Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
I'm curious how a competitor with home-made equipment would be categorised at a
competition? Any judges out there that can tell me if my home made amps and processors would be allowed to run? Is there more than one sanctioning body, each with different rules? Someone recently posted that it would be fun to compete with Pyle gear (inexpensive) and match the high-end (expensive) gear with a great install. I'd like to try it once with home made stuff, just for fun. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
Interesting question. Yeah, I was the one talking about competing with the
inexpensive gear. On second thought, I could always try to put some Pyle amps in some "high end" cases, faking the judges into thinking that it's high end gear. It would be a good experiment to not only demonstrate that "low-end" gear is not as low-end as some may think, and also to evaluate how much bias exists in these competitions. Any collaborators? PS - What do you have for home-made gear? I'm curious how a competitor with home-made equipment would be categorised at a competition? Any judges out there that can tell me if my home made amps and processors would be allowed to run? Is there more than one sanctioning body, each with different rules? Someone recently posted that it would be fun to compete with Pyle gear (inexpensive) and match the high-end (expensive) gear with a great install. I'd like to try it once with home made stuff, just for fun. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
I'm game. I'd also like to see high-end stuff put into a low-end chassis to see
if the scores drop. I was looking at the website for the IASCA and they specify retail equipment for several classes. Here is a quote from the STREET SMART class rules: "...available to all entry-level competitors who have obtained his or her mobile electronic systems through standard retail channels..." There are other classes which do not mention equipment origin but I think it may be implied to be retail. Hopefully someone out there who is familiar with the nitty gritty rules can enlighten me. My home-made gear includes two large amps and two electronic crossovers with development of a DAC underway. The amps are two channel jobs stuffed into old amplifier chassis and cooled by fans on a thermostat. One was a Jensen and the other a Pioneer I think. I media blasted the logos off and had them black anodized for better cooling. I've been toying with the idea of screening my own logos on for fun. They are capable of 400 watts RMS per channel into 4 ohms and should be capable of around 700 at 2 ohms. It's huge overkill, I just built them for fun. The cost per channel was CDN$50 plus PSU, which I'd guess at CDN$40 (with some scavenged parts). They'll run circles around "high-end" gear on the instruments. One crossover is a three way op-amp type with independently variable frequency, independently switchable slopes(12/24), phase select (0/180) and independent level control. The other is made from discrete components and is a two way, 24dB/octave, variable frequency, with independent level control. I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for volume control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for volume or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby Digital decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I decide to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC. I've considered putting a PC in my car and using the SPDIF output (like you were interested in doing) but decided I didn't want something that would take time to boot and might be a fussy install. An HU with a jack added on the back seemed elegant. I could move my amps into one chassis along with the DAC circuit for a nice clean install. Admittedly it will be large but I don't care. The flexibility options are limited only to my overactive imagination, which is what's preventing me from finishing the project. I need to draw a line and say, "ok, this is what it will do... nothing more." By the time I'm done everyone will be able to buy a DVD HU with 5.1 output for $100. "MZ" wrote in message ... Interesting question. Yeah, I was the one talking about competing with the inexpensive gear. On second thought, I could always try to put some Pyle amps in some "high end" cases, faking the judges into thinking that it's high end gear. It would be a good experiment to not only demonstrate that "low-end" gear is not as low-end as some may think, and also to evaluate how much bias exists in these competitions. Any collaborators? PS - What do you have for home-made gear? I'm curious how a competitor with home-made equipment would be categorised at a competition? Any judges out there that can tell me if my home made amps and processors would be allowed to run? Is there more than one sanctioning body, each with different rules? Someone recently posted that it would be fun to compete with Pyle gear (inexpensive) and match the high-end (expensive) gear with a great install. I'd like to try it once with home made stuff, just for fun. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for
volume control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for volume or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby Digital decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I decide to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC. I was interested in doing something similar a while back. I've since canned those plans because of the computer. Now I'm thinking more along the lines of writing some code to add some massive signal processing capabilities, probably through a digital I/O card. I think the ultimate goal will be to have independently adjustable channels for each of my speakers (my front setup is triamped, my rears biamped, and my sub - so that's 11 channels) - same signal, different processing signals. We'll see where that goes. The signal processing part is relatively easy...it's the recipient circuitry (decoding the control signals and running everything through DACs - in real time) that's a pain. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
Yes a PC gives you lots of flexibility with software. The problem with designing
my own DAC is I'll be programming in a language with next to no built-in routines for my purpose. I plan to use a PIC microcontroller so I can upgrade my code at any time. Perhaps to interface with an RTA for real-time equalisation or even installing a mic into the interior of the car for stand alone calibration. My system could then calibrate itself flat for competition. I could store pre-set curves and run demo routines too. My biggest problem so far is keeping the radio operational. I can easily patch the CD data stream out to a DAC, but the radio is all analog and would require I keep the analog side operating (not to mention volume control issues). Texas Instruments sampled me some nice delta sigma A2Ds which I could use to digitise the radio output. Then it would only be a matter of selecting the source. It's so easy to get carried away... "MZ" wrote in message ... I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for volume control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for volume or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby Digital decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I decide to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC. I was interested in doing something similar a while back. I've since canned those plans because of the computer. Now I'm thinking more along the lines of writing some code to add some massive signal processing capabilities, probably through a digital I/O card. I think the ultimate goal will be to have independently adjustable channels for each of my speakers (my front setup is triamped, my rears biamped, and my sub - so that's 11 channels) - same signal, different processing signals. We'll see where that goes. The signal processing part is relatively easy...it's the recipient circuitry (decoding the control signals and running everything through DACs - in real time) that's a pain. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
In article KjEdc.54074$Bk31.2175
@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this} says... Yes a PC gives you lots of flexibility with software. The problem with designing my own DAC is I'll be programming in a language with next to no built-in routines for my purpose. I plan to use a PIC microcontroller so I can upgrade my code at any time. Perhaps to interface with an RTA for real-time equalisation or even installing a mic into the interior of the car for stand alone calibration. My system could then calibrate itself flat for competition. I could store pre-set curves and run demo routines too. My biggest problem so far is keeping the radio operational. I can easily patch the CD data stream out to a DAC, but the radio is all analog and would require I keep the analog side operating (not to mention volume control issues). Texas Instruments sampled me some nice delta sigma A2Ds which I could use to digitise the radio output. Then it would only be a matter of selecting the source. It's so easy to get carried away... "MZ" wrote in message ... I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for volume control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for volume or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby Digital decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I decide to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC. I was interested in doing something similar a while back. I've since canned those plans because of the computer. Now I'm thinking more along the lines of writing some code to add some massive signal processing capabilities, probably through a digital I/O card. I think the ultimate goal will be to have independently adjustable channels for each of my speakers (my front setup is triamped, my rears biamped, and my sub - so that's 11 channels) - same signal, different processing signals. We'll see where that goes. The signal processing part is relatively easy...it's the recipient circuitry (decoding the control signals and running everything through DACs - in real time) that's a pain. Try the links on this page for more competition organizations: http://www.caraudiohelp.com/car_audi...udio_shows.htm -- I.Care Address fake until the spam goes away. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:50:31 GMT, "Kevin Murray"
wrote: I've considered putting a PC in my car and using the SPDIF output (like you were interested in doing) but decided I didn't want something that would take time to boot and might be a fussy install. An HU with a jack added on the back seemed elegant. I could move my amps into one chassis along with the DAC circuit for a nice clean install. Admittedly it will be large but I don't care. Have you considered a notebook for the job? Powering one in a vehicle is straightforward and they are robust enough to take all but the most extreme driving conditions. A couple of hours of modification to bypass the auto power down interlock when the lid is closed, and adding a remote power on/reset switch. I use the TV out feed to run a small LCD panel that I mount on my dash when needed. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
Interesting idea. My only concern would be controls for PLAY FWD etc. I'd
rather not fiddle with a keyboard while driving. I definitely love the idea of having a laptop in the car though. With that amount of processing power it could provide GPS navigation, interface with the car's electronics for systems monitoring and allow for custom software for whatever else the imagination cooks up. "Ian W" wrote in message ... On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:50:31 GMT, "Kevin Murray" wrote: I've considered putting a PC in my car and using the SPDIF output (like you were interested in doing) but decided I didn't want something that would take time to boot and might be a fussy install. An HU with a jack added on the back seemed elegant. I could move my amps into one chassis along with the DAC circuit for a nice clean install. Admittedly it will be large but I don't care. Have you considered a notebook for the job? Powering one in a vehicle is straightforward and they are robust enough to take all but the most extreme driving conditions. A couple of hours of modification to bypass the auto power down interlock when the lid is closed, and adding a remote power on/reset switch. I use the TV out feed to run a small LCD panel that I mount on my dash when needed. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
Interesting idea. My only concern would be controls for PLAY FWD etc.
I'd rather not fiddle with a keyboard while driving. Remote control and/or touchscreen LCD alleviates this problem. I use both. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
Cool, what make/model LCD did you use? How does it interface with the PC? Was it
meant for this purpose or did you have to write drivers? "MZ" wrote in message ... Interesting idea. My only concern would be controls for PLAY FWD etc. I'd rather not fiddle with a keyboard while driving. Remote control and/or touchscreen LCD alleviates this problem. I use both. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
I'm wondering, in competitions where the installation is not taken into account,
and RTA is only used to break a tie, how is the car judged? Does a judge simply sit in the car and listen? It sounds very subjective if you ask me. The links to these organisations are definitely helpful but not quite enough. Competitors please share your experience. Winter is just ending here so the competition season is probably a few months off. I'll have to wait a while to check one out. Kevin Murray "I.Care" wrote in message t... In article KjEdc.54074$Bk31.2175 @twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this} says... Yes a PC gives you lots of flexibility with software. The problem with designing my own DAC is I'll be programming in a language with next to no built-in routines for my purpose. I plan to use a PIC microcontroller so I can upgrade my code at any time. Perhaps to interface with an RTA for real-time equalisation or even installing a mic into the interior of the car for stand alone calibration. My system could then calibrate itself flat for competition. I could store pre-set curves and run demo routines too. My biggest problem so far is keeping the radio operational. I can easily patch the CD data stream out to a DAC, but the radio is all analog and would require I keep the analog side operating (not to mention volume control issues). Texas Instruments sampled me some nice delta sigma A2Ds which I could use to digitise the radio output. Then it would only be a matter of selecting the source. It's so easy to get carried away... "MZ" wrote in message ... I intend to modify an HU for straight digital output with provisions for volume control. I'm wrestling with the decision to modify the digital signal for volume or muxing in control bits for external volume at the DAC. I have a Dolby Digital decoder for testing my digital volume control. Any 5.1 decoder will automatically detect a PCM signal and decode it as a stereo program. If I decide to mux in volume information I will have to custom design the DAC. I was interested in doing something similar a while back. I've since canned those plans because of the computer. Now I'm thinking more along the lines of writing some code to add some massive signal processing capabilities, probably through a digital I/O card. I think the ultimate goal will be to have independently adjustable channels for each of my speakers (my front setup is triamped, my rears biamped, and my sub - so that's 11 channels) - same signal, different processing signals. We'll see where that goes. The signal processing part is relatively easy...it's the recipient circuitry (decoding the control signals and running everything through DACs - in real time) that's a pain. Try the links on this page for more competition organizations: http://www.caraudiohelp.com/car_audi...udio_shows.htm -- I.Care Address fake until the spam goes away. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
Cool, what make/model LCD did you use? How does it interface with the PC?
Was it meant for this purpose or did you have to write drivers? I used a xenarc touchscreen LCD. It was a bit pricey (I think $350 or something), but it's a 7" and uses VGA - two features that were important to me. The touchscreen part is run by a USB connection. And compared with other LCDs, it does surprisingly well in the sunlight. Also has front panel brightness controls. Another good feature is that it starts the computer when the LCD is turned on, so I didn't have to mount a separate switch and then integrate it into the computer. It came with its own drivers. The screen is mounted in the double-din space in my dash, replacing my radio. I still need to make a shroud for it though. When driving, it's even easier to just use the credit card size remote for basic functions. The receiver just plugs into a serial port, and it comes with its own software compatible with winamp. I'll have pictures of everything up by next weekend. "MZ" wrote in message ... Interesting idea. My only concern would be controls for PLAY FWD etc. I'd rather not fiddle with a keyboard while driving. Remote control and/or touchscreen LCD alleviates this problem. I use both. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
That's some interesting reading. Thanks very much. I had no idea things actually
got that silly. "I.Care" wrote in message t... In article Rigec.89924$Bk31.48484 @twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this} says... I'm wondering, in competitions where the installation is not taken into account, and RTA is only used to break a tie, how is the car judged? Does a judge simply sit in the car and listen? It sounds very subjective if you ask me. The links to these organisations are definitely helpful but not quite enough. Competitors please share your experience. Winter is just ending here so the competition season is probably a few months off. I'll have to wait a while to check one out. Kevin Murray snip It's been awhile since I competed. Last time was 1995 IASCA World Finals in Dallas, TX. The rules keep changing, I know the competition classes have changed. At the time I competed I was Amatuer Class 151- 300 watts SQ, no SPL. I have a Pioneer ODR system in a 93 Probe and was in the top 10 in my class that year at world finals. If my bass had been adjusted slightly louder and received scores like mids and high end did I would have been 4th or 5th, it was that close. Judging was done in several phases, two of them subjective. Generally installation was judged first. (Mostly Subjective) This was where you gave your 5min max speech about your system. Not what brand names you had, but why did you use a particular piece of gear in that way. What theme were you trying to present? All screws had to be the same and turned the same direction, all wires with lettering had to have the lettering terminate the same distance from the connector, panels/mounting had to have the same gap on all sides. Vinyl had to match including grain pattern etc. Were cables protected by a gromet where they went through metal, was the system fused within a certain distance from the battery, was everything safe and secure, were aux batteries vented to the outside? Sound quality was judged next. (Mostly Subjective) Two judges who sat in your car and listened to an IASCA judging disk, not just the same named disk, the same copy also. Some people were alleged to have custom made disks to compensate their systems then try to use them during competition. Yes it's subjective. Your system was compared to other systems in your class for the competition. That's why no one got max points. If the first car judged was given max points and the next system was better what score would you give? Things judged: Imaging, staging, left right balance, how well does it reproduce what would be heard at a live concert? SQ is not boom boom, is the frequency response balanced to accurately reproduce the music? The best way to tune your ears was to listen to the IASCA Judging Disk on a high-end home stereo system and tune your car system to match. The last step RTA. (Objective with a good RTA Operator) A microphone was placed on a stand in a specific position on the drivers seat and connected to an RTA (Real Time Analyzer). Points were deducted if any frequency differed by more than 3db from the adjacent 1/3 octave frequency, while playing a Pink Noise track on the CD. In other words the response had to be smooth from 20hz to 20khz. Hope that gives you some idea of what it was like when I competed, I did not cover everything. Why did I stop competing? I couldn't see spending another $10-20k changing the install by putting in waterfalls, fish tanks or other non-sound related stuff. Motorized amp racks, OK. I was in it for Sound Quality not show and flash. It was amazing to me that competitors would spend mega bucks $50k+ on flashy installs, rebuild all the panels in their cars to integrate the system components, then refuse to allow spectators or competitors to look at any time on competition day. They thought a competitor in their class was going to modify their install while in the judging lanes waiting their turn based on what they saw? The car in front of me during finals kept color coordinated vinyl covering their windows so nobody could look inside, removed the one on the windshield long enough to move up a spot then replace. -- I.Care Address fake until the spam goes away. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
It's a silly masturbatory endeavor, and a lame attempt to get it to resemble
a "sport". The people who sink that much money into that kind of stupid crap deserve to be shot. But aside from that, I have no strong feelings on the matter. -- Mark remove "remove" and "spam" to reply "I.Care" wrote in message t... In article Rigec.89924$Bk31.48484 @twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com, kev{remove}{this} says... I'm wondering, in competitions where the installation is not taken into account, and RTA is only used to break a tie, how is the car judged? Does a judge simply sit in the car and listen? It sounds very subjective if you ask me. The links to these organisations are definitely helpful but not quite enough. Competitors please share your experience. Winter is just ending here so the competition season is probably a few months off. I'll have to wait a while to check one out. Kevin Murray snip It's been awhile since I competed. Last time was 1995 IASCA World Finals in Dallas, TX. The rules keep changing, I know the competition classes have changed. At the time I competed I was Amatuer Class 151- 300 watts SQ, no SPL. I have a Pioneer ODR system in a 93 Probe and was in the top 10 in my class that year at world finals. If my bass had been adjusted slightly louder and received scores like mids and high end did I would have been 4th or 5th, it was that close. Judging was done in several phases, two of them subjective. Generally installation was judged first. (Mostly Subjective) This was where you gave your 5min max speech about your system. Not what brand names you had, but why did you use a particular piece of gear in that way. What theme were you trying to present? All screws had to be the same and turned the same direction, all wires with lettering had to have the lettering terminate the same distance from the connector, panels/mounting had to have the same gap on all sides. Vinyl had to match including grain pattern etc. Were cables protected by a gromet where they went through metal, was the system fused within a certain distance from the battery, was everything safe and secure, were aux batteries vented to the outside? Sound quality was judged next. (Mostly Subjective) Two judges who sat in your car and listened to an IASCA judging disk, not just the same named disk, the same copy also. Some people were alleged to have custom made disks to compensate their systems then try to use them during competition. Yes it's subjective. Your system was compared to other systems in your class for the competition. That's why no one got max points. If the first car judged was given max points and the next system was better what score would you give? Things judged: Imaging, staging, left right balance, how well does it reproduce what would be heard at a live concert? SQ is not boom boom, is the frequency response balanced to accurately reproduce the music? The best way to tune your ears was to listen to the IASCA Judging Disk on a high-end home stereo system and tune your car system to match. The last step RTA. (Objective with a good RTA Operator) A microphone was placed on a stand in a specific position on the drivers seat and connected to an RTA (Real Time Analyzer). Points were deducted if any frequency differed by more than 3db from the adjacent 1/3 octave frequency, while playing a Pink Noise track on the CD. In other words the response had to be smooth from 20hz to 20khz. Hope that gives you some idea of what it was like when I competed, I did not cover everything. Why did I stop competing? I couldn't see spending another $10-20k changing the install by putting in waterfalls, fish tanks or other non-sound related stuff. Motorized amp racks, OK. I was in it for Sound Quality not show and flash. It was amazing to me that competitors would spend mega bucks $50k+ on flashy installs, rebuild all the panels in their cars to integrate the system components, then refuse to allow spectators or competitors to look at any time on competition day. They thought a competitor in their class was going to modify their install while in the judging lanes waiting their turn based on what they saw? The car in front of me during finals kept color coordinated vinyl covering their windows so nobody could look inside, removed the one on the windshield long enough to move up a spot then replace. -- I.Care Address fake until the spam goes away. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Curious about Competition
It's a silly masturbatory endeavor, and a lame attempt to get it to
resemble a "sport". The people who sink that much money into that kind of stupid crap deserve to be shot. But aside from that, I have no strong feelings on the matter. Maybe so. But it did get alot of car audio people together to talk, got me lots of trips to various cities in various states and Canada. It also kept a lot of businesses and car stereo installers employed :-) I think that last item was the reason the competition programs existed. Created a competitive atmosphere so Car Audio manufactures and their dealer networks could sell more and more high priced equipment and services. Just my opinion. Yeah, that's almost certainly the case. There are a lot of benefits to doing it. I just don't see the appeal to people who don't have a financial interest in the matter. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
rec.audio.car FAQ (Part 5/5) | Car Audio | |||
FS: Helix A4 Competition amp (made by Brax) | Car Audio | |||
Using competition subs for not competing | Car Audio | |||
Competition Car Audio for Sale | Car Audio | |||
Competition Power Rating | Car Audio |