[redfire]

Originally Posted by greenhorn

in my HU, changing the Fader only decreases the Front/Rear volume to alter the balance. I've never seen it increased, so i guess the proportion is correct.

for ex, my fader is set at +2, and the fronts play exactly at the same volume as when its at 0 or the extreme-( i know that for a fact , because if it went any higher , the panels will vibrate) , while the rears play at reduced volume

Green - Isn't every HU is like that only? With my limted knowledge any audio device, fader or balance only decreases the volume of the opposite channel when incresed in a channel, while the channel we are increasing is actually not increasing. I think the method suggested by him (I am following that) is to baseline the rear volume (assuming rear is powered by HU), and increase the gain of the amp which is powering the front spakers alone till you balance the rear/front sound level according to your taste (give the front a slight upper hand to make it driver oriented). If you fade the rear and increase the gain of front, how can you make the front/rear balance (rears are muted na?)

[speedzak]

Times means, certain tracks and my ever changing moods (not the latex variety).

Yes! As guessed by many, the components are wired in parallel.

[greenhorn]

Green - Isn't every HU is like that only? With my limted knowledge any audio device, fader or balance only decreases the volume of the opposite channel when incresed in a channel, while the channel we are increasing is actually not increasing.

redfire, Thats what I think too, but since DerAlte said so, i thought there might be some HU's which have positive gain with the fader.

I think the method suggested by him (I am following that) is to baseline the rear volume (assuming rear is powered by HU), and increase the gain of the amp which is powering the front spakers alone till you balance the rear/front sound level according to your taste (give the front a slight upper hand to make it driver oriented).

If thats what he meant, I'd rather baseline the fronts and then make the rears follow suit. Wouldnt you?

[redfire]

Originally Posted by greenhorn

If thats what he meant, I'd rather baseline the fronts and then make the rears follow suit. Wouldnt you?

Green - actually I am speaking the typical 3 sets sepaker ICE (front comps powered by amp, rear co-ax powered by HU, sub in boot powered by amp). Then, we cannot adjust the rear as it is driven directly by HU. I am following what he suggested, make all amp gains to 0 and fader/balance also to 0. Play music and you will hear only rear co-axs. Then increase the gain of amp to front comps till it is balanced (according to your taste) with rear, then increase the gain of amp to sub till the sub is merged well.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by greenhorn

redfire, Thats what I think too, but since DerAlte said so, i thought there might be some HU's which have positive gain with the fader.

No, you are quite right, red and green, fader doesn't change the volume of the signal, it serves only to set the 'other' set to lower volume! With the fader set to 0, the apparent loudness is different as compared to fader set to full front or rear - there is an interdependence in front+rear systems. It doesn't matter in front only or rear only systems.

Originally Posted by greenhorn

If thats what he meant, I'd rather baseline the fronts and then make the rears follow suit. Wouldnt you?

There are no absolutes, green, you are not wrong. The principle is just to have a reference to set the other.

[greenhorn]

Originally Posted by Redfire

Green - actually I am speaking the typical 3 sets sepaker ICE (front comps powered by amp, rear co-ax powered by HU, sub in boot powered by amp). Then, we cannot adjust the rear as it is driven directly by HU.

In that case , yes that would be the better way to go. But for me , both front and rear are driven by the HU, and Rear is 4 db more sensitive than front, so for me , I chose to set front as 0 db, and turned down the rears

for you, the rears are less powerful, for me , its the fronts, so I guess that's why the different approaches

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by iraghava

Defeat function in Alpine HU's removes all the EQ, MX etc. functions that the HU is capable of & supplies non-tampered sound to the amp/speakers.

Thank you, darling. Though what did you suppose, I thought of the feature?

Originally Posted by speedzak

Times means, certain tracks and my ever changing moods (not the latex variety).

Its a good thing to be having to change Moods all the time. .

But I was coming more from the angle that since your equalizers are set to zero, turning on defeat will not make any difference to the sound, regardless of your moods.

[greenhorn]

B&T, i think setting it on defeat might remove any processing that the flat eq may still be applying to the signal, and thus increase the fidelity of the signal

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by greenhorn

B&T, i think setting it on defeat might remove any processing that the flat eq may still be applying to the signal, and thus increase the fidelity of the signal

Lol, that's a good one.

[shrivz]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

What are these times? And what difference does it make??

Must be in parallel. Impedance halved, i.e. 2 ohms. Not bad since the speakers are the same.

The reason I thought of a series config was because of overloading..

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Shouldn't the fader be at 0 to set the front gain? With the fader full front, one will get a different loudness when the fader reverts to 0 for normal playing, and never be able to figure out the front to rear proportion.

Could be in parallel, then you get loud volume with lower power, since impedance is half (keeping fingers crossed anticipating overloading)

I'm considering a case in which both front and rear are powered by an amplifier and secondly for me, the speakers sound good at a very fine point Anything more or less ruins the high frequencies.. Hence I consider the fronts as primary. The rears just fill in.. Moreover I prefer driving with the fader up front if there's nobody sitting behind..

[greenhorn]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

Lol, that's a good one.

That was not a joke!

at least in analog amps , bypassing the tone control circuitry made a world of difference, even when the controls were set to flat. I'm not sure about how things are for HU's

EDIT:@ shrivz: I suppose that's true but for my soundcard , there is a difference , since the card is 94/24 capable , but the eq resamples ( and quite badly too) to 48/16

[shrivz]

Originally Posted by greenhorn

B&T, i think setting it on defeat might remove any processing that the flat eq may still be applying to the signal, and thus increase the fidelity of the signal

There isn't any difference.. atleast to my ears there isn't.. Well, I'm not amongst the ones who have golden ears y'know!
and in a car environment, I don't think golden ears would really help!

[redfire]

Originally Posted by greenhorn

at least in analog amps , bypassing the tone control circuitry made a world of difference, even when the controls were set to flat.

Is it? Never felt with my Rotel. I always keep the tone on, and set the Bass and Treble (not you B&T ) at 0. But occassionaly fiddle with bass when I feel some songs need it more and also depends on mood. My ears never felt any difference when tone set to off compared to tone set to on and bass / treble set to 0. I will give a try. But as you know (way better than me) there's no hard and fast rule. If your ears like it that's what only matters. For me everything else is a myth.

[greenhorn]

mine's a very entry level amp, that might explain the big difference. It might not be noticeable on higher end stuff !
but on my soundcard , EQ flat vs off - the difference is noticeable

[DerAlte]

@greenhorn is truly gifted. May your tribe increase manifold!!!

Guys, shall we get back to tuning HUs? PC soundcards and analog amps are not in the same category.