www.tdiclub.com

Economy - Longevity - Performance
The #1 Source of TDI Information on the Web!
Forums Articles Links Meets
Orders TDI Club Cards TDIFest 2016 Gone, but not forgotten VAG-Com List Unit Conversions TDIClub Chat Thank You




Go Back   TDIClub Forums > TDI Model Specific Discussions Areas > VW Passat Family (NMS and B7) TDIs (2012+)

VW Passat Family (NMS and B7) TDIs (2012+) Discussion area for the 2012+ Passat TDI (North American and rest of world versions versions). The North American model was previously codenamed NMS (New Midsize Sedan) and the version the rest of the world gets is sometimes referred to as B7.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 6th, 2017, 08:00   #46
rustycat
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: seattle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tadawson View Post
To an extent, but technology and science is capable of measuring audio, unlike art . . . and I have known folks that though absolute crap sounded good (typically fans of (c)Rap, ironically . . .), so while I respect your opinion, you did duck the question! We know what we like and don't like, and most can describe why that is . . .
Not wanting to really get into such a complex area of discussion (as you said in your comment) "To me, you have frequency response, impulse response, distortion, and level, and that pretty much defines it" works for me.

I'd simply say, yeah, that pretty much covers it. The real question is how do you recreate a sonically accurate reproduction of the artist and the mastering engineer's efforts.
Tube based headunits would probably be the best and cheapest to build, but that isn't going to happen. And, even though they had record players for cars in the 60's, I don't see that happening either.....
rustycat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2017, 12:14   #47
tadawson
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lewisville, TX
Default

But, ironically, the appeal of both tubes and vinyl are theie *inaccuracies*, which many find pleasing. To me, to create the "sonically accurate reproduction" means as few variances from perfectly flat response as possible . . . *that* will be what was mastered (well, assuming no colorations in the studio gear, and studio monitors are typically build for accuracy . . . ). That, or build a duplucate studio, and sit in exactly the same spot as the mastering engineer . . . Ultimately, (setting personal preference aside), accuracy is not unique to any particular technology. Heck, most of the gripes about CD's when they came out were that they were too accurate! Folks though they were 'too bright and brittle' when in reality, they were just (finally) hearing what had been on the master tapes all along, and which prior technologies were losing . . .

My goal is always a baseline system as accurate as possible, and *then* the user/owner can tune for taste. If the colorations are inherent inthe design instead, you can't go back the other way . . .
tadawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2017, 17:49   #48
rustycat
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: seattle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tadawson View Post
But, ironically, the appeal of both tubes and vinyl are theie *inaccuracies*, which many find pleasing. To me, to create the "sonically accurate reproduction" means as few variances from perfectly flat response as possible . . . *that* will be what was mastered (well, assuming no colorations in the studio gear, and studio monitors are typically build for accuracy . . . ). That, or build a duplucate studio, and sit in exactly the same spot as the mastering enginee /r . . . Ultimately, (setting personal preference aside), accuracy is not unique to any particular technology. Heck, most of the gripes about CD's when they came out were that they were too accurate! Folks though they were 'too bright and brittle' when in reality, they were just (finally) hearing what had been on the master tapes all along, and which prior technologies were losing . . .

My goal is always a baseline system as accurate as possible, and *then* the user/owner can tune for taste. If the colorations are inherent inthe design instead, you can't go back the other way . . .
Fair enough. Guess you aren't "frending" Seniors Fletcher/Munson. CDs were terribly compromised, esp. in the early years.
rustycat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7th, 2017, 04:10   #49
Mixchump
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Stratford, ON Canada
Default

Just to be clear here, I'm talking about stuff that is ABSOLUTELY measurable. Sometime, if I have an evening off, I'll swing by my pal's studio, who happens to own an AudioPrecision Porta1Plus, and run some sweeps.

To me, there's at least an octave missing at the top, and in the time domain, I'm positive that the slew rate of the entire system is WAY slower than it should be, and depending on how an AP reports the distortion measurement when seeing digital signal degradation similar to comparing WAV to MP3, you'll see that too.

The sonic difference between an old 741 opamp and a 90's Burr Brown 2604 opamp is night and day ('awful' compared to 'pretty good for an opamp'), and that's easily measurable. I'm not interested in Audiophile-speak, just real cold, hard science.

If you can hear the difference between an SACD (DSD at 2.8MHz) compared to an MP3 (at 128mpbs), that's how radical it sounds to me, when comparing our 2003 Jetta to the 2015 Passat.

Complete and total $hite...
Mixchump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7th, 2017, 06:51   #50
thundershorts
Veteran Member
Default

auto audio is just not for serious listening. Alpine actually used burr brown dac's in one of their top radios and it was decent, well above the fender system. Loud, distortion is not good sound. Very few people here know what slew rate means...
__________________
"You can't argue with a fool..."
thundershorts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7th, 2017, 13:02   #51
tadawson
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lewisville, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mixchump View Post
Just to be clear here, I'm talking about stuff that is ABSOLUTELY measurable. Sometime, if I have an evening off, I'll swing by my pal's studio, who happens to own an AudioPrecision Porta1Plus, and run some sweeps.

To me, there's at least an octave missing at the top, and in the time domain, I'm positive that the slew rate of the entire system is WAY slower than it should be, and depending on how an AP reports the distortion measurement when seeing digital signal degradation similar to comparing WAV to MP3, you'll see that too.

The sonic difference between an old 741 opamp and a 90's Burr Brown 2604 opamp is night and day ('awful' compared to 'pretty good for an opamp'), and that's easily measurable. I'm not interested in Audiophile-speak, just real cold, hard science.

If you can hear the difference between an SACD (DSD at 2.8MHz) compared to an MP3 (at 128mpbs), that's how radical it sounds to me, when comparing our 2003 Jetta to the 2015 Passat.

Complete and total $hite...
That's fair! I have been planning to sweep mine with SMAART, but need to fab a cable to get test signal into it, so have not really been rushing. My 'seat of the pants' reaction, though, is that it is still better than most automotive systems I have heard (endured?). For some reason, car companies seem almost obsessed with putting bad audio in cars . . .
tadawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2017, 19:41   #52
shuck
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Default

I'm not an audiophile, but I do enjoy a nice sounding system. I recently got a Passat TDI SEL with the Fender system and was also extremely unimpressed at first. There was bass cutout and a number of other perceptible nuisances in the sound quality. So, on a hunch, I turned off the speed adjustment for the volume. This made all the difference in the world. I recommend anyone who is concerned with level sound reproduction turn off this feature and use the steering wheel controls to manually adjust your volume for speed. Once I did this, I'm VERY happy with the Fender system's sound quality for a stock system. The interface response, on the other hand...
shuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2017, 06:06   #53
1alfie
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ontario
Default

Next to the incredible fuel economy, the Fender system in my 2015 Passat is my favorite feature of the car. I must admit that on listening to the system for the first time, I was not impressed with Sirius Satellite Radio sound quality, however, when I used the bluetooth feature and listened to downloaded music via my phone, it took the sound quality to a whole new level. To my ears, the sound is exactly as billed from VW and Fender.
1alfie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fender upgrade on 2015 passat? wolf1389 VW Passat Family (NMS and B7) TDIs (2012+) 4 January 10th, 2017 07:21
Fender Audio LOC carlrx7 VW Passat Family (NMS and B7) TDIs (2012+) 2 July 27th, 2016 19:35
Fender audio, do u like it so far? JackMars VW Passat Family (NMS and B7) TDIs (2012+) 18 August 10th, 2015 16:13
2012 Passat Non Fender Audio Upgrade Texas Realtor VW Passat Family (NMS and B7) TDIs (2012+) 30 September 24th, 2014 08:24
Passat Fender Audio Fix @ 6,000 mile Courtesy Check 03-246 VW Passat Family (NMS and B7) TDIs (2012+) 34 May 11th, 2012 04:21


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:28.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright - TDIClub Online LTD - 2017
Contact Us | Privacy Statement | Forum Rules | Disclaimer
TDIClub Online Ltd (TDIClub.com) is not affiliated with the VWoA or VWAG and is supported by contributions from viewers like you.
1996 - 2017, All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.15564 seconds with 13 queries
[Output: 89.95 Kb. compressed to 78.50 Kb. by saving 11.45 Kb. (12.73%)]