Go Back   Team-BHP > Under the Hood > In-Car Entertainment


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28th September 2007, 13:12   #61
Team-BHP Support
 
navin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: mumbai
Posts: 22,505
Thanked: 3,882 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anupmathur View Post
That I was aware of. In fact the grapevine had it then that Bob actually developed his Magnetic Field Amp while at Phase Linear (at their cost) and then left. This was corroborated by the fact that for the first few years the M-400 was 'manufactured' in his garage!
I'd bought one in 1981, and it gave yeoman service for a full 20 years. Alas, it then gave up the ghost. I tried, but couldn't fix it..
Fully right about the Phase Linear. I have used the M1.5t, M1.0t, and M4.0t. These amps were really compact and ran cool. Ideal for concealed subs. Did you know there used to be a rack sold by carver that could accomodate 2 x M400 side by side.

We have a tendency at ICE to digress and wander after a solution is found. I dont know if everyone here likes that. Should we continue this trend? After all this is YOUR fourm, I'm just here to make sure everyone is polite and generally on topic (Audio is closely related to ICE). Besides all those engine vengine types rarely care to visit.
navin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2007, 13:33   #62
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 3,083
Thanked: 252 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by navin View Post
Ideal for concealed subs.
And everything else anyone might want to throw at them. Remember TFM?

Quote:
Originally Posted by navin View Post
Did you know there used to be a rack sold by carver that could accomodate 2 x M400 side by side.
I did not know. The M-400 length (or breadth, or height!!) was not standard rack size. Hence the need? A special rack for the Carver Cube?
How would that help anyone? They all ALREADY had their racks.
Don't tell me (my hero) Bob did such foolish things too.
anupmathur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2007, 13:54   #63
Team-BHP Support
 
navin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: mumbai
Posts: 22,505
Thanked: 3,882 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anupmathur View Post
And everything else anyone might want to throw at them. Remember TFM?
I did not know. The M-400 length (or breadth, or height!!) was not standard rack size. Hence the need? A special rack for the Carver Cube?
How would that help anyone? They all ALREADY had their racks.
Don't tell me (my hero) Bob did such foolish things too.
Yes I heard TFM 15, TFM 35, TFM 55 as well as the Silver Seven. But by that time Bob was more into marketing than designing.

The rack allowed you to stack 2 M400 side by side. The M400 was abut 7" wide. 2 of them would be 15" wide.

Anup, here is an old article on Carver's Magnetic tech.
http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/pd...08-05-8002.pdf
navin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2007, 13:58   #64
BHPian
 
Su-47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 623
Thanked: 91 Times
Default

navin and anupmathur,

A humble request: Can we please stick to the topic?

Everytime there is an update to the thread, I check it out to see if some interesting observations, comments are made about "tighter bass from 6x9s". All I find is some audio history, which I am afraid is off-topic and irrelevant.

Thank You,
Su-47

P.S: Please don't get offended, I appreciate the knowledge you gentlemen bring to this forum.
Su-47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2007, 18:48   #65
Senior - BHPian
 
panky12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 2,652
Thanked: 126 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anupmathur View Post
STK 459s? They're good!
nope, audiodyne VA-M02 available at dukaan no. 602 (amritsar wale) are better.

Last edited by panky12345 : 28th September 2007 at 19:06.
panky12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2007, 19:53   #66
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 3,083
Thanked: 252 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by panky12345 View Post
nope, audiodyne VA-M02 available at dukaan no. 602 (amritsar wale) are better.
Thanks Panky. Will check them out perhaps. It's been years since I kinda gave up all the 'jugaad' hardware.

________________
Sorry, Su-47!

Last edited by anupmathur : 28th September 2007 at 19:55.
anupmathur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2007, 13:12   #67
Senior - BHPian
 
Ramsagar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bangalore-Nellore
Posts: 1,327
Thanked: 38 Times
Default

I'm going to fix GTO937 @ rear and GTO407 in front driving with 6900 HU in my Alto...i'm confused wheather to fix them on a parcel shelf or use boxes for 6*9.which sounds good...
Ramsagar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2007, 14:51   #68
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 3,083
Thanked: 252 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsagar View Post
I'm going to fix GTO937 @ rear and GTO407 in front driving with 6900 HU in my Alto...i'm confused wheather to fix them on a parcel shelf or use boxes for 6*9.which sounds good...
Entirely YOUR decision. You know that boxes will give better sound. But how important is boot space to you?
anupmathur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2007, 14:54   #69
BHPian
 
gopz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 452
Thanked: Once
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsagar View Post
I'm going to fix GTO937 @ rear and GTO407 in front driving with 6900 HU in my Alto...i'm confused wheather to fix them on a parcel shelf or use boxes for 6*9.which sounds good...
Also consider fixing it on the rear hatch door with a little bit of damping. It will considerably increase the bass, without compromising on boot space.
gopz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2010, 23:42   #70
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: bangalore
Posts: 13
Thanked: Once
Default A Question about 6x9 speaker

Has any one tried using an enclosure for a 6x9 speaker. any specific volume that is needed? also whether a ported box is feasible for this.
kaadye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2010, 01:16   #71
BHPian
 
thelightening's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 262
Thanked: 3 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaadye View Post
Has any one tried using an enclosure for a 6x9 speaker. any specific volume that is needed? also whether a ported box is feasible for this.
I have a different setup in my wagonR.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/sound-...-iced-evo.html

Here you can see that.
thelightening is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2010, 10:58   #72
Team-BHP Support
 
navin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: mumbai
Posts: 22,505
Thanked: 3,882 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaadye View Post
Has any one tried using an enclosure for a 6x9 speaker. any specific volume that is needed? also whether a ported box is feasible for this.
Since most 6x9s are high Q drivers I'd recommend a small aperiodic box or a large sealed box.
navin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2010, 23:40   #73
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: bangalore
Posts: 13
Thanked: Once
Default

hi navin does some one makes vents for the aperiodic boxes. for a sealed box i feel i need atleast 0.5 cu ft per speaker, any one tried to measure the t/s parameters of any 6x9s here?
kaadye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2010, 10:38   #74
Team-BHP Support
 
navin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: mumbai
Posts: 22,505
Thanked: 3,882 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaadye View Post
hi navin does some one makes vents for the aperiodic boxes. for a sealed box i feel i need atleast 0.5 cu ft per speaker, any one tried to measure the t/s parameters of any 6x9s here?
Aperiodic boxes are not yet an exact science (a la bandpass, ported or sealed boxes) An aperiodic box is in effect a box which is lossier than than a sealed box. By making the box lossier you are in effect reducing the Q of the system (at the cost of some efficiency) and taming the peak of a high Q system.
navin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2010, 15:49   #75
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: bangalore
Posts: 13
Thanked: Once
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by navin View Post
Aperiodic boxes are not yet an exact science (a la bandpass, ported or sealed boxes) An aperiodic box is in effect a box which is lossier than than a sealed box. By making the box lossier you are in effect reducing the Q of the system (at the cost of some efficiency) and taming the peak of a high Q system.
But my question is how do we make it lossier, there are vents sold in the US for aperiodic boxes from scanspeak. we have to probably make some trial on an aperiodic boxes. has anyone in india tried this in the car audio setup. any pointers to start here
kaadye is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help get Bass with Xplod Speakers krazydriver84 In-Car Entertainment 21 11th March 2010 16:57
Karnataka Road Noose gets tighter ascertain Street Experiences 8 19th February 2009 23:20
6x9 speakers and amplifier question nishantgandhi In-Car Entertainment 69 13th October 2008 10:48
Audiobahn 6X9 (3 way) speakers for sale.... panky12345 Shifting gears 6 23rd October 2007 18:43
For Sale Infinity Reference 6913l 6x9 speakers clipto333 Shifting gears 0 2nd May 2007 20:16


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 08:49.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks