[Gill]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

or if you're really hell bent on using the head unit's internal crossover - by using a signal summing device.

@ Ajay bhai can you explain it a little bit or just a post a link,would love to read about it!

Originally Posted by navin

In theory if you want to TA a channel (FL, FR, RL, RR, sub) you should do it BEFORE the XO and if you want to TA a band (HF, Mid, LF) you can only do this after the XO.
As far as rear fill goes yuo can always use the XO of an amp to go active.

@Navin ji,In HU TA is done for channel right?But what we are looking is to align the different bands!Is it possible to align the bands indvaidually in car audio?if yes how can one do it!

[navin]

Originally Posted by Gill

@Navin ji,In HU TA is done for channel right?But what we are looking is to align the different bands!Is it possible to align the bands indvaidually in car audio?if yes how can one do it!

TA can be done for channels or bands or both.

However each processor also tend to rob the music of a bit of oomph (sorta like a woman with too much make up).

one can TA the left and right, front and rear channels and one can TA the left front tweeter to the left front woofer (bands) and so on. But in reality if one went through this much processing all the processors involved better be very very good.

I used to say that the 741 (and it variants - 275, 324, etc) was akin to giving a monkey too much rope, I now feel that chips like the Motorola 563xx / 567xx series, TI 320Cxxx series, etc... is like giving the monkey the whole goddamn reel. Today even a good DSP chip set like the Analog Devices 194x series can be got for under $5 (and that includes test boards etc..).

It is not a matter of IF one can do it, it is more a matter of WHY should one do it.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by navin

TA can be done for channels or bands or both.

However each processor also tend to rob the music of a bit of oomph (sorta like a woman with too much make up).

one can TA the left and right, front and rear channels and one can TA the left front tweeter to the left front woofer (bands) and so on. But in reality if one went through this much processing all the processors involved better be very very good.

I used to say that the 741 (and it variants - 275, 324, etc) was akin to giving a monkey too much rope, I now feel that chips like the Motorola 563xx / 567xx series, TI 320Cxxx series, etc... is like giving the monkey the whole goddamn reel. Today even a good DSP chip set like the Analog Devices 194x series can be got for under $5 (and that includes test boards etc..).

It is not a matter of IF one can do it, it is more a matter of WHY should one do it.

Oh man! Navin, at this rate we will be able to design a new T-BHP HU ourselves - the WHY is right there!!! You handle the signal processing, I'll handle the controls, LBM can handle the PSU. There's @clip-maharaj for the UI (and maybe the final packaging too - he is into CC boxes), Gunbir can do the CD drive part, @TSK the radio part. There are lots of gadget-happy guys who can handle the USB, iPod (why not Creative or Zune?), GPS, Bluetooth - the list is endless.

Bole to - wo @B&T-bhai hai na diraibhar dijhaeen ke liye?

And we have Sam to handle sales - couldn't have asked for a better team. We have a captive market, including their relatives and friends. A.S.S. is covered too - since T-BHP has members from Surat to Silchar, Kashmir to Kochi. Even Dubai and USA are covered.

Guys, what say you? We can at least start a separate thread to discuss the specs.

[navin]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Oh man! Navin, at this rate we will be able to design a new T-BHP HU ourselves - the WHY is right there!!! ...

Der Alte, you are scaring the newbies! ;-)

but in the old days we did design our own XOs and Amps so really I dont think a DSP is that much more difficult (the are single chip solution anyway). this is more of a manufacturing exercise than design.

[low_bass_makker]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Oh man! Navin, at this rate we will be able to design a new T-BHP HU ourselves - the WHY is right there!!! You handle the signal processing, I'll handle the controls, LBM can handle the PSU. There's @clip-maharaj for the UI (and maybe the final packaging too - he is into CC boxes), Gunbir can do the CD drive part, @TSK the radio part. There are lots of gadget-happy guys who can handle the USB, iPod (why not Creative or Zune?), GPS, Bluetooth - the list is endless.

Bole to - wo @B&T-bhai hai na diraibhar dijhaeen ke liye?

And we have Sam to handle sales - couldn't have asked for a better team. We have a captive market, including their relatives and friends. A.S.S. is covered too - since T-BHP has members from Surat to Silchar, Kashmir to Kochi. Even Dubai and USA are covered.

Guys, what say you? We can at least start a separate thread to discuss the specs.

Originally Posted by navin

Der Alte, you are scaring the newbies! ;-)

but in the old days we did design our own XOs and Amps so really I dont think a DSP is that much more difficult (the are single chip solution anyway). this is more of a manufacturing exercise than design.

What will be the brand name called ?

MegaAudio
Dhoom Electronics
Ghoda Chaap

Come on guys I think we can do it.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by navin

Der Alte, you are scaring the newbies! ;-)

but in the old days we did design our own XOs and Amps so really I dont think a DSP is that much more difficult (the are single chip solution anyway). this is more of a manufacturing exercise than design.

No, Navin, it is the design which has the most effort and significance.

Once the BoM is developed and the firmware finalized, we can get it manufactured in China! They anyway have access to all the facilities needed for productionizing a product (PCB and mech CAD, modeling etc.).

As far as the newbies are concerned, we will not be surprised if there are skilled designers hiding out there - or doing it for others for all we know.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by low_bass_makker

What will be the brand name called ?

MegaAudio
Dhoom Electronics
Ghoda Chaap

Come on guys I think we can do it.

Ai hoi na gal, shereya, that's the spirit.

Arrey yaar, think of something with universal appeal!

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by clipto333

so you don't want this discussion to go on? thats sad.

Originally Posted by clipto333

and no offence b&t but i replied and asked navinji something. why are you banging your head lol

What part of my reply made you feel that I dont want the discussion to go on? I in fact suggested 3 options by which you CAN have full-range rear fills in an active system.

I was head-banging to your following statement. This is because there ARE choices.

Originally Posted by clipto333

but one cant use rear fills in an active system. i agree with you though but then there is no choice.

No offence taken. But I must admit you are a bit touchy . If you feel offended by any of my statements, feel free to give me a call and give me a earful. I get such calls from Ishan on a daily basis, sometimes even when I have said or done nothing to him on the particular day.

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by Gill

@ Ajay bhai can you explain it a little bit or just a post a link,would love to read about it!

A simple example is that of a common audio mixer. It is not a complicated design and someone like Clip can easily DIY it. There are many such projects available online and with electronics journals.

While the generic audio mixer (as used by DJs etc) adds two or more different sound sources with equalization and levels as applied, for the purpose of audio summing, one would need a simple device that is able to add the low, mid and high frequencies (this you could derive from the line output of the amps used in the system, by the way), without any alteration of levels or equalization. Hence, a very simple circuit.

I have not encountered many devices from popular brands that do this, but one such device that can manage this with speaker level signals is this : JL Audio: Products

There must be many more, it's just that I am not aware of it.

[clipto333]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

[i]

What part of my reply made you feel that I dont want the discussion to go on? I in fact suggested 3 options by which you CAN have full-range rear fills in an active system.

i thought you are banging your head because of my stupid statements and questions.

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

[i]
I was head-banging to your following statement. This is because there ARE choices.

thanks for explaining bro. i need to do my research first. :-)

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

[i]

No offence taken. But I must admit you are a bit touchy . If you feel offended by any of my statements, feel free to give me a call and give me a earful. I get such calls from Ishan on a daily basis, sometimes even when I have said or done nothing to him on the particular day.

i never feel offended by any of your post b&t. i never would. you have a great sense of humor plus you are a knowledge power house. and i RESPECT you for this and your contribution to the forum.

pm me your no. i will take out my bhadaas on you then. lol.

and now something on topic.

like you explained, rear fills can be used. an easier but expensive way would be to use an outboard active xo. right? one will just need 2 channels from the HU. the out board xo would do the segregation. then the rears can be used on the other channels on the HU.

another way is to use the HUs xo and use a summing device to sum the channels and get a full range output. don't you think it will have an adverse effect on the sq?

another option is using the amp xo. one can use the full range output and use another amp to power the rears. this is a good option IMO if one has a good amp or has unused channels on the amp.

whats the best according to you? and how much does an outboard active xo cost?

also i was reading the specs of pioneer's 9200 dsp. it can do TA and it has a 3-way active XO. now is it a good piece of equipment according to you?

cheers

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by clipto333

i never feel offended by any of your post b&t. i never would.

Thanks, glad to know that.

Originally Posted by clipto333

like you explained, rear fills can be used. an easier but expensive way would be to use an outboard active xo. right? one will just need 2 channels from the HU. the out board xo would do the segregation. then the rears can be used on the other channels on the HU.

Correct. Accurateness of X over will depend on the type chosen. We have discussed before; rotary knobs vs those with electronic settings/ readouts.

Originally Posted by clipto333

another way is to use the HUs xo and use a summing device to sum the channels and get a full range output. don't you think it will have an adverse effect on the sq?

No, why? Will depend on the quality of summing device, but still it wouldnt be very difficult to get it right.

Originally Posted by clipto333

another option is using the amp xo. one can use the full range output and use another amp to power the rears. this is a good option IMO if one has a good amp or has unused channels on the amp.

Similar to using outboard active crossover in conjunction with regular amplifiers. But again, exactness etc depending on the frequency adjustment controls.

Originally Posted by clipto333

whats the best according to you? and how much does an outboard active xo cost?

It would be difficult to say one is clearly the best, but the idea would be to configure such that the frequency can be precisely set and as far as possible avoid the sigmal summing / DIY-giri and keep things simple. For example, adding an outboard crossover may not be possible if it is din sized, or the regular ones with rotary knobs will be difficult to set etc and maintaining distinct front/ rear channels.

So, I would actually prefer a setup where the front pre-out is used for front channels, rear for rear, sub for sub etc. and the frequency settings for crossover can be done accurately - however this may be achieved.

Originally Posted by clipto333

also i was reading the specs of pioneer's 9200 dsp. it can do TA and it has a 3-way active XO. now is it a good piece of equipment according to you?

Isnt that a very old model? I have used something like this with a similar model number ages back, if I remember correctly. With ordinary equipment though, so couldnt tell how good it is. I think an equivalent (and newer) Alpine should be better.

[navin]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

So, I would actually prefer a setup where the front pre-out is used for front channels, rear for rear, sub for sub etc. and the frequency settings for crossover can be done accurately - however this may be achieved..

B&T, you are sounding as old fashioned as me.

[low_bass_makker]

Very soon we will be seeing a thread of clip ->

DIY Mixer (food or sound you decide)

[clipto333]

Originally Posted by low_bass_makker

Very soon we will be seeing a thread of clip ->

DIY Mixer (food or sound you decide)

so you are an astrologer right(imagining lbm sitting on a foot path with a parrot)

[low_bass_makker]

Originally Posted by clipto333

so you are an astrologer right(imagining lbm sitting on a foot path with a parrot)

Nahi yaar I cannot not do that as I am not DIY astrologer.