Very slow day. I argued with him for a few days about his AC meter score. Why do people argue when they have no experience outside of their tiny little box.
Protect that ego you womanly coward. You're a ***** in every sense of the word. A real man admits when he's wrong.
Man just chill out and get out of your box. You might learn something new if you stop being stubborn.
I dropped knowledge that punk *** little know-it-all didn't believe until an expert on acoustic engineering schooled him on it. I hardly think I'M the one being stubborn here. I only want credit where it's due and the fuckhead still wants to bash me and call me stupid even after he found out I was right. Check your definition of stubborn and apply the word to the person who actually deserves it.
You are saying things to try and justify your "fake" score. That's the stubborn part. Go find a term lab and get some readings. Just try it and see what happens, you don't have to say anything about it, just for your own personal knowledge.
That'd be pretty ******* hard to do considering that sub and box are long gone. And to say that the vehicle acoustics can't justify the score is also stubborn and ignorant and completely ignores everything keep_hope_alive just said. You want me to stop being stubborn, you go first.
I know what you are saying and its true. Every vehicle will act different even adding mass to panels changes it. The problem comes from you being unrealistic. And justifying it with a know over exaggerated meter proves it. That's my point.
Okay and my point is you won't admit that a score close to that is possible with the acoustics. The meter could not have been that far off. The mic was less than a year old and it cost over $1000 for the new mic and calibration. The meter isn't as bad as everyone makes it sound and there is no way in hell it's as far off as people say, not when 4 15" Level 4s on 10k did 155db. My T1 did 144 which is exactly what RF says it's capable of. I saw dual 12's in a custom box do less than my T1 at 142db and also dual 15's in prefabs doing 138-139. 3 15" sealed L7's in a trunk did 148. So everything we metered seems about right and people (RF "mainstream" haters) only want to hate because they see a T1 do 144 which isn't even that high of score. But our meter was a maximum of 1 or 2dB off, not 5-10dB, y'all are crazy if you think that. Maybe other AC meters were way off but not ours. And my build was good whether anybody wants to admit it or not, that single 12 outdid so much **** out there it was pathetic.
You are talking to people that chase meter numbers for a hobby. We have used both. My car when it did a 144 on TL did a 155 on AC. You are not talking to people that never do this. It may have done a 140, Do you know what it takes to go from a 140 to a 144?
I realize that. What you don't understand is that nothing read out of whack like that on our meter. It took 4 15s on 10k to do 155 on our meter, that's not out of whack at all. I don't know what you had but I guarantee you wouldn't come close to 155 on our AC. Maybe the new mic was an updated version, who knows, but it didn't read fucked up like everybody says. It was a calibrated to a brand new mic less than a year before the video and the T1 is perfectly capable of 144db, especially when overpowered in a 3.5cu/ft custom box firing towards the rear in a trunk vehicle with the front windows down.
The last thing I'm going to say. How do you know it was right? 4 15s on 10k does not mean it will do a 55.
I just realized that he thinks i was implying that simply placing a sub in the vehicle does not cause a gain... I used the wrong words and i apologize. Anyways, of course enclosing any acoustic wave and forcing it to travel in a certain direction enhances it. This a pretty basic piece of knowledge that anyone who's been doing this for more than a week knows. My poorly used words regarding response were in regards to the frequency "peak" being a misnomer. And i think Rich knew where i had tripped up, hence his added words regarding phase.
