can a carputer replace a high end av dedicated system? - Page 4

JC-S60 · 10-29-2004, 03:10 PM

Mac user?

pip · 10-29-2004, 03:27 PM

If you CAN tell the difference between a 256k MP3 & CD (a very few people can) then you could easily use Monkey Audio or FLAC instead. These are lossless and produce sound as good as a CD.

JC-S60 · 10-29-2004, 03:52 PM

Hell, a computer can even play audio-dvds if you want to. A computer can be as good a soundsource as any. Nothing to do with mp3, which you can play through many HU's today, and still sound like krap.

VanMan69 · 10-29-2004, 04:08 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by sdashiki

Supposed to? Yer ******* kidding me, no such thing.

Every sound system, home, concert etc, are all different NOTHING is ever the same as it was recorded.

WHy do you think u got peeople who rattle yer windows and those who actually PLAY MUSIC LOUD. Cuz they think it sounds the way its supposed to, DEEEP BOOMING BASS, and other want all around loudness.

A pro? Gimme a break no such thing. We arent talking studio producers and engineers who have a better ear than most, we talking car audio. Car audio pro is an installer, not a tweaker, its always up to the driver/owner.

Supposed to sound? WTF is that.

High end audio (home or car, and I don't mean Alpine/Bose) gets pretty close to (if not spot on) the sound of the original recording. That's really the whole idea behind true high-fidelity.

There are different reasons for people rattling your windows. Part of it can be a "Look how big my dick... er wallet... er I mean speakers are!" Some of them like to be assholes. Some just like loud music, or like to feel their music, but that doesn't mean it's how it's "supposed to sound". If an artist wanted a rattling license plate on their track, they probably would have put it in there themselves.

They DO have sound quality competitions. A car audio pro will spend tons of time getting their EQs, crossovers, etc perfectly tuned. Some of them ARE studio producers and engineers, and they want to port that sound quality to their vehicles. If a car audio pro is an installer, I guess we've got a board full of car audio pros.

"Supposed to sound" = close your eyes and it sounds like it's live.

sdashiki · 10-29-2004, 05:30 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by VanMan69

"Supposed to sound" = close your eyes and it sounds like it's live.

Um no.

Bands and people record in strange places for acoustics, like lemme think the Beatles in a cottage, in the attic, doing reverb...

The recording of said performance is not the live performance nor does it sound as though its being played in front of you.

If you talk clarity of sound, thats one thing. But quality? WTF is that? More bits = more quality? Cuz lemme tell ya, CDs aint good quality then, 44Khz? That bull**** when a PCI card or studio can capture 192Khz and higher.

What are we talking, clarity/fidelity? Which mostly comes from speakers, not a good recording. But like a photo negative, you cant create detail where there is no detail. IE low bitrate wont sound good no matter what.

A live sounding recording, as you put it, is what? A CD of a live show? The band playing in my car? What? The acoustics of the car change, and mold the sound from a CD to fit the space, it will always sound different, car to car, player to player, person to person.

Digital recordings are the only safe bet for continuity and like i said, QUALITY? CD IS NOT QUALITY. So thats why we LOVE mp3s, it aint quality, but u can hear it.

You want real quality? Try some wax dammit.

VanMan69 · 10-29-2004, 05:55 PM

"Supposed to sound" sounds like you were live in the room when they recorded it. Sounds like you're in the cottage, in the attic. Yes, the car can mold the sound, but that's the idea of SQL, to compensate for that and get it to sound as close to original master as possible.

As I said, quality is proper tuning of EQs, amps, crossovers, etc. for proper audio imaging. Not just "How much wattage can I cram into my Suburban?" Just because you can set off car alarms with your system doesn't make you an audiophile.

What do you mean it's not a live performace? Were they dead when they recorded it? It was live in the studio. No, it's not a live concert recording.

I don't know why it's so hard to accept that there's a such thing as sound quality when it comes to car audio.

I have plenty of vinyl, thanks. And I've even had turntables set up in my van and connected to my stereo, so I guess I had the highest-fidelity system possible, hm? (hardly)

sdashiki · 10-29-2004, 06:34 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by VanMan69

I have plenty of vinyl, thanks. And I've even had turntables set up in my van and connected to my stereo, so I guess I had the highest-fidelity system possible, hm? (hardly)

Yes analog, is better.

Yes. Analog.

WHY MUST WE BE A DIGITAL CULTURE!? I WANT SOME ******* CURVES!

VanMan69 · 10-29-2004, 06:38 PM

Because analog decays, unfortunately.

DiB · 10-30-2004, 11:17 AM

I'm computer nerd new to carputers myself but I've done lots of car audio stuff along with competition for SPL & SQ. I've had a $20k car audio system but now with the touchscreens getting better and cheaper along with the itx boards a carputer seems to be the best solution for the money. Home audio though is designed to be non-mobile with more power so they can use an entire different set of parts (They have maglev audio systems so that any vibrations from almost anything are cancelled out). I'm sure people on here are aware that there are some nice (and pricey) sound cards you can use with a homemade carputer. Personally a mesh between the 2 would be best, run a fiber optic cable from the pc to a nice amp/signal processor and you're set with an extremely clean signal.

pioneer · 10-30-2004, 12:33 PM

Had a read through this thread and I just want to add my o2.
I personally can’t see the reason why Carputers are better than HU's, I also cant see why HU's are better than Carputers. They are both as good as each other, just that one takes more time and money to fit than the other.

When it comes to MP3 encoding, I can tell the difference between different bit rates, maybe it’s me, or maybe it’s my speakers. And yes, you can’t beet the feeling of great sound. Give me vinyl any day, but its all going to the digital age so you just have to lump it.

Nic · 10-31-2004, 01:59 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by sdashiki

well moron, yer doing audio in a car.

You got 12V. Wow and HUGE amps.

Your house has 120v, hmmm more power more clean sound.

A car audio setup, competition or not (which is always just Db not testing the cleanliness of the sound) IS NOT FOR CRISP CLEAN STUDIO QUALITY SOUND.

And MY ******* GOD dont start on the 320k+ Mp3 encodings still not being CD quality, of course they arent its a lossy codec as we all know. BUT FOR GODS SAKE NO HUMAN BEING CAN HEAR THE DIFFERENCE FROM 160K and up, yer fooling yerself if you can hear the difference.

Now hearing a difference from a 320k mp3 and an audio CD, yes u can hear the difference, but like I said the system in yer car is not supposed to give you 600 channel EQ and perfect audio. Car audio is for nice sound not QUALITY (in that quality is say from a movie theatre sound system) sound.

Just dont come back saying YOU CAN hear the difference from 160k encoding and up, YOU CANT. THATS WHY MP3S WORK THE WAY THEY DO! The human ear's impercepibility.

this guy is most defs a newbie

pioneer · 10-31-2004, 05:45 PM

Yeah, i mean a normal car battery can give 800A for cranking, and a house supply is usualy fused at 50A

so, when you beefy speakers or whatnot need the power, i think the car battey can deliver.

turbocad6 · 11-01-2004, 11:28 AM

I agree with a lot being said here, & I also see that there is some ignorance here too(no offence intended twards sdashiki

) . you can play cd's or dvda's through the attached drive, & if the sound card is up to par it can sound about as good, provided you went & added line driver(s) to boost the line output from the 1.5v-2v line out the average sound card provides, WITHOUT adding any more noise to the signal: noise ratio,(try actually mesuring THAT someday...) or used fiber optics to a processor(Which you would probably want to use a head unit to control anyway) but that's only one disc at a time unless you plan on installing multiple drives. Now if you could hook up a dvd/cd changer to a carputer you'd be coming a lot closer to it being acceptable as far as sound quality goes. I have an extensive collection of mp3’s & I will even admit to listening to them often, but I do have a staple of my real favorites also loaded in the changers. When I play an mp3 that I also have in a changer & compare the two it becomes obvious that the cd is truer & suffers no compression loss, I however know nothing about the two software mentioned in this post & I will look into them.

When you’re listening to rap, most rock & disco or even the majority of pop music then yes, it is a little difficult to discern any real big difference between a good mp3 recorded at a high bit rate & a cd, but that’s because the dynamic range on this sort of music isn't so high to begin with. Try listening to something really dynamic like classical instrumental or really dynamic vocals & you will see there is a significant difference, especially to a trained ear.

Technology is great & I fully embrace it, but sometimes there is a loss as technology increases, for example, nobody who really knows will ever argue that tube amplifiers aren't better than solid state amps, a definite technology improvement in efficiency, but a slight loss in warmness & overall tonal balance. now there are true class d amplifiers that again are a technological advancement in efficiency & power consumption, but again the best class d amp isn't as good as the best solid state amp, which isn't as good as a tube amp. This is not my opinion; this is a widely accepted fact. Up until recently class d amps were reserved for bass use only because they sounded so "digital" that they sucked, but now there are compensations that allow use for full range that is CLOSE to as good as a solid state amp.

For several years after digital photography has been on the scene, while it was a technological wonder for what it was, professional photographers would still be using film because the digital stuff just wasn't as good. Obviously advances have made it good enough that today the majority of photographers use digital, but there are still a few who insist that film is better, even minutely, but better none the less....

GRANTED, I get the point that the average guy here doesn't care, & I can't say that I blame you either. I really am not trying to convince anybody here that I am right & you are wrong. I guess my bottom line conclusion to this thread as far as my question original went is that while it may be possible to build a carputer that can closely emulate a high end system install it is still a simulation

sim•u•la•tion P Pronunciation Key (s m y -l sh n)
n.
1. The act or process of simulating.
2. An imitation; a sham.
3. Assumption of a false appearance.
4.
a. Imitation or representation, as of a potential situation or in experimental testing.
b. Representation of the operation or features of one process or system through the use of another: computer simulation of an in-flight emergency.
My analogy would be similar to the guy who has a virago & thinks it’s the same as a Harley, almost.

I do wholeheartedly believe that the technology to build a carputer that is as good as a high end system is available, & in the right hands it could be done, but I also do admit that I am not enough of a computer genius to pull it off, & the majority here isn’t either. In the end I stand by my belief that: THE BEST POSSIBLE SYSTEM IF MONEY IS NOT A FACTOR, IS A HYBRYD SYSTEM FOR ME. THIS GIVES ME ALL OF THE BENEFITS OF EACH WITHOUT A LOT OF THE DRAWBACKS EITHER WOULD HAVE IF STAND ALONE.

This does not mean that there is anything wrong with building a carputer simulation, IT IS VERY COST EFFECTIVE & MORE THAN GOOD ENOUGH FOR EVEN THOSE WHO APPRECIATE MUSIC, hence the loyalty to it displayed here. There is nothing wrong with saving thousands for something that is almost as good.

My next question would be as to if there are any class winning competition cars that are based on a carputer ALONE!!!!? I haven’t competed in a few years now & while I did see quite a few pc installs in the lanes, I never saw a carputer best a high end system, & when I compete I will always rely on my BEST SOURCE for sound quality, which is not my pc., times are changing quickly & I don’t doubt that someday a carputer can top a conventional install, but I have yet to see it & I know I am not enough of a guru to pull it off myself, although I wish I could. Maybe one day I would turn to this board seeking out the best available tech’s to team up with me to build a competition vehicle truly based on a pc, for all I know it may have already happened… if it did then please enlighten me…

I DO GIVE EVERYONE HERE CREDIT FOR THERE AMBITIONS & TRIUMPHS, & DON"T WANT TO TAKE ANYTHING AWAY FROM ANYONE, THIS ISN"T ABOUT ANYONE BEING RIGHT OR WRONG....This is just an open discussion to bring out fact's, opinions & thoughts...

turbocad6 · 11-01-2004, 12:18 PM

....As far as the guys who are arguing about voltage & amperage you must realize that it has been demonstrated many times that huge amounts of power can be available for a vehicle install. I have seen well over 5,000 watts of tru rms power in one vehicle that is driven daily & to think that there isn't enough power available for a good stereo install is rediculous, ohm's law aplies & there aren't any problems there...

less voltage will require more amperage & vice versa, but that isn't going to be a limiting factor in the range required here & most car sytems will actually require more power than a home install simply because of the noise "ground floor" that a car system must overcome compared to a home install...

"intelligence is displayed by NOT insisting something is a fact when you know nothing about it..." this quote is actually mine....& developed by this thread....

Nic · 11-01-2004, 08:18 PM

I think with the right equipment a computer could easily match or beat a headunit, especially if you are playing uncompressed music directly off the computer, there are several soundcards out there that are 24bit@96khz (mostly made for production and profesional recording), i dont know of any headunits that can play at that level (are there SACD and DVD-A headunits out there?) Granted you would first have to find audio at that quality.

I dont know anyone thats done this, but my point was with the right components and a fair bit of knowledge i'm sure a computer install has the potential to be a winning SQL competition car