I Just Hit It From Behind = (

[hzsogood 5,000+ posts]

If you consider being unable to come up with a logical dispute that statement, or a rebuttal thats not on the 3rd grade level of "I kno you are but what am I?"...hitting home, sure ya did! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif
The difference between me and you in our arguments is that i will not allow you to escape a logical discusion and go off on some epic ca.com flamefest devoid of common sense and evidence. Based on the fact that if you can say something the right way people will tend to believe it no matter how ridiculous it is.

"So i'm going to say because you are in your 30's and argue on this forum as you do.

You probably live either alone or at your mom's house. Get a kick out of being a know it all prick and think its somehow amusing when you label yourself better than someone else. You probably work at a shitty job since you only seem to get REALLY riled up when people who don't know their elbow from their as$ buy really expensive equipment like I did, back in the day. Meaning you get pissed off when you cant afford simple equipment some people view as mediocre based on price. If that SUV in your SIG is your daily driver, that definitely holds true. So anytime someone with puerile knowledge getts a bunch of equipment that makes you jealous, but hooks it up in a stupid way (in your opinion) you look for every excuse possible to pick them apart so that your own life seems a little less pathetic. You'd probably, if you'd follow the course of history reply with some ridiculous accusation about someone besides me paying for the equipment. (with no basis of reasoning, because you don't need it. Just as much as you can be jealous enough to not believe I make the money I make, Others are likely to believe it due to their own jealousy.)"

See now that entire statement is likely false, or at least most of it. Maybe none of it is even close.

The point is, This is how you construct your arguments and statements about me. You feed off the fact that most people are stupid enough to make and believe assumptions just because they WANT to believe something is a certain way.

I've done it too, every time I come on this forum I browse thread titles for ignorant comments. Partially because I naturally have a hate for false information, partially cause I naturally like to make my knowledge useful.

So no I will not argue with someone who tells me that his personal opinion devoid of and fact, reason, or experience is grounds for an argument.

If you want to talk to me in a logical way, without that stupid BS flaming attitude, I'll discuss it with you.

However, its very likely you won't. You're behavior suggests that you don't really care what the truth is, and that at this point, you just want to believe that false construct in your head. Because, all other situations aside, the one you've constructed is the most amusing and easy to live with from your own point of view.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

reading your post makes me fart //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

 

[hzsogood 5,000+ posts]

the system so far costed 2000 bucks more than my car is worth

so burn it, claim $2050 insurance, start over and do it right....???

 

[tehWorstest]

so burn it, claim $2050 insurance, start over and do it right....???

lol thats some **** good advice.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

You are spewing off random bullshit that different drivers together intrinsically create an unfavorable response! Show me proof of that! You CAN'T, cause its BULLSHIT! YOU MADE IT UP!!!!

Once again, your own words defy you.

there is no cancellation! fer cryin out loud the 13 is set to 35 hertz and the 10's are set to 60...

So, a few years ago when this problem was posed to you, you claimed to have a fix. But now here you are years later, stating I made the problem up for this argument. Which is it? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

I'll take your lack of one shred of evidence, not one link, not one quote, nothing, as evidence of your failure to find any corroborating data. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wave.gif.002382ce7d7c19757ab945cc69819de1.gif

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

The only problem I had was some sort of cancellation due to a difference in the polarity in the amps. didn't really study the problem enough to now the actual reason. never had any monstrous acoustical problems like you've claimed from day one and I've denied from day one. And as ignorant as I was for setting my subs like that to avoid this imaginary concept of acoustic cancellation, you were the ones who pushed this imaginary concept on me.

When you are trying to come up with a problem that isn't real to tell me i have, i'm going to try to come up with an imaginary solution. It's like a salem witch trial. You act surprised that a kid with minimal experience tried to follow your advice when you do this every day. Well now i know enough to say definitely that you were/are full of shit.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

The only problem I had was some sort of cancellation due to a difference in the polarity in the amps. didn't really study the problem enough to now the actual reason. never had any monstrous acoustical problems like you've claimed from day one and I've denied from day one. And as ignorant as I was for setting my subs like that to avoid this imaginary concept of acoustic cancellation, you were the ones who pushed this imaginary concept on me.
When you are trying to come up with a problem that isn't real to tell me i have, i'm going to try to come up with an imaginary solution. It's like a salem witch trial. You act surprised that a kid with minimal experience tried to follow your advice when you do this every day. Well now i know enough to say definitely that you were/are full of shit.

You just cant help lying can you.

there is no cancellation! fer cryin out loud the 13 is set to 35 hertz and the 10's are set to 60...

You didnt say "you guys are right and Im changing my system to accomodate your 'theory' on cancellation to seperate freqs between the two sub sizes"... you claimed your system was set up that way all along, to avoid the problem you now claim is bogus, and that I made up to create this argument with you. You obviously think Im stupid enough to fall for that line of bullshit... Im not. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wave.gif.002382ce7d7c19757ab945cc69819de1.gif Not only that, I guess all the other people in that thread years ago made it up as well. Its a grand conspiracy against cotjones and his uber four-10's and one-13 sub system. Right? We're all just jealous because none of us ever thought of running multiple sub sizes before. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Or maybe all those people were wrong, and your enormous brain and 17 year old's experience is simply superior. Your ego knows no bounds. The really sad part is, you yourself know you are lying, yet you continue this facade in hopes of keeping that ego in tact. Makes a lot of sense. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif

And, we both know you tried to find evidence to support your theory that running multiple sub sizes is perfectly acceptable, but failed. But your ego again wont let you tell the truth, so you divert, change subjects, try anything but admit you are clueless and arrogant. Im confident you'd love nothing more than to put me in my place, and you know the only way you'll do it is to find some authority that backs up your claim of multiple sub sizes. You cant. Go ahead, I double dog dare you to find one single solitary reliable source that backs you up. Just one. I triple dog dare you! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif You cant even explain why no serious SQ guy runs multiple sized subs, which seems odd if your theory were true, that its a great plan to fill in the subbass freqs smoothly. Pathetic

You now claim you were too ignorant back then to realize all us telling you it was a terrible setup were wrong, yet back then you were just as sure of yourself, your intelligence, and your experience as you are now. Your golden ears would tell you if there was a problem, that was your claim then, and that's your claim now. The common denominator? That you have always thought your knowledge was superior to anyone who questions you. Hmmm. You wont ever change, you'll always be narcissistic, and even when you look back on previous times and realize you werent the smartest and most experienced person around, you will fail to apply that reasoning to present day.

Oh btw, since you are so smart and experienced with car audio now, you should be made aware of the fact that no, running rear speakers at the same freqs as your fronts is not a good idea. It does not corroborate your subwoofer theory, it merely highlights you are still a noob at this hobby.

 

[RAM_Designs 5,000+ posts]

You just cant help lying can you.


You didnt say "you guys are right and Im changing my system to accomodate your 'theory' on cancellation to seperate freqs between the two sub sizes"... you claimed your system was set up that way all along, to avoid the problem you now claim is bogus, and that I made up to create this argument with you. You obviously think Im stupid enough to fall for that line of bullshit... Im not. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wave.gif.002382ce7d7c19757ab945cc69819de1.gif Not only that, I guess all the other people in that thread years ago made it up as well. Its a grand conspiracy against cotjones and his uber four-10's and one-13 sub system. Right? We're all just jealous because none of us ever thought of running multiple sub sizes before. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Or maybe all those people were wrong, and your enormous brain and 17 year old's experience is simply superior. Your ego knows no bounds. The really sad part is, you yourself know you are lying, yet you continue this facade in hopes of keeping that ego in tact. Makes a lot of sense. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif

And, we both know you tried to find evidence to support your theory that running multiple sub sizes is perfectly acceptable, but failed. But your ego again wont let you tell the truth, so you divert, change subjects, try anything but admit you are clueless and arrogant. Im confident you'd love nothing more than to put me in my place, and you know the only way you'll do it is to find some authority that backs up your claim of multiple sub sizes. You cant. Go ahead, I double dog dare you to find one single solitary reliable source that backs you up. Just one. I triple dog dare you! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif You cant even explain why no serious SQ guy runs multiple sized subs, which seems odd if your theory were true, that its a great plan to fill in the subbass freqs smoothly. Pathetic

You now claim you were too ignorant back then to realize all us telling you it was a terrible setup were wrong, yet back then you were just as sure of yourself, your intelligence, and your experience as you are now. Your golden ears would tell you if there was a problem, that was your claim then, and that's your claim now. The common denominator? That you have always thought your knowledge was superior to anyone who questions you. Hmmm. You wont ever change, you'll always be narcissistic, and even when you look back on previous times and realize you werent the smartest and most experienced person around, you will fail to apply that reasoning to present day.

Oh btw, since you are so smart and experienced with car audio now, you should be made aware of the fact that no, running rear speakers at the same freqs as your fronts is not a good idea. It does not corroborate your subwoofer theory, it merely highlights you are still a noob at this hobby.

Ouch.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

You just cant help lying can you.


You didnt say "you guys are right and Im changing my system to accomodate your 'theory' on cancellation to separate freqs between the two sub sizes"... you claimed your system was set up that way all along, to avoid the problem you now claim is bogus, and that I made up to create this argument with you. You obviously think Im stupid enough to fall for that line of bullshit... Im not. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wave.gif.002382ce7d7c19757ab945cc69819de1.gif

I didn't say I did. I DID say that I believed that was the reason I didn't have the problem you claimed I had. In other words I believed you about the problem and tried to figure out what about my system avoided that problem. Bottom line, i've said again and again is that it sounded fine. My system now sounds better, but it sounded great, and was better than almost everything around my home town there. It's not some golden ear BS, its simple comparison. You don't think I listened to you people at all? I paid TONZ of money on that setup, and did hours of work trying to find these problems that didn't exist that you people just magically CLAIMED that I had. You assume alot and it makes you an idiot.

Not only that, I guess all the other people in that thread years ago made it up as well. Its a grand conspiracy against cotjones and his uber four-10's and one-13 sub system. Right? We're all just jealous because none of us ever thought of running multiple sub sizes before. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Or maybe all those people were wrong, and your enormous brain and 17 year old's experience is simply superior. Your ego knows no bounds. The really sad part is, you yourself know you are lying, yet you continue this facade in hopes of keeping that ego in tact. Makes a lot of sense. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif

Really? There is no such thing as a bandwagon on CA.COM!?!?!?!?! OMFG!!!!!!!! I would like to see a count of people who have either attempted to engineer a multi sub setup, or heard one that didn't consist of at least one sony Xplode? I'm betting that number is pretty small. It wasn't the different sized subs that made people jealous, it was the fact that someone you viewed as inferior in skill to you could afford such nice equipment. It's like watching a monkey handle a bottle of fine wine. It's almost painful to watch. I know, i've felt it too.

And, we both know you tried to find evidence to support your theory that running multiple sub sizes is perfectly acceptable, but failed. But your ego again wont let you tell the truth, so you divert, change subjects, try anything but admit you are clueless and arrogant. Im confident you'd love nothing more than to put me in my place, and you know the only way you'll do it is to find some authority that backs up your claim of multiple sub sizes. You cant. Go ahead, I double dog dare you to find one single solitary reliable source that backs you up. Just one. I triple dog dare you! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif You cant even explain why no serious SQ guy runs multiple sized subs, which seems odd if your theory were true, that its a great plan to fill in the subbass freqs smoothly. Pathetic

Show me evidence that suggests the opposite? I dare YOU. Just because something might not be the most ideal way to do something doesn't mean its not a way to do something.

You now claim you were too ignorant back then to realize all us telling you it was a terrible setup were wrong, yet back then you were just as sure of yourself, your intelligence, and your experience as you are now. Your golden ears would tell you if there was a problem, that was your claim then, and that's your claim now. The common denominator? That you have always thought your knowledge was superior to anyone who questions you. Hmmm. You wont ever change, you'll always be narcissistic, and even when you look back on previous times and realize you werent the smartest and most experienced person around, you will fail to apply that reasoning to present day.

And what a logically sound arguement. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif:laugh://content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif You know claim it's still the "golden ears" that i'm arguing with. No it's the FACT. that there is no intrinsic drawback to having 2 different acoustic sources operating at the same time. It happens all around you every day. You think any 2 speakers can deliver the precise same signal? nope. For that matter even sitting in the passenger seat instead of an equidistant point from all the car's speakers produces un-unfavorable response characteristic.
What you are doing is pot-kettling, Trying to explain to me that my setup had acoustic problems a common same size setup lacks. Well it simply doesn't. Spreading the peak frequency in the 2 sub types apart gave me a fairly even response. Even compared to some setups? I'm sure there are MORE than plently that could put it to shame on an RTA, however, to the common ear it was perfectly acceptable for a daily driver.

Oh btw, since you are so smart and experienced with car audio now, you should be made aware of the fact that no, running rear speakers at the same freqs as your fronts is not a good idea. It does not corroborate your subwoofer theory, it merely highlights you are still a noob at this hobby.

Right, because the people sitting in the back seats shouldn't be able to hear the music being played in the front seats. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif And every stock system, (and most aftermarket systems) in the world don't follow this example? BAHAHA and I'm the one bucking the common knowledge now? I tell you what, why don't you publish this bullshit audioholic theory that different speakers always produce an unfavorable response when playing the same frequencies. You will revolutionize all the current theories with that piece of bullshit you just pulled out of your ***.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

 

[Slo_Ride 5,000+ posts]

how does your goat breathe fire

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Bottom line, i've said again and again is that it sounded fine.

It's not some golden ear BS, its simple comparison.

Your ears didnt hear any problems, so there were no problems. But you dont have 'golden ears', right? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Comparing to other systems has three fundamental flaws. One, you were comparing different setups. For all you know, or we know, the systems you compared it to had even worse installs. Two, personal bias. Of course you think your system sounded the best, you thought your dodge pick up had some exotic racing chip in it, and you think your 245hp car will turn tire at will even while doing decent speeds on dry pavement. Im sure if you did a comparison to your friends, you'd decide your shit smells like roses too. Three, your ears are not golden, and you have no way of knowing if the system would have sounded better had it been designed right (no multi-sized subs).

Really? There is no such thing as a bandwagon on CA.COM!?!?!?!?! OMFG!!!!!!!! I would like to see a count of people who have either attempted to engineer a multi sub setup, or heard one that didn't consist of at least one sony Xplode? I'm betting that number is pretty small. It wasn't the different sized subs that made people jealous, it was the fact that someone you viewed as inferior in skill to you could afford such nice equipment. It's like watching a monkey handle a bottle of fine wine. It's almost painful to watch. I know, i've felt it too.

Like I said, your ego would rather believe some vast conspiracy against you personally from a bunch of strangers than it would believe you might *gasp* be wrong. Narcissism, the tell-tale sign of an over inflated ego.

What you are doing is pot-kettling, Trying to explain to me that my setup had acoustic problems a common same size setup lacks. Well it simply doesn't.

It doesn't? I thought that multi-sized setup was no more? I think your paranoia and defnsive nature is starting to create a situation where you are losing of track of what you are even defending.

Spreading the peak frequency in the 2 sub types apart gave me a fairly even response.

After reading your response that stock systems do it, so it must be 'right', Im no longer surprised you were/are unable to build a subwoofer system that is able to maintain a flat response for a mere 2 octaves. Seems to me you just admitted you **** at building sub systems, as if it wasn't already obvious.

IEven compared to some setups? I'm sure there are MORE than plently that could put it to shame on an RTA, however, to the common ear it was perfectly acceptable for a daily driver.

I never said it wasn't 'perfectly acceptable', Ive always maintained it was simply a less than ideal situation, and completely unnecessary. Acceptable to your ears? Yes, Im sure it was, but that's hardly the point, except to the guy who thinks he'd hear any and every problem that might occur within his system. The guy with the golden ears.

Right, because the people sitting in the back seats shouldn't be able to hear the music being played in the front seats. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif And every stock system, (and most aftermarket systems) in the world don't follow this example? BAHAHA and I'm the one bucking the common knowledge now? I tell you what, why don't you publish this bullshit audioholic theory that different speakers always produce an unfavorable response when playing the same frequencies. You will revolutionize all the current theories with that piece of bullshit you just pulled out of your ***.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

People sitting in the back seat are irrelevant. Id say "and you know it" but honestly, I dont think you are even following the point any longer. Having rear passengers hear the stereo better means nothing to the discussion of if rear speakers interfere with fronts. How many serious SQ competitors have you heard of that run rear speakers? At best, they mighht run rears heavily attenuated and bandpassed, so as to minimize interference with their front stage. Ambiance, rear-fill, nothing more. Most wont bother with rears at all. Maybe you think all those SQ guys simply dont have enough friends to fill their back seats? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif
I guess because Ford and Kia put rear speakers in their cars, that proves your acoustical theory? I honestly cant believe Im even debating with someone at your experience level and mentality. If I didnt get so much personal satisfaction out of it, Id dismiss your comments as the nonsensical ramblings of just another know-it-all idiot in the car audio hobby and save my breath for someone with more knowledge. But like I say, you amuse me.

Show me evidence that suggests the opposite? I dare YOU. Just because something might not be the most ideal way to do something doesn't mean its not a way to do something.

Just cant bring yourself to admit you cant find one single solitary shred of evidence to support your argument eh? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif I asked you to support your view, even stipulated you only needed to provide a mere single example from a reputable source, and you think you will turn that back on me by simply demanding me to disprove your claims? Again, if you want to shut me up, find one, just ONE source, go ahead. lol Keep squirming and dodging the fact you cant, I see right through you.
But I'll oblige you so far as to state that NO serious SQ competitor uses multiple sized subs for subsonic freqs. Not one. Go ahead, show me up and post up one, ONE. You cant. So you'll squirm, you'll divert, you'll try anything but admit you've looked and you've failed. So I'll ask again, since this is a well discussed topic, multiple sub sizes, it should be easy to find even just one single solitary reference to back you up. The more you refuse, the more obvious it is that you cant. I'll cut you off at the pass and tell you that people such as Vance Dickason and Richard Clark have discussed this topic... care to guess what their stance was? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif So go on, shoo, go find your source that says multiple sub sizes is necessary, and a good idea. Then come back and claim you wont even look, rather than admit you failed. Meanwhile I, and anyone else who is bothering to read this anymore, will be laughing.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

Your ears didnt hear any problems, so there were no problems. But you dont have 'golden ears', right? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Comparing to other systems has three fundamental flaws. One, you were comparing different setups. For all you know, or we know, the systems you compared it to had even worse installs. Two, personal bias. Of course you think your system sounded the best, you thought your dodge pick up had some exotic racing chip in it, and you think your 245hp car will turn tire at will even while doing decent speeds on dry pavement. Im sure if you did a comparison to your friends, you'd decide your shit smells like roses too. Three, your ears are not golden, and you have no way of knowing if the system would have sounded better had it been designed right (no multi-sized subs).

Wrong on all accounts.

#1 that "opinion" that my system sounded better was not only mine, but the people in my home town and the drivers of the other cars themselves.

#2 That's 270hp.

#3 It WILL spin at 30mph on dry pavement.

Like I said, your ego would rather believe some vast conspiracy against you personally from a bunch of strangers than it would believe you might *gasp* be wrong. Narcissism, the tell-tale sign of an over inflated ego.

Thats a great theory... WHEN YOU'RE CORRECT

It doesn't? I thought that multi-sized setup was no more? I think your paranoia and defnsive nature is starting to create a situation where you are losing of track of what you are even defending.

Pay attention to a grammar tense error instead of the information you can't refute, Typical.

After reading your response that stock systems do it, so it must be 'right', Im no longer surprised you were/are unable to build a subwoofer system that is able to maintain a flat response for a mere 2 octaves. Seems to me you just admitted you **** at building sub systems, as if it wasn't already obvious.

I'm suprised how reading isn't your strong suit. I additionally said most after-market systems. How much do you want to wager that some 95+ percent of systems in general do it? you can go buy a $30,000 klipsch home theater system that does it. i'm sure the people that market individual speakers for $3500 aren't as knowledgeable as you are, and they are nooobxes xD. lolz

I never said it wasn't 'perfectly acceptable', Ive always maintained it was simply a less than ideal situation, and completely unnecessary. Acceptable to your ears? Yes, Im sure it was, but that's hardly the point, except to the guy who thinks he'd hear any and every problem that might occur within his system. The guy with the golden ears.

See you came so close, but alas the true ego problem shows its ugly face. If you could just leave it at the bold, we'd all get along. But you insist on discounting perfectly logical and obvious information just because you want to believe i'm stupid. So sad. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

People sitting in the back seat are irrelevant. Id say "and you know it" but honestly, I dont think you are even following the point any longer. Having rear passengers hear the stereo better means nothing to the discussion of if rear speakers interfere with fronts. How many serious SQ competitors have you heard of that run rear speakers? At best, they mighht run rears heavily attenuated and bandpassed, so as to minimize interference with their front stage. Ambiance, rear-fill, nothing more. Most wont bother with rears at all. Maybe you think all those SQ guys simply don't have enough friends to fill their back seats? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

Or maybe because all they are trying to do is get the best possible quality from one point of view to win awards. It will always be harder to achieve a flat response with multiple speakers rather than individual ones. Doesn't make it correct just because you can do it easier with 2 channels than 4. LOL I'd like to see whose car win's an award in DVD sound quality between those 2 channel SQ guys. 5.1 FTW. So when your goal is to win SQ, and it is unnecessary and more difficult to accomplish that goal with rear speakers? why do it? Again, you are using competitions to say concepts can't be accomplished, failing to take into account that these people are trying to win an award and not interested in making things harder than they have to be. Like I said, I bet those systems sound like shit in the back seat.

I guess because Ford and Kia put rear speakers in their cars, that proves your acoustical theory? I honestly cant believe Im even debating with someone at your experience level and mentality. If I didnt get so much personal satisfaction out of it, Id dismiss your comments as the nonsensical ramblings of just another know-it-all idiot in the car audio hobby and save my breath for someone with more knowledge. But like I say, you amuse me.

More meaningless banter, your most common response.

Just cant bring yourself to admit you cant find one single solitary shred of evidence to support your argument eh? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif I asked you to support your view, even stipulated you only needed to provide a mere single example from a reputable source, and you think you will turn that back on me by simply demanding me to disprove your claims? Again, if you want to shut me up, find one, just ONE source, go ahead. lol Keep squirming and dodging the fact you cant, I see right through you.

Hmmm lets see because that request isn't loaded? Who would you consider a reputable source? I could go to any amount of installers and home/car audio guys, yet if they give you an opinion in my court, you will simply say something in the effect of "they don't know shit." So who is a reputable source? some random guy on the internet? Why don't you give me a shred of evidence, a physics class write-up, an article on speaker design, ANYTHING?!?! you can't do that either can you?

What you are asking is the equivalent of saying "if you are so tough, hit me" over the internet.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif

But I'll oblige you so far as to state that NO serious SQ competitor uses multiple sized subs for subsonic freqs. Not one. Go ahead, show me up and post up one, ONE. You cant. So you'll squirm, you'll divert, you'll try anything but admit you've looked and you've failed. So I'll ask again, since this is a well discussed topic, multiple sub sizes, it should be easy to find even just one single solitary reference to back you up. The more you refuse, the more obvious it is that you cant. I'll cut you off at the pass and tell you that people such as Vance Dickason and Richard Clark have discussed this topic... care to guess what their stance was? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif So go on, shoo, go find your source that says multiple sub sizes is necessary, and a good idea. Then come back and claim you wont even look, rather than admit you failed. Meanwhile I, and anyone else who is bothering to read this anymore, will be laughing.

Again, why would they do it when it makes it more difficult??? And when did I say it was necessary or a good idea? No, I simply said it could be done. Honestly, I bet it sounded a lot better than your first, second or maybe even 3rd setup. Maybe not you but a lot of people on this forum I guarantee you.

 

[tehWorstest]

Why is this still going on.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Or maybe because all they are trying to do is get the best possible quality from one point of view to win awards. It will always be harder to achieve a flat response with multiple speakers rather than individual ones. Doesn't make it correct just because you can do it easier with 2 channels than 4. LOL I'd like to see whose car win's an award in DVD sound quality between those 2 channel SQ guys. 5.1 FTW.

I stopped reading at this point. Ridiculous logic. Music is recorded in 2 channel, your 4 channel, and 5.1 channel points, are irrelevant here. As for the SQ guys, if multiple sub sizes breeds more optimal results than single sized systems, why is NOBODY using your theory? because its too hard? lol But you, master of everything he touches, knows better. Makes about as much sense as your DVD point.

Wrong on all accounts.

So prove it already. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif If you can come up with one reputable source, one link, one quote, anything, id be glad to keep an open mind. But you cant, you can only go on about how everyone in your town thinks your stereo sounds the best. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Yeah, Im sure you won over a lot of nay sayers with that logic. I'll be back tomorrow, you have the rest of today to come up with a single source that backs up your claims. Like 12 hours, to find ONE source. That should be easy for someone with your knowledge and experience in this field. BTW, Id really love to see a link to this $30 Klipsch home theater that uses multiple sized subs, to play 2 octaves. lol
Thanks for the laughs cot.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Or maybe because all they are trying to do is get the best possible quality from one point of view to win awards. It will always be harder to achieve a flat response with multiple speakers rather than individual ones. Doesn't make it correct just because you can do it easier with 2 channels than 4. LOL I'd like to see whose car win's an award in DVD sound quality between those 2 channel SQ guys. 5.1 FTW.

I stopped reading at this point. Ridiculous logic. Music is recorded in 2 channel, your 4 channel, and 5.1 channel points, are irrelevant here. As for the SQ guys, if multiple sub sizes breeds more optimal results than single sized systems, why is NOBODY using your theory? because its too hard? lol But you, master of everything he touches, knows better. Makes about as much sense as your DVD point.

Wrong on all accounts.

So prove it already. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif If you can come up with one reputable source, one link, one quote, anything, id be glad to keep an open mind. But you cant, you can only go on about how everyone in your town thinks your stereo sounds the best. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Yeah, Im sure you won over a lot of nay sayers with that logic. I'll be back tomorrow, you have the rest of today to come up with a single source that backs up your claims. Like 12 hours, to find ONE source. That should be easy for someone with your knowledge and experience in this field. BTW, Id really love to see a link to this $30 Klipsch home theater that uses multiple sized subs, to play 2 octaves. lol
Thanks for the laughs cot.