t/s specs vs actual sound quality

[Tirefryr 1,742]

Dude, These mods over here love drama ... good for ratings or something, not shure.

This Topic should be closed by now ...

That's just how wrong you are. We don't take any shit around here. There is no drama and no need to close the thread. Except for a troll, there is nothing warranting a close and everyone is having a nice discussion. Everybody likes to bitch and complain, but they all keep coming back.

[Randal Johnson 544]

Thats cool with me guys, your show. Its fun to read.

[CrazyKenKid 64]

I am also in the not fully understand T/S specs but from this thread I am starting to see they are important but maybe the install would be equally as important.

I have an interesting question, lets say I like how one driver sounds and I know the T/S specs of that driver, and lets say this driver I love gets discontinued and some how mine gets stolen, and I need a replacement driver..

I know kind a random question/story line but bear with me for a second.

could I simple just look at other T/S specs of other drives and match the specs of the old drivers and then pop in the new drivers? would they sound different or the same because the specs are the same?

also how are the specs measured? I assume there is some kind a standard to measure the specs...

[cobra93 47]

I am also in the not fully understand T/S specs but from this thread I am starting to see they are important but maybe the install would be equally as important.

I have an interesting question, lets say I like how one driver sounds and I know the T/S specs of that driver, and lets say this driver I love gets discontinued and some how mine gets stolen, and I need a replacement driver..

I know kind a random question/story line but bear with me for a second.

could I simple just look at other T/S specs of other drives and match the specs of the old drivers and then pop in the new drivers? would they sound different or the same because the specs are the same?

also how are the specs measured? I assume there is some kind a standard to measure the specs...

While I'm no authority on the subject, I'll go out on a limb and say no.

It seems to me that the distortion measurements, as well as other types of distortion that I don't fully understand, would be an important part of the equation that are not represented by the T.S. parameters.

I don't know that they can be modeled in a program, I'd assume they cannot, which is why actual measurements must be taken.

As far as standards go, I don't believe there is a standard.

Take sensitivity for example, 1 watt @ 1 meter vs. 2.83 volts @ 1 meter. I'd assume that's one of the most basic measurements. Even then I think frequency comes into play. I saw something recently that was rated @ .5 meters for sensitivity.

The CEA compliant crap that came out years ago never made sense to me. How many people with a "good" amount of power can maintain 14.4 volts constant?

There always seems to be some angle that someone uses to represent their product to be better then it really is. I chalk it up to marketing hype.

Please correct me where I'm wrong. The last thing I want to do is misinform people, there are plenty of those around as it is.

[ford302redneck 15]

The people will a "good amount" of power can stay above 14 volts because usually they have the proper electrical to back up the power they have.

Not everyone skimps and runs the maximum their electrical can handle.

CEA was suppose to cut out the bullshit ratings companies pull out their ass for MAX power. To give a equal testing of each product, to insure the company ratings was true or not. That's the idea anyways.

I suppose the concept is a marketing strategy none the less.

[ford302redneck 15]

///M5 Really sick of bullshit threads take some time to make it useful when others read it people.

that's your current status......and validates my point exactly.

Mine too. If OP's would spend a little time trying to make a thread useful then there would be no troubles, but that you can easily see if you've truly searched. This forum is about helping people not only with their question but understanding why so that they grow as a person. That requires effort on their part.

EXACTLY. Perfect definition.

Pointing one person's post out and giving them the correct info is way better than a bunch of misguided people with wrong info posting.

1 vs 1000. Which is better?

Its better not to have bullshit from the start, then trying to convince a big group of people they aren't correct.

And if you don't see it that way, maybe this forum isn't for you.

SSA has always been known as more of a technical audio forum than the rest.

So if you want a bunch o people giving out wrong info and not allowing people to correct others, SMD is for you.

The words "Sound Quality" should have never been the topic of this thread ...

Sub bass only counts maybe 15% of a TRUE Sound Quality install ... Not one word in this whole thread about TOTAL system function capability ...

Which should have been worked out in the first couple of post ...

"Sound Quality" means Installation (Vehicle Alarm and Safety), Stageing and Imageing (Sound, Height, width, Linearity, and dynamics) , Vehicle owner knowledge, Vehicle apearance and presentation, and most spl runs are only used in case of a tie breaker ...

Hope this helps the op out some ... just my suggestion here ... Thanks, Randal ...

That definition is how SQ is judged not actually what SQ means.

[Randal Johnson 544]

The words "Sound Quality" should have never been the topic of this thread ...

Sub bass only counts maybe 15% of a TRUE Sound Quality install ... Not one word in this whole thread about TOTAL system function capability ...

Which should have been worked out in the first couple of post ...

"Sound Quality" means Installation (Vehicle Alarm and Safety), Stageing and Imageing (Sound, Height, width, Linearity, and dynamics) , Vehicle owner knowledge, Vehicle apearance and presentation, and most spl runs are only used in case of a tie breaker ...

Hope this helps the op out some ... just my suggestion here ... Thanks, Randal ...

That definition is how SQ is judged not actually what SQ means.

Sir, Can you please explain to me the true definition of Sound Quality ??

[Randal Johnson 544]

The words "Sound Quality" should have never been the topic of this thread ...

Sub bass only counts maybe 15% of a TRUE Sound Quality install ... Not one word in this whole thread about TOTAL system function capability ...

Which should have been worked out in the first couple of post ...

"Sound Quality" means Installation (Vehicle Alarm and Safety), Stageing and Imageing (Sound, Height, width, Linearity, and dynamics) , Vehicle owner knowledge, Vehicle apearance and presentation, and most spl runs are only used in case of a tie breaker ...

Hope this helps the op out some ... just my suggestion here ... Thanks, Randal ...

That definition is how SQ is judged not actually what SQ means.

Sir, Can you please explain to me the true definition of Sound Quality ??

This is What I come up with ...

Advanced Car Audio Sound Quality Concepts

Although the four basic sound quality concepts (clarity, dynamic range, frequency response, and tonal balance) are the most fundamental to understand before purchasing a new car audio system, there are a few other sound quality attributes that are also important.

Timbre

Timbre (pronounced "TAM-bir") refers to a system's ability to recreate the sound of an instrument as it was originally intended to be heard. An acoustic guitar is usually a good test for this because most people have heard one. Does the sound have that warm, slightly resonant quality that the instrument is known for, or does it merely sound like a low-resolution reproduction of that signature sound?

Tonal accuracy

Tonal accuracy describes how faithful a system is in general to the original recording. It can apply to instruments as well as vocals. The more accurate the system is while playing a good recording, the more you feel as if you are there, listening to a live performance as opposed to a recording.

Tonal accuracy can also apply to the ambiance in a recording, which refers to the space in which a recording is made. Most modern recordings are made in a sort of vacuum, with individual instruments recorded separately or, in the case of some rap music, the individual parts are sampled from other recordings. But many older recordings, some modern ones, and almost all live albums capture the environment in which the performance was recorded. In fact, certain recording studios and performance spaces are known and revered for their sound, which give a recording or performance a specific ambiance.

Think of timbre and tonal accuracy as the reproduction of how close you get to the actual performance or how the producer intended for it to sound. Whether it's the sound of Miles Davis's trumpet, Jimmy Page's guitar, a Dr. Dre beat, or the ambiance of Carnegie Hall, how well a system can reproduce it the way it went down in a studio or concert hall determines the difference between a good system and a great one.

Staging and imaging

Staging and imaging are related concepts that go back to the heyday of stereo, and therefore don't always apply to modern music. The basic idea is that when you're listening to a stereo recording, the system should recreate the illusion of the stage on which the performance occurred, and you should be able to pinpoint the sonic image of the individual performers and instruments within the stage.

Think about the example of a basic rock band that includes a singer, guitarist, bass player, and drummer. You should be able to close your eyes and picture the singer at the center of the stage, the guitarist to the right, the bass player on the left, and the drummer center and behind the singer. Keep in mind that this is an ideal that sound quality systems should approach if not achieve. With rap and many pop-music recordings, the vocalist will be centered, but the concept of a band playing on a stage doesn't exactly apply.

Speaker placement has a dramatic effect on staging and imaging, and hardcore enthusiasts often go to great lengths to position their speakers for the best possible results. This includes rebuilding door panels to better position speakers. Some have even built elaborate mechanisms to mount speakers in or raise them above the dash in order to achieve better staging and imaging.

Finally, no discussion of sound quality would be complete without mentioning interior acoustics. A car's interior, its reflective surfaces (such as glass), and its absorptive materials (upholstery) play a dramatic role in a system's response. And every car interior is different; if you install the exact same components in your Toyota Camry that your friend has in his Chrysler 300C, the systems will sound very different.

[ford302redneck 15]

Now your almost giving a definition on how to achieve SQ. The meaning of SQ is quiet simple.

I couldn't word it correctly myself but this will do.

"Sound quality can be defined as the degree of accuracy with which a device records or emits the original sound waves."

[Randal Johnson 544]

What's that got to do with the very first post in this thread ...

That book or site you got that from ... Does it say anything about SPL ???

[Randal Johnson 544]

This is where it can get interesting. No rattling th mirrors, vibrating panels, or blowing up some underaged chicks hair ... This is absolute reproduction of music as it was ment to sound when it was recorded ... Now I'm very interesred !!! Please continue ...

[Tirefryr 1,742]

Sir, Can you please explain to me the true definition of Sound Quality ??

It's dependent upon the judges(s).

[Randal Johnson 544]

Sir, Can you please explain to me the true definition of Sound Quality ??

It's dependent upon the judges(s).

I will agree to that ...

But what if it is like somebody like ///M5 that has a million dollars worth of test equipment for personal use. Is it still judges dependent ??

Based on the answer you just gave me, I'm learning and asking questions, not subjective ... I'm Very interested on this one guys ...

thanks, Randal ...

[Randal Johnson 544]

Here is another one we can ponder through ...

Terms to Know about Car Audio: Aspects of Sound Quality

Listening to audiophiles go on about the sound quality of their audio systems — from their woofers to their tweeters — can sound a lot like oenophiles going on and on about the qualities of wine. To understand such talk, start by understanding the four basics of sound quality:

Clarity

Dynamic range

Frequency response

Tonal balance

Clarity

Clarity is the ability of a system to produce the original signal as intended, without distortion. Distortion can be caused by numerous things — from a head unit that's not level-matched with an amplifier to an amplifier that's clipping, or being overdriven and sending a distorted signal to the speakers. And distortion can come from any component in a system.

A good test is to listen to cymbals, which can have a brassy and off-putting sound when distorted. High-pitched female vocals are also difficult to reproduce and can reveal distortion rather easily.

Achieving clarity and therefore avoiding distortion is all about proper system design and tuning. It's making sure components are of sufficient quality and compatible with one another and that signal levels are well matched between electronics. It also involves using a component as it was intended and not pushing it past its design limits.

Dynamic range

Dynamic range refers to the ability of a system to reproduce loud and soft passages in music with the same level of detail. When you're at a live concert, a singer may wail and then whisper or a drummer may hit a drum head with brute force and then back off a bit. Each extreme is an important part of the performance.

If the performance is recorded and reproduced by an audio system, the loud and soft parts should be delivered with the same detail and accuracy. But often a system tends to suppress soft parts and emphasize loud ones, meaning you lose the subtleties of the performance.

A related concept is linearity, which refers to a system's tendency to lose detail when the volume is turned down. A system has great linearity if it can retain the same detail at a low volume that it does when it's cranked up.

Frequency response

Every sound you hear, from the low rumble of thunder to the high-pitch wail of a siren, is caused by vibrations in the air that occur at certain frequencies. These vibrations are measured in hertz (Hz), which refers to the number of times per second these vibrations occur.

Humans can hear frequencies roughly from 20 to 20,000 Hz. A car audio system's frequency response represents how much of the audible frequency spectrum it can reproduce. The frequency response of a car audio system can be measured by an instrument known as a real-time analyzer (RTA), which consists of a microphone attached to a processor with a display that has a graph that shows a system's response.

Tonal balance

An ideal car audio system uniformly reproduces the entire audible frequency spectrum from 20 to 20,000 Hz. But no system — at least while playing music — is perfect. Music is dynamic; some parts are loud and some are soft, so a system will naturally have dips and peaks in its frequency response.

Although a system can have these peaks and dips in frequency response, it needs to have good tonal balance — a relatively equal amount of sonic energy across the frequency range — to sound good. Subsequently, system designers and tuners often measure frequency response to gauge which frequencies may need to be boosted or cut as opposed to trying to achieve a flat frequency response. This can be done with an equalizer, although it's best that the system is designed in such a way that it has good tonal balance to begin with.

Read more: http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/terms-to-know-about-car-audio-aspects-of-sound-qua.html#ixzz1IGxrzAQ8

[Tirefryr 1,742]

I was speaking in terms of competition as that is the the only theater in which "sound Quality" lives. Measurements don't measure quality, they measure quantity. That's the problem we keep running into in these debates. People take our type and terms to mean something different.

When you take the measurements, you are measuring the sound, not the sound quality. When you throw that word in there, it makes everything subjective. No computers or numbers can ever give an indication of quality.

[Randal Johnson 544]

When you take the measurements, you are measuring the sound, not the sound quality. When you throw that word in there, it makes everything subjective. No computers or numbers can ever give an indication of quality.

Thank you Tirefryr ... My point exactly ... My whole reasoning for saying this ...

The words "Sound Quality" should have never been the topic of this thread ...

[///M5 2,833]

Sound Quality can actually be measured, BUT it requires a panel of listeners to calibrate the test equipments metrics. This is NEVER done in the realm of loudspeakers as it would piss off way to many people claiming to be Audiophiles. Instead it is a measurement technique used to decide how an exhaust should sound, what the closure of a door should sound like, how a washing machine sounds and so on. Huge money in industry doing this work, but again there is a marriage here of a statistically significant sampling of true blind A/B test subjects and measurement techniques. Obviously from an algorithm standpoint this could be done for loudspeakers as well, but it wouldn't prove anything other than the majority of the test panel prefers unit X. IE, it is used for determining things for the masses and considering every person's hearing is different for acoustic reproduction it isn't absolutely the best method.

Another method could of course be implemented, but "scoring" around it would be tough. It is rather easy from a technical perspective to combine an original signal with a recorded one and compare. One could even use panels to then define the metrics that Randal plagiarized above, but the usefulness is a bit absurd as quite frankly the average SQ competitors car really isn't so special that it is hard to tell which is better.

[RAM_Designs 25]

No mention of motor topology or inductance in the OP?