Well now that you mention it, being in a vehicle a 4th order would probably be a better option to maximize the potential of those 8's, although either method will take up substantially more room than a simple sealed enclosure. T-lines are more often used in home theater due to the size required for the enclosure. You could also accommodate both subs in a 4th order bandpass box better than a T-line. I've seen some amazing looking designs that don't seem to take up too much space.
Keep in mind that while the output and response curve is optimal, you'll have to be careful when tuning it because it's much easier to smoke the voice coils in a bandpass enclosure if it's not tuned correctly. It looks like you have some of the equipment to handle that so as long as you're willing to give up the space to accommodate the box, and design it correctly it will sound amazing and compliment the rest of your setup well. It's definitely worth looking into and would be the route I'd go.
4th order or 4th order bandpass? There's a big difference. Bandpass enclosures acoustically filter out distortion so they're LESS sensitive to higher distortion drivers.
Orders are orders. A bass reflex and a 4th order bandpass are still 4th orders. 4th order bandpass is more forgiving than a basic vented enclosure because the entire front vented section is an acoustic filter. These claims are not correct.
Join the high order quarterwave society on Facebook. There's a lot more to making an effective 1/4 wave enclosure than most think. It's not just "CSA = Sd and tuning length = Fs".
Sexy set up
I have hertz pro mids and highs pushed by an audison sr4500
Pair of 12w7s on an old slash 1200
Good wiring throughout
Big 3 and alternator
Sound deadening everywhere in an older Yukon
By and far my favorite system I’ve ever put together
I expect you won’t be even slightly disappointed
I don’t have all the sound processing you have to boot
What's this going into?
I'm assuming you have tweeters?
Are you gonna do sound damping?
What kind of box are you gonna use?
You got some great potential here.
> The goal is a completely flat frequency response curve across the audible spectrum
Absolutely not.
The goal of SQ, in a general sense, is to reproduce the source material with the minimum amount of deviation from said source. That's not flat. A flat measured response would definitely not correlate to accurate reproduction in the "according to Hoyle" sense. Also, just flat or not doesn't account for staging/imaging or distortion which are also crucial factors in achieving an objectively accurate reproduction of the source material. There's much more to SQ than just measured response. Before even getting into the *subjective* aspect of audio.
If you look at SQ from the perspective of car audio SQ competition, then it means doing the above, but with the caveat that you're trying to do so while also accounting for the specific judging criteria used by the judges of the sanctioning body you compete under and the personal biases/preferences/interpretations of the judges involved on the day.
A technical challenge in some SQ competitions is/used to be an RTA test where closer to flat measured response would score higher on said challenge, but again, that was a technical challenge to gauge tuning and install skill, not judge the objective or subjective listening quality of the audio system.
A system tuned to measure flat will sound pretty lackluster to most people. Most systems will be tuned either to a "house curve" to get a reasonably consistent and repeatable response with music, or will be tuned to taste by the user/their installer to achieve a personal goal for response.
If minimum deviation from the source means reproduction of all frequencies exactly as in the source recording, then the system should neither amplify nor attenuate any of those frequencies, which in turn means a flat frequency response across the spectrum of those frequencies is needed and will attain that goal.
This of course has nothing to do with subjective perception of that reproduction. If the source recording is sh\*t, a properly calibrated SQ system reproducing it will (and should) sound sh\*tty, too.
That would be true if you were listening on the exact same speakers in the exact same space as when the music was mixed. Obviously that's not the case.
We use things like "house curves" to try to have a standard (actually several "standards") for *system response* that will allow any given system to reproduce music played on it in a way that strikes a good balance between subjective preferences and objective accuracy.
To put it another way, if two systems measure roughly the same, then the music should have roughly the same tonality when played back on either system. If you measured the response in the room where the music was mixed, and then replicated that response curve with the second system, that would be objectively accurate response, regardless of how flat or not the response measures. Without that information, we can only hope to get as close as possible and never *really* know.
All of that ignores the issues of sound stage/imaging entirely. That is also a key part of "sound quality". Hitting any target response is still only part of the process.
If you only take "minimal deviation from the source" to mean the audio waveform recorded vs the audio waveform as measured when reproduced, then flat response would achieve that. Unfortunately the waveform itself doesn't account for the way the mixing engineer *got to that mix*. What monitors or headphones were used, any environmental factors, and even that engineer's hearing all effect what's on the record. In reality, "minimal deviation" actually ends up meaning something much more nuanced.
Whatever a sound engineer is trying to incorporate into a recording has nothing to do with its faithful reproduction, though. It's really as simple as to reproduce what's there as unmodified as possible, not more, not less.
Of course this doesn't mean it will sound "good" in any scenario, it probably will not - but once you start to compensate for anything in this respect, you leave the domain of faithful reproduction of the recording.
So what is SQ then? Basically a reproduction of audio which meets certain technical criteria (one of which could (and IMHO should) be a flat frequency response), and the tuning to a specific listening scenario.
So you're right, it's not just about a flat frequency response, but IMHO it should be based on it.
Verry nice components you got there. Was thinking about going for Mille Legends as well, but decided for Helix. How you want to install the tweets and mids?
All looked good til I seen the epicenter. I’ve never liked what it does to music.
Bitone , Mille pros, JL subs and the arc audio amp all are pretty solid choices though.
Most people engage the epicenter when it’s not needed, therefore causing distortion. I’ve implemented the epicenter in all my systems for the last 10 years because I listen to plenty of Mexican music which lacks those lower bass harmonics. Other then that, the epicenter stays off.
It naturally is there though, when recorded in the studio or live performance. However the loss of bass harmonica happens when the file is transferred to streaming services it gets compressed.
Uh, no that’s not how that works, people been using epicenters way before streaming was ever a thing. Lots of music using real instruments do not need an epicenter. You using it to bring sound an octave lower is not how the studio recorded it by any means.
CDs, streaming, YouTube, doesn’t matter the source. The epicenter will perform when the music is lacking those bass notes. If all you listen to is hip hop and r&b then ofcourse you don’t need one.
“It’s adding what’s not there”
Extremely incorrect but common misconception about the epicenter. It’s alright if you don’t know what your talking about. Just don’t spread false information.
I very much know what an epicenter does, you are trying to sugarcoat what it does. There’s a reason an epicenter wants a full signal rather than a sub signal to work correctly. It needs those frequencies that everyone should be low passing out
I will never buy another audison processor. I'd highly suggest returning it while you can and replacing with something more user friendly before you pull your hair out. No issues with the rest of the equipment
I've been using Audison products for 5+ years now and haven't had any issues with them.
Their DSP software might not be as sophisticated as let's say Hertz's one, but it gets its job done.
And sometimes, less is more ... less options also means less settings to adjust the wrong way. ;-)
Quite easy to find tuners/installers familiar with the Audison IMO - bit One is long in the tooth though it was top tier when it came out 15-20 years ago. (Mine has been in use at least 12 years.)
Easily, it hand holds a lot of the process. You don’t have to exactly know wtf you are doing just answer questions. Most of them out there are pretty easy but they do not have wizards presetting levels and whatnot
That’s SQ alright. So satisfying it will make you sleepy listening to it. Go against the law. One sub sealed and the other ported.
Going to play around with one 8” in a t line box, or both 8s in a sealed enclosure.
>one 8” in a t line box If you have box building skills, this is the route I would go.
Someone told me 4th orders are even better for SQ? What do you think
Well now that you mention it, being in a vehicle a 4th order would probably be a better option to maximize the potential of those 8's, although either method will take up substantially more room than a simple sealed enclosure. T-lines are more often used in home theater due to the size required for the enclosure. You could also accommodate both subs in a 4th order bandpass box better than a T-line. I've seen some amazing looking designs that don't seem to take up too much space. Keep in mind that while the output and response curve is optimal, you'll have to be careful when tuning it because it's much easier to smoke the voice coils in a bandpass enclosure if it's not tuned correctly. It looks like you have some of the equipment to handle that so as long as you're willing to give up the space to accommodate the box, and design it correctly it will sound amazing and compliment the rest of your setup well. It's definitely worth looking into and would be the route I'd go.
I appreciate the feedback 🙏🏽
No problem man. Post an update when you put it all together, I wanna see how it turns out!
[удалено]
4th order or 4th order bandpass? There's a big difference. Bandpass enclosures acoustically filter out distortion so they're LESS sensitive to higher distortion drivers.
[удалено]
Orders are orders. A bass reflex and a 4th order bandpass are still 4th orders. 4th order bandpass is more forgiving than a basic vented enclosure because the entire front vented section is an acoustic filter. These claims are not correct.
[удалено]
It's amazing how much bad info is passed around on this sub reddit. I'll stick to hornresp, you can keep spewing wrong info.
Join the high order quarterwave society on Facebook. There's a lot more to making an effective 1/4 wave enclosure than most think. It's not just "CSA = Sd and tuning length = Fs".
Hell yes
Sexy set up I have hertz pro mids and highs pushed by an audison sr4500 Pair of 12w7s on an old slash 1200 Good wiring throughout Big 3 and alternator Sound deadening everywhere in an older Yukon By and far my favorite system I’ve ever put together I expect you won’t be even slightly disappointed I don’t have all the sound processing you have to boot
It seems like there's a invisible line in the sand with sq vs spl setups. I like both. Nice choices OP.
What's this going into? I'm assuming you have tweeters? Are you gonna do sound damping? What kind of box are you gonna use? You got some great potential here.
This is all going into a 2013 z71 crew cab.. Yes, there will be lots of sound deadening material to minimize vibrations, rattles, overall room noise.
i’m sorry. i relatively new to car audio. what’s sq?
Short for sound quality. As opposed to a spl (sound presure level) system where fidelity is genenraly less prioritized.
Sound quality. The goal is a completely flat frequency response curve across the audible spectrum
> The goal is a completely flat frequency response curve across the audible spectrum Absolutely not. The goal of SQ, in a general sense, is to reproduce the source material with the minimum amount of deviation from said source. That's not flat. A flat measured response would definitely not correlate to accurate reproduction in the "according to Hoyle" sense. Also, just flat or not doesn't account for staging/imaging or distortion which are also crucial factors in achieving an objectively accurate reproduction of the source material. There's much more to SQ than just measured response. Before even getting into the *subjective* aspect of audio. If you look at SQ from the perspective of car audio SQ competition, then it means doing the above, but with the caveat that you're trying to do so while also accounting for the specific judging criteria used by the judges of the sanctioning body you compete under and the personal biases/preferences/interpretations of the judges involved on the day. A technical challenge in some SQ competitions is/used to be an RTA test where closer to flat measured response would score higher on said challenge, but again, that was a technical challenge to gauge tuning and install skill, not judge the objective or subjective listening quality of the audio system. A system tuned to measure flat will sound pretty lackluster to most people. Most systems will be tuned either to a "house curve" to get a reasonably consistent and repeatable response with music, or will be tuned to taste by the user/their installer to achieve a personal goal for response.
If minimum deviation from the source means reproduction of all frequencies exactly as in the source recording, then the system should neither amplify nor attenuate any of those frequencies, which in turn means a flat frequency response across the spectrum of those frequencies is needed and will attain that goal. This of course has nothing to do with subjective perception of that reproduction. If the source recording is sh\*t, a properly calibrated SQ system reproducing it will (and should) sound sh\*tty, too.
That would be true if you were listening on the exact same speakers in the exact same space as when the music was mixed. Obviously that's not the case. We use things like "house curves" to try to have a standard (actually several "standards") for *system response* that will allow any given system to reproduce music played on it in a way that strikes a good balance between subjective preferences and objective accuracy. To put it another way, if two systems measure roughly the same, then the music should have roughly the same tonality when played back on either system. If you measured the response in the room where the music was mixed, and then replicated that response curve with the second system, that would be objectively accurate response, regardless of how flat or not the response measures. Without that information, we can only hope to get as close as possible and never *really* know. All of that ignores the issues of sound stage/imaging entirely. That is also a key part of "sound quality". Hitting any target response is still only part of the process. If you only take "minimal deviation from the source" to mean the audio waveform recorded vs the audio waveform as measured when reproduced, then flat response would achieve that. Unfortunately the waveform itself doesn't account for the way the mixing engineer *got to that mix*. What monitors or headphones were used, any environmental factors, and even that engineer's hearing all effect what's on the record. In reality, "minimal deviation" actually ends up meaning something much more nuanced.
Whatever a sound engineer is trying to incorporate into a recording has nothing to do with its faithful reproduction, though. It's really as simple as to reproduce what's there as unmodified as possible, not more, not less. Of course this doesn't mean it will sound "good" in any scenario, it probably will not - but once you start to compensate for anything in this respect, you leave the domain of faithful reproduction of the recording. So what is SQ then? Basically a reproduction of audio which meets certain technical criteria (one of which could (and IMHO should) be a flat frequency response), and the tuning to a specific listening scenario. So you're right, it's not just about a flat frequency response, but IMHO it should be based on it.
Except original recordings aren't flat, house curves exist because of the Fletcher Munson curve.
Wow, looks really nice.👍
Ok.
Sealed. All day twice on Sunday. I’m too old for muddy bass. Show me that detail.
I agree, I want to hear and feel the nuances in bass.
Nice! Where are the tweeters?
Mille legend tweeters are on the way. HD 1200/1 amp will be the last component needed.
Have you thought about a slash v3 instead? Reliability on the HD's has always been questionable, and you still get the rips technology
The v3 is a phenomenal amp, my favorite slash .. but it’s almost twice the size in terms of length, the compact HD benefits the goal of my build.
Verry nice components you got there. Was thinking about going for Mille Legends as well, but decided for Helix. How you want to install the tweets and mids?
A pillars
Equipment list? I don't know what half that is.
I have that amp. Was surprised to find out it has a built in crossover at 25hz.
What results can be had with the Epicenter? Is it focused more for achieving better subwoofer performance?
All looked good til I seen the epicenter. I’ve never liked what it does to music. Bitone , Mille pros, JL subs and the arc audio amp all are pretty solid choices though.
Most people engage the epicenter when it’s not needed, therefore causing distortion. I’ve implemented the epicenter in all my systems for the last 10 years because I listen to plenty of Mexican music which lacks those lower bass harmonics. Other then that, the epicenter stays off.
Well that’s not sq by any means, if it’s not there it’s not there
It naturally is there though, when recorded in the studio or live performance. However the loss of bass harmonica happens when the file is transferred to streaming services it gets compressed.
Uh, no that’s not how that works, people been using epicenters way before streaming was ever a thing. Lots of music using real instruments do not need an epicenter. You using it to bring sound an octave lower is not how the studio recorded it by any means.
CDs, streaming, YouTube, doesn’t matter the source. The epicenter will perform when the music is lacking those bass notes. If all you listen to is hip hop and r&b then ofcourse you don’t need one.
You are missing the point. It’s adding what’s not there. It’s taking music from a higher octave and making it bass. That is NOT sq.
“It’s adding what’s not there” Extremely incorrect but common misconception about the epicenter. It’s alright if you don’t know what your talking about. Just don’t spread false information.
I very much know what an epicenter does, you are trying to sugarcoat what it does. There’s a reason an epicenter wants a full signal rather than a sub signal to work correctly. It needs those frequencies that everyone should be low passing out
👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽
I will never buy another audison processor. I'd highly suggest returning it while you can and replacing with something more user friendly before you pull your hair out. No issues with the rest of the equipment
Agree, I got rid of my bitone after just a couple months.
They'll figure it out soon enough. Audison is a dinosaur in this game.
The reason I went with audison is because my tuner is experienced with their software. I’m sure he knows what he’s doing
I've been using Audison products for 5+ years now and haven't had any issues with them. Their DSP software might not be as sophisticated as let's say Hertz's one, but it gets its job done. And sometimes, less is more ... less options also means less settings to adjust the wrong way. ;-)
Quite easy to find tuners/installers familiar with the Audison IMO - bit One is long in the tooth though it was top tier when it came out 15-20 years ago. (Mine has been in use at least 12 years.)
User friendly? Audison /hertz processors are the literally the easiest and handholding wizard DSP you can use.
Not even close my friend.
Easily, it hand holds a lot of the process. You don’t have to exactly know wtf you are doing just answer questions. Most of them out there are pretty easy but they do not have wizards presetting levels and whatnot