Observations on Mark Levinson Audio on 2023 ES 350 - Average at best
04-10-23, 10:43 AM
#31
The following users liked this post:
LexFinally (04-10-23)
04-10-23, 02:19 PM
#32
We bought a 2023 ESh in November - there was not a lot of choice back then and we wanted a car so that we could let my son use my wife's Avalon as he had turned 16 - so we ended up with a base model (with the premium package + larger screen + several other options - but no ML). We like it, but in hindsight, there are several features of the Ultra Luxury that I like and I've thought about trading our current ES in for an Ultra Luxury as used car values are still pretty high. It seems like most of the UL come with the optional ML and Triple Beam headlights (which I want) - so trying to weigh the options.
04-10-23, 02:38 PM
#33
Wife has a 23 IS350 F Sport with triple beams, inhave a 23 ES300h with the normal bi level LEDs. We swap cars back and forth, and I can’t tell a difference between them other than the triple beams move a bit during cornering. I actually prefer the side turn lights of the bi levels. The triple beams don’t seem to make the road any brighter at night.
04-10-23, 03:22 PM
#34
Wife has a 23 IS350 F Sport with triple beams, inhave a 23 ES300h with the normal bi level LEDs. We swap cars back and forth, and I can’t tell a difference between them other than the triple beams move a bit during cornering. I actually prefer the side turn lights of the bi levels. The triple beams don’t seem to make the road any brighter at night.
04-11-23, 03:19 AM
#35
Pit Crew
Thread Starter
The bass and treble setting is set to mid-way on the b&o whereas the treble is the highest with ML.
Sound at the highest level is clear and loud without distortion with b&o. I can't say the same with ML.
04-13-23, 12:41 PM
#36
Instructor
Having had the Lexus ES 350 now for about a month or so and testing the ML Audio extensively, I can say that the ML Audio at best has been average when compared to the Bang & Olufsen on my Audi q5 of 2016.
A few findings that I've seen is
1. The Base and Treble in B&O are at about halfway; however, the Treble on the ML is at 100%, but it still sounds low in comparison
2. The Bass is boomy on the ML (not good) whereas in the B&O its punchy
The configuration of ML is through wireless Carplay audio. When it's on Bluetooth it's "slightly" better as it can also leverage the inbuilt equalizer on the iPhone, which the Carplay does not leverage.
Is there a way to fine-tune or mod the ML Audio to get better? I would have expected ML to at least be close to B&O from 2016.
I've also had the B&O on my BMW 650 in the earlier days and Audi's sound quality is comparable to the BMW's B&O config. There are multiple youtube videos that talk very highly of the ML Audio and how the engineers configured it so well for each car but in my honest comparison, I feel it's all a bunch of "marketing and uplift". If ML Audi is so sub-par then I wonder how bad would the factory audio be.
What do you all observe and what are your configurations?
A few findings that I've seen is
1. The Base and Treble in B&O are at about halfway; however, the Treble on the ML is at 100%, but it still sounds low in comparison
2. The Bass is boomy on the ML (not good) whereas in the B&O its punchy
The configuration of ML is through wireless Carplay audio. When it's on Bluetooth it's "slightly" better as it can also leverage the inbuilt equalizer on the iPhone, which the Carplay does not leverage.
Is there a way to fine-tune or mod the ML Audio to get better? I would have expected ML to at least be close to B&O from 2016.
I've also had the B&O on my BMW 650 in the earlier days and Audi's sound quality is comparable to the BMW's B&O config. There are multiple youtube videos that talk very highly of the ML Audio and how the engineers configured it so well for each car but in my honest comparison, I feel it's all a bunch of "marketing and uplift". If ML Audi is so sub-par then I wonder how bad would the factory audio be.
What do you all observe and what are your configurations?
I like surround sound off, Bass on the higher side, Mid just below that, and Treble a little higher than Mid. It's called preference. You've got a fader; use it. But to say that the ML system's quality is garbage is grossly undervaluing its potential. Notice I said potential. Low-quality sound systems only can produce up to a specific potential. Play the highest resolution audio in a lower-quality audio system, and the potential is lost. You can't blame your boombox sound system when your FLAC file does sound like you are at the symphony! Nor can you blame the ML system for not living up to expectations when you listen via FM radio or an Mp3. Play high-quality sources like FLAC files or DVDs/CDs. Take time to understand how to get the best from a High-Quality system like an ML audio system. To have quality output, you need quality input. Trying to polish a turd and calling it a diamond isn't going to work. Using low-quality audio sources and connections expecting high-quality results will only reinforce your perception of a low-quality system. That isn't fair, is it?
And in the spirit of being fair, you shouldn't be the only one singled out for this as you certainly aren't the first and won't be the last to have this perception of the Mark Levinson Audio system; my point in my rant is to attempt to bring an understanding to what the potential root cause of what you are experiencing and to ultimately help you to get the most out of the car and the audio system that you had been waiting; for what I am sure, felt like an eternity, to get. There needs to be a level playing field.
Disclaimer** I am no expert, even if I believe I am in my mind, but that's the delusion I must live with. These are facts, some as I see them and some that are actual, with some colorful opinions sprinkled into the mix. Any corrections and overly negative views are welcome and can be submitted to File 13! So sit back and wait for the spirited retorts to begin. Enjoy!
Last edited by UltraLux22; 04-13-23 at 03:00 PM.
04-13-23, 01:29 PM
#37
Lead Lap
Your explanation is sensible and concise. Crap in - crap out... However, the average buyer of a new car, when told how super duper the sound system is, will not know this. They would expect the system to be exactly that.: exceptional due to it's increased cost as an option. I think that this is behind the numerous complaints that are posted on this forum and thread.
I know nothing about "flac files" and quite frankly aren't interested in them. And I believe that most of the other owners of Marc Levinson systems don't care either. All these complainers are looking for is a system that sounds great when they turn it on. If Lexus explained to a potential buyer that "hmmm, of course you know that you must utilize flac files to achieve superior sound, " I don't think many buyers would put up the coin for the ML system. This, in my opinion, is where the disconnect takes place. Is the ML system an upgrade from the standard sound system? Yes... But it doesn't perform as it is portrayed to perform due to the "crap in - crap out" reasons. And your rant was a pleasure to read. Bob C.
I know nothing about "flac files" and quite frankly aren't interested in them. And I believe that most of the other owners of Marc Levinson systems don't care either. All these complainers are looking for is a system that sounds great when they turn it on. If Lexus explained to a potential buyer that "hmmm, of course you know that you must utilize flac files to achieve superior sound, " I don't think many buyers would put up the coin for the ML system. This, in my opinion, is where the disconnect takes place. Is the ML system an upgrade from the standard sound system? Yes... But it doesn't perform as it is portrayed to perform due to the "crap in - crap out" reasons. And your rant was a pleasure to read. Bob C.
The following users liked this post:
UltraLux22 (04-13-23)
04-13-23, 01:50 PM
#38
Instructor
I aim to please—myself! J/K To add to that point, if anything, due to the ML system's higher-end potential, it will further enhance the nature inherent in lower-quality audio sources, reinforcing the disappointment and expectation people are likely to have; if they have it, as you say, some people won't care one iota! But, of course, this is just for the less-enlightened haters. So don't hate until you have fairly judged the ML.
04-13-23, 02:06 PM
#39
Instructor
I'm glad I could amuse you! Words are great, but "Likes" are what all the kids want these days...Why should I be any different, "Like" it? LOL Don't be one of those people who, "I loved the meal; it was the best I've ever had: "Chef's Kiss," and your service was impeccable!" and then leave no tip! 👍😜
04-13-23, 03:48 PM
#40
Intermediate
My music of choice is very questionable LOL so I don't know if ML is really top notch or average at best, but after 4 years and 65K miles of listening crap out it via Youtube and Apple music most of the time, I give it 8/10, could be a but louder, but def. better than the base audio that I have listened numerous of time when on base loaner.
04-13-23, 04:26 PM
#41
Just a few clarifications and comments. I think that it is important to clear up some misconceptions - especially so that everyone to understands that Carplay does not use bluetooth for audio, that wired Carplay (via USB) is available on all models that have Carplay and that there are reasons that someone would hear different things when using BT vs Wifi or wired Carplay.
This is not the way it works. Wireless carplay uses wifi for the interface. It uses bluetooth to negotiate the initial connection and then switches to wifi. If you don't believe me, turn off bluetooth once connected and your music will still play. There is some debate what wireless carplay support (some say high bit rate ACC-LC others say up to 16 bit / 48 hz). For USB there is also some debate - some say 16 bit / 48 hz (slightly better than lossless CD quality) up to 24 bits / 96 hz.
Wireless Carplay uses wifi once connected and Wired carplay (via USB) also works on 23MY. This is important as USB should give you the best sound (even if WIFI supports the same bit rate, as it is not subject to wireless interference/latency) and I wouldn't want anyone with a 23MY not able to get the best quality they could only use Wifi (or worse BT) by relying on this, especially if they've invested in the ML audio.
Bluetooth audio (which is both connection protocol and then negotiates to use one of many possible and typically lossy audio codecs) would make things sound different than wifi or USB. The BT codec likely being used (SBC) is similar to a 256kb/s MP3 which is of reasonable quality.
I agree that the BT codec used by the ES is much more likely to make a higher quality source sound worse, but it certainly is different and would explain someone hearing a difference between Bluetooth and Carplay via WIFI (or USB). It is not out of the realm of possibilities that either the person is more used to listening to compressed sources (e.g. MP3s or BT headphones that don't use a lossless codec) so BT sounds more natural - or that there is some sort of equalization happening on the iPhone - or that it simply allows for a louder input which would result in a louder output (which can make people think an identical source sounds better).
I would expect the ML system to faithfully reproduce it (warts and all). I would expect it to be tuned appropriately to accept both high quality and low quality sources - not make low quality sources sound like a either a symphony or sound worse than what they should.
Continuing with the turd analogy - I wouldn't expect a system to polish the turd, but at the very least it should look like the same turd that was fed into the system and not a turd that had been smashed or broken apart as it went through (i.e. it should not be toilet for the sound). I have high quality DACs, amplifiers, speakers and headphones that I use at home and I also know what lower quality mp3s and SiriusXM sound like, but I would not expect it to sound worse than what they really are on the ML system - that is the impression that I get which is why I commented on this thread in the first place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that impression.
While I wholeheartedly disagree with your representation of the ML audio, I am baffled, to say the least, as to this assessment: "The configuration of ML is through wireless Carplay audio," and "When it's on Bluetooth, it's "slightly" better as it can also leverage the inbuilt equalizer on the iPhone, which the Carplay does not leverage." Firstly, whether you use wireless Carplay or the Lexus interface wirelessly, they both utilize Bluetooth. When you are using wireless Carplay and when you are using Bluetooth, where is the music coming from: your iPhone? Same source, a different interface, and the same connection to the ML system.
I agree that the BT codec used by the ES is much more likely to make a higher quality source sound worse, but it certainly is different and would explain someone hearing a difference between Bluetooth and Carplay via WIFI (or USB). It is not out of the realm of possibilities that either the person is more used to listening to compressed sources (e.g. MP3s or BT headphones that don't use a lossless codec) so BT sounds more natural - or that there is some sort of equalization happening on the iPhone - or that it simply allows for a louder input which would result in a louder output (which can make people think an identical source sounds better).
If you take a low-quality MP3 file or record a song from a cassette tape onto a CD/DVD and transfer the files to your phone or play through Bluetooth on your phone or even through the connected USB, it will sound like ******! If you put 87 octane into a Formula One car, what do you think will happen????? It's going to run like ******!! Is it the best top-of-the-line out there; No, and no one is saying it is, but the whole soundstage issue is not an issue. They are called adjustments. I like surround sound off, Bass on the higher side Mid's just below that, and Treble a little higher than Mids. It's called preference. You've got a fader; use it. But to say that the ML system's quality is garbage is grossly undervaluing its potential. Notice I said potential. Low-quality sound systems only can produce up to a specific potential. Play the highest resolution audio in a lower-quality audio system, and the potential is lost. You can't blame your boombox sound system when your FLAC file does sound like you are at the symphony! Nor can you blame the ML system for not living up to expectations when you listen via FM radio or an Mp3.
Take time to understand how to get the best from a High-Quality system like an ML audio system. To have quality output, you need quality input. Trying to polish a turd and calling it a diamond isn't going to work. Using low-quality audio sources and connections expecting high-quality results will only reinforce your perception of a low-quality system. That isn't fair, is it?
Last edited by n2it; 04-13-23 at 04:32 PM.
04-13-23, 04:35 PM
#42
As a side note, if the base or ML systems had a different or better equalizer I’d be a lot happier. A five band EQ would be great, or a way to change the cutoff frequencies of the existing 3 band EQ. Some manufacturers offer parametric EQ now which would be nice.
I guess having had decent aftermarket systems spoiled me too much because I enjoyed tuning them. And a good system can make even mediocre sources sound pretty good.
I guess having had decent aftermarket systems spoiled me too much because I enjoyed tuning them. And a good system can make even mediocre sources sound pretty good.
The following users liked this post:
n2it (04-13-23)
04-13-23, 04:51 PM
#43
Instructor
Just a few clarifications and comments. I think that it is important to clear up some misconceptions - especially so that everyone to understands that Carplay does not use bluetooth for audio, that wired Carplay (via USB) is available on all models that have Carplay and that there are reasons that someone would hear different things when using BT vs Wifi or wired Carplay.
This is not the way it works. Wireless carplay uses wifi for the interface. It uses bluetooth to negotiate the initial connection and then switches to wifi. If you don't believe me, turn off bluetooth once connected and your music will still play. There is some debate what wireless carplay support (some say high bit rate ACC-LC others say up to 16 bit / 48 hz). For USB there is also some debate - some say 16 bit / 48 hz (slightly better than lossless CD quality) up to 24 bits / 96 hz.
Wireless Carplay uses wifi once connected and Wired carplay (via USB) also works on 23MY. This is important as USB should give you the best sound (even if WIFI supports the same bit rate, as it is not subject to wireless interference/latency) and I wouldn't want anyone with a 23MY not able to get the best quality they could only use Wifi (or worse BT) by relying on this, especially if they've invested in the ML audio.
Bluetooth audio (which is both connection protocol and then negotiates to use one of many possible and typically lossy audio codecs) would make things sound different than wifi or USB. The BT codec likely being used (SBC) is similar to a 256kb/s MP3 which is of reasonable quality.
I agree that the BT codec used by the ES is much more likely to make a higher quality source sound worse, but it certainly is different and would explain someone hearing a difference between Bluetooth and Carplay via WIFI (or USB). It is not out of the realm of possibilities that either the person is more used to listening to compressed sources (e.g. MP3s or BT headphones that don't use a lossless codec) so BT sounds more natural - or that there is some sort of equalization happening on the iPhone - or that it simply allows for a louder input which would result in a louder output (which can make people think an identical source sounds better).
I would expect the ML system to faithfully reproduce it (warts and all). I would expect it to be tuned appropriately to accept both high quality and low quality sources - not make low quality sources sound like a either a symphony or sound worse than what they should.
Continuing with the turd analogy - I wouldn't expect a system to polish the turd, but at the very least it should look like the same turd that was fed into the system and not a turd that had been smashed or broken apart as it went through (i.e. it should not be toilet for the sound). I have high quality DACs, amplifiers, speakers and headphones that I use at home and I also know what lower quality mp3s and SiriusXM sound like, but I would not expect it to sound worse than what they really are on the ML system - that is the impression that I get which is why I commented on this thread in the first place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that impression.
This is not the way it works. Wireless carplay uses wifi for the interface. It uses bluetooth to negotiate the initial connection and then switches to wifi. If you don't believe me, turn off bluetooth once connected and your music will still play. There is some debate what wireless carplay support (some say high bit rate ACC-LC others say up to 16 bit / 48 hz). For USB there is also some debate - some say 16 bit / 48 hz (slightly better than lossless CD quality) up to 24 bits / 96 hz.
Wireless Carplay uses wifi once connected and Wired carplay (via USB) also works on 23MY. This is important as USB should give you the best sound (even if WIFI supports the same bit rate, as it is not subject to wireless interference/latency) and I wouldn't want anyone with a 23MY not able to get the best quality they could only use Wifi (or worse BT) by relying on this, especially if they've invested in the ML audio.
Bluetooth audio (which is both connection protocol and then negotiates to use one of many possible and typically lossy audio codecs) would make things sound different than wifi or USB. The BT codec likely being used (SBC) is similar to a 256kb/s MP3 which is of reasonable quality.
I agree that the BT codec used by the ES is much more likely to make a higher quality source sound worse, but it certainly is different and would explain someone hearing a difference between Bluetooth and Carplay via WIFI (or USB). It is not out of the realm of possibilities that either the person is more used to listening to compressed sources (e.g. MP3s or BT headphones that don't use a lossless codec) so BT sounds more natural - or that there is some sort of equalization happening on the iPhone - or that it simply allows for a louder input which would result in a louder output (which can make people think an identical source sounds better).
I would expect the ML system to faithfully reproduce it (warts and all). I would expect it to be tuned appropriately to accept both high quality and low quality sources - not make low quality sources sound like a either a symphony or sound worse than what they should.
Continuing with the turd analogy - I wouldn't expect a system to polish the turd, but at the very least it should look like the same turd that was fed into the system and not a turd that had been smashed or broken apart as it went through (i.e. it should not be toilet for the sound). I have high quality DACs, amplifiers, speakers and headphones that I use at home and I also know what lower quality mp3s and SiriusXM sound like, but I would not expect it to sound worse than what they really are on the ML system - that is the impression that I get which is why I commented on this thread in the first place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that impression.
Last edited by UltraLux22; 04-13-23 at 07:00 PM.
04-13-23, 06:33 PM
#44
Instructor
Just a few clarifications and comments. I think that it is important to clear up some misconceptions - especially so that everyone to understands that Carplay does not use bluetooth for audio, that wired Carplay (via USB) is available on all models that have Carplay and that there are reasons that someone would hear different things when using BT vs Wifi or wired Carplay.
This is not the way it works. Wireless carplay uses wifi for the interface. It uses bluetooth to negotiate the initial connection and then switches to wifi. If you don't believe me, turn off bluetooth once connected and your music will still play. There is some debate what wireless carplay support (some say high bit rate ACC-LC others say up to 16 bit / 48 hz). For USB there is also some debate - some say 16 bit / 48 hz (slightly better than lossless CD quality) up to 24 bits / 96 hz.
Wireless Carplay uses wifi once connected and Wired carplay (via USB) also works on 23MY. This is important as USB should give you the best sound (even if WIFI supports the same bit rate, as it is not subject to wireless interference/latency) and I wouldn't want anyone with a 23MY not able to get the best quality they could only use Wifi (or worse BT) by relying on this, especially if they've invested in the ML audio.
Bluetooth audio (which is both connection protocol and then negotiates to use one of many possible and typically lossy audio codecs) would make things sound different than wifi or USB. The BT codec likely being used (SBC) is similar to a 256kb/s MP3 which is of reasonable quality.
I agree that the BT codec used by the ES is much more likely to make a higher quality source sound worse, but it certainly is different and would explain someone hearing a difference between Bluetooth and Carplay via WIFI (or USB). It is not out of the realm of possibilities that either the person is more used to listening to compressed sources (e.g. MP3s or BT headphones that don't use a lossless codec) so BT sounds more natural - or that there is some sort of equalization happening on the iPhone - or that it simply allows for a louder input which would result in a louder output (which can make people think an identical source sounds better).
I would expect the ML system to faithfully reproduce it (warts and all). I would expect it to be tuned appropriately to accept both high quality and low quality sources - not make low quality sources sound like a either a symphony or sound worse than what they should.
Continuing with the turd analogy - I wouldn't expect a system to polish the turd, but at the very least it should look like the same turd that was fed into the system and not a turd that had been smashed or broken apart as it went through (i.e. it should not be toilet for the sound). I have high quality DACs, amplifiers, speakers and headphones that I use at home and I also know what lower quality mp3s and SiriusXM sound like, but I would not expect it to sound worse than what they really are on the ML system - that is the impression that I get which is why I commented on this thread in the first place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that impression.
This is not the way it works. Wireless carplay uses wifi for the interface. It uses bluetooth to negotiate the initial connection and then switches to wifi. If you don't believe me, turn off bluetooth once connected and your music will still play. There is some debate what wireless carplay support (some say high bit rate ACC-LC others say up to 16 bit / 48 hz). For USB there is also some debate - some say 16 bit / 48 hz (slightly better than lossless CD quality) up to 24 bits / 96 hz.
Wireless Carplay uses wifi once connected and Wired carplay (via USB) also works on 23MY. This is important as USB should give you the best sound (even if WIFI supports the same bit rate, as it is not subject to wireless interference/latency) and I wouldn't want anyone with a 23MY not able to get the best quality they could only use Wifi (or worse BT) by relying on this, especially if they've invested in the ML audio.
Bluetooth audio (which is both connection protocol and then negotiates to use one of many possible and typically lossy audio codecs) would make things sound different than wifi or USB. The BT codec likely being used (SBC) is similar to a 256kb/s MP3 which is of reasonable quality.
I agree that the BT codec used by the ES is much more likely to make a higher quality source sound worse, but it certainly is different and would explain someone hearing a difference between Bluetooth and Carplay via WIFI (or USB). It is not out of the realm of possibilities that either the person is more used to listening to compressed sources (e.g. MP3s or BT headphones that don't use a lossless codec) so BT sounds more natural - or that there is some sort of equalization happening on the iPhone - or that it simply allows for a louder input which would result in a louder output (which can make people think an identical source sounds better).
I would expect the ML system to faithfully reproduce it (warts and all). I would expect it to be tuned appropriately to accept both high quality and low quality sources - not make low quality sources sound like a either a symphony or sound worse than what they should.
Continuing with the turd analogy - I wouldn't expect a system to polish the turd, but at the very least it should look like the same turd that was fed into the system and not a turd that had been smashed or broken apart as it went through (i.e. it should not be toilet for the sound). I have high quality DACs, amplifiers, speakers and headphones that I use at home and I also know what lower quality mp3s and SiriusXM sound like, but I would not expect it to sound worse than what they really are on the ML system - that is the impression that I get which is why I commented on this thread in the first place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that impression.
Sounding worse than it SHOULD isn't how I was characterizing the low-quality audio, or wasn't my intent; I was expressing when your audio source, i.e., mp3 or low resolution/ low quality, song, regardless of what source, i.e., iPhone, USB stick, or old-timey cassette player hooked up through the aux. jack; it is played from when pumped through the ML system; the impression they will have is that it sounds worse because their expectation will be unrealistic and that it will somehow sound amazing versus them just expecting it sounds the way a low bitrate, low-res audio will sound. So my semi-over-the-top editorial/rebuttal to those complaining that their HIGH dollar ML system isn't producing what they were expecting would be that it would sound like something else. The actual will not sound like the expected! So yeah, it will sound like it should. But those in the know will get the full potential when playing Amazon Music or Tidal; when playing Spotify or low-res music, they will know what to expect and not expect more than what their music can provide.
I reserve the right to be slightly askew concerning wireless carplay. Because I made it clear in my Disclaimer—I reserve the right to be wrong once a year, and because I don't have it in my car, I'm low-key bitter about it! But I digress. I will reluctantly stand corrected; however, I will stand behind the explanation regarding the production of the sound quality I have tirelessly described. I am accurate about the rest. To help clear up the misconception and to have realistic expectations of what their audio system can provide.
The other point is that you clearly understand and are acutely aware of what to expect from your system, whether ML or otherwise. This post wasn't orchestrated for someone of your apparent understanding. This was for those that have unrealistic expectations of the ML. The unrealistic expectation is that the ML system ameliorates Mp3s to sound like a FLAC or other Hi-Res/quality song.
In contrast, Mp3s can and often do sound perfectly fine and, with the ML's potential, could sound better than on a lower-quality sound system—I'ts about knowing what you have and getting what you expect. Unfortunately, the audio can only play up to its limit. It's wasted potential. Now all of this is with the assumption that the source being listened to is not hi-res type music. This wasn't meant to educate you; for you, it could have been colorful commentary. Unfortunately, I failed at my intent if the underlying tone wasn't understood as part satire. At least you agreed with me on a few points...soooo I was right more than I was wrong, so like 99.9% right! Also, if I missed addressing any other vital issues you had, and you did have a few, it's likely because I was so focused I tired myself out, and my cat kept climbing all over everything indicating it was time to eat and be petted. They win, so I'm out!
04-13-23, 08:00 PM
#45
Pit Crew
Thread Starter
While I wholeheartedly disagree with your representation of the ML audio, I am baffled, to say the least, as to this assessment: "The configuration of ML is through wireless Carplay audio," and "When it's on Bluetooth, it's "slightly" better as it can also leverage the inbuilt equalizer on the iPhone, which the Carplay does not leverage." Firstly, whether you use wireless Carplay or the Lexus interface wirelessly, they both utilize Bluetooth. When you are using wireless Carplay and when you are using Bluetooth, where is the music coming from: your iPhone? Same source, a different interface, and the same connection to the ML system. That is, unless you are using USB for Carplay, that is another connection. It would help if you turned the iPhone music equalizer off. Otherwise, you will have iPhone equalizer settings playing into the mix. Iphone music is a source, a CD/DVD is a source, and Sirrus/XM or Spotify, whether from your iPhone or built into the car's interface, is a source. Bluetooth, USB/cord, Aux. jack, these are connections. Carplay is not a source; it is an interface or directory you use to decide what music to play from a source. You would be using the Lexus interface if you weren't using Carplay. You can utilize Carplay via USB (22 and under) or Bluetooth. (Bluetooth only on 23MY) Bluetooth through a specialized DAC connected to your iPhone, and only a few have this codec, would allow for the highest, lossless resolution, but I'm not getting into that rabbit hole right now. So, in short, your explanation isn't holding water. What annoys me about so many people trashing ML audio is that they must utilize the appropriate content and sources to achieve its potential. If you take a low-quality MP3 file or record a song from a cassette tape onto a CD/DVD and transfer the files to your phone or play through Bluetooth on your phone or even through the connected USB, it will sound like ******! If you put 87 octane into a Formula One car, what do you think will happen????? It's going to run like ******!! Is it the best top-of-the-line out there; No, and no one is saying it is, but the whole soundstage issue is not an issue. They are called adjustments.
I like surround sound off, Bass on the higher side, Mid just below that, and Treble a little higher than Mid. It's called preference. You've got a fader; use it. But to say that the ML system's quality is garbage is grossly undervaluing its potential. Notice I said potential. Low-quality sound systems only can produce up to a specific potential. Play the highest resolution audio in a lower-quality audio system, and the potential is lost. You can't blame your boombox sound system when your FLAC file does sound like you are at the symphony! Nor can you blame the ML system for not living up to expectations when you listen via FM radio or an Mp3. Play high-quality sources like FLAC files or DVDs/CDs. Take time to understand how to get the best from a High-Quality system like an ML audio system. To have quality output, you need quality input. Trying to polish a turd and calling it a diamond isn't going to work. Using low-quality audio sources and connections expecting high-quality results will only reinforce your perception of a low-quality system. That isn't fair, is it?
And in the spirit of being fair, you shouldn't be the only one singled out for this as you certainly aren't the first and won't be the last to have this perception of the Mark Levinson Audio system; my point in my rant is to attempt to bring an understanding to what the potential root cause of what you are experiencing and to ultimately help you to get the most out of the car and the audio system that you had been waiting; for what I am sure, felt like an eternity, to get. There needs to be a level playing field.
Disclaimer** I am no expert, even if I believe I am in my mind, but that's the delusion I must live with. These are facts, some as I see them and some that are actual, with some colorful opinions sprinkled into the mix. Any corrections and overly negative views are welcome and can be submitted to File 13! So sit back and wait for the spirited retorts to begin. Enjoy!
I like surround sound off, Bass on the higher side, Mid just below that, and Treble a little higher than Mid. It's called preference. You've got a fader; use it. But to say that the ML system's quality is garbage is grossly undervaluing its potential. Notice I said potential. Low-quality sound systems only can produce up to a specific potential. Play the highest resolution audio in a lower-quality audio system, and the potential is lost. You can't blame your boombox sound system when your FLAC file does sound like you are at the symphony! Nor can you blame the ML system for not living up to expectations when you listen via FM radio or an Mp3. Play high-quality sources like FLAC files or DVDs/CDs. Take time to understand how to get the best from a High-Quality system like an ML audio system. To have quality output, you need quality input. Trying to polish a turd and calling it a diamond isn't going to work. Using low-quality audio sources and connections expecting high-quality results will only reinforce your perception of a low-quality system. That isn't fair, is it?
And in the spirit of being fair, you shouldn't be the only one singled out for this as you certainly aren't the first and won't be the last to have this perception of the Mark Levinson Audio system; my point in my rant is to attempt to bring an understanding to what the potential root cause of what you are experiencing and to ultimately help you to get the most out of the car and the audio system that you had been waiting; for what I am sure, felt like an eternity, to get. There needs to be a level playing field.
Disclaimer** I am no expert, even if I believe I am in my mind, but that's the delusion I must live with. These are facts, some as I see them and some that are actual, with some colorful opinions sprinkled into the mix. Any corrections and overly negative views are welcome and can be submitted to File 13! So sit back and wait for the spirited retorts to begin. Enjoy!
I hear your explanation. I have had my surround turned off as well. Some clear further findings.
Carplay is disabled and Bluetooth is still .better. With EQ off there is a slight improvement but not that huge as Carplay Wireless does not leverage the iphone's EQ and Bluetooth does.
This is in comparison to Bang & Olufsen that honestly is a night and day. You got to listen to it to believe it. ML is much better than my dad's Honda with factory radio for sure but it's average at its best.
Lexus could have taken this a notch up by adding cleaner bass modules as B&O vs, the boomy sound output with the ML
Furthermore, to this whole discussion of FLAC, why should I care when the music on my iPhone is being delivered? The audio settings are on the highest settings causing my data to go off the roof. The exact same source sounds like a nightclub in the Audi where as on the ML, it's a glorified boom box. I love the lexus for sure but in terms of music, they should have done better.
Last edited by asadani; 04-13-23 at 08:04 PM.
The following users liked this post:
bc6152 (04-14-23)