X5 DSP Stereo, not impressed

[1984911Porsche]

Purchased a X5 2006 with DSP, and not impressed at all, I would expect a little more volume, and sound field.

Wondering if I have something set wrong?

Michael

[X5 Sport]

It is not worth the money but if you look on the front page of this site there are surgested settings

The main problem is the kind of music you listen to if you like music with heavy bass forget it! Just try some other music some times it sounds great.

[Wagner]

I agree. For me it is perfect but I'm not a HUGE loud bass fan. I found that adding a simple 10" sub from www.bavauto.com was enough to give me what I was looking for from the system. If anything the DSP system has very good OEM tweeters. IMO.

[Quicksilver]

Originally Posted by 1984911Porsche

Purchased a X5 2006 with DSP, and not impressed at all, I would expect a little more volume, and sound field.

Wondering if I have something set wrong?

Michael

Depends on the kind of music. Early Temptations stuff sounds Terrible. 101 Eastbound by fourplay is off the hook.Never too busy by Kenny Latimore is another on that pumps very well in the X. But deep booming bass that you hear from passing cars you will never get from 2- 6 inch subs. Digital recordings also sound much better. IMHO the iPod dosn't help improve the signal path either which is why I kept the CD Changer. Experiment with different music and you may find a vast difference in mastering, an art that seems to have fallen on death ears. In my personal experience I prefer not having that booming bass and have found that the X5 does indeed render some recordings with excellent clarity. But again as I mentioned IMHO it really depends on the recording. Here's a good example of what I mean.http://tinyurl.com/3jak

[el_duderino]

I find the DSP system over-engineered but under-listend to by those engineers. It certainly should sound better.

[Quicksilver]

Originally Posted by el_duderino

I find the DSP system over-engineered but under-listend to by those engineers. It certainly should sound better.

The problem is that the engineers are not 20 years old. It may be that the system was designed for a cross section of all drivers not just people who want to hear boom boom. Your right though it could sound better. But no matter what, the audio needs of everyone will never be met.

[x5GuyInLA]

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

Digital recordings also sound much better. IMHO the iPod dosn't help improve the signal path either which is why I kept the CD Changer. Experiment with different music and you may find a vast difference in mastering, an art that seems to have fallen on death ears. In my personal experience I prefer not having that booming bass and have found that the X5 does indeed render some recordings with excellent clarity. But again as I mentioned IMHO it really depends on the recording. Here's a good example of what I mean.http://tinyurl.com/3jak

I have both the cd changer(alpine s634 w blitzsafe(?) adapter) and the aux input. When listening to the same mp3s, the music played from the cd changer is so much crisper w/ better bass response than when I have the mp3 player hooked up to the aux input. Maybe it's the mp3 player, but I think that some of the sound quality is lost through the aux input. I'm a basshead, and while the bass is not overwhelming, which is what I like, it's pretty clean and loud enough when I use the changer. It also does depend on the type of music you listen to. Mellower music would probably sound pretty good, although Nelly's "Grillz" actually hits pretty well.

[el_duderino]

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

The problem is that the engineers are not 20 years old. It may be that the system was designed for a cross section of all drivers not just people who want to hear boom boom. Your right though it could sound better. But no matter what, the audio needs of everyone will never be met.

This system has a control front panel, a separate tuner, and a 10-channel amp with a multiplexing input selector, analog to digital conversion for the tuner, tape, and sat radio, active filters, equalization, and digital signal processing.

Each speaker looks well made, with injection-molded, application-specific frames and synthetic rubber surrounds instead of thin stamped metal and cloth.

It has two 6.5 subs with no grille, firing into a 3mm-thick piece of ABS, and those woofers have a mechanical resonance of 80 Hz - when they are being crossed in at 80 Hz!

Bottom line -there was a LOT of money wasted on this audio system. Whether or not your red herring statement about ALL sound systems is true, this system is a terrible example of performance return on cost.

[Quicksilver]

Originally Posted by el_duderino

This system has a control front panel, a separate tuner, and a 10-channel amp with a multiplexing input selector, analog to digital conversion for the tuner, tape, and sat radio, active filters, equalization, and digital signal processing.

Each speaker looks well made, with injection-molded, application-specific frames and synthetic rubber surrounds instead of thin stamped metal and cloth.

It has two 6.5 subs with no grille, firing into a 3mm-thick piece of ABS, and those woofers have a mechanical resonance of 80 Hz - when they are being crossed in at 80 Hz!

Bottom line -there was a LOT of money wasted on this audio system. Whether or not your red herring statement about ALL sound systems is true, this system is a terrible example of performance return on cost.

What red herring statement about ALL sound systems are you refering to?