Interesting find about the early G50's audio system

[Q451990]

Here is part of a long article at http://www.roger-russell.com/lsd2.htm about McIntosh Loudspeakers and their involvment in the design of the Q45's audio. Very interesting in terms of the timeline... I wonder if it never actually made it in to production, and how it got branded as "Bose"?_________

...In August, 1990, McIntosh was purchased by Clarion of Japan for 28.6 million dollars. Clarion was a large and well-known manufacturer of car audio equipment. In Japan, McIntosh had the highest reputation for quality and excellence. Clarion expressed its firm commitment to continuing McIntosh philosophies, McIntosh policies, McIntosh management and McIntosh marketing. Also in August, key people, including me, were required to sign a two year contract with Clarion. This was to guarantee that we would remain at McIntosh and continue to do the same work we had been doing prior to the purchase. Later that year, Carl and I were directed by Mr. Shiojiri, the Clarion General Manager of McIntosh, to design our first car system in a Nissan Infiniti Q45.

1991



Before a new garage could be constructed, management rented an unused space attached to Pronto’s Restaurant in Conklin, a few miles down the road from the main plant. There were double doors and we were able to drive the Infiniti into the building. It was not heated very well for the middle of winter (January 24, 1991) but it was a beginning. Here is Carl running the chart recorder and sound and vibration analyzer. I preferred to use random noise measurements to minimize resonances and reflections inside the car. Of course, frequency response would be altered if someone were actually sitting in the car.



I later found, when listening with woofers in the rear and tweeters in the front, that the coherence of the sound was poor, perhaps due to the great arrival time and direction difference. When both woofers and tweeters were located in the front or rear, the coherence was audibly much better. Of course, woofers in the rear had the advantage of the large volume of air in the trunk and better bass could be achieved than locating the woofers in the doors with a small volume of air.



In early January 1991, construction began on the large two-car garage at McIntosh. It was connected to the acoustics lab so that we could work on car systems with easy access to the lab. The garage was completed at the end of February 1991.

The initial Q45 design was based on our measurement of the drivers and crossovers in the reverberant room. This indicated the total energy of the system regardless of the directional properties of the drivers. When this was mentioned in a progress report to Clarion, response was very negative and we were directed to work only in the car. There was no one who I could explain the need for correlation. They were in Japan and a one-to-one dialog was not possible.

As we worked on the car system, I again concluded that this was a step backwards from creating accurate sound. Pleasing sound, of course, is very subjective and I found the sound that the Japanese Clarion people liked was not what I liked and visa-versa. Although they indicated they were pleased with the results of our first car system, the story changed later. Response measurements were not very useful in this very close and reflecting environment. Moving the microphone from left to right by the distance between the ears changed the response drastically at the mid and higher frequencies. Use of a dummy head could show similar results. It would seem that neither measurement nor listening would be the answer to pleasing a foreign market.

The next best approximation was to use electronic equalization for one arbitrary microphone location at a point in space between where the ears would be. Of course this was also arbitrary as the ear height would vary from person to person. In addition, equalization had to be used not only for low frequencies but also above 1 kHz, which is very position sensitive. At least we had maintained a controlled bass response that was not like the boomy one-note bass found in some car systems,

Although Carl and I had what we thought was pleasing sound, when the car was actually driven on the road, almost everything was lost in the road noise, despite the fact that the Infiniti had relatively low road noise. The best sound was when the car was not being driven. In the final analysis, the best solution was to have adequate tone control adjustments for the customers so they can adjust the sound to suit their individual preferences. Apparently, exaggerated, boomy bass is one of them.

1992

Carl and I completed the design for the Infiniti Q45 prototype system and the XR290. Carl began work on design of McIntosh drivers for the car systems. I worked on documenting the XR290 for production, including the crossover layout, bill of materials, test procedures, owner's manual and service manual.

In September, Ron Fone became the new McIntosh president. He was a very different person compared to Gordon Gow. He signed a four-year contract with Clarion. Maurice Painchaud stayed on until May 1992 and then retired.

The XR250 and the LD/HP woofer went into production. Carl received a patent for his new woofer design. The XR250 became our best smaller system.

The second car system we installed was in Mr. Shiojiri’s Nissan Maxima. After listening for a while, he was not happy with the sound when sitting in the rear seats. He asked us to improve the sound without any restrictions on how we would accomplish it. Carl and I decided the best place would be to put the speakers in the top of the rear seats facing to the rear. This was probably the best sound I had heard so far in a car. I could actually hear some stereo. However, when Mr. Shiojiri saw this, he said we couldn’t put the speakers there, so that was the end of that...
Modified by Q451990 at 3:26 AM 11/29/2008

[qship96]

The timelines the article of when McIntosh did the research were AFTER the q45 was already introduced to the market with the clarion head unit and Bose speakers- guess they were trying to develop their own in-house speaker system to replace the already specced and factory installed Bose?

Seems like they never got it off the ground, as Bose continued to supply the equalised speaker arrays for every generation Q45.

[goody90q45]

The writer was upgrading his audio systems in his cars since the 60's...6 watt amps were the norm. I thought that his tweeter/woofer system might have made it into the 94+ Q's?

That was a long article.

[maxnix]

Yeah, I posted this before and have actually coreesponded with Roger about it. The VIN and whereabouts fo the car are unknown.

At least we had maintained a controlled bass response that was not like the boomy one-note bass found in some car systems,

In the final analysis, the best solution was to have adequate tone control adjustments for the customers so they can adjust the sound to suit their individual preferences. Apparently, exaggerated, boomy bass is one of them.

So far ahead of his time. Lossy MP3 format not extant yet, so lord knows.....

Shows the waste of money investing in car audio with road noise present while operating. Even in the parking lot, one person inside, a door or window open, and everything changes acoustically.

[Jesda]

Oh, what could have been.

Should have just commissioned Nakamichi.

[maxnix]

Oh, what could have been.

Should have just commissioned Nakamichi.

Over McIntosh? I don't think so!

[Jesda]

Over McIntosh? I don't think so!

McIntosh isn't known for building speakers. They're known for amps and preamps. I was at a local shop a couple weeks ago sampling a pair of B&W 703s ($3k pair) and a McIntosh amp. It was a beautiful experience.

But in a car, especially in the early 90s where tape decks were the norm, Nakamichi would have been much preferred.

[qship96]

Nakamichi tapedecks were great as far ascassette goes, but the cassette format was never a high end medium. Vinyl LP and open reel were always a superior format. CD at its best is mediocre, SACD approaches vinyl, but still is just multiple digital snapshots of an analog waveform at best.

Digital is like taking ground beef and trying to turn it back into a steak

[maxnix]

McIntosh isn't known for building speakers..

I beg your pardon? Until the early 1990's, they built the most accurate and least distorted speakers you could buy that didn't use unobtainium.

Read Richard Russel's site and I guarantee you will learn much baout loudspeaker design (he was their primary speaker engineer) and why Monster Cable is such a scam, like MP3, ported speaker cabinets, horn drivers, metal tweeters and rubberized cones.

Nakamichi's reputation was indeed made on their cassette decks, spcifically the 700 and 1000 models. Tandbergs were only a little worse for less money. Nakamichi car audio was good for the day, but there was no competition then from other high end manufacturers.

[Jesda]

I like where this thread is going, and I fully agree: digital audio, especially compressed, is generally terrible. Its more than sufficient for portable applications, but at home its just not good enough.

Its too bad Nakamichi is nothing but a Chinese-owned trainwreck these days (so I hear). I had one of their CD head units in a Mazda about seven years ago, and it was simply superb.

I think we share most of the same views on speaker design.

[oldmako]

I spent some big bucks on a NAK tape deck in my youth. It was junk. Sure the sound it was capable of capturing and reproducing was superb, but it was usually broken and horrifically expensive to repair.

I often wondered what ever happened to Macintosh. Stereo was better in the 80s. I just unloaded a mid 70's 160 watt Sansui receiver on craigslist. It was a 50 pound beast. The fone rang off the hook! Kinda wish I'd kept it now.

[maxnix]

Yeah, most of theat 60's & 70's stuff was built like tanks. I still use some McIntosh amplifiers from then.

[MinisterofDOOM]

I like where this thread is going, and I fully agree: digital audio, especially compressed, is generally terrible. Its more than sufficient for portable applications, but at home its just not good enough.

I heart my vinyl copy of Zeppelin 1. Black Mountain Side never sounded so amazing.

[Peterofdevon]

I like where this thread is going, and I fully agree: digital audio, especially compressed, is generally terrible. Its more than sufficient for portable applications, but at home its just not good enough.

Its too bad Nakamichi is nothing but a Chinese-owned trainwreck these days (so I hear). I had one of their CD head units in a Mazda about seven years ago, and it was simply superb.

I think we share most of the same views on speaker design.

Jesda, You are spot-on about compression. It has ruined many current recordings and the current reissue market is full of it. Compare current reissues to pre 01-02 CDs and you will see. Nothing wrong with the Ipod and MP3---its the COMPRESSIONDIDISAYCOMPRESSION!!!!!

Peter

[maxnix]

Nothing wrong with the Ipod and MP3---its the COMPRESSIONDIDISAYCOMPRESSION!!!!!

Peter

One of the ways MP3 achieve compression is to leave out "non-essential" music information. Just lose a little timbre, tonality, low frequency definition, dynamics and ambiance. Of course, hip hop, techno and most studio recorded material don't have any of that anyway.

People think music originates out of a 6x9 speaker or ear buds these days. Many have never heard an acoustic intrument in their short life.

[BLACKonBLACK98]

People think music originates out of a 6x9 speaker or ear buds these days. Many have never heard an acoustic intrument in their short life.

pretty broad generalization there.

i thought the article was pretty interesting because of the archaic problems they chronicled (no disrespect to the mcintosh crew).

it's a well known fact that the car environment is an audio nightmare but there have been leaps and bounds in technology/application since the early 90's. "tweeters in the front/woofers in the rear" is a thing of the past. processing has far surpassed bass/treble equalization to overcome the obstacles of the auto interior. installation has evolved into (more of) a science. even losses digital media has found it's way into cars.

even mentioning 6x9s show how disconnected you are from anyone doing anything worthwhile in car audio. stop shakin' your stick old man.

[Jesda]

The iPod buds deserve some credit. They're insanely comfortable, very portable, and allow music videos and TV shows to be viewed at 40,000 feet without disturbing others. They create a reasonably wide stage for how simple they are, and pick up background details in movies and music quite well, depite a lack of accuracy. Of all the cheapo ear buds on the market (I've bought and destroyed many pairs), the Apple buds are by far the best. I'd get a set of Shures but I'm abusive and the in-ear stuff doesn't stay in my canals.

I LOVE LOVE LOVE Grado headphones. I've had the SR40 and SR80, and I'm ready to get a clean headphone amp and upgrade further.

I had a pair of Bose Triports, and they were just horrible. Bass was tight and accurate, but the soundstage was an inch wide, and highs were overboosted and harsh. It felt like U2 was playing in my nostrils. My roommate traded me some things for them, and I gave them right back after a week.

[oldmako]

Jesda,

Where and how much for the Grados??

I found the ipod buds to be a bit uncomfortable. After I ran them through the wash they sounded funny as well. I replaced them with SONYs which although inexpensive (30 bucks) sound pretty good....however, they are flimsy and the rubber caps fall off and I lost them. Without the cap you may as well stick a rock in your ear, you'll get the same level of enjoyment.

I cannot see spending BIG bucks on quality buds simply because of their flimsy construction. So, I am looking for a good compromise. Excellent sound, yet not insanely pricey.

[maxnix]

pretty broad generalization there.

i thought the article was pretty interesting because of the archaic problems they chronicled (no disrespect to the mcintosh crew).

it's a well known fact that the car environment is an audio nightmare but there have been leaps and bounds in technology/application since the early 90's.

As you yourself stated, those "archaic problems" still exist because the acoustic environment remains the same without any change.

It's not the components, its the physics. No catalog or superfly audio setup will change that.

Better study what is important, young 'un.

[maxnix]

So, I am looking for a good compromise. Excellent sound, yet not insanely pricey.

Unachievable when you are listening to an MP3 source that is already compromised - the acoustic information is absent, what remains is compressed paper thin.

[Jesda]

Jesda,

Where and how much for the Grados??

I found the ipod buds to be a bit uncomfortable. After I ran them through the wash they sounded funny as well. I replaced them with SONYs which although inexpensive (30 bucks) sound pretty good....however, they are flimsy and the rubber caps fall off and I lost them. Without the cap you may as well stick a rock in your ear, you'll get the same level of enjoyment.

I cannot see spending BIG bucks on quality buds simply because of their flimsy construction. So, I am looking for a good compromise. Excellent sound, yet not insanely pricey.

Since MP3 playback is already a compromise, the fewer compromises down the line, the better. Grados unfortunately are not very portable. They make a portable set called iGrados, but the housing is restrictive and the sound quality, as a result, isn't that great.

The SR40s ($40) are no longer made because the plastic from their supplier wasn't very good. Mine broke. The SR60s ($60) and up use an (arguably) unattractive but very strong metal band and plastic housing. The Reference series use wood enclosures.

Once you go beyond SR60, you should have a portable amp. My SR80s were $90 and worth every penny. The SR60s and up rotate for flat fitment into a bag or briefcase. They're big and heavy, so they'll never be truly portable. Also, some have complained about their comfort.

The next best brand for the money, in my opinion, is Sennheiser. I dislike the plastic headbands but the sound is respectable and the comfort and styling are excellent.

I haven't bought anything from Sony in years because I no longer trust them, but I've heard decent things about their ear buds and head phones. For $30 its hard to go wrong.

Call Grado to find a local retailer:

Even if you don't buy a set, they're absolutely worth sampling.http://www.gradolabs.com/50years.htm

One of my favorite audio forums: http://www.head-fi.org/

A lot of the members on that forum swear by Koss Portapros for use with iPods, but I have no idea what stores carry them, if any.

[Romeo5k]

Back to this MP3 sux thing. IMHO MP3 is the best for its quality for the size it comes in. Im a pioneer man, so everything in the Q is pioneer Xcept for those bose tweeters.. i love those. All my speakers are 3 wayz and sound great with my mp3 properly made at 320kb/s constant. Car plays wav i think, but i think thats compressed wav, not looseles. And also it plays AAC, i have never heard music in that format. ORIGINAL cds do always have a certain more umph! tan the mp3, but you really would not hear it anyway, instead it just sounds like the volume is a bit louder. So after all, mp3 is not so bad, Hell, wma is bad.. Now whoever listens to that is listening to crap. And that Nakamichi wateva it is, wasnt that the radio in the 92 LS400. I think thats what mine said when i had it. Was not a bad system, bass sucked tho.

[Jesda]

My 98 LS400 had a Nakamichi system. The bass was deep and clean, and with time you come to really appreciate that as you listen to it more. Its less tiring and more detailed.

In my opinion, good bass is tight, subtle, and tidy. A lot of car audio enthusiasts however go for the big and boomy.

[BLACKonBLACK98]

As you yourself stated, those "archaic problems" still exist because the acoustic environment remains the same without any change.

It's not the components, its the physics. No catalog or superfly audio setup will change that.

Better study what is important, young 'un.

you truly do amuse me. you seem to have a lot of preconceived notions and arrogant opinions. perhaps your time would be better spent doing the research instead of assuming that i have not.

i'll leave you with this:



not to say that's the best or only example, but please do continue to tell me what is and isn't possible.

[maxnix]

Show us graphs with another person inside, then another, then another, then with a window down, then two then another then all 4. Even just moving your calibration microphone 3 ft. up or down or across will blow the whole equalization curve.

Even 10 dB, while good for a car, is bad for a good home system that is properly equalized. The larger volume in a room means relatively less change in the equaliztion curve with furniture and people placement than the confined volume of a car. Will ignore ambient noise for now.

It's all about the physics of the acoustical space, once it is equalized for any configuration and a set location for the calibrated pcikup, which to your credit, most don't even attempt for car audio. I agree it is better to start off flat, but as soon as anything changes (like someone getting in or changing pickup location) it all is out the window.