Why do more expensive speakers tend to be less efficient?

[Calvin Hobbes]

I suppose they would want to engineer a horrid thump and bump and fizz. I'm lad it is a tough climb for them.

On practically all new cars, modifying the sound system voids the vehicle's warranty anyway.

Modifying the sound system does not void the car warranty.

A warranty claim can be denied by the manufacturer, only if they can prove that the modification caused the failure that is being claimed.

 

[TLS Guy]

Modifying the sound system does not void the car warranty.

A warranty claim can be denied by the manufacturer, only if they can prove that the modification caused the failure that is being claimed.

Well good luck with a claim, when the audio systems are based in the head unit which contains a good deal of the vital control systems of the car. I would say getting into a mod would be high risk finger pointing and lawyer fees. I think it would be highly inadvisable to mess with a head unit.

 

[MinusTheBear]

The gain of the amps does not have to be identical. The drivers will not have identical sensitivity anyway. That is what trim pots are for.

The car manufacturers do not agree with your cost analysis. My humble Chevy has a stock sound system, that is 100% active. No passive crossovers, which is typical of modern car sound systems. It sounds wonderful. The best audio system most people own is in their cars. In fact the sound in my Chevy is better than around 90% of the systems on offer at high end dealers. It is better by miles than any speaker made by Paradigm for instance.

The sound systems in Audi vehicles are phenomenal. They have invested millions is sound system research. Any Audi audio engineer would laugh at you if you suggested using passive crossovers.

As to reliability, I think amps and active crossovers can be very reliable. A lot of amp unreliability is due to the stress of being loaded by passive crossovers. In any event with modular design servicing can be made easy.

I don't care if receivers have a pre out or not. Receivers need to go, they are absolutely horrid crude audio devices.

We just need to move on and change the standard square.

I can assure you that in three ways an active design at least for the lower crossover results in a quantum leap in performance. The same applies to BSC compensation, which is much better accomplished active.

This will come, as the right place for amps is in the speakers, so the leads are short and the amp really can control the speakers like a vice. Then you need pre pros with optical out to the speakers and a phantom powering system developed. At the current time home audio is in a stultifying morass, not so the car designers. They are ahead of the home guys.

I had similar thoughts on a recent road trip in a 2013 Ford F-150. I was VERY impressed with the stock sound system in that vehicle. I thought to myself this sounds more balanced than a lot of home systems. The fact I had no listener fatigue speaks volumes. Very enjoyable listening experience.

 

[twoeyedbob]

Of course it's easier to perfect a car system because you know
A:Where people are going to sit ,
B:the shape/size/acoustic properties of the listening
Area and
C: where the speakers are always going to be....
Also no one's going to stick a recliner/plant pot in front
Of the spkrs

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk 2

 

[TLS Guy]

Of course it's easier to perfect a car system because you know
A:Where people are going to sit ,
B:the shape/size/acoustic properties of the listening
Area and
C: where the speakers are always going to be....
Also no one's going to stick a recliner/plant pot in front
Of the spkrs

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk 2

Oh Really? You try and do it. Its a challenging environment. Why do you think car systems have been pretty lousy until recently? The problem has been solved by the car companies throwing millions at the problem. Their audio R & D budgets dwarf the home equipment makers.

It seems to me that car systems are surpassing most of the systems illustrated on these forums.

The car audio designers are not stultified in obsolescence, and yesterday's systems. I think there is evidence of much more innovation in that quarter. The trail has been blazed in Europe.

We really are due for a break out in home audio. On these forums people don't realize how dissatisfied they should be with the current state of home audio. With just a little imagination, the average level of performance could go up in leaps. I do stop in and audition this stuff. In the main its pathetic and I just shake my head. You all deserve better, much better.

 

[TLS Guy]

I had similar thoughts on a recent road trip in a 2013 Ford F-150. I was VERY impressed with the stock sound system in that vehicle. I thought to myself this sounds more balanced than a lot of home systems. The fact I had no listener fatigue speaks volumes. Very enjoyable listening experience.

Thank you for validating what I'm talking about.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Modifying the sound system does not void the car warranty.

A warranty claim can be denied by the manufacturer, only if they can prove that the modification caused the failure that is being claimed.

You are absolutely correct, the defining law for the US in this case is the Magnuson-Mossy Act, but I think TLS Guy's point is that the level of integration of the infotainment system with other car functions is getting to the point where upgrades are getting less and less practical over time. I agree with him.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Well good luck with a claim, when the audio systems are based in the head unit which contains a good deal of the vital control systems of the car.

Head units do not contain any automotive control systems, though as I mentioned in a previous post I agree that the level of integration is increasing to the point where audio system swapping is getting impractical. Interesting that you believe automotive entertainment systems are getting so good when the #1 company in that field is Bose. I'm pretty sure #2 is Harman.

 

[Grador]

Many cars do use the head unit as a means of control for other car systems. Example, I rented a Pontiac g6 a few years ago where the menu system on the head unit was where you set the speedometer to mph or kph, and if the headlights were to come on automatically or manually.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Many cars do use the head unit as a means of control for other car systems. Example, I rented a Pontiac g6 a few years ago where the menu system on the head unit was where you set the speedometer to mph or kph, and if the headlights were to come on automatically or manually.

That's becoming more common, but to my knowledge no manufacturer is yet putting "vital control systems" in the head unit, or perhaps I'm just misinterpreting the intended meaning of the term by TLS Guy. When I think of a vital control system I think of something like engine management, ABS management, yaw control, etc. The fact that a display function is there didn't strike me as "vital".

There are some newer cars where I am wondering if the infotainment system can be removed at all, like the Cadillac CUE system, because the display is also used for climate control. It's a nice cost and weight-savings measure, along the same lines for why many car systems use digital streams over plastic fiber to feed integrated DAC-amp-speaker assemblies. It saves weight versus using copper cables everywhere.

 

[Grador]

If it's the only means of changing settings, it's pretty vital. That g6 had things you would absolutely need in the headunit menus.

 

[TLS Guy]

If it's the only means of changing settings, it's pretty vital. That g6 had things you would absolutely need in the headunit menus.

The body computer is generally in the head unit. Pretty much everything except engine management goes through the body computer now. Things like turn signals, wipers, lights, just about every electrical function not to do with the engine, transmission or brakes.

I recently had a problem with the drivers side seat warmer. I phoned the dealer and they said it will be the switch most likely. I said not likely as the switches were in the head unit. I said you press once and get level 3, press again and get level 2, press again and get level one, press again and it switches off.

I said that will work via logic in the body computer, and send a control voltage to the box at the seat. This makes no sound and so is a MOSFET gated switch. So the seat warmer basically works via a controllable DC power amp.

Any how, the tech wanted to remove the seat and change the heating element. He said the resistance was a bit too high. Being suspicious I demanded to check things for myself. I quickly confirmed the 5 volt control voltage was not getting through. The trouble was oxidation at an in line connector and the problem cured with contact cleaner. Cars are really comparatively complex pieces of electronics now.

 

[Hocky]

The body computer is generally in the head unit.

No, it isn't. An example where that is the case may exist, but I have never seen one. They are typically stand alone modules, just like the ecu.

 

[Irvrobinson]

No, it isn't. An example where that is the case may exist, but I have never seen one. They are typically stand alone modules, just like the ecu.

Either have I, at least with 2013 and prior model Chevrolets. The body computer is not in the head unit for the Camaro, the Corvette, the Cruze, the Malibu, the Silverado, the Tahoe, the Suburban... I don't know what you're driving, TLS Guy, but something doesn't seem right here.

That said, Hocky, I do suspect TLS Guy's overall point that upgrading auto AV systems is going to get pretty difficult, regardless of the accuracy of his reasoning, is becoming correct. The 2014 Corvette looks like everything is integrated into a common display. I already mentioned the Cadillac CUE system. I'm not much for Fords, but I know the Mustang head unit can be replaced. Porsche hasn't integrated anything. BMW hasn't even integrated the displays in the latest 3s and 5s.

Of course, I suppose I'm discussing this just out of boredom. I don't even turn on the systems in any of our cars, no less think about upgrading them anymore.

 

[Hocky]

Absolutely. I wouldn't even consider messing with it. It has become a bad time for once great companies like Alpine.

 

[twoeyedbob]

It's not just the display's that's making things difficult.

Stuff that used to be fairly straightforward ..like running cable's and removing panels...there's just so much technology and gubbins packed into cars these days..
Personnally ,I gave up on car system's when everyone started fitting xbox's/playstation's

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk 2

 

[TLS Guy]

Either have I, at least with 2013 and prior model Chevrolets. The body computer is not in the head unit for the Camaro, the Corvette, the Cruze, the Malibu, the Silverado, the Tahoe, the Suburban... I don't know what you're driving, TLS Guy, but something doesn't seem right here.

That said, Hocky, I do suspect TLS Guy's overall point that upgrading auto AV systems is going to get pretty difficult, regardless of the accuracy of his reasoning, is becoming correct. The 2014 Corvette looks like everything is integrated into a common display. I already mentioned the Cadillac CUE system. I'm not much for Fords, but I know the Mustang head unit can be replaced. Porsche hasn't integrated anything. BMW hasn't even integrated the displays in the latest 3s and 5s.

Of course, I suppose I'm discussing this just out of boredom. I don't even turn on the systems in any of our cars, no less think about upgrading them anymore.

It goes onto the right side of the head unit on the 2012 Chevy Equinox.

 

[Hocky]

But is in no way a part of the head unit.