Car Audio Central - Ultimate Car Audio Forum and Community

Jonathan wrote:Never done a line array, but I've considered trying a MTM D'Appolito arrangement before.

LOL... I am doing just that... trying to put them on the a-pillars or dash due to the size of the speakers & sensitivity,,,

Sure I could go for a MTM in the kicks, but my TM setup is already a little on the large side & with the smaller drivers, the low sensitivity & kicks locations just doesn't equate to a posibility.... I hope to have more on this in the next month or so...

Judges
This is one area where there is a problem. Orgs should make more of an effort to make sure the judges are more consistent. IASCA attempted this, by offering a guideline for the judges to use, spelling out what to listen for & how to listen for it with certain tracks. Yet, most get in your vehicles & let their egos take over. You can educate a judge to know what the source was intended to sound like, to remove all subjectivity out of the equation for the tone deaf, bass heavy & sizzling highs lover...

Then the is the lack of local events.... 2 or 3 a year in some areas.... I have to drive out of the state most of the time... that sux... gas prices aren't helping either.

And there is an obvious lack of manufacturer support @ large events... this is huge. And with 3 diff finals... they don't know which to support... SQ needs to be unified for it to survive... IASCA tried with USAC... but the USAC judges & rules suck and many complained about it...

with SPL you can just about buy stuff and throw it into any car and get a loud system, so in a sense it is cheaper and easier than doing a good SQ system for the average Joe.
A good SQ system tends to involve a very solid understanding of acoustic principles that most people don't possess, whereas simply wiring a fast&furious system from best buy into a car, a trained monkey could do.
That's another issue to consider when weighing SQ proliferation in the market.
SQ in regards to perception though, I'll say that SQ usually equates to higher quality components and better brands, which target that as a higher price range for the goods.
People often equate SQ with high performance, high quality, expensive brands or lines of product.

Good SQ systems to require more effort though, if you're talking about anything below world class competition in any catagory, since things like crossover design and speaker placement play a much larger role in system design compared to the typical "slap speakers into factory holes" approach.

Now lastly I just wanted to note in regards to Ryan's comment on SQ being subjective, this is a misconception a lot of people have, again thanks largely to IASCA rule structures of past and present relying heavily on install and customization etc as already noted by Geolemon.
actual SQ can in many ways be objectively measured, using an RTA for sound curve, and a simple binary system of points for things like soundstage, accurate imaging, and a real-feel factor, giving a point simply for presence or lack thereof in each catagory. Many aspects of a good SQ system are fairly objective, if not a bit more complex in determination compared to a simple SPL score on a microphone in a single lane pass.

SPL events are ok, and sure I appreciate a loud stereo, but as a purist, I still feel that while loud is nice now and then, I see no real point in having a system that's loud if you can't use it for waht all of this is really about in the first place.. enjoying the music.

Geolemon, nice to see you here once again. Hope the holidays treated you well.

Jonathan wrote:Never done a line array, but I've considered trying a MTM D'Appolito arrangement before.

"line array" is sort of the wrong term, so I apologize for that.
But "phase aligned array" just sounds way too technical.

A real "line array" is typically used to project sound, as the rate of decay is lower than it is with a single speaker in a traditional cabinet.
Usually, line arrays are used in huge venues, like stadiums... big outdoor concerts... things like that, to project sound WAY OUT TO YOU GUYS BACK IN THE CHEAP SEATS...

Line arrays have problems when you try to listen to them in the near-field (close to them), because you start to GET the lobing and other phase-related bad anomolies (exactly the same reasons I don't advocate people to run rear speakers... at least the SQ related reasons ) due to having speakers playing sound to you from different distances on the array - i.e. different "arrival times".

Which is why I had to make sure the speakers would all be equidistant from your ears - so I'd get the benefits of a line array (the simulation of a "point" that is farther away than the speakers actually are for better imaging, direct-pathlength sound that decays slower than the reflected-pathlength sounds for better imaging and cleaner sound quality, and generally louder sound levels - rock on!! ).

So it really is more a "phase aliigned array", especially since we're intentionally sitting in the near-field of the speakers.
The GREAT thing about car audio, is that you CAN build your system around what you KNOW are fixed seating positions! :happy055:
In my house, I'm NEVER sitting in one place - makes it hard, with traditional cabinet designs (which is why I play with very non-traditional ones ).

Give an MTM a shot! I think there are also issues with listening to an MTM in the near-field... so maybe you could try it like what I did, phase-align them all along a curve.. make your curve how I did, it was a piece of cake.

As long as you don't mind taking a sawzall to the inside of your doors, that is.

Not to edit your post to out-of-context proportions or anything:

KikiTheCat wrote:with SPL you can just about buy stuff and throw it into any car and get a loud system...for the average Joe.
People often equate SQ with...expensive brands or lines of product.

Perception is reality.
My point was that IASCA needs to do a lot more, put more effort, more marketing, more promotion, more spectator involvement going behind it's SQ competition, compared to it's SPL competition - because of these very perceptions.
Doesn't matter if they are wrong or right - they just are.

Here's to hoping that IASCA - or MECA - or whoever - recognizes this, and actually does make SQ more accessible, more sporting, more fun to watch as well as participate in - like SPL did with DB Drag.

A nice side-effect if this actually could be made to play out by people smarter and more powerful:
Car audio might begin to shed its immature, "boom car" stereotype that plagues this hobby.
I'm sick of noise ordinances that are brought on by kids who don't have the common sense to understand where (and when) booming is appropriate.
Look at me - there's no bigger enthusiast I'm sure - and I've pondered actually setting up traps like building a "herf gun" to shut ignorant little pricks down as they drove down my suburban street at 140dB. And I'm someone that would stand up in court and argue against a noise law - think about how annoyed people can get who don't like car audio.

But, actual fact - they say something like 60%-80% of the US population has (I'm not kidding) NO common sense.

Geolemon, nice to see you here once again. Hope the holidays treated you well.

They did I suppose - although trying to coordinate and schedule and plan so as not to offend my family, and not offend the in-laws, and make sure we can get there when the rest of the family is there, and which house is going to be lunch, and which one is going to be dinner, and god-what-do-you-mean-your-mother-wants-us-to-come-over-in-the-morning-and-then-later-for-our-planned-dinner-we-agreed-to...
It gets crazy.
Don't get married.

A good SQ system tends to involve a very solid understanding of acoustic principles that most people don't possess

OR...

...you could just belong to the forums, like this one, and ask questions.
Plan before you build - that simple?

"Here's to hoping that IASCA - or MECA - or whoever - recognizes this, and actually does make SQ more accessible, more sporting, more fun to watch as well as participate in - like SPL did with DB Drag."

I don't know if SQ could be made more fun to watch. While I am a SQ buff and could care less about SPL, I realize that comparing SPL to SQ in that aspect is like comparing hardcore porn to delicate lovemaking. Both are nice to participate in, but most people will want to see the porn flick because it's pretty goal-orientated and is easier to relate to. SQ is more like lovemaking in the fact that it can really only be respected by those ones that can relate to it, and that isn't the intended target in this aspect.

Jonathan wrote:"Here's to hoping that IASCA - or MECA - or whoever - recognizes this, and actually does make SQ more accessible, more sporting, more fun to watch as well as participate in - like SPL did with DB Drag."

I don't know if SQ could be made more fun to watch. While I am a SQ buff and could care less about SPL, I realize that comparing SPL to SQ in that aspect is like comparing hardcore porn to delicate lovemaking. Both are nice to participate in, but most people will want to see the porn flick because it's pretty goal-orientated and is easier to relate to. SQ is more like lovemaking in the fact that it can really only be respected by those ones that can relate to it, and that isn't the intended target in this aspect.

haha. Nicely put!

I know it - I just can't accept it.

Like I said - "I hope someone smarter..."

Not that I have ideas for how to make it fundamentally visually interesting... a spectator sport... but I do have ideas on how they could start:

I don't know about you, but by me, IASCA events have no requirement for competitor's cars to be parked near one another, not ordered by class, not even a requirement to park separate from spectators or other cars that might be parked in the lot. The judges just roam the lots looking for cars and owners.

I think to begin with, giving everyone a bold colored sticker on the outside of their windshield to identify their competition class, and then have them park together - organized by class.

Then, people who were interested, at least could compare the cars within the classes, not necessarily knowing which one was better than another to begin with, but they could see the different approaches to SQ people took... and usually SQ competitors like talking about their cars, their approaches to SQ, their strategies, etc.

I don't know how it could really be made visually interesting - maybe certain things, like RTA could be done on a big board, or even head-to-head, with a computerized interpolation of a curve into a calculated "score" that could display on a bar chart... something.

One thing I always wished they'd DO in SQ competition - a live, at-the-headrest measurement of attack and decay. A waterfall plot, taking the entire system into account. That could be done head-to-head.

Also - SQ cars HAVE an SPL portion of the score - even if they only do have to hit 135 - why DO they stop awarding points at that point?
That's one potential change that could be fun and spectator-oriented also.

Maybe they could set up these things in a chain - station after station after station. Like one drive-through window, to the next. Have competitors bring their cars THROUGH the competition, rather than having judges wander around, trying to find cars.
At least it would LOOK like a competition. Otherwise, to non-participants - it's just "a tent over there... doesn't look like much".

Even if I can't picture fully how to really make it a "spectator sport" - it at least has a chance of being "spectator-interesting" if at least it is organized.