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


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 4th July 2009, 14:41   #16
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: .
Posts: 30
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

I dont think its car palace or motor plaza.
pankkaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2009, 00:18   #17
BHPian
 
jithudigitised's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Thiruvananthapuram
Posts: 329
Thanked: 58 Times
Default

well it was one in Pongumoodu Junction.tvm.I think its car shoppy.

i will mention the situation.

I reached there to just inquire about the spacer rings for my swift.But seing the hertz components there, i thought why not install it there as i will not have time to DIY my new illusions in swift(yep some new work came at office) for a month.So i asked them if they could install it and they said,"Sure,Why not?".
The owner called a guy(who speaks hindi only) and asked him to install it.But since he was already working in someone else car,he instructed another guy to install it and second guy started installing it.
But when the time came to connect the amp out to speakers,he tried to connect to directly to the mid,then i instructed him to use the crossover and then connect the mid outs of the crossover to my mid and the treble out to the tweeters.So he started doing it that way.
Now comes our hero of the story(the hindi speaking installer).He asked him why are you connecting the tweeters to crossover since the out was from the amp.Now the second guy followed his instructions and was going to undo the installation of crossover.
At this time i interfered and told the first guy in my half-english-half-hindi (remember the scene in kilukkam with jagathy) that i wanted more control over the music and i want to seperate the mids and highs.I don't know whether he understood it or not,but he went away.I instructed the first guy to do the install as i already said.And he finished job with good precision without the interference of first guy.
Thus my installation story finishes.I thank the guy wo installed it.(I must say he did good installation with me instructing him)and i pay them the installation charge of Rs250 and also purchased a floor mat for the car and left to my home.

@pankkaj

Motor plaza is the worst in my opinion when compared to others.They damaged a friends roof-light i10 while installing two JBL GTO 947 coaxials in boot and it costed him 1200 to repair it.
jithudigitised is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2009, 01:22   #18
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: .
Posts: 30
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

omg @ motorplaza

lol @ (remember the scene in kilukkam with jagathy)

Happened with me - one guy from car palace told me alpine monoblocks lacks punch ??
@ when I was purchasing my amp MRP-M352, It may be the lightest mono from alpine but, He adviced me to buy kenwood 6203 instead..six two zero three?? which gives 130wrms when bridged..ha ha ha..That too when i had a 5203 giving 150wrms bridged. It may be a four channel amp, But he was not even ready to listen what I am saying or trying to clear his mind about wrms. May be he wanted to sell this alpine to someone else. But i came out of the store with my alpine and going happy, coupled with a SWS-1243D in sealed.

Alpine.com*-*V-Power Amplifiers*-*MRP-M352
pankkaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2009, 10:26   #19
Senior - BHPian
 
DerAlte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 8,076
Thanked: 2,876 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jithudigitised View Post
... The owner called a guy(who speaks hindi only) ...
Somehow this reminds me of "The Martians are coming". Installers being exported phrom Uttar Bharat?

A guy who speaks Hindi only in TVM? Tch tch tch, adappaavi, he must be like a pheesh out ob tha watar!

Close shave, Jithu, anyhow what matters is that you are enjoying your music! Congrates.
DerAlte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2009, 12:15   #20
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: .
Posts: 30
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

adappaavi @ tamil not mallu
Yes, people not good in hindi. phhies out ob tha wbatar ji.. phiees

@ jithu. Have you seen the innova done by car palace? polk stuff! In their demo vehicle they have one KAC-5203!!? and two 7204! Next he is going to build a swift it seems. Saw it on TV. @ Jaihind. Hows the new shop POWER HOUSE @Pattom? Did you visit?
pankkaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2009, 18:57   #21
BHPian
 
jithudigitised's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Thiruvananthapuram
Posts: 329
Thanked: 58 Times
Default

i visited the new shop at pattom also.But they only had the JBL speakers and some infinity coaxials.Hadn't seen any components though.
But thinking of doing the g-sport seat covers from them pretty soon.

haven't been to car palace,so no comments.
I think in every car accessory shop there are peoples like these at tvm!
But there are some who know these stuffs pretty well.
jithudigitised is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2009, 19:50   #22
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: .
Posts: 30
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Planning to power the 608c without the crossover and with the high pass switched on the amp (GT5a 604) and to power the tweeter from the Head Unit (with crossover) which is OFF now. I feel I will get more control on the midbass. Any advice? Anybody who has done this before, Throw some light.

Reasons I found ( My logic )

1. To filter only once ( makes sense )
2. No power sharing for mid bass and tweeter ( again )
2. Enough power for the tweeter (18wrms in this case)

Idea struck when installer in TVM asked him (jithudigitised) to connect like that. Which for normal reasons he didnt.

@jithudigitised - May be the installer at carshoppy wanted this!
pankkaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2009, 21:15   #23
Senior - BHPian
 
DerAlte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 8,076
Thanked: 2,876 Times
Default

@pankkaj:
1. What is wrong with the simple straight-forward XO connection method?
2. Is there any problem if power is shared by mid-bass and tweeter? Neither is the amp anaemic, nor do the components demand energy like a black hole?
3. Do you realize you will lose controllability / tunability since the HU volume control will also affect the Pre-out going to the amp? That is, if you tune your system at one volume control setting, that tuning will be lost everytime you even inadvertently change the volume control
4. If you want 18W rms going to the tweeter, you will have to keep the volume full up, What will you do to the amp to control the mid-bass?

If you really want to do it properly the way you are describing it, you have to go 'active'. Not much of a problem, just needs a bit more equipment, maybe a different HU, a few more channels of amplification!
DerAlte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2009, 22:15   #24
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: .
Posts: 30
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Thanks.

I feel as the amp got a variable crossover it will be easy to get what i want instead of relying on the speaker crossover. Tweeter part i can do it either way (with amp or hu).
If we switch High pass on and tune it, The speaker crossover will again filter it and give. So our tuning goes waste. Its like why having two K&N in series when one is sufficient and good considering the free flow, which we want in speakers also. On basis of that i am going to try this. 608c direct to amp with on board crossover on amp. (in a week- read lazy). Is there any souls who have done it. Please comment.
pankkaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2009, 23:23   #25
BHPian
 
jithudigitised's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Thiruvananthapuram
Posts: 329
Thanked: 58 Times
Smile

@pankakaj
may be the installer was thinking the way you thought.I demanded not of that, as obvious reasons stated by DerAlte.
And the installer was not trying to go 'active' also.
jithudigitised is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2009, 09:03   #26
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: .
Posts: 30
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

@ jithu - First see why we have a crossover! and what is the purpose?
Second - A fixed one or a variac?

Now with these I said i would like to try. Still searching for someone who has done this!
pankkaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2009, 09:28   #27
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: .
Posts: 30
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Just googled about this issue. lot to say, so please go wit this link
Audio crossover - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Passive networks may be bulky and cause power loss.


reduction in power amplifier output requirement. With no energy being lost in passive components, amplifier requirements are reduced considerably (up to 1/2 in some cases), reducing costs, and potentially increasing quality.

Networks are not only frequency specific, but also impedance specific. This prevents interchangeability with speaker systems of different impedances.

now this is what i want, instead of using a frequency specific cross over, I will be happy using a variable crossover.
pankkaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2009, 10:53   #28
Team-BHP Support
 
navin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: mumbai
Posts: 22,503
Thanked: 3,882 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pankkaj View Post
Planning to power the 608c without the crossover and with the high pass switched on the amp (GT5a 604) and to power the tweeter from the Head Unit (with crossover) which is OFF now.
1. To filter only once ( makes sense )
2. No power sharing for mid bass and tweeter ( again )
2. Enough power for the tweeter (18wrms in this case)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pankkaj View Post
Passive networks may be bulky and cause power loss.

With no energy being lost in passive components, amplifier requirements are reduced considerably (up to 1/2 in some cases), reducing costs, and potentially increasing quality.
Oh mama mia you have stirred a hornets nest! None of the Gurus are responding so you'll have to make do with what little I know (Gurus please wake up!). I'll try to be brief.

What does a well designed passive XO do?
1. It seperates the sound into 2 or more sections
2. It compensates for driver anamolies (minor highs and lows in the freq response)
3. It matches and flattens driver impedance (a driver is an inductor and usually a crossover will have a network that can flatten impedance rise due to the iductive nature of the voic coil)
4. it offers some degree of phase compensation
5. better XO have ladder networks to compesate for time alignment too (but these are motly found only in home audio).

What does going active give you?
1. no loss of power driving passive compoents (inductors, resistors, capacitors).
2. better damping factor as the amp is connected directly to the speaker/driver
3. if a woofer demands too much power and forces the amp to be over driven the distortion is not felt in the more critical midrnage and the midrange has it's own amp.

As a rule going active is great. However to go active one must fully understand what the passive crossover supplied is doing.

Now for an example lets say you have a 3 way system with XO at say 300hz and 3000Hz. Energy requirements for mst music is as follows:

50-55% below 300hz, 40-45% from 300-3000Hz and 10-12% above 3000Hz. To be safe one would consider 60%, 50%, and 15% (I know it does not add up to 100% but this gives you headroom and the ability to have adequate power for all genres be it baroque, western classical, trance, pop or rock). So while 'going active' has no loss of power in passive components some redundancy means that you need to have about 20-25% more power on tap.

Then you need to apply impednace compensation as amps really prefer loads that are resistive to reactive loads. Amps work more efficeintly when driving a resistive load (an AES paper by KEF in the 70s has more details on this) and hence impedance compensation is desireable if not mandatory.

Then if you really want to be particular your electronic crossover needs to have phase compensation and time alignment as well.

Now, pankkaj, lets get back to your idea.

you want to take you HU's pre out send the signal to your amp which operates only below 3000Hz (via the amp's internal XO) and use the amp to feed the midbass. then you want to take the speaker out of the HU and feed it via the HP network of the passive crossover to your tweeter. Right?

1. How do you know if the HP netwok of the tweeter is set to 3000Hz or 4000Hz?
2. Do you know if there is any impednace compensation applied in this XO?

To do this you first need to trace the schematic of the passive XO and simulate the same using some XO designing software LEAP, LSPCad, Clio, etc.. without this you are driving blind.
navin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2009, 11:27   #29
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: .
Posts: 30
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Thanks, i was expecting these kind of answers and nice to see mr navin replying me.

tweeter part - i mentioned it before also. i can do it either way, so its not a big thing now for me.

mid bass part - what i wanted, how much advantage will i get if i take off the passive and drive it with the amps crossover. i also mentioned as the passives are frequency specific, i will be happy with a variable crossover

Is it must to talk about LEAP. LSP cad, CLio when i wanted was to change the crossover for in search on better sound (may be)

If jbl designed crossover for 608c and we feel its good, then why cant a variable crossover from them sound.

PS- if sticking to passive, why do we have controls even in passive to adjust highs?

The same way i want to control my mid bass which is not possible directly now with the passive, or i feel its too much with (hu - hp, amp - hp, passive xover- nobody does that, just saying) to avoid all these i told these, just one hp filter from amp to the 608c direct. i feel i will get more control on the music being played with a variac direct, than a variac + passive.

Thanks.
pankkaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th July 2009, 16:46   #30
Team-BHP Support
 
navin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: mumbai
Posts: 22,503
Thanked: 3,882 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pankkaj View Post
mr navin

tweeter part - i can do it either way
mid bass part - what i wanted, how much advantage will i get if i take off the passive and drive it with the amps crossover.

Is it must to talk about LEAP. LSP cad, CLio when i wanted was to change the crossover

If jbl designed crossover for 608c and we feel its good, then why cant a variable crossover from them sound.

PS- if sticking to passive, why do we have controls even in passive to adjust highs?
1. Drop the "Mr." ok. I am ok with just "navin".
2. tweeter section - it is best not to exclude the passive XO as it offers the tweeter protection.
3. midbass section -if you want to bypass the passive crossover you can try it. It wont really harm the midbass but you might find the sound to sound more ragged. While this ragged sound can sound exciting at first listen longer sessions might prove otherwise.
4. If you want to remove a crossover and substitute it with another (active in your case) you must understand all that the crossover does . To do that you need a simulation tool like Clio, Calsod, etc...if however you do not have FRD curves then you'd need tool as well such as MLSSA, LMS, etc..
5. did not understand. the sentence "then why cant a variable crossover from them sound." looks incomplete
6. Many speaker manufacturers offer some rudimentary controls usually 0db, +3db, -3db etc.. for the HP section of their crossover. there are 3 reasons for this.
a) it offers the user some degree of control over the sound - one user might like the sound laid back, another might like it more forward....etc...
b) offering control to the HP section is a lot cheaper than applying the same controls to the LP section (besides the reduction of damping factor caused by the resistive element of these controls is more easily felt/noticed in the bass).
c) some locations in a car make the tweeter sound dul,l other's bright so this control is nesscary.
navin 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
Streering Remote fot Pio 4950 nicejits In-Car Entertainment 18 7th January 2008 00:52
whats better ?? a pioneer 4950 or a 3050 ?? Delta9 In-Car Entertainment 9 26th December 2007 21:28
Specs Req Pioneer 2950 and Pioneer 4950 HU nicejits In-Car Entertainment 3 23rd November 2007 12:03


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 01:51.

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