Retrofit Dynaudio & DAB?

[mac7]

I used to have a £500 quid Technics Hi-Fi stereo, I now have thousands of pounds worth of seperates and I know they are better, I didnt have to listen to them side by side to tell.

I'd agree with you there Kev, up to a point. What I was trying to say is that I get used to what I'm listening to, so I don't really notice the difference until I'm given something significantly better/worse to compare with.

Back to back, I could clearly hear the difference between the Dynaudio and standard systems but if I had to live with the standard system, I'd get used to it and not notice. I've got the standard VW kit in my Passat and it's fairly average, but I've got used to it.

However, although separates will undoubtably be superior to an all-in-one Technics, a more expensive sound system might not necessarily sound better than a lower cost one - because our experience of sound is subjective.

[AdrianM]

 You only really notice the difference between sounds systems if you compare them back-to-back. Which you're never going to do in a car.


In my opinion, Mac makes a great point here. Notwithstanding I'm as deaf as a post, I feel you can only compare when you hear one system and then another with the same media. Of course volume, filters, speakers and indeed the cabling do have an input [and cost money] but is it worth it?

Selfeshly, for me, no - I'll be lucky if I cover 5K/year and my commute is pretty short so I won't necessarily /notice/ much difference. But, you guys who are in your cars a lot, are not corned beef and do like your music will go up the audio ladder.


Ava

Can't agree with that at all, I used to drive a Saxo VTS, I know that GTI drives better and its impossible for me to drive 2 cars at once to compare. I used to have a £500 quid Technics Hi-Fi stereo, I now have thousands of pounds worth of seperates and I know they are better, I didnt have to listen to them side by side to tell.

The dynaudio speakers and amp upgrade is already an upgrade to the standard system, its just VW are fitting it. You could technically class it as aftermarket as nothing from the system is standard VW.

Firstly, driving and hearing are two completely different things and aren't comparable.

Secondly, more money, even vastly more money will not guarantee you a better sound although it will probably assure you more headroom and probably more features. I've read write ups of blind tests of multi-£10K systems against £300 Yamaha receivers and the listener could not hear a difference. Speakers will sound different (sometime a lot, sometimes not) but hardware is unlikely to or it'll be so subtle that you'd need ideal listening conditions (e.g. not in a car at the very least) to discern them.

[VWKev]

 You only really notice the difference between sounds systems if you compare them back-to-back. Which you're never going to do in a car.


In my opinion, Mac makes a great point here. Notwithstanding I'm as deaf as a post, I feel you can only compare when you hear one system and then another with the same media. Of course volume, filters, speakers and indeed the cabling do have an input [and cost money] but is it worth it?

Selfeshly, for me, no - I'll be lucky if I cover 5K/year and my commute is pretty short so I won't necessarily /notice/ much difference. But, you guys who are in your cars a lot, are not corned beef and do like your music will go up the audio ladder.


Ava

Can't agree with that at all, I used to drive a Saxo VTS, I know that GTI drives better and its impossible for me to drive 2 cars at once to compare. I used to have a £500 quid Technics Hi-Fi stereo, I now have thousands of pounds worth of seperates and I know they are better, I didnt have to listen to them side by side to tell.

The dynaudio speakers and amp upgrade is already an upgrade to the standard system, its just VW are fitting it. You could technically class it as aftermarket as nothing from the system is standard VW.

Firstly, driving and hearing are two completely different things and aren't comparable.

Secondly, more money, even vastly more money will not guarantee you a better sound although it will probably assure you more headroom and probably more features. I've read write ups of blind tests of multi-£10K systems against £300 Yamaha receivers and the listener could not hear a difference. Speakers will sound different (sometime a lot, sometimes not) but hardware is unlikely to or it'll be so subtle that you'd need ideal listening conditions (e.g. not in a car at the very least) to discern them.

Of course not directly comparable, but the principal is the same.

I wish I couldnt tell the difference between £300 and £10k, then I could save myself £9.7k. I wish a Fiesta did 150mph and look the bollox, and I could save myself £20k.

[AdrianM]

Firstly, driving and hearing are two completely different things and aren't comparable.

Secondly, more money, even vastly more money will not guarantee you a better sound although it will probably assure you more headroom and probably more features. I've read write ups of blind tests of multi-£10K systems against £300 Yamaha receivers and the listener could not hear a difference. Speakers will sound different (sometime a lot, sometimes not) but hardware is unlikely to or it'll be so subtle that you'd need ideal listening conditions (e.g. not in a car at the very least) to discern them.

Of course not directly comparable, but the principal is the same.

Actually, no, the principles are not the same. Maybe you should read up on psychoacoustics.

I wish I couldnt tell the difference between £300 and £10k, then I could save myself £9.7k. I wish a Fiesta did 150mph and look the bollox, and I could save myself £20k.

And if you did do some reading, you'd understand that just knowing that the equipment you are listening to costs £10K will, without a shadow of a doubt, influence your opinion of what you are hearing and how good it is. This has been proven time and again. What has also been proven time and again, is that generally speaking, most well designed digital equipment sounds just about the same as any other well designed digital equipment no matter what the differences are in prices and, even when there are differences, they tend to be very subtle.

That's not to say that spending more is always waste as it's not; there are other reasons to spend more money besides the non-existent "better sound" that include build quality, longevity , more power and headroom, more functionality, nicer aesthetics, and better support.

[VWKev]

Firstly, driving and hearing are two completely different things and aren't comparable.

Secondly, more money, even vastly more money will not guarantee you a better sound although it will probably assure you more headroom and probably more features. I've read write ups of blind tests of multi-£10K systems against £300 Yamaha receivers and the listener could not hear a difference. Speakers will sound different (sometime a lot, sometimes not) but hardware is unlikely to or it'll be so subtle that you'd need ideal listening conditions (e.g. not in a car at the very least) to discern them.

Of course not directly comparable, but the principal is the same.

Actually, no, the principles are not the same. Maybe you should read up on psychoacoustics.

I wish I couldnt tell the difference between £300 and £10k, then I could save myself £9.7k. I wish a Fiesta did 150mph and look the bollox, and I could save myself £20k.

And if you did do some reading, you'd understand that just knowing that the equipment you are listening to costs £10K will, without a shadow of a doubt, influence your opinion of what you are hearing and how good it is. This has been proven time and again. What has also been proven time and again, is that generally speaking, most well designed digital equipment sounds just about the same as any other well designed digital equipment no matter what the differences are in prices and, even when there are differences, they tend to be very subtle.

That's not to say that spending more is always waste as it's not; there are other reasons to spend more money besides the non-existent "better sound" that include build quality, longevity , more power and headroom, more functionality, nicer aesthetics, and better support.

  You must be a barrel of laughs down the pub on a Sat night.

[AdrianM]

You must be a barrel of laughs down the pub on a Sat night.

You'd be surprised

But usually I'm at home enjoying my £20K AV system in my living room. 

[VWKev]

You must be a barrel of laughs down the pub on a Sat night.

You'd be surprised

But usually I'm at home enjoying my £20K AV system in my living room. 

Should have spent £200, wouldnt have been able to tell the diff.

[Rolfe]

Dragging this back somewhere closer to the topic....

I'm not sure I'm crazy about the 310, and I might consider an upgrade if I didn't have to have that big 510 screen on my dashboard.  The 310 has all the funcionality I want, I'm just not sure about the sound quality.

I've been playing a particular CD a lot, which I have as an iPod transfer.  It's OK, but somehow lacks some je ne sais quoi.  At the weekend I was in the car belonging to the friend who owns the actual CD, and she had it in her car stereo.  It definitely sounded better.  Cheaper, older car though.

Perhaps it's due to the difference between the native CD and the .m4p conversion?

Rolfe.

[p3asa]

Perhaps it's due to the difference between the native CD and the .m4p conversion?

Rolfe.

Yeah it could very well be. Can you not try the original CD and see what that sounds like?

[AdrianM]

Dragging this back somewhere closer to the topic....

I'm not sure I'm crazy about the 310, and I might consider an upgrade if I didn't have to have that big 510 screen on my dashboard.  The 310 has all the funcionality I want, I'm just not sure about the sound quality.

I've been playing a particular CD a lot, which I have as an iPod transfer.  It's OK, but somehow lacks some je ne sais quoi.  At the weekend I was in the car belonging to the friend who owns the actual CD, and she had it in her car stereo.  It definitely sounded better.  Cheaper, older car though.

Perhaps it's due to the difference between the native CD and the .m4p conversion?

Rolfe.

It could be a bad encoding but most probably she had better speakers and/or better acoustics in her car.

FWIW, audio memory is fickle and if you are lucky, subtle differences will be retained for 5 seconds or so and after that any comparison you make will be more or less pointless. Larger differences will be retained for longer but not as much as you'd think. But even how you've slept or your mood can have a big influence on how you perceive a sound so unless you are comparing one system with another side-by-side, the comparison is pretty much pointless anyway.