FINALIZED EQ Settings for Enhanced Premium Sound. LOOK INSIDE.

[kmarei]

Originally Posted by Technic

Fixed.

The OEM amp will adjust that flat EQ curve the moment you start driving (speed dependent EQ and bass boost).

This cannot be disabled, only somewhat minimized.

Sooo
Which wire gives the head unit or amp the speed signal?
Can't we trick the amp/head unit into thinking we're at a standstill all the time.
That's also disables the speed volume setting as well

[Technic]

Originally Posted by kmarei

Sooo
Which wire gives the head unit or amp the speed signal?
Can't we trick the amp/head unit into thinking we're at a standstill all the time.
That's also disables the speed volume setting as well

The Individual Audio OEM amp is controlled by MOST data messages. You will have to "sniff" those messages out and find the one changing the EQ curve by speed.

Yeah, right.

Why do you think that I coded out this system in my first M3 (from Top HiFi to HiFi just to have analog flat balanced signals) and did not order it in my second M3?

[kmarei]

Originally Posted by Technic

The Individual Audio OEM amp is controlled by MOST data messages. You will have to "sniff" those messages out and find the one changing the EQ curve by speed.

Yeah, right.

Why do you think that I coded out this system in my first M3 (from Top HiFi to HiFi just to have analog flat balanced signals) and did not order it in my second M3?

what happened to that Mobridge device that had could intergrate with the optical signal coming from the head unit?
at least that way its easy to just plug in the OEM amp when its time to sell

[Technic]

Originally Posted by kmarei

what happened to that Mobridge device that had could intergrate with the optical signal coming from the head unit?
at least that way its easy to just plug in the OEM amp when its time to sell

There's some still out there; I think that one of them was for sale in the classifieds. There is the AGW+ processor or RCA out converters as well, but very few people in here got them and a couple were also sold here.

To be honest, it would be better for you to just code your CIC to HiFi and add the RCA to the Quadralock and run them (with the OEM remote) to the trunk. That's what I did in my E90.

Actually, what I did now with my E92 is to install all the mids/tweeters/coaxials from a junk Individual Audio M3 (SSMB8 underseats) with the factory HiFi system and added the center and the rear deck speakers to the HiFi OEM connector... basically the same thing as a coded Individual Audio to HiFi.

[kmarei]

Originally Posted by Technic

There's some still out there; I think that one of them was for sale in the classifieds. There is the AGW+ processor or RCA out converters as well, but very few people in here got them and a couple were also sold here.

To be honest, it would be better for you to just code your CIC to HiFi and add the RCA to the Quadralock and run them (with the OEM remote) to the trunk. That's what I did in my E90.

Actually, what I did now with my E92 is to install all the mids/tweeters/coaxials from a junk Individual Audio M3 (SSMB8 underseats) with the factory HiFi system and added the center and the rear deck speakers to the HiFi OEM connector... basically the same thing as a coded Individual Audio to HiFi.

I guess I could use my LC6i to integrate to factory amp
But then I'd need the ms-8 to get a flat signal
I was hoping to skip using the ms-8
After I removed it from my 08, and just had The head unit going straight to amps
The system sounded great, so much more clarity, than with ms-8
At the expense of a lower soundstage, but I preferred the clearer midrange

Cleansweep after the LC6i?

[Technic]

Originally Posted by kmarei

I guess I could use my LC6i to integrate to factory amp
But then I'd need the ms-8 to get a flat signal
I was hoping to skip using the ms-8
After I removed it from my 08, and just had The head unit going straight to amps
The system sounded great, so much more clarity, than with ms-8
At the expense of a lower soundstage, but I preferred the clearer midrange

Cleansweep after the LC6i?

HiFi coding is the best solution. A Cleansweep after the LC6i is a decent solution -I did that also but I never liked it. There was always some minor adjustment to make as this still depended on the changing OEM amp outputs while moving.

[Ateam]

what was the very finalized settings everyone has accepted for the e92?

[kmarei]

Originally Posted by Ateam

what was the very finalized settings everyone has accepted for the e92?

did you see this?
i guess this is a good starting point


PencilGeek's settings for a "flat" frequency response (as flat as possible):
EQ Settings:
100 Hz: +0
200 Hz: +1
500 Hz: +5
1000 Hz: +3
2000 Hz: +8
5000 Hz: +5
10000 Hz: +5

Treble: 0
Bass: +3

Front/Rear Balance: Rear: +3


Malek's settings
EQ Settings: E92 M3, Enhanced Premium Sound:

100 Hz: 0
200 Hz: +1
500 Hz: +3
1k Hz: +4
2k Hz: -1
5k Hz: +3
10k Hz: +3

Bass: +3 (User definable)
Treble: +1 (User Definable)
Fader: 0 (User Definable, based on height and seating position. If you are tall and sit further back, adjust the fader. For reference, I am 6 feet tall, and have the fader set to ZERO)
Balance: 0

[Ateam]

Originally Posted by kmarei

did you see this?
i guess this is a good starting point


PencilGeek's settings for a "flat" frequency response (as flat as possible):
EQ Settings:
100 Hz: +0
200 Hz: +1
500 Hz: +5
1000 Hz: +3
2000 Hz: +8
5000 Hz: +5
10000 Hz: +5

Treble: 0
Bass: +3

Front/Rear Balance: Rear: +3


Malek's settings
EQ Settings: E92 M3, Enhanced Premium Sound:

100 Hz: 0
200 Hz: +1
500 Hz: +3
1k Hz: +4
2k Hz: -1
5k Hz: +3
10k Hz: +3

Bass: +3 (User definable)
Treble: +1 (User Definable)
Fader: 0 (User Definable, based on height and seating position. If you are tall and sit further back, adjust the fader. For reference, I am 6 feet tall, and have the fader set to ZERO)
Balance: 0

Thanks-yes this is what I have tried but was not sure based on the posts if there was an updated version. A couple things maybe you audio gurus can help out with. I know nothing about car audio or how to describe audio in general but Ill give it a shot.

First though why is there so much different in the mid-high range frequencies of the two setups when both are supposed to be this "flat" thing they speak of? How would there be such a difference in two people supposedly measuring this ?

What is this "flat frequency" both talk about as being the basis for this eq settings-not sure what that means or why its desirable.

Third, I find probably the biggest problem is the bass being really "muddy" when the 100 or 200hz settings are in the 1 Plus range. Less than that the sound and vocals are nice and clear but than sound a bit anemic. I can't seem to find a nice combo of clear thumping base with non-disorted crystal clear mids and highs. (i am not expected a huge sub type thumping, just a bit of bass that is clear) To clarify its not the big obvious bass that is the problem, as that thumps pretty good, but its the muddy baseline background "bass" that is mudy. I only call it base because it changes with the 100 and 200hz settings but I know this is the wrong terminology.

PG's settings are pretty good only base at plus 3 gets disorted at loud volumes and I find 2 is clearer. I do not like fader to the back. Other than that I have been trying to tweak it but cannot seem to get it any better.

I have been trying to work with the 100 and 200 hz a bit by turning them to the negative 1-2 range on each. This clears things up but than sounds a bit to "high" and therefore I need to adjust the bottom equalizer bars down a bit, and by that time it loses the same sound arggg!

The best I have done so far is the 100 at 0 and 200 at 0 and everything else the same as PG only with bass plus 2 and fader in the middle and speed volume at 4.

Anyone else shed some light on some of this I am taling about?

[kmarei]

I've noticed the bass sounds better if you raise the bass slider as opposed to raising the 100 or 200hz sliders
So I've kept those at 0 and bass is at +3
Supposedly PG measured the output and that EQ setup is what produced the flattest response
So I think you start with the PG setup
And tweak from there according to your preference

[Ateam]

So I spent 20 minutes doing some reading to actually figure out what all those frequencies mean and some basic on digital equalizers and actually was able to completely find a great setup but I also realized malek and PG's listed settings are pretty different than what the theory generally is for car audio or relatively normal size home audio. Different for huge powerful professional speakers and such.

Almost everything I read is 100hz is almost completely mud and needs to be way down for clarity. The biggest overall useful piece was when using an equalizer the sound remains much more crisp and improved if you cut rather than add boost, meaning lower the signals below zero instead of above. Found several car audio threads with a 7 EQ adjustable system and many of them had this and from spending 10 minutes playing with mine this created a MUCH cleared bass and sound without the mud.


100 Hz: -7
200 Hz: -7
500 Hz: -6
1000 Hz: -5
2000 Hz: -3
5000 Hz: +5
10000 Hz: +5

treble 0
bass 1
fader middle

Another point was making a more "smooth" curve if this was graphed out rather than something that would create a bunch of peaks and troughs next to each other such as 100hz at -8 200 hz at + 7 500 at -4 etc.

The real question though is that it seems to be an EQ is for "fine tuning" and a system should sound great with no eq settings but ours absolutely blows without the eq tweaking and it appears it has to be very very carefully tweaked to get a crystal clear pounding sound without too much high treble and not too much muddy bass.

Anyway I am looking forward to a couple days sampling out some tunes with my settings. The muddy 100hz and 200hz was really ruining the sound for me and made it sound like cheap systems that were never powerful enough to push speakers and would sound like mud

[Malek@MRF]

Originally Posted by kmarei

I've noticed the bass sounds better if you raise the bass slider as opposed to raising the 100 or 200hz sliders
So I've kept those at 0 and bass is at +3
Supposedly PG measured the output and that EQ setup is what produced the flattest response
So I think you start with the PG setup
And tweak from there according to your preference

The settings that I came up were with an RTA if you read the original post.

They produce a flat response as possible, PencilGeeks settings do not. Look at his 2khz setting, it is overly boosted and something must not have been right with his testing equipment or Mic placement.

The mic needs to be placed in semi-neutral listening position to mimic how we actually listen to music. How we listen to music is far different than how we "should" listen to music.

The EQ settings posted in this thread are FLAT as possible in response, any tweaking from there is obviously user definable, and as many have stated, at the end of the day, tweak it to what sounds best you. Everyones ears are constructed differently, pick up sound differently. Systematically the response is flat and unmodified to personal preference. However, a test MIC cannot compensate for how are ears are shaped, how small or large they are and how they channel the sound to be processed.

Let me know if I can help you guys out to get the sound you are looking for.

Also, I would just like to make it clear, no EQ setting is the end-all setting for sound, it will always greatly depend on personal preference, the anatomy of ones ear and many other small factors.

-Malek

[SROC3]

Originally Posted by Malekreza11

The settings that I came up were with an RTA if you read the original post.

They produce a flat response as possible, PencilGeeks settings do not. Look at his 2khz setting, it is overly boosted and something must not have been right with his testing equipment or Mic placement.

The mic needs to be placed in semi-neutral listening position to mimic how we actually listen to music. How we listen to music is far different than how we "should" listen to music.

The EQ settings posted in this thread are FLAT as possible in response, any tweaking from there is obviously user definable, and as many have stated, at the end of the day, tweak it to what sounds best you. Everyones ears are constructed differently, pick up sound differently. Systematically the response is flat and unmodified to personal preference. However, a test MIC cannot compensate for how are ears are shaped, how small or large they are and how they channel the sound to be processed.

Let me know if I can help you guys out to get the sound you are looking for.

Also, I would just like to make it clear, no EQ setting is the end-all setting for sound, it will always greatly depend on personal preference, the anatomy of ones ear and many other small factors.

-Malek

I completely agree. I've even tweaked your settings a little. Given that my car is brand new, the sound system also needs to be "broken in". In my past car (335i), I found that the Logic 7 system sound got better over time and my setting changed a little too to compensate.

[abehwang]

Originally Posted by Ateam

So I spent 20 minutes doing some reading to actually figure out what all those frequencies mean and some basic on digital equalizers and actually was able to completely find a great setup but I also realized malek and PG's listed settings are pretty different than what the theory generally is for car audio or relatively normal size home audio. Different for huge powerful professional speakers and such.

Almost everything I read is 100hz is almost completely mud and needs to be way down for clarity. The biggest overall useful piece was when using an equalizer the sound remains much more crisp and improved if you cut rather than add boost, meaning lower the signals below zero instead of above. Found several car audio threads with a 7 EQ adjustable system and many of them had this and from spending 10 minutes playing with mine this created a MUCH cleared bass and sound without the mud.


100 Hz: -7
200 Hz: -7
500 Hz: -6
1000 Hz: -5
2000 Hz: -3
5000 Hz: +5
10000 Hz: +5

treble 0
bass 1
fader middle

Another point was making a more "smooth" curve if this was graphed out rather than something that would create a bunch of peaks and troughs next to each other such as 100hz at -8 200 hz at + 7 500 at -4 etc.

The real question though is that it seems to be an EQ is for "fine tuning" and a system should sound great with no eq settings but ours absolutely blows without the eq tweaking and it appears it has to be very very carefully tweaked to get a crystal clear pounding sound without too much high treble and not too much muddy bass.

Anyway I am looking forward to a couple days sampling out some tunes with my settings. The muddy 100hz and 200hz was really ruining the sound for me and made it sound like cheap systems that were never powerful enough to push speakers and would sound like mud

Interesting... I'm gonna go try this out later tonight. I do love clarity but I also love the clean bass hits. So we'll see how much it affects it

[Ateam]

EDIT-This has been as good as I have had it in a month and I have tried tons of things. From my research its consistent with having things underboosted or not boosted to maintain clarity other than the 2 higher frequencies. Provides enough baseline low notes without feeling muddy at good volume and still provide a crystal clear hard "punch" of bass, especially if set bass to 2. I don't know how people do not find malek or PG settings very muddy and no clarity.

Malek what exactly does this "flat" response everyone keeps throwing out there-I dont even understand what that means?

I got to play around today and adjusted settings a bit as the ones I just posted were a bit hollow-here is revised

100 Hz: -4
200 Hz: -3
500 Hz: -2
1000 Hz: -1
2000 Hz: +1
5000 Hz: +5
10000 Hz: +5

treble 0
bass 2
fader middle

This seemed to keep the nice clarity but add back enough depth and "bass" without making it muddy again like maleks settings.

I dont know how malek can say those are good settings, whether its flat or not because wtih the 100 and 200 hz at his levels its total mud and no clarity and any decent volume with any songs that have any type of boosted 100-200hz range already built into the track which is almost everything.

[kmarei]

Originally Posted by Ateam

Malek what exactly does this "flat" response everyone keeps throwing out there-I dont even understand what that means?

Flat basically means your system is not adding anything to the sound of the recording
I.e. Reproducing it exactly as it's recorded

See this link for a better description
http://www.ecoustics.com/electronics...es/131062.html

[Ateam]

Originally Posted by kmarei

Flat basically means your system is not adding anything to the sound of the recording
I.e. Reproducing it exactly as it's recorded

See this link for a better description
http://www.ecoustics.com/electronics...es/131062.html

Thanks that was helpful.

I guess my problem with a flat frequency is that this does not account for the volume of music and the fact if a stereo does not have enough power to push the sounds at a higher volume it just becomes disorted. The "flat" settings for this system sound good at medium volumes but getting a bit louder the distortion and muddy sound gets to be really bad and makes it sound like crap. Therefore I think tuning out some of the low frequencies-100, 200hz allows you to get a higher volume without the disortion even though essentically you have "changed" the way its heard v. the way recorded. But to me that is ok because you have to account for the system your listening to. Ideally in a really high end system, a flat response is good because the system can handle producing those sounds at all volumes.

I am no engineer so not saying I am a pro or anything just from the little I have read about this seems to make sens.

[kmarei]

Keep in mind that the sound of the system changes depending on speed
I assume (hope) that both PG and Malek did all their testing with the car stationary
If you're listening with the car in motion
All the testing they did is incorrect
so that might account for what you said about the 100-200hz bands

All we need is for someone to do the same testing on a moving car

[Ateam]

Originally Posted by kmarei

Keep in mind that the sound of the system changes depending on speed
I assume (hope) that both PG and Malek did all their testing with the car stationary
If you're listening with the car in motion
All the testing they did is incorrect
so that might account for what you said about the 100-200hz bands

All we need is for someone to do the same testing on a moving car

hmm that is true-that would be helpful

[LTJohn]

You also have a volume dependent effect of excitation of interior panels. If you RTA at 95 db, and produce a flat response, even without the compression effects that all drivers produce, you will still have anomalies when you push the spl to 105 db.

certain panels will harmonically vibrate at certain frequencies, and they will produce harmonics as the sound decays. These can become additive to other harmonics. unless you are in an anechoic chamber (not a car), you probably will never get a "reference" sound.

When we used to do installs back in the late 90's, we would RTA a customer's car in our workshop and give them the printout. A few days later, they would come back unhappy. They would not be able to hear certain details compared to their Martin logans back at home. So we started using the RTA at the volume that the customer actually listened to on the road. We also used to try to sample the car driving down a test road and see if the road noise had a spike somewhere. If we found the spike, we would secretly tweak the response a tad to account for it.

Either way, we would still discover that the customer would tweak his tone controls anyway! LOL!

I guess the moral of the story is that in Car Audio, you never stop tweaking!!

[Ateam]

Thats a good point-its like the more settings and adjustability you have, the more you basically always constantly want to adjust things! I noticed this with my 20 way comfort seats in my last bimmer. For 4 years I still did not go a day without making some adjustment because from day to day for some reason the seat would feel less comfortable one day compared to the next!

My last car had the basic stereo wtih only treble and bass and that puppy was not adjusted once in 4 years.

Now with the m3 the seats are much less adjustable so I really do not adjust them but the stereo is adjusted every damn time I drive!

Sometimes simple is better.

One thing I do not get is why this system does not have some pre-set settings such as -rock, pop, classical etc. because to me there is really a difference in what settings sound good for most rock songs v. a completely different set for pop.

Todays pop songs tend to have their bass and low frequencies much more boosted in the recording and requires much less boosting your equalizer which keeps the low sounds crystal clear, however rock tends to require more boosting on the EQ due to lack of lows built in the recording which unfortunatley makes things more disorted

[SamS]

Originally Posted by Ateam

Todays pop songs tend to have their bass and low frequencies much more boosted in the recording and requires much less boosting your equalizer which keeps the low sounds crystal clear, however rock tends to require more boosting on the EQ due to lack of lows built in the recording which unfortunatley makes things more disorted

Today's pop/rock songs are all mastered too loudly. You'll have a hard time trying to get the BMW EQ to overcome an inherent problem with the mastering of the recording itself.

Please view: