not impressed w/Eclipse Head Unit
04-20-2004, 08:13 AM
#41
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 248
what are you smokin?
Were you expecting to have your hair be blown off your head? It's just like when people go to the movies. If they have an expectation already of what they want to happen, or see, and it doesnt happen, then they trash the movie. Eclipse is one of the higher end brands. I have had no complaints, nor have any of my riders had any complaints. It's also like cell phone coverage. People always think that the grass is greener on the other side as far as coverage is concerned. If you were told that this Eclipse model is going to be sooo much better than what you have, then you were possibly misguided.
04-20-2004, 02:42 PM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,771
Originally Posted by jmax
I don't know why anyone would expect one headunit to sound "better" than another. 99.9% of better sound is achieved with speakers. 95% of that improvement is because of speaker placement, aiming, and integration with the vehicle interior.
There are definite improvements that can be had from a high quality headunit like the Eclipse. But you aren't going to notice them if you don't know what to listen for. I would pay $550 for the Eclipse if it didn't have all the BS bells and whistles. With that BS it's just another pretty face worth no more than any other $100 headunit.
There are definite improvements that can be had from a high quality headunit like the Eclipse. But you aren't going to notice them if you don't know what to listen for. I would pay $550 for the Eclipse if it didn't have all the BS bells and whistles. With that BS it's just another pretty face worth no more than any other $100 headunit.
Each "high-end" HU I've owned in the past several years have all given me a distinct, well defined sonic experience. I went from the flagship models in each of these brands and heard a world of difference in each: Eclipse, Alpine, Sony and Nakamichi. IN MY OPINION, the Alpine CDA-7939 was the weakest unit in the SQ department. Very bright, tinny and muddled in comparison. The Eclipse 5303R was a huge improvement...much more natural sounding (escpecially vocals) and each instrument was more independent and well focused in relation to the other instruments. The Nakamichi CD-700 was the strongest sounding of the group. Absolutely insane. So incredibly detailed and perfectly transparent. The Sony CDX-C90 I would have to say is a very close 2nd...so close in fact that I would have trouble differentiating the two.
Having said all this, I would like to add that I've learned my ears are apparently more attuned than most people I know to the little nuances of music reproduction. I'm incredibly picky. Like Jmax said, if you don't know what to listen for then you won't know the difference. If you're one of those people, then there's certainly no reason to spend a large amount of cash on a HU. I on the other hand have a hard time putting a dollar amount on how "moved" I can be while listening to my music in my car. Therefore, I could care less how much I spend...as long as I have the money.
Truth be told, I've had a few experts tell me that all the differences I "think" I can hear between the above-mentioned HUs is all in my head. I say not true. And a whole lot of other people agree with me. It's debateable either way, but at least for me the proof is in my ears.
Tony
04-20-2004, 03:48 PM
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
No, the debate can easilly be ended with a simple ABX test. Many headunits have special processors built in to alter the phase and frequency response. I think Alpine's is the MX button. Sometimes these features do as intended but that should be a rare case as every vehicles interior dimensions and speaker placement will alter the effectiveness of these features. It's better to start from the foundation, speaker placement. Only after every option in that category has been examined should you go on to the next step of altering relative phase and frequency response characteristics of individual drivers. While you may improve the listening experience for one listener with those digital effects it typically degrades the signal an equal or greater amount for the other listening positions.
Another simple truth is that if we think something will sound better 95% of the time it will, psycho - acoustics. But in this headunit example the listener was expecting somthing that was not reasonable. Or there is a problem with the install.
Another simple truth is that if we think something will sound better 95% of the time it will, psycho - acoustics. But in this headunit example the listener was expecting somthing that was not reasonable. Or there is a problem with the install.
04-20-2004, 09:44 PM
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by jmax
No, the debate can easilly be ended with a simple ABX test. Many headunits have special processors built in to alter the phase and frequency response. I think Alpine's is the MX button. Sometimes these features do as intended but that should be a rare case as every vehicles interior dimensions and speaker placement will alter the effectiveness of these features. It's better to start from the foundation, speaker placement. Only after every option in that category has been examined should you go on to the next step of altering relative phase and frequency response characteristics of individual drivers. While you may improve the listening experience for one listener with those digital effects it typically degrades the signal an equal or greater amount for the other listening positions.
Another simple truth is that if we think something will sound better 95% of the time it will, psycho - acoustics. But in this headunit example the listener was expecting somthing that was not reasonable. Or there is a problem with the install.
Another simple truth is that if we think something will sound better 95% of the time it will, psycho - acoustics. But in this headunit example the listener was expecting somthing that was not reasonable. Or there is a problem with the install.
If there is no difference in HU SQ, why not just get an AudioVox?
And my Yamaha Home Stereo, GEE, I could have just bought one from Radio Shack!
-beav q
04-20-2004, 10:13 PM
#45
Guest
Posts: n/a
No body said there was no difference in HU SQ. You oversimplified it 1 million fold. As to your yamaha, you may be correct in that assessment. Radio Shack is likely equal if not better.
By the way, do you even have an idea what an ABX test is? Or why it is the only way to prove you can hear a difference, if you can?
By the way, do you even have an idea what an ABX test is? Or why it is the only way to prove you can hear a difference, if you can?
04-20-2004, 10:37 PM
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
It's partially a computerized random selection tool, and partially a high grade switching tool. You connect the units you want to test to the all copper or all silver relay device. That connects to the computer with the random selection program. You can select device A or device B, head unit, amp, whatever, doesn't matter. The computer has selected X and you choose whether X is A or B. X is always A or B, there are no other options. The computer keeps track of the results. You can switch back and forth between A, B and the computer selected choice as many times as you want. With amps it always averages out to 50 / 50. Humans can not hear the difference, not with music.
Headunits with all of their processors should sound different. But that doesn't mean that the one that sounds better will be the one you think. Also, it should be able to be overcome with an EQ. Phase differences will be more complex to overcome.
Headunits with all of their processors should sound different. But that doesn't mean that the one that sounds better will be the one you think. Also, it should be able to be overcome with an EQ. Phase differences will be more complex to overcome.
04-21-2004, 01:50 AM
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,771
Originally Posted by jmax
No, the debate can easilly be ended with a simple ABX test. Many headunits have special processors built in to alter the phase and frequency response. I think Alpine's is the MX button. Sometimes these features do as intended but that should be a rare case as every vehicles interior dimensions and speaker placement will alter the effectiveness of these features. It's better to start from the foundation, speaker placement. Only after every option in that category has been examined should you go on to the next step of altering relative phase and frequency response characteristics of individual drivers. While you may improve the listening experience for one listener with those digital effects it typically degrades the signal an equal or greater amount for the other listening positions.
Another simple truth is that if we think something will sound better 95% of the time it will, psycho - acoustics. But in this headunit example the listener was expecting somthing that was not reasonable. Or there is a problem with the install.
Another simple truth is that if we think something will sound better 95% of the time it will, psycho - acoustics. But in this headunit example the listener was expecting somthing that was not reasonable. Or there is a problem with the install.
I dunno. I've never done an ABX test & certainly wouldn't mind trying one.
Tony
04-21-2004, 02:34 AM
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by jmax
No body said there was no difference in HU SQ. You oversimplified it 1 million fold. As to your yamaha, you may be correct in that assessment. Radio Shack is likely equal if not better.
By the way, do you even have an idea what an ABX test is? Or why it is the only way to prove you can hear a difference, if you can?
By the way, do you even have an idea what an ABX test is? Or why it is the only way to prove you can hear a difference, if you can?
you should quit smoking that ABX pipe of yours...
I don't need a technical test to tell me what my ears are hearing as better or worse...
04-21-2004, 06:34 AM
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by VQMAN
A Radioshack receiver better than a Yamaha?
you should quit smoking that ABX pipe of yours...
I don't need a technical test to tell me what my ears are hearing as better or worse...
you should quit smoking that ABX pipe of yours...
I don't need a technical test to tell me what my ears are hearing as better or worse...
There is a simple difference between myth and fact. The facts may be demonstrated to be true with experiments or real world situations.
04-21-2004, 07:02 AM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 719
I am sure the two units sound slightly different. But the problem is determining which one sounds better and why. The ABX test sounds like a good one since it is blind and you can switch between the two quick enough to listen to the same passage over and over. If you really want to know if it is the headunit try putting it in. Chances are they will sound a little different.
04-21-2004, 07:07 AM
#52
Getting back to the topic at hand- the Eclipse 8053/8443 has the most extensive and versatile
Eq/crossover/along with time alignment compared to any HU I've come across out there- so I dont see
how a decade old deck can compare as far as SQ goes
Eq/crossover/along with time alignment compared to any HU I've come across out there- so I dont see
how a decade old deck can compare as far as SQ goes
04-21-2004, 07:19 AM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Queens
Posts: 522
Originally Posted by MannyNJ2k2max
Getting back to the topic at hand- the Eclipse 8053/8443 has the most extensive and versatile
Eq/crossover/along with time alignment compared to any HU I've come across out there- so I dont see
how a decade old deck can compare as far as SQ goes
Eq/crossover/along with time alignment compared to any HU I've come across out there- so I dont see
how a decade old deck can compare as far as SQ goes
yea manny
04-21-2004, 08:55 AM
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,280
Originally Posted by MannyNJ2k2max
Getting back to the topic at hand- the Eclipse 8053/8443 has the most extensive and versatile
Eq/crossover/along with time alignment compared to any HU I've come across out there- so I dont see
how a decade old deck can compare as far as SQ goes
Eq/crossover/along with time alignment compared to any HU I've come across out there- so I dont see
how a decade old deck can compare as far as SQ goes
And as far as Radioshack goes, who makes the Radioshack electronics nowadays? It might even be Yamaha for all you know. Radioshack certainly doesn't make it.
04-21-2004, 11:53 AM
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Some of the radio shack stuff is still made by, let's see, radio shack. And some of there stuff is still used by the top placing cars in competition on a routine basis. The only reason I brought up radio shack was because someone bragged about a yamaha home amp or home receiver.
Quite a bit has changed in car audio in the past 10 years. A watt of RMS power is significantly less expensive. Headunits have significantly higher output power and pre-amp level outputs with lower output impedance. Also significantly better power supply isolation. Alpine was making some of the best headunits 10 years ago and they still make some of the best stuff. But now the features you paid top dollar to get in the best units are in the cheapest units you can get at Circuit City - trickle down economy.
Quite a bit has changed in car audio in the past 10 years. A watt of RMS power is significantly less expensive. Headunits have significantly higher output power and pre-amp level outputs with lower output impedance. Also significantly better power supply isolation. Alpine was making some of the best headunits 10 years ago and they still make some of the best stuff. But now the features you paid top dollar to get in the best units are in the cheapest units you can get at Circuit City - trickle down economy.
04-21-2004, 10:40 PM
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by jmax
Another misinformed customer. The salesmen love you, really. You pay for their cars with that "knowledge". Better or worse is all relative and if you can hear the difference you can and will likely adjust to accomadate with an EQ. If you can really hear the difference you already have the EQ. I love it when people say they got new amps and the car sounds so much better. If you had access a friends car you could replace all the amps with the cheapest brand you can find from a pawn shop. So long as you adjust the gains and crossovers to match what you took out they wouldn't know that anything was different untill they opened the trunk.
There is a simple difference between myth and fact. The facts may be demonstrated to be true with experiments or real world situations.
There is a simple difference between myth and fact. The facts may be demonstrated to be true with experiments or real world situations.
some amps have better signal to noise ratio's
no eq is going to fix that.
-vq
Originally Posted by MannyNJ2k2max
Getting back to the topic at hand- the Eclipse 8053/8443 has the most extensive and versatile
Eq/crossover/along with time alignment compared to any HU I've come across out there- so I dont see
how a decade old deck can compare as far as SQ goes
Eq/crossover/along with time alignment compared to any HU I've come across out there- so I dont see
how a decade old deck can compare as far as SQ goes
The DEH-990DSP was way ahead of its time.
and I never said that the Pioneer sounded better
It's been 5 years since I've had the Pioneer in a car. If you would read all of my posts, I said it was easier to use (as the buttons are super sensitive) and there wasn't a significant enough upgrade in SQ to warrant buying a new HU.
I could have installed the Pioneer, saved $550 and had maybe 9/10's as good of a system as I have now.
I NEVER SAID THE ECLIPSE SUCKED OR THAT THE PIONEER WAS BETTER THAN THE ECLIPSE!!!!!
I just am saying that considering I already OWNED the Pioneer, I am not seeing big enough improvements to justify spending $550 on a HU when I already had a pretty damn good one.
when you defenders of the Eclipse realize that, you'll get off of my back.
Go to a Pioneer authorized service center, ask for an old tech that used to work on these, they'll know the DEH-990DSP was a bad ****...not better than the Eclipse, but the only thing seperating the two are low impedence 8V preouts and more tuning options....
-vq
Originally Posted by Maxima Dan
But the problem is determining which one sounds better and why.
determining what sounds better is totally up to the individual.
I care not what others think of the way my set up sound. I know what I like, and that's all that matters to me.
Determining what sounds better is not a problem, all I have to do is listen.
-vq
Originally Posted by Kojiro_FtT
And as far as Radioshack goes, who makes the Radioshack electronics nowadays? It might even be Yamaha for all you know. Radioshack certainly doesn't make it.
it was a few years back, I don't know if it still is...
but it definately wasn't the Pioneer "Elite" series...
My point wasn't really about RADIOSHACK, it was just about any junk K-Mart receiver vs. a yamaha.
I think of Yamaha as being between receivers like Sony/Pioneer/Panasonic and the likes of Onkyo/Denon/Harmon Kardon...Sony/Pioneer/Panasonic is the "lesser" stuff, and Onkyo, etc. is top of the line (unless your Bill Gates).
Yamaha (I think) is right between those two classes...and I doubt anything at Radioshack gets any reviews in the class of a decent Yamaha receiver..
-vq
Originally Posted by jmax
cars in competition on a routine basis.
-vq
Originally Posted by boyfriendhasmax
yea manny
nice to see we have some hotty cheerleaders running around in the org...
so what year is your boyfriends max?
I'm just messing with you man, don't take offense...
-vq
04-21-2004, 11:48 PM
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by adamlee2001GXE
Were you expecting to have your hair be blown off your head? It's just like when people go to the movies. If they have an expectation already of what they want to happen, or see, and it doesnt happen, then they trash the movie. Eclipse is one of the higher end brands. I have had no complaints, nor have any of my riders had any complaints. It's also like cell phone coverage. People always think that the grass is greener on the other side as far as coverage is concerned. If you were told that this Eclipse model is going to be sooo much better than what you have, then you were possibly misguided.
I was expecting way to much out of it.
-vq
04-22-2004, 02:50 AM
#58
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Queens
Posts: 522
Quote: Originally Posted by boyfriendhasmax
yea manny
nice to see we have some hotty cheerleaders running around in the org...
so what year is your boyfriends max?
I'm just messing with you man, don't take offense...
wow, thats was, ummmm, stupid?
yea manny
nice to see we have some hotty cheerleaders running around in the org...
so what year is your boyfriends max?
I'm just messing with you man, don't take offense...
wow, thats was, ummmm, stupid?
04-22-2004, 05:10 AM
#59
wow, thats was, ummmm, stupid?[/QUOTE]
...very......
VQMAN...... you post about one of the best HU's money can buy
and people with actual experience/hands on with the unit post in its defense, there's no reason for cheesy humor-
Anyways get your $$$ back and good luck with that "OLD" HU - (I've owned Pioneers/Premiers.....that unit is most likely on its last legs....)
I bet it'll look great
on that nice updated interior!
...very...... VQMAN...... you post about one of the best HU's money can buyand people with actual experience/hands on with the unit post in its defense, there's no reason for cheesy humor-
Anyways get your $$$ back and good luck with that "OLD" HU - (I've owned Pioneers/Premiers.....that unit is most likely on its last legs....)
I bet it'll look great
on that nice updated interior!
04-22-2004, 06:38 AM
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
It's still possible that he bought a bad seed. It happens. I don't think it's as common with Eclipse as some other brands, but still happens. He was set up by a salesman for an unrealistic expectation. Happens a million times or more every day. Look, he still thinks he can hear the differences between amps that use the same methodology to amplify.
I remember several years ago I bought a Nak because they were supposed to be the best. High volt pre-out, seperate 20 bit DA converter, the works. But it turned out to be the crappiest head unit I have ever heard. Serious audible clipping at the HU outputs. So bad it sounded like a CD skipping significantly below it's rated output level. Preferred Nak dealer did everything to et that sucker to work and it just wasn't happening. Ordered a new one and it had the exact same problem. Then I found out that Nak charges a 30% restocking fee if you have the unit more than 30 days. Between teh time I paid for the first unit and we installed the second unit that time had expired. Nak reps were unfriendly on the phone and refused to remedy the problem. To make a long story short I only got 70% f my money and that was as a store credit. So I have a high output alternator instead of a Nak HU. Basically you don't always get whay you pay for, typically much less. I never go into an audio purchase with great expectations anymore. And I am happy with cheap equipment if it sounds as good or better than expensive equipment. In the end experience, such as this one as well as others, and education allow my system to sound better than others.
I remember several years ago I bought a Nak because they were supposed to be the best. High volt pre-out, seperate 20 bit DA converter, the works. But it turned out to be the crappiest head unit I have ever heard. Serious audible clipping at the HU outputs. So bad it sounded like a CD skipping significantly below it's rated output level. Preferred Nak dealer did everything to et that sucker to work and it just wasn't happening. Ordered a new one and it had the exact same problem. Then I found out that Nak charges a 30% restocking fee if you have the unit more than 30 days. Between teh time I paid for the first unit and we installed the second unit that time had expired. Nak reps were unfriendly on the phone and refused to remedy the problem. To make a long story short I only got 70% f my money and that was as a store credit. So I have a high output alternator instead of a Nak HU. Basically you don't always get whay you pay for, typically much less. I never go into an audio purchase with great expectations anymore. And I am happy with cheap equipment if it sounds as good or better than expensive equipment. In the end experience, such as this one as well as others, and education allow my system to sound better than others.
04-22-2004, 10:59 AM
#62
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 198
I'll lend you my old BOSE HU for a few weeks...listen to that for a while and then switch back to the Eclipse. The Eclipse will sound unbelievable.
As for the Yamaha receivers...I have an RX-V1400 and love it. They're definitely on par with Onkyo and Denon, and better in my opinion when it comes to HT processing. Not to mention their reliability (especially compared to Denon and H/K). If you had the money to buy an RX-Z9, you'd have one of the best HT receivers period (not talking stereo here...). Yamaha has always had a reputation for building excellent amps, and unlike most of the Denon / Onkyo / HK stuff of recent, they have never done a complete retrofit of their receiver platforms. They just build on what works, and integrate new technology as its invented.
As for the Yamaha receivers...I have an RX-V1400 and love it. They're definitely on par with Onkyo and Denon, and better in my opinion when it comes to HT processing. Not to mention their reliability (especially compared to Denon and H/K). If you had the money to buy an RX-Z9, you'd have one of the best HT receivers period (not talking stereo here...). Yamaha has always had a reputation for building excellent amps, and unlike most of the Denon / Onkyo / HK stuff of recent, they have never done a complete retrofit of their receiver platforms. They just build on what works, and integrate new technology as its invented.
04-22-2004, 05:43 PM
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
my system sounds great, everyone who has listened to it has been in awe...
the HU is fine.
I just think that because I already had a good unit (one that was 9/10's as good) that the $550 was a waste of money.
If I was concerned about looks, do you think I would be driving a Maxima (instead of a G35??)
-vq
the HU is fine.
I just think that because I already had a good unit (one that was 9/10's as good) that the $550 was a waste of money.
If I was concerned about looks, do you think I would be driving a Maxima (instead of a G35??)
-vq
04-23-2004, 02:53 AM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,771
Originally Posted by VQMAN
my system sounds great, everyone who has listened to it has been in awe...
the HU is fine.
I just think that because I already had a good unit (one that was 9/10's as good) that the $550 was a waste of money.
If I was concerned about looks, do you think I would be driving a Maxima (instead of a G35??)
-vq
the HU is fine.
I just think that because I already had a good unit (one that was 9/10's as good) that the $550 was a waste of money.
If I was concerned about looks, do you think I would be driving a Maxima (instead of a G35??)
-vq
Tony
04-23-2004, 08:29 AM
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Tony Fernandes
VQ...stop getting so defensive. I'm totally backing you!!! Just sell the Eclipse and keep the Pioneer! Who cares what everyone else thinks. If you're happy then that's all that matters. There's TONS of audiophiles out there that go out of their way to spend as little money as possible on stuff most people wouldn't be caught dead with...and their systems sound just as good if not better than most.
Tony
Tony
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
worldwiderecognized
6th Generation Maxima (2004-2008)
0
09-30-2015 01:16 PM