greater with the box facing the rear.


Well then how come that doesn't occur in my car and the others I've used?

This theory can also apply to home theater, or sound systems, in fact it
could be proven to you easier here than in a car. If you take the sub
woofer for the speaker system, and it has to be just the sub and it has to
be loud, take that sub and play a real low tone through it, then face it
against the wall, now move it back and forth against the wall, not like a
couple of inches either, I'm talking feet. You WILL notice a difference.
This is attributed to that simple physics problem that you really can
dispute.


Home Theater is my specialty. Yes if you move your subwoofer away from a wall
or out of the corner response does change in the range of 30-300 Hz in the
typically sized listening room. That's because any other location, other than a
corner will fail to excite some room modes and put holes in the sound pressure.


My point is that in a smaller space, like a car, that inflection point is
raised by roughly an octave to 60-600 Hz.

In either space, room or car, below the lowest axial mode the speaker (if it
has adequate displacement) directly pressurizes the space. There are no modes
(standing waves) below this frequency. What happens with the "Eddie Effect" as
described on his web-site is that a single wall replection can cause a response
cancellation BUT NOT at or below the pressure zone.

In my experiment that occured at 188 Hz and with the woofer facing the rear of
the vehicle. Boundary cancellation is well known and has been for years. But it
doesn't happen at the excitation frequency.
  #63   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

"Luke Hague" wrote:

I guess I just have a couple of questions in this can then.

How many times have you preformed any sort of scientific experiment on this,
and in how many vehicles?


How many times have YOU performed this experiment in what vehicles and what
were the conditions?


Why then if it's not the reason that Eddie and I both feel is the truth, how
come it still increases bass when the subs are turned around?


It doesn't. If it did then it would occur in any vehicle, wouldn't it. I didn't
see any qualifications about vehicles or size on Eddie's web-site. That bass
is improved is simply your conjecture un-verified by analysis and experimental
results.


How come noise-cancelling head phones work so well, when they use the
same principle that I stated? The headphones produce the same tone as the
ambient noise around you to cancel it out, at least this is how Sony does
it, I haven't read anything on Bose, but I would imagine it's the same
prinicple.


The "same" tone is quite different from a 'reflection' is it not. But that's
one of my points about the Eddie cartoon. If it worked as he says with the
samplitudes shown in his drawing, why doesn't the 'reflection' completely
cancel the original signal?


What else I have to add would be that I see you never took physics, and
that if you used a corvette that it really wouldn't make a difference anyhow
because there is little trunk space.


What does 'trunk space' have to do with anything? There's no "trunk" in the
cartoon that I can see.


To continue with that physics example though, it wouldn't completely
cancel out the 60hz tones because it's an imperfect environment, it would
only quiet it down, for it to be a complete cancelation, everything would
have to be the same.



Oh boy??????? With the drawing what's different anywhere, anytime?


"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Luke Hague"
wrote:

You just keep referring to your test which I'm sure came out as true,
because of you're test environment, but for you to prove you're theory

you
should try it in multiple vehicles.
What was the vehicle you were using to test this on?


Corvette;but what difference should that make. Eddie's web-site uses NO

car.

Because space is
what is the biggest factor in subwoofer direction, I may not be a
professional at car installation, but it doesn't take an expert to
understand that sound wave can be cancelled by two of the same sound

waves
colliding, this can be show in a simple physics problem, such as force.
When two object traveling at the same speed, and that have the same mass,
collide, they cancel eachother out, meaning neither object moves.


Really? well how does the force get distributed and/or disappated? 2

vehicles
traveling at 50 mph in a head-on will simply stop and nothing else will

happen?


Of course, you aren't but that's what you said.

What
happens, as Eddie has explained on his, in where he used test equipment
(like you) and in an average everyday vehicle, is that the back of the

box
produces the same waves as the front of the box, when these waves

collide,
they cancel out.


So if you put in a 60 Hz tone and they cancel out and you get no sound? If
that's true then why do you need a wall?

It's a very simple theory, and the only way it can be
proven is by testing. And in such I have, in my own vehicle, as I said
before, I changed NOTHING except the direction of my box.


I hear this all the time fromothers but every time I investigate i find

that
other factors have not been controlled or documented.

As far as bias listening as you put it, I can't really object, except
only to remind you that I've done this many times in the same car,

turning
the box back to the front, and then to the rear again, and each time I

can
hear a greater amount of bass. I don't really understand how you can sit
there, and tell me that I am wrong when I know for a fact it's made a

huge
difference. Perhaps it's something else that has occurred, but I know

for a
FACT that the bass is greater with the box facing the rear.


Well then how come that doesn't occur in my car and the others I've used?

This theory can also apply to home theater, or sound systems, in fact

it
could be proven to you easier here than in a car. If you take the sub
woofer for the speaker system, and it has to be just the sub and it has

to
be loud, take that sub and play a real low tone through it, then face it
against the wall, now move it back and forth against the wall, not like a
couple of inches either, I'm talking feet. You WILL notice a difference.
This is attributed to that simple physics problem that you really can
dispute.


Home Theater is my specialty. Yes if you move your subwoofer away from a

wall
or out of the corner response does change in the range of 30-300 Hz in the
typically sized listening room. That's because any other location, other

than a
corner will fail to excite some room modes and put holes in the sound

pressure.


My point is that in a smaller space, like a car, that inflection point is
raised by roughly an octave to 60-600 Hz.

In either space, room or car, below the lowest axial mode the speaker (if

it
has adequate displacement) directly pressurizes the space. There are no

modes
(standing waves) below this frequency. What happens with the "Eddie

Effect" as
described on his web-site is that a single wall replection can cause a

response
cancellation BUT NOT at or below the pressure zone.

In my experiment that occured at 188 Hz and with the woofer facing the

rear of
the vehicle. Boundary cancellation is well known and has been for years.

But it
doesn't happen at the excitation frequency.



  #64   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Luke Hague wrote:

Why then if it's not the reason that Eddie and I both feel is the truth, how
come it still increases bass when the subs are turned around?


Tom says
1) it cant happen!
2) if we think it does happen we dont know the defintion of bass and its really
highs that get louder, not bass...

ha ha ha

What else I have to add would be that I see you never took physics, and
that if you used a corvette that it really wouldn't make a difference anyhow
because there is little trunk space.


Think about how small a corvette is on the interior, I can barely get my
fat ass into one, so just how much can the woofer box in the back actually
be moved for the test???

We can scoot a box around in a normal car trunk several feet, in Toms
Corvette piece of **** I would doubt there is enough room to move a box
around more then a few inches...

EVERYONE here can plainly see, but dont expect a reversal
from Tom, he wrote a magazine article for the kiddies and it would
be too big of an embarasment for him to admit he is wrong now..

(human nature I think)

Eddie Runner
http://www.installer.com/tech/



  #65   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Eddie Runner wrote:

Luke Hague wrote:

Why then if it's not the reason that Eddie and I both feel is the truth,

how
come it still increases bass when the subs are turned around?


Tom says
1) it cant happen!
2) if we think it does happen we dont know the defintion of bass and its
really
highs that get louder, not bass...

ha ha ha

What else I have to add would be that I see you never took physics, and
that if you used a corvette that it really wouldn't make a difference

anyhow
because there is little trunk space.


My 2001 C5 has 25 cubic feet of hatch space which is larger and has more
movement space than most trunks.

But so what, according to Eddie all the room you need is enough to put the box
in the car and close the boot. Then you can put it in backward.

But, I've done a full analysis of the effect including max SPL at the drivers
seat between 10 and 60 Hz with the enclosure face facing the frotn of the
vehicle and with it facing the rear. Plus a set of full-band frequency response
measurements with the enclosure faced either way.

The ONLY thing that happens is that an interference effect at 188 Hz can be
seen when the woofer face is facing the rear of the car.


Think about how small a corvette is on the interior, I can barely get my
fat ass into one, so just how much can the woofer box in the back actually
be moved for the test???


3 feet front to back and 4 feet side to side.


We can scoot a box around in a normal car trunk several feet, in Toms
Corvette piece of **** I would doubt there is enough room to move a box
around more then a few inches...

EVERYONE here can plainly see, but dont expect a reversal
from Tom, he wrote a magazine article for the kiddies and it would
be too big of an embarasment for him to admit he is wrong now..

(human nature I think)

Eddie Runner
http://www.installer.com/tech/

It's human nature for you to continue to posture but not put your claims to the
test. You are simply very wrong which can be shown through a simple experiment
with the variables controlled. This I have done before and I did it again in
the past few days and the experimental evidence shows you are wrong.

A single boundary cancellation will occur in a car but it never happens below
the lowest axial mode of the vehicle interior space. In a compact car like an
Integra, CRX, Civic, Spirit, Camaro, Corvette or even a full size X-Cab pick-up
this cut-off point is 60 Hz.

In a Pontiac Bonneville its a few Hz lower. In a full size van it may be as low
as 45 Hz.

But, no matter what car you're using this is related to the volume of the
interior and it doesn't cancel deep bass and a single or mulitple boundary
cancellation always occurs at frequencies above the lowest axial mode.





  #66   Report Post  
Luke Hague
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Exactly Eddie, the guy doesn't understand. Even if I were to drive the
facts at him even harder by showing data, not just from my car but from my
friend or my parents, he would still say we're wrong.

90% of the audiphile must be wrong in his case then.....

I'm really sick of trying to explain this to him, he's either stubborn
or really stupid.

"Eddie Runner" wrote in message
...
Luke Hague wrote:

Why then if it's not the reason that Eddie and I both feel is the truth,

how
come it still increases bass when the subs are turned around?


Tom says
1) it cant happen!
2) if we think it does happen we dont know the defintion of bass and its

really
highs that get louder, not bass...

ha ha ha

What else I have to add would be that I see you never took physics,

and
that if you used a corvette that it really wouldn't make a difference

anyhow
because there is little trunk space.


Think about how small a corvette is on the interior, I can barely get my
fat ass into one, so just how much can the woofer box in the back actually
be moved for the test???

We can scoot a box around in a normal car trunk several feet, in Toms
Corvette piece of **** I would doubt there is enough room to move a box
around more then a few inches...

EVERYONE here can plainly see, but dont expect a reversal
from Tom, he wrote a magazine article for the kiddies and it would
be too big of an embarasment for him to admit he is wrong now..

(human nature I think)

Eddie Runner
http://www.installer.com/tech/





  #67   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

TOM, Your all WORDS.....

Lets SEE your data!!!

When I have a claim I scan it and put it on the website for all to see..
Right now I dont have a car here with a woofer box and the installers in
the shop have been too busy for me to push them outa the way to do
some tests..

WE DID DO SOME tests for TeamROCS back when your crappy
article came out several years ago... We used Foggys woofer box in his
car and we posted the data WITH PICTURES on a web site back then.
I was hoping Foggy or some of the other folks that may remember that
test or might still have the pictures would happen by here, but I guess not.

If I get some free time and the shops not too full I will do some documented
tests with plenty of pictures and credible witnesses for you to interview.

Your just not worth it to me to DROP EVERYTHING right this instant
though... Kinda like the ACOUSTICS BOOK... I take a few days to
produce it and your actin like I was a big liar when I said I owned the book.
(GOTCHA THERE DIDNT I) ha ha ha

Lets see the pictures of what your doing!!!!!!!!!!!
Your all talk, how do we know your not just TALKING BULL****
when you tell us you made THREE MORE TESTS yesterday???

LETS SEE EM!

Eddie Runner
So far we have seen NOTHING from Tom except his words, I have
made 3 web pages full of scans and quotes from REAL BOOKS!

Nousaine wrote:

Eddie Runner wrote:

Luke Hague wrote:

Why then if it's not the reason that Eddie and I both feel is the truth,

how
come it still increases bass when the subs are turned around?


Tom says
1) it cant happen!
2) if we think it does happen we dont know the defintion of bass and its
really
highs that get louder, not bass...

ha ha ha

What else I have to add would be that I see you never took physics, and
that if you used a corvette that it really wouldn't make a difference

anyhow
because there is little trunk space.



  #68   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Eddie Runner wrote:



TOM, Your all WORDS.....

Lets SEE your data!!!

When I have a claim I scan it and put it on the website for all to see..


Why no data there then?

Right now I dont have a car here with a woofer box and the installers in
the shop have been too busy for me to push them outa the way to do
some tests..

WE DID DO SOME tests for TeamROCS back when your crappy
article came out several years ago... We used Foggys woofer box in his
car and we posted the data WITH PICTURES on a web site back then.
I was hoping Foggy or some of the other folks that may remember that
test or might still have the pictures would happen by here, but I guess not.


My article has been printed for all to see. The reason you have no data is
because real data would not support your position.

For those who have been reading I response mapped a MTX9500 in a 1.25-foot
enclosure with MLSSA and a SPL test @ 10% distortion with the woofer facing the
rear of the car and with it facing the front.

There was a deep notch at 188 Hz with the box facing the front of the vehicle
that was absent when the enclosure faced the front of the vehicle. I rotated
the enclosure so that the face of the driver occupied the same plane in both
cases. Otherwise response was within 0.5 dB in either case below 60 Hz. There
were 2-4 dB variations at 100 Hz when the speaker was rotated but nothing
large.

SPL capability when measured from 10 to 62 Hz showed less than 0.5 dB
difference and using my 3 bass tracks max SPL was 0.7 dB higher when the woofer
faced the front of the vehicle. These differences are well within the
measurment tolerances with tests of this nature.

I also tested 10,12 and 15-inch woofers in the past 3 days taking care to
measure response with the enclosure facing front/rear/left/right. It was
possible to make minor changes at 100 Hz by woofer direction but nothing that
was dramatic. It simply changed the amount of EQ needed at that frequency.




If I get some free time and the shops not too full I will do some documented
tests with plenty of pictures and credible witnesses for you to interview.

Your just not worth it to me to DROP EVERYTHING right this instant
though... Kinda like the ACOUSTICS BOOK... I take a few days to
produce it and your actin like I was a big liar when I said I owned the book.
(GOTCHA THERE DIDNT I) ha ha ha


Of course you don't have time. You're too FOS to do it right.


Lets see the pictures of what your doing!!!!!!!!!!!
Your all talk, how do we know your not just TALKING BULL****
when you tell us you made THREE MORE TESTS yesterday???

LETS SEE EM!


Let's see some data from you Eddie. All you have is a cartoon.


Eddie Runner
So far we have seen NOTHING from Tom except his words, I have
made 3 web pages full of scans and quotes from REAL BOOKS!


But no real data. All BS and Bluster. And the copies of Baranek just made my
point.


  #70   Report Post  
Eddie Runner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

ITS WAY MORE than you have posted...
ha ha ha

Nousaine wrote:


Plus I have posted data on these three web pages, you have posted NOTHING
except your lying words... ha ha

http://installer.com/tech/aiming.html
http://installer.com/tech/baranek.html
http://www.installer.com/tech/standingwave.html
http://installer.com/tech/freqandwave.html

You the one that hasnt posted any data!!

Eddie


There's no experimental data there.




  #71   Report Post  
Fat Bastard
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Tom, you keep saying you have tested this, and you say you are right because
you tested it, but yet you have not PROVEN anything because you have not
SHOWN us those tests. For them to be valid tests we would need pictures,
documentation, and WITNESSES to each stage of your test. Otherwise, your
words are just that, words. Words of a man proven wrong consistantly by
Eddie Runner. You say one thing, and argue it, and use obscure references,
and then when Eddie shows you the error in your argument by posting actual
pictures of the references you are using to prove your side, and showing
that they support his argument, you immediately change your tune, and start
arguing in another direction.

You can talk (argue) all you want, but you have not proven anything, any
further than everyone else here has by merely SAYING that they've had z
results from doing x test. Dozens of people have already stated that they
have had significant increases in bass output when turning their enclosures
around, but you say it doesn't happen. Are you calling everyone liars, or
just saying that they are hearing things? They aren't making it up, and they
certainly didn't DREAM it (they weren't just hoping so much that it would
increase that they imagined that it did, trust me), so how do you explain
it? I guess maybe you define bass differently than the average consumer.....

Let's make up our minds already.

Although, I could care less what Tom Nuisance has to say, since we know the
REALITY of the whole situation since we're the ones doing the real world
testing every day, and we DO notice the increase when switching the box
around.

I know we're mainly focusing on sealed enclosures at this point, but I have
a little story to provide as well, and I will share it in just a moment. My
story involves ported enclosures though, and while it doesn't necessarily
support Eddies (or anyone elses) view 100%, it certainly doesn't support
Toms either. In my case the results varied depending upon what change I
made, and proved that there was a difference between forward firing and rear
firing, but that there were other variables to contend with.

Here goes:

Ok, I have a 1994 Honda Accord LX with no major interior modifications,
other than I cut the back deck to port through. I started out with 3 JL
8w6's in a box with 2 4" ports of the appropriate length for this setup, and
an Xtant 2140c running them (bridged), with the subs firing FORWARD into the
back of the backseats, ports extended up so as to pass through the holes cut
in the back deck. I drove around a while with it like this, and it sounded
great, but I wanted a change, and wanted to show off the subs from the rear,
so, I turned the enclosure around, and changed NOTHING else. I merely
rotated the box so that the subs fired to the rear, and the ports still
fired up through the back deck. The sound (bass response) was much more
muddy, and the response was lacking greatly. Before I could play anything
from about 33hz up and it was pretty responsive, after switching the box
around so the subs fired back, I lost quite a bit of the low end response,
and some of the higher frequencies were lacking as well. I think from that
point I noticed a huge difference from 33-47hz, but from 48-63hz wasn't too
bad, and from 64-100hz was sorta ****ty as well. So, I decided to experiment
further with things, and I merely swapped the 2 4" ports out (removed the
top of the enclosure) with a single slot port, still firing up through the
back deck like before, which of course was in a slightly different location
than the 2 4" ports (2 4" were about 6" apart centered across the back deck,
the slot port was now dead center in the back deck). The response improved
greatly with the subs firing to the rear, and everything was almost as good
as when I had the subs firing forward with the 2 4" ports. So, out of
curiosity I rotated the box back around so the subs fired forward into the
back of the back seats. This muffled things again, and made the response
very similar to the 2 4" port setup with subs firing back.

So, I have not found it completely true that firing subs BACK entirely
improves the "bass", but I HAVE, most DEFINITELY, found that changing the
position of the enclosure, and the direction the subs fire, makes a HUGE
difference in output, perceived or otherwise, and that there are often other
factors (ports) involved that can also greatly affect the output.

The car was only metered twice during the entire time these subs were
installed, once with the 2 4" ports with subs forward (the best sounding
setup), and once with the slot port with subs firing back (almost as good as
the first setup), and the difference between them was - 2 4" ports with subs
forward, 138db, slot port with subs firing back 132.3db. So, firing subs
back in this case lowered my max spl, and the perceived loudness and QUALITY
of the "bass" was quite a bit different. Shortly after I removed this setup
completely, and slapped 6 JL 8w6's into a custom fiberglass enclosure in the
spare tire well (well, extending up beyond the tire well of course), but
never metered it, and shortly thereafter removed everything from the car to
start other modifications, and have yet to reinstall anything.

So, as you can see, in my case firing BACK did NOT really increase the bass
at all, and would not prove either Tom or Eddies theory, but this is just
ONE CAR and one particular enclosure design (well 2 if you count the change
to the ports). This only shows that there IS a difference when enclosures
are moved around. Anyone that argues otherwise is a complete fool. We've
seen SPL vehicles that did one #, and simply sliding the enclosure back a
couple of inches increase the output greatly (.5-3db, and while that doesn't
sound like a lot, it is when we're talking 168+db already).

I guess one of these years when I care enough about car audio again to
actually install anything in one of my vehicles, like maybe my Range Rover,
I'll do a little experiment on this very subject to see if we notice a
difference.

I would say Tom is definitely not "right" though....

Eddie is an annoying bugger, but he's usually spot on (or damn close) in his
information, and he's certainly forgotten more about audio (or has he?!)
than most of us will ever learn. Remember, he's not only one to STUDY
everything he can get his hands on, he's also a hands-on type of guy that
has applied most of these theories in his day to day business for over 30
years. He's an old MF! Did anyone mention he was a figure skater once in his
life? hahaha



"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
Eddie Runner wrote:

Luke Hague wrote:

Why then if it's not the reason that Eddie and I both feel is the

truth,
how
come it still increases bass when the subs are turned around?


Tom says
1) it cant happen!
2) if we think it does happen we dont know the defintion of bass and its
really
highs that get louder, not bass...

ha ha ha

What else I have to add would be that I see you never took physics,

and
that if you used a corvette that it really wouldn't make a difference

anyhow
because there is little trunk space.


My 2001 C5 has 25 cubic feet of hatch space which is larger and has more
movement space than most trunks.

But so what, according to Eddie all the room you need is enough to put the

box
in the car and close the boot. Then you can put it in backward.

But, I've done a full analysis of the effect including max SPL at the

drivers
seat between 10 and 60 Hz with the enclosure face facing the frotn of the
vehicle and with it facing the rear. Plus a set of full-band frequency

response
measurements with the enclosure faced either way.

The ONLY thing that happens is that an interference effect at 188 Hz can

be
seen when the woofer face is facing the rear of the car.


Think about how small a corvette is on the interior, I can barely get my
fat ass into one, so just how much can the woofer box in the back

actually
be moved for the test???


3 feet front to back and 4 feet side to side.


We can scoot a box around in a normal car trunk several feet, in Toms
Corvette piece of **** I would doubt there is enough room to move a box
around more then a few inches...

EVERYONE here can plainly see, but dont expect a reversal
from Tom, he wrote a magazine article for the kiddies and it would
be too big of an embarasment for him to admit he is wrong now..

(human nature I think)

Eddie Runner
http://www.installer.com/tech/

It's human nature for you to continue to posture but not put your claims

to the
test. You are simply very wrong which can be shown through a simple

experiment
with the variables controlled. This I have done before and I did it again

in
the past few days and the experimental evidence shows you are wrong.

A single boundary cancellation will occur in a car but it never happens

below
the lowest axial mode of the vehicle interior space. In a compact car like

an
Integra, CRX, Civic, Spirit, Camaro, Corvette or even a full size X-Cab

pick-up
this cut-off point is 60 Hz.

In a Pontiac Bonneville its a few Hz lower. In a full size van it may be

as low
as 45 Hz.

But, no matter what car you're using this is related to the volume of the
interior and it doesn't cancel deep bass and a single or mulitple boundary
cancellation always occurs at frequencies above the lowest axial mode.





  #72   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

"Fat *******" wrote:

Tom, you keep saying you have tested this, and you say you are right because
you tested it, but yet you have not PROVEN anything because you have not
SHOWN us those tests. For them to be valid tests we would need pictures,
documentation, and WITNESSES to each stage of your test. Otherwise, your
words are just that, words.


So what is Eddie's argument except words. Its his claim. I see no data, no
pictures, no witnessess, noreplication.

I simply conducted a short experiment and found different results. Indeed even
you posted something below that is in disagreement with his claim.

Words of a man proven wrong consistantly by
Eddie Runner. You say one thing, and argue it, and use obscure references,
and then when Eddie shows you the error in your argument by posting actual
pictures of the references you are using to prove your side, and showing
that they support his argument, you immediately change your tune, and start
arguing in another direction.


Actually the pictures from Baranek didn't support Eddies argument.



You can talk (argue) all you want, but you have not proven anything, any
further than everyone else here has by merely SAYING that they've had z
results from doing x test. Dozens of people have already stated that they
have had significant increases in bass output when turning their enclosures
around, but you say it doesn't happen. Are you calling everyone liars, or
just saying that they are hearing things? They aren't making it up, and they
certainly didn't DREAM it (they weren't just hoping so much that it would
increase that they imagined that it did, trust me), so how do you explain
it? I guess maybe you define bass differently than the average consumer.....


Dozens of people get abducted by Aliens everyday too. Many people have seen
BigFoot. Many people believe that hot water freezes faster than cold water. So
what?

In my explanation I define low bass as 10-62 Hz. The subwoofer region. Some
will consider anything up to 200 Hz as bass. That's fine with me as long as you
specify the frequencies of interest.


Let's make up our minds already.

Although, I could care less what Tom Nuisance has to say


Next time supply some pictures and witnesses to verify your anecdote

But no one has to make up their minds. No one has supplied any data that
reversing the woofer direction alone changes anything below the lowest axial
mode in a car.

Also your SPL readings mentioned are pretty much frequency independent. A
wide-open Sound Level Meter reading could simply be encompassing any
frequencies; they are not frequency specific unless the excitation stimulus is.
For example when I test maximum SPL of a woofer system in the car I use a
6.5-cycle ramped sine burst at 1/3 octave preferred frequencies and measure
both distortion and SPL at those specific frequencies.

  #73   Report Post  
Fat Bastard
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Dozens of people get abducted by Aliens everyday too. Many people have
seen
BigFoot. Many people believe that hot water freezes faster than cold

water. So
what?


So, we've seen evidence of at least one of these things, what does that have
to do with this topic? lol

In my explanation I define low bass as 10-62 Hz. The subwoofer region.

Some
will consider anything up to 200 Hz as bass. That's fine with me as long

as you
specify the frequencies of interest.


I think the majority of people define bass from 120hz and below (some would
probably consider 200hz and down though, as you mentioned).

Also your SPL readings mentioned are pretty much frequency independent. A
wide-open Sound Level Meter reading could simply be encompassing any
frequencies; they are not frequency specific unless the excitation

stimulus is.
For example when I test maximum SPL of a woofer system in the car I use a
6.5-cycle ramped sine burst at 1/3 octave preferred frequencies and

measure
both distortion and SPL at those specific frequencies.


When I test SPL I typically test using a single tone, and repeat the same
tone at the same volume (MAX) for each test, so as not to have anything else
taint the results. I build and compete in SPL competitions, and we have
definitely seen increases by moving the enclosures around, but have no
reason to sit and document every aspect of it (until now, but of course
things have died in Arizona, so I have not been working on anything in quite
some time). One of these days I might break out one of my vehicles and do a
couple of controlled tests just to satisfy you though, but by the time I get
around to it this thread will probably be long forgotten. It doesn't really
matter though since 99% of those responding have stated that they DID, and
DO notice a difference when flipping the box around, and that is ALL that
matters really, to them, and to myself. If there is a perceived increase,
and the sound is more enjoyable to them, that's all that matters. Whether
you think it is true or not, it is a FACT that it happens.

If you want to use examples, I can also use the example of my 86.5 nissan
with solid side shell, walk-through, with 2 18's in it. With subs halfway
back in the bed firing forward it ROCKED, but I noticed an increase simply
by moving the subs further back in the bed. If I had them turned around
facing the rear, but centered in the bed, it would TWANG a bit more on the
outside (tailgate would vibrate) but still had a lot of output. If I slid
the enclosure back, it got louder (or at least it appeared to, but of course
we never metered it, this was back in the late 80's early 90's and I never
cared about metering anything). If we had the enclosure up near the front of
the bed, with the subs firing forward, it sounded ok, and hit pretty good,
but not as much as with the subs firing back, but enclosure in the same
position (front of bed). It was just one of those strange things that
happens.

We also had an 89 Prelude with a bandpass enclosure, firing forward into the
seat, and it didn't sound nearly as loud, or as good as when the port fired
to the rear, or towards any corner.

We took a customers 91 cutlass supreme that had an enclosure with 2 12's
firing into the back seat, and flipped the enclosure around and he noticed
an increase in the bass output as well. We did NOT tell the customer we were
changing anything, but he ASKED what we did because it sounded louder to
him. I told him I was just screwing around with his system and flipped the
box around to see how it'd sound. His trunk flexed a lot more, so we ended
up having to dynamat the hell out of it, but he was much more happy with the
enclosure that way, and refused to switch it back (I wanted to because it
sounded like ass outside the vehicle with it that way).

My dads olds cutlass supreme with 2 Boston Pro 10's running off an RF 200ix
sounded pretty good with subs firing forward into the rear seat area, and ok
with them firing up, but when we rotated the box so it fired towards the
back it increased the output greatly, and he noticed it, because he asked me
to change whatever it was I did because it was then TOO MUCH for his tastes.
Didn't change anything else except rotate the enclosure.

Trust me, it happens, but you are so caught up in only performing tests and
looking at meters, and #'s, that you can't, or WON'T see what goes on in the
REAL WORLD of installation. Your tests show that there is a difference, in
your car, albeit a small amount, but that is not representative of ALL
vehicles, or all listening choices. Everyone is different, and a mic cannot
pick up differences that the human BODY can (trust me, it's not all in the
SOUND here, it's in the FEEL as well with most people). Have you not ever
had a system that tickled your ears with it setup one way, but you change
the position of the box and it now hurt your chest or you felt it in your
stomach more than in your ears? I know I have, and I bet 100's of others in
this newsgroup have too.




  #74   Report Post  
Lex
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Ok I guess it is time to voice in on the subject.
1. Just because the Interior volume of the Covette is the same is an integ
hatch doesn't mean it shares the same acoustical properties. Fiberglass
body, differents angles in the trunk space, ect ect ect effect this too, its
not like we are bouncing signal off of a solid wall.

2. when it comes to what sounds good (not talking about spl/sq comps or
anything else) the best meter I am equiped wiith is my ears. Make a system
run a flat line on an RTA and see what you think it sounds like..
considering a flat RTA would be considered perfect in many cases, but most
would agree that it sounds like ****, and this goes into the same principal.
I hear more bass (and yes this is using a 60 hz test tone) in my system with
the subs firing rearward than when they fire frontward, and the SPL tests I
have done go to prove this. I also Notice more bass when I don't have my
equipment for work in my trunk, which effectively forms a big ass wall
acrossed the trunk. Maybe I will have to go down to the local shop and get
a scope and an rta and all that other fancy **** out just to help prove what
we all know... Moving the sub box can cause noticeable differences in bass
output.

"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Fat *******" wrote:

Tom, you keep saying you have tested this, and you say you are right

because
you tested it, but yet you have not PROVEN anything because you have not
SHOWN us those tests. For them to be valid tests we would need pictures,
documentation, and WITNESSES to each stage of your test. Otherwise, your
words are just that, words.


So what is Eddie's argument except words. Its his claim. I see no data, no
pictures, no witnessess, noreplication.

I simply conducted a short experiment and found different results. Indeed

even
you posted something below that is in disagreement with his claim.

Words of a man proven wrong consistantly by
Eddie Runner. You say one thing, and argue it, and use obscure

references,
and then when Eddie shows you the error in your argument by posting

actual
pictures of the references you are using to prove your side, and showing
that they support his argument, you immediately change your tune, and

start
arguing in another direction.


Actually the pictures from Baranek didn't support Eddies argument.



You can talk (argue) all you want, but you have not proven anything, any
further than everyone else here has by merely SAYING that they've had z
results from doing x test. Dozens of people have already stated that they
have had significant increases in bass output when turning their

enclosures
around, but you say it doesn't happen. Are you calling everyone liars, or
just saying that they are hearing things? They aren't making it up, and

they
certainly didn't DREAM it (they weren't just hoping so much that it would
increase that they imagined that it did, trust me), so how do you explain
it? I guess maybe you define bass differently than the average

consumer.....

Dozens of people get abducted by Aliens everyday too. Many people have

seen
BigFoot. Many people believe that hot water freezes faster than cold

water. So
what?

In my explanation I define low bass as 10-62 Hz. The subwoofer region.

Some
will consider anything up to 200 Hz as bass. That's fine with me as long

as you
specify the frequencies of interest.


Let's make up our minds already.

Although, I could care less what Tom Nuisance has to say


Next time supply some pictures and witnesses to verify your anecdote

But no one has to make up their minds. No one has supplied any data that
reversing the woofer direction alone changes anything below the lowest

axial
mode in a car.

Also your SPL readings mentioned are pretty much frequency independent. A
wide-open Sound Level Meter reading could simply be encompassing any
frequencies; they are not frequency specific unless the excitation

stimulus is.
For example when I test maximum SPL of a woofer system in the car I use a
6.5-cycle ramped sine burst at 1/3 octave preferred frequencies and

measure
both distortion and SPL at those specific frequencies.



  #75   Report Post  
Lex
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

define supra-bass frequencys... as I said I used a 60 hz test tone..
assuming the tone was clear.. then 60 hz should be the only frequency that
is being produced, which is the tone you are claiming this does not happen
at.
"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Lex" wrote:

Ok I guess it is time to voice in on the subject.
1. Just because the Interior volume of the Covette is the same is an

integ
hatch doesn't mean it shares the same acoustical properties. Fiberglass
body, differents angles in the trunk space, ect ect ect effect this too,

its
not like we are bouncing signal off of a solid wall.


Corvette's have a steel uni-body. So the internal acoustics are quite

similar
to other compact cars. The reason I know this is I've had a chance to

review
the transfer functions of 150 vehicles measured by an auto company AND

I've
owned both a Corvette and an Integra.


2. when it comes to what sounds good (not talking about spl/sq comps or
anything else) the best meter I am equiped wiith is my ears. Make a

system
run a flat line on an RTA and see what you think it sounds like..
considering a flat RTA would be considered perfect in many cases, but

most
would agree that it sounds like ****, and this goes into the same

principal.

Sure; this is a known deal. If you EQ a speaker flat in its direct field

it
will show a gradually falling response measured in the far-field or

listening
position.

We know this and it doesn't affect the issue here.

I hear more bass (and yes this is using a 60 hz test tone) in my system

with
the subs firing rearward than when they fire frontward, and the SPL tests

I
have done go to prove this.


Data please.

I also Notice more bass when I don't have my
equipment for work in my trunk, which effectively forms a big ass wall
acrossed the trunk. Maybe I will have to go down to the local shop and

get
a scope and an rta and all that other fancy **** out just to help prove

what
we all know... Moving the sub box can cause noticeable differences in

bass
output.


Only at supra-bass frequences.


"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Fat *******"
wrote:

Tom, you keep saying you have tested this, and you say you are right

because
you tested it, but yet you have not PROVEN anything because you have

not
SHOWN us those tests. For them to be valid tests we would need

pictures,
documentation, and WITNESSES to each stage of your test. Otherwise,

your
words are just that, words.

So what is Eddie's argument except words. Its his claim. I see no data,

no
pictures, no witnessess, noreplication.

I simply conducted a short experiment and found different results.

Indeed
even
you posted something below that is in disagreement with his claim.

Words of a man proven wrong consistantly by
Eddie Runner. You say one thing, and argue it, and use obscure

references,
and then when Eddie shows you the error in your argument by posting

actual
pictures of the references you are using to prove your side, and

showing
that they support his argument, you immediately change your tune, and

start
arguing in another direction.

Actually the pictures from Baranek didn't support Eddies argument.



You can talk (argue) all you want, but you have not proven anything,

any
further than everyone else here has by merely SAYING that they've had

z
results from doing x test. Dozens of people have already stated that

they
have had significant increases in bass output when turning their

enclosures
around, but you say it doesn't happen. Are you calling everyone liars,

or
just saying that they are hearing things? They aren't making it up,

and
they
certainly didn't DREAM it (they weren't just hoping so much that it

would
increase that they imagined that it did, trust me), so how do you

explain
it? I guess maybe you define bass differently than the average

consumer.....

Dozens of people get abducted by Aliens everyday too. Many people have

seen
BigFoot. Many people believe that hot water freezes faster than cold

water. So
what?

In my explanation I define low bass as 10-62 Hz. The subwoofer region.

Some
will consider anything up to 200 Hz as bass. That's fine with me as

long
as you
specify the frequencies of interest.


Let's make up our minds already.

Although, I could care less what Tom Nuisance has to say

Next time supply some pictures and witnesses to verify your anecdote

But no one has to make up their minds. No one has supplied any data

that
reversing the woofer direction alone changes anything below the lowest

axial
mode in a car.

Also your SPL readings mentioned are pretty much frequency independent.

A
wide-open Sound Level Meter reading could simply be encompassing any
frequencies; they are not frequency specific unless the excitation

stimulus is.
For example when I test maximum SPL of a woofer system in the car I use

a
6.5-cycle ramped sine burst at 1/3 octave preferred frequencies and

measure
both distortion and SPL at those specific frequencies.


Isn't it interesting that neither this poster nor Eddie has anything BUT
anecdote to bolster their position?





  #76   Report Post  
Soundfreak03
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

define supra-bass frequencys... as I said I used a 60 hz test tone..
assuming the tone was clear.. then 60 hz should be the only frequency that
is being produced, which is the tone you are claiming this does not happen
at.


Data please.



You first Insane, urm uh Nousaine.

  #78   Report Post  
Fat Bastard
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

So, we've seen evidence of at least one of these things, what does that
have
to do with this topic? lol


Which one "of those things?"


Aliens of course.... j/k The hot water freezing faster than cold. We've
seen experiments on this, and it is true. Or at least it CAN BE, in the
tests we've seen. Still has nothing to do with this topic. lol


So you have nothing but anecdotal evidence to support your conjecture. I
figured as much.


Tom, you continue to tell everyone else that they have nothing but anecdotal
evidence, but yet your evidence is exactly the same. You are merely TELLING
US that you did these tests, but have not PROVEN them to us, so what's to
say you are doing anything more than we are? What is to say you aren't
LIEING (as Eddie would spell it) to us just to protect your reputation?

Well if that's true why don't I see any contradictory evidence?


multiple people reporting that they have experienced it bears more weight
with me as "contradictory evidence" than YOU merely saying it can't be true.
You have not provided one shred of evidence to contradict what everyone else
says. You gave #'s, but you didn't SHOW any pics or evidence of such. At
least Eddie has posted page after page of information to contradict your
statements. What makes your word any better than the people that have
commented on the subject in this thread? NOTHING. You may THINK your word is
better because you are Mr. Magazine, but that doesn't sway me at all. I'm
not impressed with you just because you write for a magazine. I know
hundreds of people that write for these rags, and I can say that a large
percentage of them are biased about what they write, and quite often
"stretch" the truth to suit their advertisers, or what their bosses want.
Many of them are just not bright enough to carry on a conversation with
toast, let alone write for the magazines they write for.... Not saying you
fit that category, so don't think that was aimed at you.

If 10 or more people say they've experienced it, and only you say it doesn't
happen, who is right? I think I'd take the opinions of the MAJORITY over the
one that doesn't agree.

And your recount is simply an anecdote. There are plenty of those

describing
alien abductions in great detail too.


I don't see a majority of people saying they've been abducted by aliens,
while a minority say it can't happen, so your "anecdote" doesn't quite jive
here. In this subject I see the majority ruling that there IS a noticable
difference when switching the box around, and only ONE person stating that
it doesn't happen, and can't happen. So thousands of people are wrong, while
one is right? HAHAHA yeah, I'll believe that one.

OK; at what frequencies? "Louder" is a pretty wide term. I can turn an un
lowpassed woofer arounf facing the driver and it will sound "louder"

simply
because it has more high frequencies; IOW it "is" louder but not at bass
frequencies.


Does it matter? Let's use an example of an SPL vehicle that has NO mid/high
frequency transducers at all. This person does a sweep to see where their
peak frequency is, and then they play only that tone during BURPS to get
their max SPL #. They then decide they want to try to increase the output so
they simply move the enclosure around a little bit in hopes it makes a
difference, and sure enough, they burp the same frequency, using the same
exact disc, same track, etc., using the same exact system settings (volume
maxed out, gains adjusted earlier and never touched again during subsequent
tests, same head unit, same temperature, same everything except the sub box
has been moved), and they have since increase their output by .5-3db. They
also HEAR (or think they hear) a noticable difference (which is corroberated
by their higher #'s)? Does this support YOUR theory that it doesn't happen?
Ask anyone that has ever competed in SPL competitions if they've tried even
the most minor little things and either gained, or lost output, and I can
promise you they will tell you that they HAVE seen/heard it. This is the
real world Tom, not some laboratory experiment.

If I can find time, and the energy (it's too f'n hot here in AZ right now to
be outside), I'll try to setup one of my vehicles with a single amp, running
one of my enclosures, NO frequencies above 100hz, and will not touch
anything other than the enclosure to change its position, and try to get
some readings for you. However, since I sold my LinearX to a buddy in
California (who has also experienced the same "phenomenon" in his SPL van,
that you say cannot happen), I will have to find someone else with a meter
to use. I will use the same disc, and the same track each time so as to
satisfy you, and we'll see if there is NO INCREASE in output. Maybe I can
get a buddy of mine to bring his meter by to do some quick tests for you one
of these days. If I wasn't in the process of rebuilding/swapping an engine
in my Range Rover, I'd have a lot more time on my hands, but right now is a
bad time to battle you with printed data, and I'll admit that much. This
gives you time to create a bunch of pics, and charts, and other information
to post for comparison, and to support YOUR theory, instead of just "telling
us" that your theory is correct.

"He noticed" is a pretty imprecise term. On what material; under what
conditions? It's pretty easy to play the same music segment twice to

people and
get them to describe 'differences' in great detail.


Same disc, same track, same everything. However, the difference in TIME is a
factor that could muddle the data. Because he had listened to it 45 minutes
earlier, and then listened again when he returned, there was enough time
lost in between that he may not "remember" how loud it was before, but he
drove around with the same car, and same system for months before this, and
was always playing the same crap (these are youngsters we're talking about
here) over and over, so I think he'd be able to tell if there was some
difference with his system before and after.

"Louder"???? What does that have to do with bass? I can make any system

sound
'louder' by turning up the volume control.


The volume knob was never in question in any of these cases. When you MAX
the volume there is no variation from one test to another. Think about it.

If nothing else changed, then why did he notice a difference? Hmmm, maybe
because there WAS ONE? Or maybe I hypnotised him without knowing it, into
thinking it was louder so that I'd continue to get all his business in the
future. Maybe that's it.

I told him I was just screwing around with his system and flipped the
box around to see how it'd sound. His trunk flexed a lot more, so we

ended
up having to dynamat the hell out of it, but he was much more happy with

the
enclosure that way, and refused to switch it back (I wanted to because it
sounded like ass outside the vehicle with it that way).


Why would anyone care how it sounded outside the vehicle; except the

neighbors?


I guess you don't know any teenagers, and you were never one yourself.....


But of course you didn't specify the crossover frequency, the levels, the
actual frequency response or use any listening bias controls. Again its

like
"old-timers memory" which slowly gets worse over time until that fateful

day
when it improves so much that the subject becomes able to 'remember' stuff

that
didn't actually happen


Well, it's not alzheimers I assure you. I'm only 33, and the memory is still
pretty sharp. What were we talking about again?

Seriously though, when you listen to the exact same tracks on the exact same
discs, all the damn time, and you always have the volume set to exactly the
same # (or maxed out in the case of the kids mentioned earlier, or any of my
SPL vehicles), and nothing else changed (no eq's involved, no crossovers
adjusted at any time, NOTHING), then I'd say it's pretty obvious where the
change occurs.

Of course, BUT neither you or Eddie has delivered any contrary evidence.

You
both have conjecture but no data.


Everyone has provided contrary evidence that is just as strong as yours. You
use your WORDS, and so do we. You have not posted any EVIDENCE of anything
Tom, that is my point. You SAY you have it, but there has been no PROOF.
Your word is not good enough to me, just as mine or Eddies, or the dozens of
others that have posted on this and the other threads here, are not good
enough for you. However, if there are 10 people saying yes, and only one
saying no, I think I'll go with the majority vote.....


Extreme low bass is ALL feel.


Indeed, and these people that have reported that they notice a difference,
probably FELT something, but maybe they heard it too. Maybe that is your
whole argument really... You can't "hear" the difference as everyone has
been saying, but had they said we FEEL the difference, maybe you'd have
responded differently. lol
(note: I was kidding, there is no doubt you'd argue it either way).

No. I set up my systems optimally from the start. In a car it's easy to

get a
system that you can 'feel.' It's much harder to get one that is sonically
balanced through the entire spectrum.


Optimally. In your opinion, yes, but optimal for you is not optimal to Roy
the Ricer, or Bob the Bassfreak, or Ted the Tuner, or Scott the skater...

Remember, most of the respondants here are the type that are TRYING to get
more BASS that they can "hear" or FEEL (if you prefer), and thus they
actually try switching their enclosures around, and every other little thing
they can think of to try and get more output, and every one of them so far
has stated that they DO notice a difference, whether you believe it or not.
Is this mass hysteria or something?

"Aiming" woofers only has an effect at 50 Hz and above in any car


Hmm, earlier it was above 60hz and only noticable at 188hz (I think that's
what I saw, but I haven't read the ENTIRE thread, it's too much BS to trudge
through). Make up your mind.

If there is a difference at 50hz and up, then you should be ready to admit
that everyone that says they noticed a difference, really HAS! Most people
consider "louder bass" anything from about 120hz and down (some may only
consider 100hz and down, others maybe 80hz and down, but the point stands.
There are many levels between 50hz and 120hz that apparently DO make a
difference). Which is it Tom, is it not possible, or is it possible, to hear
a difference?

I've ever
used; these include an Aerostar,


Me too. A 96 Aerostar with a single 10" in a sealed enclosure under the
second row of seats, and eventually moved to the 3rd row, and then back. We
tried lots of locations for that one sub, and they all made noticable
differences to everyone involved. Personally I liked it best with it located
under the 2nd row of seats off to the driver side. It had the best sound in
that location in my opinion. I never had the urge to meter it, or get any
#'s off of it (it wasn't gonna turn any significant #'s anyway, it was just
to add a touch of low end for that system). I've done THOUSANDS of
installations, and many of them had little subtle changes to the enclosure
locations that were noticable in some way, be it better sound, louder,
quieter, whatever. Why would a normal every day installer bother with
testing every single vehicle they work on? We aren't writing articles for
any rag, nor do we care to waste time on all the little BS details and #'s
that people like you want to waste time with, because we can HEAR our
differences, and we know what we LIKE, so we just stick with that.

I know I have, and I bet 100's of others in
this newsgroup have too.


Sure but they're all just anecdotes. I have numbers.


Yeah, I have a # too, it's right between my index finger and my ring finger,
care to count it?

Seriously though, you haven't given us anything more than anecdotal evidence
either in my opinion. You TELL US you have the data, but we hvaen't SEEN the
data. There IS a difference. I know, you are used to just TELLING people
what you want them to hear, and expect nobody to question it, since you are
a writer in a well known magazine, and nobody is to question the greatness
of such a magazine. BAH.


  #79   Report Post  
sl2perfect
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

Eddie is right
--
sl2perfect
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CarAudioForum.com - Usenet Gateway w/over one million posts online!
View this thread: http://www.caraudioforum.com/vbb2/sh...hreadid=149062

  #80   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Subwoofer direction

"Fat *******" wrote:

A long diatribe that trys to make this a popularity contest, claiming that
"thousands" of people support him.

In fact there are only 3 or 4 others who have spoken at all. I'd say that if
you go to a newsgroup for Alien Abduction or the BigFoot crowd you'd find a
'majority' of the opinions one way or another.

But he seems to be offering to do some experimentation and provide some data.
That's a start.


So, we've seen evidence of at least one of these things, what does that

have
to do with this topic? lol


Which one "of those things?"


Aliens of course.... j/k The hot water freezing faster than cold. We've
seen experiments on this, and it is true. Or at least it CAN BE, in the
tests we've seen. Still has nothing to do with this topic. lol


So he believes the hot water freezing faster Myth too. It's all a matter of
heat transfer; pretty straightforward BUT nonetheless lots of people believe
it.

So you have nothing but anecdotal evidence to support your conjecture. I
figured as much.


Tom, you continue to tell everyone else that they have nothing but anecdotal
evidence, but yet your evidence is exactly the same. You are merely TELLING
US that you did these tests, but have not PROVEN them to us, so what's to
say you are doing anything more than we are? What is to say you aren't
LIEING (as Eddie would spell it) to us just to protect your reputation?


I have no reason to lie about it because I haven't convinced my customers they
should pay more labor for me to schootch their enclosure around.


Well if that's true why don't I see any contradictory evidence?


multiple people reporting that they have experienced it bears more weight
with me as "contradictory evidence" than YOU merely saying it can't be true.
You have not provided one shred of evidence to contradict what everyone else
says. You gave #'s, but you didn't SHOW any pics or evidence of such. At
least Eddie has posted page after page of information to contradict your
statements.


Actually Eddie has page after page of conjecture with no real evidence. If he'd
actually do a little investigatory work he'd see that he's wrong.

What makes your word any better than the people that have
commented on the subject in this thread? NOTHING. You may THINK your word is
better because you are Mr. Magazine, but that doesn't sway me at all. I'm
not impressed with you just because you write for a magazine. I know
hundreds of people that write for these rags, and I can say that a large
percentage of them are biased about what they write, and quite often
"stretch" the truth to suit their advertisers, or what their bosses want.
Many of them are just not bright enough to carry on a conversation with
toast, let alone write for the magazines they write for.... Not saying you
fit that category, so don't think that was aimed at you.

If 10 or more people say they've experienced it, and only you say it doesn't
happen, who is right? I think I'd take the opinions of the MAJORITY over the
one that doesn't agree.


So 10 people saying that BigFoot is in the woods is the same as actually
producing one for verification. Truth is not a popularity contest when it comes
to audio.


And your recount is simply an anecdote. There are plenty of those

describing
alien abductions in great detail too.


I don't see a majority of people saying they've been abducted by aliens,


But don't we have to accept the accounts just because they say so?

while a minority say it can't happen, so your "anecdote" doesn't quite jive
here. In this subject I see the majority ruling that there IS a noticable
difference when switching the box around, and only ONE person stating that
it doesn't happen, and can't happen.


What you have is a few people in the install business or who are customers
supporting a popular myth. Happens all the time.

So thousands of people are wrong, while
one is right? HAHAHA yeah, I'll believe that one.


"Thousands" ???? How about a half dozen.


OK; at what frequencies? "Louder" is a pretty wide term. I can turn an un
lowpassed woofer arounf facing the driver and it will sound "louder"

simply
because it has more high frequencies; IOW it "is" louder but not at bass
frequencies.


Does it matter? Let's use an example of an SPL vehicle that has NO mid/high
frequency transducers at all. This person does a sweep to see where their
peak frequency is, and then they play only that tone during BURPS to get
their max SPL #.


Sure and at what frequency does that occur? And yes microphone/driver/enclosure
will affect this but not at subwoofer frequencies UNLESS you consider 100 Hz
and up as "bass." If you do then we all agree that subwoofer direction can
change response here.

They then decide they want to try to increase the output so
they simply move the enclosure around a little bit in hopes it makes a
difference, and sure enough, they burp the same frequency, using the same
exact disc, same track, etc., using the same exact system settings (volume
maxed out, gains adjusted earlier and never touched again during subsequent
tests, same head unit, same temperature, same everything except the sub box
has been moved), and they have since increase their output by .5-3db.


Sure and often they can get changes of this magnitude by running the same test
twice without changing anything at all.

They
also HEAR (or think they hear) a noticable difference (which is corroberated
by their higher #'s)? Does this support YOUR theory that it doesn't happen?


Depends on the frequency.

Ask anyone that has ever competed in SPL competitions if they've tried even
the most minor little things and either gained, or lost output, and I can
promise you they will tell you that they HAVE seen/heard it. This is the
real world Tom, not some laboratory experiment.


The "real" world is full of uncontrolled variables that lead to incorrect
perceptions. It's in the lab where we find exactly what's happening and why.


If I can find time, and the energy (it's too f'n hot here in AZ right now to
be outside), I'll try to setup one of my vehicles with a single amp, running
one of my enclosures, NO frequencies above 100hz, and will not touch
anything other than the enclosure to change its position, and try to get
some readings for you.


It's about time someone besides me did any validation of the concept.

However, since I sold my LinearX to a buddy in
California (who has also experienced the same "phenomenon" in his SPL van,
that you say cannot happen), I will have to find someone else with a meter
to use. I will use the same disc, and the same track each time so as to
satisfy you, and we'll see if there is NO INCREASE in output.


Why not use a test disc and narrow this down to specific frequencies. Don't
forget to hold mic position constant as well.

Maybe I can
get a buddy of mine to bring his meter by to do some quick tests for you one
of these days. If I wasn't in the process of rebuilding/swapping an engine
in my Range Rover, I'd have a lot more time on my hands, but right now is a
bad time to battle you with printed data, and I'll admit that much. This
gives you time to create a bunch of pics, and charts, and other information
to post for comparison, and to support YOUR theory, instead of just "telling
us" that your theory is correct.


Well why do I have to provide evidentiary corroboration when you'll accept
conjecture from anybody who agrees with you?

But, no. I'm the only one who has done any real acoustics work so far and I'm
not going to do any more work to convince anybody who refuses to do the work
for himself.


"He noticed" is a pretty imprecise term. On what material; under what
conditions? It's pretty easy to play the same music segment twice to

people and
get them to describe 'differences' in great detail.


Same disc, same track, same everything. However, the difference in TIME is a
factor that could muddle the data. Because he had listened to it 45 minutes
earlier, and then listened again when he returned, there was enough time
lost in between that he may not "remember" how loud it was before, but he
drove around with the same car, and same system for months before this, and
was always playing the same crap (these are youngsters we're talking about
here) over and over, so I think he'd be able to tell if there was some
difference with his system before and after.


You'd "think"? But it's easily shown that humans will respond "different" 3/4
of the time when given 2 identical sound presentations side by side.


"Louder"???? What does that have to do with bass? I can make any system

sound
'louder' by turning up the volume control.


The volume knob was never in question in any of these cases. When you MAX
the volume there is no variation from one test to another. Think about it.

If nothing else changed, then why did he notice a difference? Hmmm, maybe
because there WAS ONE? Or maybe I hypnotised him without knowing it, into
thinking it was louder so that I'd continue to get all his business in the
future. Maybe that's it.


But maybe it was louder at 200 Hz.


I told him I was just screwing around with his system and flipped the
box around to see how it'd sound. His trunk flexed a lot more, so we

ended
up having to dynamat the hell out of it, but he was much more happy with

the
enclosure that way, and refused to switch it back (I wanted to because it
sounded like ass outside the vehicle with it that way).


Why would anyone care how it sounded outside the vehicle; except the

neighbors?


I guess you don't know any teenagers, and you were never one yourself.....


But of course you didn't specify the crossover frequency, the levels, the
actual frequency response or use any listening bias controls. Again its

like
"old-timers memory" which slowly gets worse over time until that fateful

day
when it improves so much that the subject becomes able to 'remember' stuff

that
didn't actually happen


Well, it's not alzheimers I assure you. I'm only 33, and the memory is still
pretty sharp. What were we talking about again?

Seriously though, when you listen to the exact same tracks on the exact same
discs, all the damn time, and you always have the volume set to exactly the
same # (or maxed out in the case of the kids mentioned earlier, or any of my
SPL vehicles), and nothing else changed (no eq's involved, no crossovers
adjusted at any time, NOTHING), then I'd say it's pretty obvious where the
change occurs.


Yeah at higher frequencies.


Of course, BUT neither you or Eddie has delivered any contrary evidence.

You
both have conjecture but no data.


Everyone has provided contrary evidence that is just as strong as yours. You
use your WORDS, and so do we.


I provided experimental details that can be replicated by anyone with the skill
and diligence. Which is what I originally did several years ago to find out
exactly what the best subwoofer location was. I response mapped an entire
vehicle and discovered that response didn't change with sub location at low
frequencies. It did matter at higher frequencies but with a suitable low pass
filter at 100 Hz or lower there was essentially no improvement or change in the
subwoofer range.

Of course, if you run the woofer up to 200 or 500 Hz, not uncommon, than you
have an issue.

You have not posted any EVIDENCE of anything
Tom, that is my point. You SAY you have it, but there has been no PROOF.
Your word is not good enough to me, just as mine or Eddies, or the dozens of
others that have posted on this and the other threads here, are not good
enough for you. However, if there are 10 people saying yes, and only one
saying no, I think I'll go with the majority vote.....


Again you're just shouting. You can replicate the experiment any time you're
ready.



Extreme low bass is ALL feel.


Indeed, and these people that have reported that they notice a difference,
probably FELT something, but maybe they heard it too. Maybe that is your
whole argument really... You can't "hear" the difference as everyone has
been saying, but had they said we FEEL the difference, maybe you'd have
responded differently. lol
(note: I was kidding, there is no doubt you'd argue it either way).

No. I set up my systems optimally from the start. In a car it's easy to

get a
system that you can 'feel.' It's much harder to get one that is sonically
balanced through the entire spectrum.


Optimally. In your opinion, yes, but optimal for you is not optimal to Roy
the Ricer, or Bob the Bassfreak, or Ted the Tuner, or Scott the skater...


Sound quality doesn't depend on popularity. There is a spectral balance that
provides the most natural reproduction of the sounds of human voiuce and
acoustic intruments using a high-quality home audio system as a reference. It
is true that people are entitled tojack a system around anyway they want but I
want one that sounds the most natural with natural sound as a referent.


Remember, most of the respondants here are the type that are TRYING to get
more BASS that they can "hear" or FEEL (if you prefer), and thus they
actually try switching their enclosures around, and every other little thing
they can think of to try and get more output, and every one of them so far
has stated that they DO notice a difference, whether you believe it or not.
Is this mass hysteria or something?

"Aiming" woofers only has an effect at 50 Hz and above in any car


Hmm, earlier it was above 60hz and only noticable at 188hz (I think that's
what I saw, but I haven't read the ENTIRE thread, it's too much BS to trudge
through). Make up your mind.


Depends on the size of the car. In a compact or full sized X-cab pickup its 60
Hz. In a Bonneville its closer to 50 Hz.


If there is a difference at 50hz and up, then you should be ready to admit
that everyone that says they noticed a difference, really HAS! Most people
consider "louder bass" anything from about 120hz and down (some may only
consider 100hz and down, others maybe 80hz and down, but the point stands.
There are many levels between 50hz and 120hz that apparently DO make a
difference). Which is it Tom, is it not possible, or is it possible, to hear
a difference?


At 100 Hz and upward, yes.


I've ever
used; these include an Aerostar,


Me too. A 96 Aerostar with a single 10" in a sealed enclosure under the
second row of seats, and eventually moved to the 3rd row, and then back. We
tried lots of locations for that one sub, and they all made noticable
differences to everyone involved. Personally I liked it best with it located
under the 2nd row of seats off to the driver side. It had the best sound in
that location in my opinion. I never had the urge to meter it, or get any
#'s off of it (it wasn't gonna turn any significant #'s anyway, it was just
to add a touch of low end for that system). I've done THOUSANDS of
installations, and many of them had little subtle changes to the enclosure
locations that were noticable in some way, be it better sound, louder,
quieter, whatever. Why would a normal every day installer bother with
testing every single vehicle they work on?


You don't need to do everyone. But you would seem to be advancing your
knowledge and skill by doing one for every class of vehicle size.

We aren't writing articles for
any rag, nor do we care to waste time on all the little BS details and #'s
that people like you want to waste time with, because we can HEAR our
differences, and we know what we LIKE, so we just stick with that.

I know I have, and I bet 100's of others in
this newsgroup have too.


Sure but they're all just anecdotes. I have numbers.


Yeah, I have a # too, it's right between my index finger and my ring finger,
care to count it?


And here's where this always winds up. Insults are always the basic tactic of
those where the evidence doesn't support the position.


Seriously though, you haven't given us anything more than anecdotal evidence
either in my opinion. You TELL US you have the data, but we hvaen't SEEN the
data.



Let me say it again:

12-inch woofer in 1.25ft3 sealed enclosure. Maximum SPL with 10% distortion
limits over the 10 to 62 Hz range:

Woofer facing front of car: 123.8 db SPL
Woofer facing rear of car: 123.3 dB SPL
Hatch Open: 113 dB SPL over 16-62 Hz range; system will not reproduce 12 and 16
Hz with 10% with hatch open.

There IS a difference. I know, you are used to just TELLING people
what you want them to hear, and expect nobody to question it, since you are
a writer in a well known magazine, and nobody is to question the greatness
of such a magazine. BAH.


And you have a personal need to support an Audio Myth that has no basis in
fact.

I think the hatch-open numbers are quite revealing because according to the
Eddie Theory SPL should increase when we let the 'cancellation' waves out of
the car.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Subwoofer power to go with 100 watts/channel Cathryn Mataga General 6 March 1st 04 02:12 AM
Subwoofer hum: is it my receiver? Brian General 15 February 20th 04 10:11 PM
Advice rebuilding a BIC subwoofer amplifier Carl Swanson General 2 January 20th 04 11:28 AM
Newbie Subwoofer questions OodlesoFun General 28 January 12th 04 06:51 PM
FS: 3000 watt amp $179!! 900 watt woofers $36!! new- free shipping Nexxon General 1 October 14th 03 02:06 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:48 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"