Boston Acoustics sound system

[go_go_gadget88]

Add me to the list of people underwhelmed by the stock BA stereo. My old 2004 GTO had a Blaupunkt system in it that sounded a ton better than this BA system, and my 2009 silverado I currently have has the bose system in it. It's a lot clearer than the BA setup.

I think I would have liked this Camaro's system a lot more if I hadn't had either of these other 2 before it.

Generally speaking though, I prefer to just listen to the music coming from the exhaust pipes when I drive this thing!

[Rock-It Man]

Originally Posted by Moto-Mojo

Amen.

EQ was invented by Mitch Miller (‘Sing Along with Mitch’) to compensate for poor and different room acoustics. So theoretically, you could set the EQ for your ‘room’, your Camaro and leave it. But people soon discovered they could use an EQ to suit their tastes. And since every recording is different - now throw in CD, MP3, XM, radio, etc., and you could make the case that EQ could be tweaked for every medium AND song. It’s individual taste.

I prolly lost anyone here younger than 55!

LOL! I'm 66, yet even for me, Mitch Miller is that fool that grandparents watched.

EQ was "invented" by him? I don't think EQ had much effect on the mono recordings in his time. The EQ settings on a modern digital device do a a lot more, including adding "ambiance" throughout the use of time phasing gadgets like reverb and stereo chorus.

[Moto-Mojo]

Long before the internet, I was taught this in a recording class in San Diego. (the Mitch Miller EQ invent thing) So either the instructor - who owned the successful studio, was an early pioneer in fake news or, it was true. This was in 1980. I took it as a factoid of the day. You can Snope and expose me if you like. But who Snope’s Snope?

I will say the modern day internet doesn’t seem to support that he did. Now should I question everything every teacher ever uttered prior to Google?

[CamaroFred]

Perhaps not from the beginning of audio recording, but very quickly it was discovered that bass notes were not able to be recorded properly without the volume being reduced. Thus equalizers were invented. Any phonograph has an 'equalizer' built in to return certain frequencies that have been reduced to more or less what they were reduced by.
When AM was popular singles (45 RPM records) were 'equalized' to broadcast well on AM radio. Long play albums (33 1/3 RPMs) were designed to play well on FM and home audio systems.
Television was FM sound, but AM equipment producing the output, except for a few high-end consoles. It was designed for voice. Music was an afterthought.

With the advent of digital recording (CDs), the sound quality was often reduced to reduce the cost. It wasn't long before audiophiles discovered that the new, magic, CD, that would never pop, or hiss, or skip, did indeed have pop, and hiss, and occasionally, skip, and if the recording was condensed, there was a loss of dynamics compared to wax (records).
I remember bringing home my first CD player and a CD of my wife's favorite album, Meatloafs "Bat Out Of Hell!"
I was crushed when I played it. The bass was reduced to AM.



All that said, there are very few automobiles produced with anything considered 'high-end' stereos. Again, it is all about the cost.
And for good reason. With the government (damn them) requiring ever increasing MPGs, power consumption and weight are major considerations.
I gave up long ago on paying extra for an 'upgraded' car stereo. They are never worth the money, IMHO.


As for Mitch Miller, he probably one of the first to discover and exploit the limitations of TV audio.

[fly2hip8]

I may be the minority here, but I am happy with mine. I can't stand a lot of bass I get headaches from it. If there is a car next to me thumping my head starts to hurt. And, my volume never goes above 20. This is the only car I have ever owned that was brand new. All others were at least 10 years old.

[Junior]

Originally Posted by redcoats1976

120,000 watts in unimagineable.i have to take my 50 watt peavy outside on order to crank it...

I used to have a 500w Hartke head that powered a 4x10 cabinet and a 1x15 cabinet. Talk about some bass! Most shows I just ran the 4x10, but for outdoor gigs, forget about it! Nowadays, my Eden 50w is all I need LOL.

[zlathim]

Originally Posted by Junior

I used to have a 500w Hartke head that powered a 4x10 cabinet and a 1x15 cabinet. Talk about some bass! Most shows I just ran the 4x10, but for outdoor gigs, forget about it! Nowadays, my Eden 50w is all I need LOL.

I'm satisfied with the factory BA system in my car. I've never been a big car stereo guy. I'd rather spend my money on things that make it hard to hear the stereo.

[Moto-Mojo]

I used to use the “Fletcher-Munson effect” on my parents. Simply, it states that human hearing doesn’t pick up high and low frequencies at lower volume levels hence, creating the need to, CRANK IT UP!

So as it relates here, you may not be getting the full effect of your BA system at lower volumes.

https://ehomerecordingstudio.com/fletcher-munson-curve/

[WannaBgeneral]

I have found that my BA 9 speaker setup is very cool.

[mikeinmobile]

We traded our 96 Lincoln Mark VIII in on the Camaro. The Bose Surround in that car was the best sounding stereo I've ever owned and that's saying something as that my wife and I own a Ballroom Dance studio and we always have top end audio equipment at work and at home. The car was fully loaded which included an amplifier in the trunk. The amp went out the last few months (started making a very loud popping noise) and we disconnected it. The system of course lost all it's punch after that. It was surprising what a difference the amp made at low and high volumes. Someone earlier mentioned an amp and I'm guessing that it will instantly bring our systems to life. I mentioned earlier that my homemade cds w/the record level turned up sound REAL good in the Camaro and the bass thumps so I know these systems are capable of producing good sound at low and high volume. W/o amplification though the radio is not even OK in my opinion. Another issue is the road noise in the Camaro, the Lincoln was so quite that the stereo really shined through and of course the Camaro stereo gets drowned out alot regardless of the quality or volume. (I know, Dynomat) Anyway, this thread has inspired me to get an amp for the Camaro.


By the way, anyone else have a Mark VIII w/the 32 valve Intech V8? I love my SS but we still miss the Lincoln. For those not familiar it was a 2door coupe w/factory air ride and would smoke the tires like an old school muscle car. The exhaust was Lincoln quite at normal rpms but under load had the sweetest note. Cool cars fo sho.

[matteo0021]

I like my BA sound system. After i tuned the EQ

[Rock-It Man]

Originally Posted by matteo0021

I like my BA sound system. After i tuned the EQ

Yeah, a lot of people don't realize that you have to tune the EQ separately for each source.

But sadly, my winter beater, a 2015 Trax LTZ, has a better sound system (Bose) than the BA in the 2010 Camaro. That is surprising since, in general, my experience with Bose is that it's overpriced and mediocre.

[wasthatacop?]

I do not like the Boston Acoustics setup. It's more of the stock amp and head unit that I dont like. I changed out the speakers hoping for something better. Yes it was clearer and louder, but overall the sound quality is flat. I had some work done on the Camaro and had a 2016 Deanali rental for a week. I was shocked at the impressive quality of the sound system in that Denali. I'm just not willing to pay for a complete stereo in the Camaro. I'd rather spend the money on suspension and performance.

[sixty9fordkiller]

the lower speaker on the passenger side door has been shot since about 2012

im not impressed by the system but at least it has bluetooth streaming audio