Cypren

Given how much power the ML system has at low volume levels, I would imagine turning it up to 70-90% would permanently deafen you long before it would wreck the audio system. =)

ES3

I don't disagree, and will likely not turn up the volume above the 50 level very often, and even then, it'd probably only be when the windows are down. Just kind of wondered what my capacity could be and for how long---spearkers and amps, not ear drumbs---THOSE are already shot!

picus

I'd like to plot the IS/ML system.

Nice review Percy.

pumper

Percy, you seem like one of those guys who listens to music with your eyes closed. I hope you don't do that while you're driving.

I'm surprised you did this for a subjective review such as yours. Most reviewers use a flat setting for tone controls when judging an audio component's sound. Is your home system set up hot on the bass and treble like this, or did you need to boost the ML's bass and treble to get it to sound "flat."? Also, do you know the center frequencies, "Q's" and volume adjustment ranges of these controls so we can put your adjustments into perspective?

One other observation about your review. The sound of a car audio system while sitting still in a quiet dealer showroom is interesting. But I never listen to my car's audio system there. I listen to it while driving. Once you're at 70 mph, the background noise level in the car is so high that none of the "inner details" of the music are apparent. The bass is lost in the road noise, the midrange is lost in the tire noise and the treble is muffled by the wind noise. In addition, the vehicle's ventilation systems can add several dB to the background noise level. Eventually, the car's audio system is competing with so much extraneous noise that it is impossible to have a quality "audiophile experience." Not to mention that, if you're whizzing along the freeway, you better be paying more attention to your driving than you are to the music's inner details or how big the soundstage is. If you can hear rosin on a violin bow at 70 mph, you better slow down.

My point is, I don't understand why it is so important to have a car audio system that has the audiophile qualities of a good home stereo system, or why you would compare it to one. What is required in a car audio system is the ability to play cleanly above the din of the background noise. The ability to place voices and instruments in 3-dimensional space??? The height, width and depth of the soundstage??? Who can even focus on those things while you're driving? Maybe for the 20 seconds when you come to a stop at a stoplight.. Or, like I did this morning when "Stairway to Heaven..." was just ending as I arrived at work.

For the most part, a car audio system is for background music while you're driving, or for listening to sports and talk radio. You don't need an audiophile quality system to do that. You need a system with flat frequency response, good bass extension, and adequate dynamic range. If a car audio system can acheive those three things, it will sound great.

One final comment: the most important improvement that can be made is to reduce the car's background noise. Percy, your next reveiw should be of the different Lexus models and their noise levels at varying speeds. This is much more important than how they sound "at rest".

pumper

Percy

Many people make the mistake of having completely flat tone controls. Doesn't account for the rooms acoustics, nor what the speaker is capable of at it's "maximum" performance from the items being tested. Doens't mean that the bass, treble and mid are at max though, it's at what sounds the most "realistic" according to my ears. Mark Levinson (the man himself) uses the same technique.

Can't really adjust the Q's of the ML system. No provision.

Audio system was listened with the car off, to at least give it an equal, or at least close, background noise to what I'm used to with the home system. A realy good home audio system as well as an excellent car audio system will have the qualities that you mentioned. Soundstage, depth, height...all are there when the actual performance is going on, so why not with the audio system which is basically trying to replicate the same "sound", so to speak.

Much more difficult to pick out the nuances when the car is moving...plus trying to drive with eyes close is hazardous to ones health...unless it's on a dyno with simulated road noise in the cabin. For the most part, the system will sound good to the average ear. Main goal was to find out what all the market hype was about, and if it lived up to it's reputation. With the IS/ML, it came much closer than I thought.

Percy

pumper

In my previous post, I asked:
Not to belabor this point, but do you know the "scale" of the volume range? If it is a decibel scale and you are adding 3 dB to the treble, this is a doubling of the treble energy relative to the midrange. Also, at what frequency does the control work, (the center frequency), and over what portion of the bandwidth, (the "Q")? I have the same question about adding +2 to the bass. The reason I ask is this:

You keep coming back to this 400 Hz issue. (I can't tell if you mean it's a peak or a null. In the first quote you call it a peak, but in the second and third quotes it sounds like you're describing a null.) Nevertheless, If you are boosting the frequencies above and below 400 Hz, how can you say anything meaningful about 400 Hz? This is why I want to know the amount of boost and over what frequency range the bass and treble controls work.

I doubt Mr. Levinson designed the IS audio system to have a flat FR, (Frequency Response) with a boost of +2 on the bass and +3 on the treble. I'm sure the system was designed to have flat FR at "0" on the tone controls. If it sounds better to your ears to boost the bass and treble, that is something readers of your review should keep in mind as they read it, especially if you've doubled the treble energy and added about 60% to the bass. (I don't know the frequency or volume ranges so I'm assuming it's a dB scale.)

To put *my* comments in perspective, I have my bass control at +2 to help overcome the road noise at speed. However, my treble control is flat. I find the system to have enough treble energy without any boost. Setting it at +3 makes it overly bright for me.

Edit: My car does NOT have the ML audio system. For some unfathomable reason, Lexus decided not to offer it in my area and I didn't want to wait the 4 months for a special order.

pumper

tigmd99

If Mr. Levinson used this method, then it would make sense to make it FLAT to the frequency that sounds good. For example, if Mr. Levinson felt that +2 treble and +3 bass sounded the best, then wouldn't he adjust the system to have this exact sound at FLAT settings, instead of +2 treble and +3 bass??! Isn't that the whole point of designing a sound system to the car's environment??

I am sorry, unless you can show me DATA (aka, actual frequency dips/peaks) on the syst***s sound, your review is about as useful as mine. I am 100% sure that Mark Levinson's audio engineers use a lot more sophisticated equipment to test out the IS's interior.

cmusic

BTW, the Mark Levinson company is not owned by Mark Levinson anymore. The company started my Mr. Levinson and bears his name was sold to and now owned by Harmon International. (Click here to read about Harmon.) Harmon makes Harman Kardon, JBL, Infinity, Revel, Audioaccess, Lexicon, Mark Levinson, Madrigal Imaging and Proceed audio equipment. There are some of the best audio engineers in world working at Harmon, but Mark Levinson is not one of them. I understand from some high-end home audio boards that Mr. Levinson is still designing some equipment for other small audio brands.

Percy

Just change out the speaker to Thais most hated name...Dynaudio. Just kidding there Thai....you can put down the 1000w aftermarket amp now...

Percy

Percy

Yep. Mark was out of the Harmon family since the 90's. Rather brutal of the parent company too.

Percy

Percy

Good point. Why don't we ask him? Also, it depends on the source he used (IF he did the IS system) as a reference point/level.

Also another good point...what did they (ML) really use when measuring out the system? Simple 1 octave analyzer? 1/3rd oct? 1/24th? Measuring time delay for each driver? Accounting for the actual response of each driver, it's individual peaks and valleys? MLSSA? B&K solutions for audio analysis? Hmmm...

My guess is that they kept if fairly simple. I highly doubt that ML would put in 10,000,000 dollars worth of engineering for a 1k add on. Wouldn't make sense financially.

Percy

tigmd99

You guys are taking my comments to literally. Yes, i know that Mark Levinson is long gone, but the engineers are the same. I don't see why Levinson's engineers did not use the same equipment to map out the IS interior as they did with the LS. And they could easily spend hours during the development of the IS to tune it. Remember, this is a mass production unit...therefore, the price is low because you have to spend time only once and the materials are used throughout the Lexus line.

MASS PRODUCTION = cheap price.

BTW, Dynaudio is a great brand. At least, we agree on that! However, it simply costs too much and is too much headache to deal with aftermarket installation.

clubfoot

There must have been some thought put into the system. Why else would the go through the trouble of making an acoustic sun visor if it didn't affect the sound???

spwolf

i see this is still going on...

Percy

Didn't know that it had an acoustic sunvisor!

Percy