Best HU among the 3....

[anToNIcHeN]

Hi All,
I was comparing the 3 HU...
Alpine CDA-9853, 9855 and Pioneer DEH-P880PRS....

Between Alpine 9853 and 9855, the only difference is the display and
preout voltage (9855 have multi color display and 4v preout)... would
this 4v preout matter? coz this is going to an amplifier which have an
input sesitivity adjustment anyways...

And for Pioneer, it have L/R independant 16 band Graphic equalizer but
lacks the subwoofer control that alpine set have. (it also plays aac
file format...)...
(Did I miss any other important info?)....

So could you guys put in your inputs as to which is the best among
these 2 brands?
I am from India, and these models are not yet available in India... so
if i want to get one, i need to get it from abroad and once i get it,
there is no way i can return it back....
SO I need both Advantages (or features) (what does it mean in terms of
sound quality... coz i read the features on net, and i dont know how it
would sound...) and Disadvantages of both the systems....

Regards,
Antony.

[MOSFET]

"anToNIcHeN" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Hi All,
> I was comparing the 3 HU...
> Alpine CDA-9853, 9855 and Pioneer DEH-P880PRS....
>
> Between Alpine 9853 and 9855, the only difference is the display and
> preout voltage (9855 have multi color display and 4v preout)... would
> this 4v preout matter? coz this is going to an amplifier which have an
> input sesitivity adjustment anyways...
>
OK, I have a lot of experience here. First off, I have the 9853 and I LOVE
IT!!! It is certainly the best deck I have ever owned and I have used three
Alpine's, two Kenwoods, a Pioneer, and a Sony (for my wife's car). I used
to own the Alpine 7939 which HAD a 4 volt output and I don't notice ANY
difference between a 2 volt output and a 4 volt output. I suspect much of
this is simply marketing, a feature that those who don't know better will
assume makes the HU a better unit. HOWEVER, that being said, I do believe
that if you were to have some kind of induced noise (like a ground-loop
producing alternator whine), it might be possible to mask some of that noise
with a higher pre-out voltage. That would be the ONLY benefit, IMHO. But
to me, that is really only a band-aid for a problem that really should be
dealt with, and can almost ALWAYS be erradicated (alternator whine) by
working through the problem. And again, a 4 volt output WOULD NOT
completely cover-up a noise problem, just make it less noticable.

Anyway, I have not had alternator-noise problems with my systems and I just
don't feel that 2 volts vs. 4 volts makes any difference sound quality wise.

The 9855 does have a fancier display, but all the sound shaping options are
the same (Bass Engine Pro). I believe the Alpine is superior to the Pioneer
because of the parametric EQ. With the Alpine, you have 32 bands to choose
from (a full 1/3 octive) as well as a Q adjustment. Again, I have been more
than happy with my 9853. You can see pictures of my car at:

http://www428.pair.com/mosfet/mtx.html

and at: http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2359697

MOSFET

> And for Pioneer, it have L/R independant 16 band Graphic equalizer but
> lacks the subwoofer control that alpine set have. (it also plays aac
> file format...)...
> (Did I miss any other important info?)....
>
> So could you guys put in your inputs as to which is the best among
> these 2 brands?
> I am from India, and these models are not yet available in India... so
> if i want to get one, i need to get it from abroad and once i get it,
> there is no way i can return it back....
> SO I need both Advantages (or features) (what does it mean in terms of
> sound quality... coz i read the features on net, and i dont know how it
> would sound...) and Disadvantages of both the systems....
>
> Regards,
> Antony.
>

[Vivek]

Since 4v pre-out is not needed and multi-color display is just a personal
liking. So 9855 is out of the picture (for me). And independent eq curves
for the L/R channel is not needed (again for me). Anyways alpine has
parametric eq (better than graphic eq).

Thus 9853 is the ideal choice (not for long read below)

But I doubt if this is available in the market since this has been taken
back by alpine.
Another thing to consider is warranty. If you take it to another country and
the system breaks. I don't think 9853 is so cheap.

If buying high end unit then I suggest to buy the ones which are supported
locally. Hard earned money.


"anToNIcHeN" > wrote in message
ups.com...
| Hi All,
| I was comparing the 3 HU...
| Alpine CDA-9853, 9855 and Pioneer DEH-P880PRS....
|
| Between Alpine 9853 and 9855, the only difference is the display and
| preout voltage (9855 have multi color display and 4v preout)... would
| this 4v preout matter? coz this is going to an amplifier which have an
| input sesitivity adjustment anyways...
|
| And for Pioneer, it have L/R independant 16 band Graphic equalizer but
| lacks the subwoofer control that alpine set have. (it also plays aac
| file format...)...
| (Did I miss any other important info?)....
|
| So could you guys put in your inputs as to which is the best among
| these 2 brands?
| I am from India, and these models are not yet available in India... so
| if i want to get one, i need to get it from abroad and once i get it,
| there is no way i can return it back....
| SO I need both Advantages (or features) (what does it mean in terms of
| sound quality... coz i read the features on net, and i dont know how it
| would sound...) and Disadvantages of both the systems....
|
| Regards,
| Antony.
|

[Chad Wahls]

The 9855 does not have a color display, you can change the button color but
the display is black and white. I have a 9855 and love it. They are on
sale at best buy now for 300 bones. The display is very readable in the
sunlight, it sounds great and the i-Personalize is a wonderful feature. If
you have to change batteries, do work and disconnect battery, etc the
settings can be restored with a CD. I use mine in a 3 way active rig.
Here's a pic.

http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=reardashshot.jpg

http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=HPIM2327.jpg

http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=HPIM2342.jpg

I canot comment on the Pioneer, many love them, I've never been a Pioneer
fan though so I am biased :(

Best of luck!
Chad

"anToNIcHeN" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Hi All,
> I was comparing the 3 HU...
> Alpine CDA-9853, 9855 and Pioneer DEH-P880PRS....
>
> Between Alpine 9853 and 9855, the only difference is the display and
> preout voltage (9855 have multi color display and 4v preout)... would
> this 4v preout matter? coz this is going to an amplifier which have an
> input sesitivity adjustment anyways...
>
> And for Pioneer, it have L/R independant 16 band Graphic equalizer but
> lacks the subwoofer control that alpine set have. (it also plays aac
> file format...)...
> (Did I miss any other important info?)....
>
> So could you guys put in your inputs as to which is the best among
> these 2 brands?
> I am from India, and these models are not yet available in India... so
> if i want to get one, i need to get it from abroad and once i get it,
> there is no way i can return it back....
> SO I need both Advantages (or features) (what does it mean in terms of
> sound quality... coz i read the features on net, and i dont know how it
> would sound...) and Disadvantages of both the systems....
>
> Regards,
> Antony.
>

[anToNIcHeN]

Hi all,
Thanks guys for the inputs...
But that takes me to another set of questions.....
1. What is the difference between a parameteric EQ and a Graphic
EQ...or what makes parametric EQ better?
2. how would I have 32 bands to choose from?... they just have a 5 band
parametric EQ right?
3. Isnt no of bands in the EQ always good? (like 16 in Pioneer)

".Bass Focus maximises bass sound where you want it the most.
..Lots of other subwoofer and speaker tuning capabilities. "
MOSFET.. above 2 lines i just copied from
http://www.alpine-europe.com/content/english/a581.det.CDA-9853R_CD--MP3--WMA-RECEIVER.htm

can you elaborate on the same?...

I also read somewhere that these systems had CD eject problems...

MOSFET, i have seen your system long before.... its just too much for
me.... :) some thing i can only dream about.... :)...

Vivek, these modles are available in India... and the grey market
prices are around $350
equivalent.... (That is costly!!..)




Chad Wahls wrote:
> The 9855 does not have a color display, you can change the button color but
> the display is black and white. I have a 9855 and love it. They are on
> sale at best buy now for 300 bones. The display is very readable in the
> sunlight, it sounds great and the i-Personalize is a wonderful feature. If
> you have to change batteries, do work and disconnect battery, etc the
> settings can be restored with a CD. I use mine in a 3 way active rig.
> Here's a pic.
>
> http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=reardashshot.jpg
>
> http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=HPIM2327.jpg
>
> http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=HPIM2342.jpg
>
> I canot comment on the Pioneer, many love them, I've never been a Pioneer
> fan though so I am biased :(
>
> Best of luck!
> Chad
>

[Chad Wahls]

I prefer parametric EQ, I sometimes think I can do more with it than a
standard graphic. Wide cuts do not invoke as much phase shift.
Parameetric allows you to chose the frequency of the boost/cut, the
amount of boost/cut and the width of the curve, also called Q. The
alpine allows you to use either graphic OR parametric. The CD Eject
and Glide touch problems were corrected in the early runs, later models
are not reported to have these problems. The time allignment works
well for me and really helps my image. EQ is alright but not as
professional as I'm used to but my Pro parametric EQ alone costs 6
times the amount of a CDA9855 :)
If you can play with one then try it out, it's a little different than
the standard alpine operation at first but not bad at all. It does
sound AWESOME, Mine has never skipped once and I have a fairly taught
suspension and some REALLY old CD's. It will interface with an iPod.
You can use sat radio with it AND an external input too. I have
AM/FM/SAT/CD/AUX for my iRiver. If you can find one for the sale price
of 300 bucks i believe you cannot go wrong! last affodable models with
Bass Engine Pro too!

Chad

anToNIcHeN wrote:
> Hi all,
> Thanks guys for the inputs...
> But that takes me to another set of questions.....
> 1. What is the difference between a parameteric EQ and a Graphic
> EQ...or what makes parametric EQ better?
> 2. how would I have 32 bands to choose from?... they just have a 5 band
> parametric EQ right?
> 3. Isnt no of bands in the EQ always good? (like 16 in Pioneer)
>
> ".Bass Focus maximises bass sound where you want it the most.
> .Lots of other subwoofer and speaker tuning capabilities. "
> MOSFET.. above 2 lines i just copied from
> http://www.alpine-europe.com/content/english/a581.det.CDA-9853R_CD--MP3--WMA-RECEIVER.htm
>
> can you elaborate on the same?...
>
> I also read somewhere that these systems had CD eject problems...
>
> MOSFET, i have seen your system long before.... its just too much for
> me.... :) some thing i can only dream about.... :)...
>
> Vivek, these modles are available in India... and the grey market
> prices are around $350
> equivalent.... (That is costly!!..)
>
>
>
>
> Chad Wahls wrote:
> > The 9855 does not have a color display, you can change the button color but
> > the display is black and white. I have a 9855 and love it. They are on
> > sale at best buy now for 300 bones. The display is very readable in the
> > sunlight, it sounds great and the i-Personalize is a wonderful feature. If
> > you have to change batteries, do work and disconnect battery, etc the
> > settings can be restored with a CD. I use mine in a 3 way active rig.
> > Here's a pic.
> >
> > http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=reardashshot.jpg
> >
> > http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=HPIM2327.jpg
> >
> > http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/cwahls/Civic%20Audio/?action=view&current=HPIM2342.jpg
> >
> > I canot comment on the Pioneer, many love them, I've never been a Pioneer
> > fan though so I am biased :(
> >
> > Best of luck!
> > Chad
> >

[bob wald]

i'd go with the alpine with 4v outs..32 band i think that has both sides
16 perside. left-n-right. But 16 is great but i think awaste.. 9-11 eq
per side is all any1 would every need..NO1 can tell 11band from a 16
band.a computer might.
Its more important haveing less thd than 16 or more bands, just the
Kings opinion...

[bob wald]

mosfet mosfet moafet, i was starting to have alil respect for you until
that ''i notice no difference 2v to 4v outs'',,,lollll....
I went 3v to 5v.IT CHANGED MY LIFE.......
I'll NEVER buy below 4v AGAIN.....

[Chad Wahls]

"bob wald" > wrote in message
...
> i'd go with the alpine with 4v outs..32 band i think that has both sides
> 16 perside. left-n-right. But 16 is great but i think awaste.. 9-11 eq
> per side is all any1 would every need..NO1 can tell 11band from a 16
> band.a computer might.
> Its more important haveing less thd than 16 or more bands, just the
> Kings opinion...
>

It can make quite a difference in an electrically noisy car. It allows you
to have the gains set way back, double the voltage and gain 3 dB, this
effectively lowers your noise floor 3dB. The 9855 also has a different
converter output scheme than the 9853. I BELIEVE it has 6 separate DA units
as opposed to 2 in the 9855. The predecessors of the line
9813/9815/9833/9835 all had 6 DA's too. If you can find a NOS of any if
these units they have the same functionality processor wise and sound
equally wonderful. the 9813/9815 are cult faves for some reason.

Chad

[MOSFET]

> 2. how would I have 32 bands to choose from?... they just have a 5 band
> parametric EQ right?

OK, the way a parametric EQ like the Alpine's works is that although you
have 32 frequencies to choose from, you may only adjust 5 of them at a time
(you choose which 5). The reason is that in any car cabin, you will have
strange acoustic anomalies that are usually not present in a typical room.
Things like all the glass, the seats, the strange angles the speakers are
at, the fact that most systems have the subwoofers in the rear, etc., create
very peculiar frequency response curves because you will have cancellation
effects and unusual boost effects at certain frequencies. Generally
speaking, there will only be three or four frequency areas where you will
have these unusually huge peaks or valleys (again, caused by cancellation
effects, standing waves, etc.). Once you identify where these (three, four
or five) peaks and valleys are, you can use a parametric EQ to smooth-out
your frequency response. BTW, a relatively flat (no huge dips or peaks)
frequency response is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL if you wish to create a realistic
soundstage.

To correctly set 32 band (1/3 octave) graphic EQ OR a 5 band EQ (where you
have 32 bands to choose from) you will need special equipment. This IS NOT
something that can be done by ear unless you are VERY, VERY experienced at
this. The best device is what's called an RTA (Real Time Analyzer) which
will give you a computerized graphic representation of your frequency
response (you play pink noise through your system which sounds like radio
static and contains every frequency in the audible audio spectrum at equal
volumes). By looking at the peaks and valleys on the RTA graph, you can set
your EQ. RTA's are VERY expensive (even used ones are usually over $1,000),
but you can rent the use of one at some stereo shops. Even then, it takes
some know how just to operate an RTA. For a price, some shops will use
their RTA and EQ your system for you (this can be pricey).

Of course, there is the poor man's way (aka MOSFET'S way). What you do is
get your hands on a test disc that contains test tones at 1/3 octave
increments (so it will sound 32 tones, each tone about 5 seconds long).
Sheffield Labs makes a disc called "My Disc" that contains this series of
tones and this is what I use. You must also have an SPL meter (it measures
decibel levels) and these devices can be had at Radio Shack for $30. By
playing this disc and noting the SPL on each tone, you can plot your own
frequency response curve, just like an RTA. Yes, it's time consuming, but
it will yield accurate results.

You can find out more about EQ's and how to set them on this group's FAQ at
http://www.mobileaudio.com/rac-faq/

You can learn TONS there, I would definitely check it out.

MOSFET

[RG]

"BTW, a relatively flat (no huge dips or peaks)
frequency response is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL if you wish to create a realistic
soundstage."

This is something that has puzzled me for the 40 or so years I have dabbled
in audio. There is no such thing as a flat response. Live music does not
have a flat response, studio recordings are not made with a flat response,
and CD's sold to the consumer were not made with a flat response in mind.
Most artists do not strive for a flat response in their recordings. But
consumers receiving the end product have this huge misconception that they
must make the respose flat. In home audio it is by not using any EQ or tone
controls at all (and don't get me started on this) and in car audio it does
a 360 by people using RTA's and such. Of course it is completely ludicrous
and has nothing to do with how good something sounds or how it meets one's
particular tastes, let alone it being "critical" to a realistic soundstage.
It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ competitions.
I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense.

-RG

[Chad Wahls]

RG wrote:
> "BTW, a relatively flat (no huge dips or peaks)
> frequency response is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL if you wish to create a realistic
> soundstage."
>
> This is something that has puzzled me for the 40 or so years I have dabbled
> in audio. There is no such thing as a flat response. Live music does not
> have a flat response, studio recordings are not made with a flat response,
> and CD's sold to the consumer were not made with a flat response in mind.
> Most artists do not strive for a flat response in their recordings. But
> consumers receiving the end product have this huge misconception that they
> must make the respose flat. In home audio it is by not using any EQ or tone
> controls at all (and don't get me started on this) and in car audio it does
> a 360 by people using RTA's and such. Of course it is completely ludicrous
> and has nothing to do with how good something sounds or how it meets one's
> particular tastes, let alone it being "critical" to a realistic soundstage.
> It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ competitions.
> I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense.
>
> -RG

Some like a flat system like myself. It will drive most people nuts!
I work as an audio enigner though. NOW, to I make my live rigs flat...
HELL NO! Do I mix an album flat and dry? HELL NO. But I DO need some
sort of reference.

Now y'all know how I can get by with a single 10" in a car :) But I
use 18" subs in TL enclosures and an incredible amoount of power in a
small mastering room :)

Chad

[MOSFET]

You are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!! By all means, I CERTAINLY DO NOT strive for a
flat response curve in my car. In fact, a flat response curve sounds
ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE (too much treble, WAY, WAY TOO LITTLE BASS).

What I should have said, is that although you are not striving for a
perfectly flat frequency response, what you DON'T WANT are huge NARROW
deviations (either up or down) at certain frequencies. In other words, your
overall curve may have slopes, but what you don't want are sudden large
spikes either up or down at certain frequencies (usually caused by standing
waves or cancellation effects). This is where a parametric EQ or a 1/3
octave graphic EQ can be helpful.

And like I said before, eliminating (or at least minimizing) these types of
HUGE NARROW peaks and valleys is necessary for realistic sound reproduction.
Otherwise, what you get is that some instruments, voices, or other sounds
are unrealistically loud while others seem to drop out of the soundstage.

MOSFET


"RG" > wrote in message
...
> "BTW, a relatively flat (no huge dips or peaks)
> frequency response is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL if you wish to create a
> realistic
> soundstage."
>
> This is something that has puzzled me for the 40 or so years I have
> dabbled in audio. There is no such thing as a flat response. Live music
> does not have a flat response, studio recordings are not made with a flat
> response, and CD's sold to the consumer were not made with a flat response
> in mind. Most artists do not strive for a flat response in their
> recordings. But consumers receiving the end product have this huge
> misconception that they must make the respose flat. In home audio it is by
> not using any EQ or tone controls at all (and don't get me started on
> this) and in car audio it does a 360 by people using RTA's and such. Of
> course it is completely ludicrous and has nothing to do with how good
> something sounds or how it meets one's particular tastes, let alone it
> being "critical" to a realistic soundstage. It must be some sort of cruel
> joke foisted on people by the SQ competitions. I can't believe anyone
> actually buys into this nonsense.
>
> -RG
>
>

[MOSFET]

> It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ
> competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense.
>
> -RG
>
After rereading your post I just have to take issue with your views on RTA's
and the importance of tweaking the frequency response in a car. First off,
this ONLY applies to cars. I would NEVER use an EQ on my home system. My
Michael Green Rev 80 speakers with my Denon 3600 sound perfect to me and I
would not DARE mess with the frequency response of my home system.

But in a car, you get all kinds of weird things going on and many strange
peaks and valleys in the frequency response, many of which you won't even
notice UNLESS YOU HAPPEN TO PLAY A PIECE OF MUSIC THAT HAS THAT PARTICULAR
PROBLEM FREQUENCY! This is why RTA's can be so useful. You may listen to a
song and say, you know, there's something missing in the upper treble
region, but you have no idea precisely what the center frequency of the
problem region is or how big the "Q" is. Unless you are an expert at
hearing a sound and knowing what frequency it is, this absolutely requires
the use of special equipment.

But, you know, the proof is in the pudding. With EVERY system I have ever
built, once I adjust it using either an RTA or test tones, it ALWAYS sounds
better. Like I said before, I AM NOT going for a flat line. What I AM
trying to do is take out those large peaks and valleys that are ALMOST
ALWAYS caused by the nature of a car's cabin (the glass, the upholstery,
etc.). Also, know that when I adjust a 1/3 octave EQ (for instance), I am
not going for a radical change in the sound, in fact it would concern me if
the sound were somehow radically different. It is STRICTLY to correct
problems. And again, these problems ARE NOTICEABLE, but are difficult to
pinpoint without special equipment.

MOSFET

[anToNIcHeN]

Thanks Guys.... This indeed was really informative.... :)


MOSFET wrote:
> > It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ
> > competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense.
> >
> > -RG
> >
> After rereading your post I just have to take issue with your views on RTA's
> and the importance of tweaking the frequency response in a car. First off,
> this ONLY applies to cars. I would NEVER use an EQ on my home system. My
> Michael Green Rev 80 speakers with my Denon 3600 sound perfect to me and I
> would not DARE mess with the frequency response of my home system.
>
> But in a car, you get all kinds of weird things going on and many strange
> peaks and valleys in the frequency response, many of which you won't even
> notice UNLESS YOU HAPPEN TO PLAY A PIECE OF MUSIC THAT HAS THAT PARTICULAR
> PROBLEM FREQUENCY! This is why RTA's can be so useful. You may listen to a
> song and say, you know, there's something missing in the upper treble
> region, but you have no idea precisely what the center frequency of the
> problem region is or how big the "Q" is. Unless you are an expert at
> hearing a sound and knowing what frequency it is, this absolutely requires
> the use of special equipment.
>
> But, you know, the proof is in the pudding. With EVERY system I have ever
> built, once I adjust it using either an RTA or test tones, it ALWAYS sounds
> better. Like I said before, I AM NOT going for a flat line. What I AM
> trying to do is take out those large peaks and valleys that are ALMOST
> ALWAYS caused by the nature of a car's cabin (the glass, the upholstery,
> etc.). Also, know that when I adjust a 1/3 octave EQ (for instance), I am
> not going for a radical change in the sound, in fact it would concern me if
> the sound were somehow radically different. It is STRICTLY to correct
> problems. And again, these problems ARE NOTICEABLE, but are difficult to
> pinpoint without special equipment.
>
> MOSFET

[Phonedude]

"anToNIcHeN" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Thanks Guys.... This indeed was really informative.... :)
>
>
> MOSFET wrote:
>> > It must be some sort of cruel joke foisted on people by the SQ
>> > competitions. I can't believe anyone actually buys into this nonsense.
>> >
>> > -RG
>> >
>> After rereading your post I just have to take issue with your views on
>> RTA's
>> and the importance of tweaking the frequency response in a car. First
>> off,
>> this ONLY applies to cars. I would NEVER use an EQ on my home system.
>> My
>> Michael Green Rev 80 speakers with my Denon 3600 sound perfect to me and
>> I
>> would not DARE mess with the frequency response of my home system.
>>
>> But in a car, you get all kinds of weird things going on and many strange
>> peaks and valleys in the frequency response, many of which you won't even
>> notice UNLESS YOU HAPPEN TO PLAY A PIECE OF MUSIC THAT HAS THAT
>> PARTICULAR
>> PROBLEM FREQUENCY! This is why RTA's can be so useful. You may listen
>> to a
>> song and say, you know, there's something missing in the upper treble
>> region, but you have no idea precisely what the center frequency of the
>> problem region is or how big the "Q" is. Unless you are an expert at
>> hearing a sound and knowing what frequency it is, this absolutely
>> requires
>> the use of special equipment.
>>
>> But, you know, the proof is in the pudding. With EVERY system I have
>> ever
>> built, once I adjust it using either an RTA or test tones, it ALWAYS
>> sounds
>> better. Like I said before, I AM NOT going for a flat line. What I AM
>> trying to do is take out those large peaks and valleys that are ALMOST
>> ALWAYS caused by the nature of a car's cabin (the glass, the upholstery,
>> etc.). Also, know that when I adjust a 1/3 octave EQ (for instance), I
>> am
>> not going for a radical change in the sound, in fact it would concern me
>> if
>> the sound were somehow radically different. It is STRICTLY to correct
>> problems. And again, these problems ARE NOTICEABLE, but are difficult to
>> pinpoint without special equipment.


The correct cliché is "the proof of the pudding is in the eating." Make an
effort please.

PD

[MOSFET]

> The correct cliché is "the proof of the pudding is in the eating." Make
> an effort please.
>
> PD
Well (done with Steve Martin immitation), EXCUSE ME.

MOSFET