JL Audio Cleansweep
03-24-2008, 12:43 PM
#1
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Kansas City, Mo
Age: 37
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JL Audio Cleansweep
This weekend I had a JL Audio Cleansweep installed into my TL and it sounds awesome. It really leveled things out. I wish I would have done it myself though because it cost me $730!!! 
It sounds great though!
It sounds great though!
03-24-2008, 12:57 PM
#4
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Kansas City, Mo
Age: 37
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rodneyc77
Great to hear you got success with it... 
I think you should have got a 3sixty.2...
I think you should have got a 3sixty.2...
03-24-2008, 03:19 PM
#5
the 3sixty.2 normalizes the EQ from the factory settings just like the cleansweep... but then gives you the ability to set your own EQ (31 band) and crossover points for every speaker individually.... FR, FL, C, RR, RL and SW (10 Band)...
So in conclusion, the 3sixty.2 is a Cleansweep plus Equalizer and Crossover...
Later Guys...
So in conclusion, the 3sixty.2 is a Cleansweep plus Equalizer and Crossover...
Later Guys...
03-24-2008, 11:17 PM
#6
huh??? you paid $730 installed?? the JL cleansweep costs only $250. you paid $730 for labor alone, or did that at least cost the price of the unit?
both alpine V-series and RF power amps aren't what they used to be by the way. they used to make rock solid indestructible amps.........then they become "mainstream"
both alpine V-series and RF power amps aren't what they used to be by the way. they used to make rock solid indestructible amps.........then they become "mainstream"
03-25-2008, 11:45 AM
#7
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Kansas City, Mo
Age: 37
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure the alpines arn't what they used to be just like every other company's products but I have had nothing but bad luck with rockford and they are a bit pricey for what you get.
The $730 included the clean sweep to. I really wish I would have done it now though! Oh well.
The $730 included the clean sweep to. I really wish I would have done it now though! Oh well.
Trending Topics
04-18-2010, 05:48 PM
#8
Drifting
Did you have to use the CL-SSI? That is the summing device. From what I gather, the cleansweep needs the signals to be sumed if the low freq. bass (like from out subout) is not "in" the other 4 speaker channels. In that case it has to add the subwoofer to the other front and rear channels to make a "normalized" output. Some car systems require this because there is no bass in the 4 channels. I am thining that our TL systems already has enough bass in all 4 channels so we dont have to use the CL-SSI to add it to them. If so, then that would save us the money of buying a summing device. Thats another difference between the cleansweep and the 3sixty. the 3sixty has a summing device in it. So, you dont have to purchase another summing device. But the 3sixt is a lot more expensive, so I say why buy a summing device if you dont need it.
regardless, I am thining of buying the cleansweep too, and I dont know for sure if I will need the CL-SSI summing device.
04-18-2010, 06:01 PM
#9
Drifting
btw, both cleansweep and the 3sixty require all frequencies to be present before they can normalize the signals. So, its not just a thing with the cleansweep. It's just not possible to normalize a signal that is not there. IMO, the 3sixty makes you buy a summing device by adding it to their unit, and charging more than cleansweep. And I dont see the purpose of having all the crossovers and adjustible features if you have to do it via a computer. In other words, its not done on the fly liek a natural EQ. Plus, we already have bass and treble controls on our head unit. That's 95% of the sound range, and plus I dont have to access a computer to change it while driving down the road.
Plus the TL's may not need a summing device, so I see no point in buying a 3sixty. Plus I've heard of many faulty 3sixty's on the net. Seems like they dont last very long or there are problems with them.
Plus the TL's may not need a summing device, so I see no point in buying a 3sixty. Plus I've heard of many faulty 3sixty's on the net. Seems like they dont last very long or there are problems with them.
04-18-2010, 06:17 PM
#11
Drifting
sweet
04-18-2010, 06:27 PM
#13
Drifting
well, for me and my TL, I dont need the 3sixty. Plus even if I had an EQ, I would listen to it like a V shape. And thats exactly how bass and treble controls work. So, I dont require any added sound filtering or boosting beyond what normal bass and treble controls provide. So, for me, the added cost of a 3sixty is not worth it because I don't need a suming device, I don't need an EQ and I don't need crossovers. Crossovers are normally built into amplifiers. And its easier to flip a crossover switch on the amp rather than messing with a hand held bluetooth or wifi device to set up the 3sixty.
04-18-2010, 08:09 PM
#15
TL owner
huh??? you paid $730 installed?? the JL cleansweep costs only $250. you paid $730 for labor alone, or did that at least cost the price of the unit?
both alpine V-series and RF power amps aren't what they used to be by the way. they used to make rock solid indestructible amps.........then they become "mainstream"
both alpine V-series and RF power amps aren't what they used to be by the way. they used to make rock solid indestructible amps.........then they become "mainstream"
Both companies have been mainstream since the late 80's early 90's so....how can u compare a v-series to a power series. The v series is entry level alpine as has always kind od sucked and the power series it the top line rockford fosgate. Actually the power series amps now are must better built then the older RF power series of the past.
04-20-2010, 03:02 PM
#24
Instructor
I control my whole car audio system using my laptop via wireless connection. I can control how each speaker+sub sounds using my laptop. It sounds like your in the front row of a concert or in a nightclub with the DJ right next to you.
04-30-2010, 10:23 PM
#25
Drifting
So, I went running at a local lake last weekend and while I was out, something occurred to me about the JL. I'm not sure exactly how they create the flat signal that they claim. And that is important because there could be a possibility of signal loss if the only thing they do is filter the peaks. JL says according to the spectrum analyzer, most (or all) factory head units do not output a flat signal (even volume of frequencies) from about 20hz to 20khz. So, they custom tune each application by inputting a cd into the head unit, and it plays and the JL device configures itself for a flat and even signal from low to high frequencies so, now when you turn up the bass or treble, you get just exactly that. The equivalent would be similar to a "smiley face EQ" if both the treble and bass were turned up all the way. Or a flat signal if the bass and treble settings were 0. So long story short, the JL device could be only a filter. And an EQ of any kind is also a filter. But I think EQ's can also boost. So the question is, Is JL only filtering the peaks or is it only boosting the lows or is it doing a combination of both to get the flat signal? If all it does is filter the peaks down, then you would be losing most of your signal from the head unit and you would have to crank the volume way up to get any through put out of the JL device. However, if they boost only the "valleys" or the low spots in the frequency spectrum of the head unit, then you would only gain some output at those frequencies and lose nothing off the higher ones. Problem is, who knows!
So, I have a new opinion on JL regarding their "tuning". If the cleansweep is only acting like a filter, and not a frequency booster, then it would be better to get an old fashion EQ and do your own adjusting. Ironically, the 3sixty gives you a full range EQ to do your own adjusting.. But of course, you would be adjusting the sound to your own ears and waving goodbye to a ‘flat signal”. But who listens to a flat signal anyway? But still JL was just providing the flat signal as a baseline to do your own adjusting at the head or by an EQ. then you would then modify the signal again to your own bass and treble preference. So for me, and my Acura TL, which already has a full range output, unless my output from my head unit is really whacked, and I doubt it is, then it may be best for me to just delete my factory amp and speakers and adjust out "weird sounds" by using the bass and treble. I mean lets face it, once the head unit has put a filter on a signal, you can't change it back. Maybe you can a little bit with an EQ booster on those filtered (attenuated) frequencies, but if you do that, you stand to introduce some noise or at least a signal that does not represent the original signal perfectly. So there's a lot to think about. I may not be expressing myself perfectly.. But I just wanted to say that, the head unit is already put some kind of filter on the output, and only another filter will further attenuate the remaining frequencies to make it flat. Boosting is better, but still not perfect. And if it was up to me, since I don’t know how JL achieves a flat signal, then, for the sake of tuning your own, 3sixty is probably better for tuning and overall output levels. Plus if you don’t like the way it sounds, you can change it. You can’t adjust the frequencies in the cleansweep. So hey, maybe the 3sixty is worth an extra hundred for that alone?
So, I have a new opinion on JL regarding their "tuning". If the cleansweep is only acting like a filter, and not a frequency booster, then it would be better to get an old fashion EQ and do your own adjusting. Ironically, the 3sixty gives you a full range EQ to do your own adjusting.. But of course, you would be adjusting the sound to your own ears and waving goodbye to a ‘flat signal”. But who listens to a flat signal anyway? But still JL was just providing the flat signal as a baseline to do your own adjusting at the head or by an EQ. then you would then modify the signal again to your own bass and treble preference. So for me, and my Acura TL, which already has a full range output, unless my output from my head unit is really whacked, and I doubt it is, then it may be best for me to just delete my factory amp and speakers and adjust out "weird sounds" by using the bass and treble. I mean lets face it, once the head unit has put a filter on a signal, you can't change it back. Maybe you can a little bit with an EQ booster on those filtered (attenuated) frequencies, but if you do that, you stand to introduce some noise or at least a signal that does not represent the original signal perfectly. So there's a lot to think about. I may not be expressing myself perfectly.. But I just wanted to say that, the head unit is already put some kind of filter on the output, and only another filter will further attenuate the remaining frequencies to make it flat. Boosting is better, but still not perfect. And if it was up to me, since I don’t know how JL achieves a flat signal, then, for the sake of tuning your own, 3sixty is probably better for tuning and overall output levels. Plus if you don’t like the way it sounds, you can change it. You can’t adjust the frequencies in the cleansweep. So hey, maybe the 3sixty is worth an extra hundred for that alone?
Last edited by Chad05TL; 04-30-2010 at 10:27 PM.
04-30-2010, 11:04 PM
#26
Team Owner
well, for me and my TL, I dont need the 3sixty. Plus even if I had an EQ, I would listen to it like a V shape. And thats exactly how bass and treble controls work. So, I dont require any added sound filtering or boosting beyond what normal bass and treble controls provide. So, for me, the added cost of a 3sixty is not worth it because I don't need a suming device, I don't need an EQ and I don't need crossovers. Crossovers are normally built into amplifiers. And its easier to flip a crossover switch on the amp rather than messing with a hand held bluetooth or wifi device to set up the 3sixty.
The V shape you mention is mostly used when you have cheap components that you have to overboost to make them reproduce the lowest and highest frequencies.
04-30-2010, 11:11 PM
#27
Drifting
04-30-2010, 11:21 PM
#28
Team Owner
04-30-2010, 11:29 PM
#29
Drifting
its got bass because you got a bazillion watts on it and a box. power boosting is same as boosting the bass and treble controls. No bodys head unit is so special that listing to a flat frequency response curve sounds good. UNLESS you've inadvertantly changed the tone by adding amps and big over sized woofers etc etc.
i think you just like to argue. Didint you go out tonight? haha
i think you just like to argue. Didint you go out tonight? haha
05-01-2010, 10:22 AM
#30
So, I went running at a local lake last weekend and while I was out, something occurred to me about the JL. I'm not sure exactly how they create the flat signal that they claim. And that is important because there could be a possibility of signal loss if the only thing they do is filter the peaks. JL says according to the spectrum analyzer, most (or all) factory head units do not output a flat signal (even volume of frequencies) from about 20hz to 20khz. So, they custom tune each application by inputting a cd into the head unit, and it plays and the JL device configures itself for a flat and even signal from low to high frequencies so, now when you turn up the bass or treble, you get just exactly that. The equivalent would be similar to a "smiley face EQ" if both the treble and bass were turned up all the way. Or a flat signal if the bass and treble settings were 0. So long story short, the JL device could be only a filter. And an EQ of any kind is also a filter. But I think EQ's can also boost. So the question is, Is JL only filtering the peaks or is it only boosting the lows or is it doing a combination of both to get the flat signal? If all it does is filter the peaks down, then you would be losing most of your signal from the head unit and you would have to crank the volume way up to get any through put out of the JL device. However, if they boost only the "valleys" or the low spots in the frequency spectrum of the head unit, then you would only gain some output at those frequencies and lose nothing off the higher ones. Problem is, who knows!
So, I have a new opinion on JL regarding their "tuning". If the cleansweep is only acting like a filter, and not a frequency booster, then it would be better to get an old fashion EQ and do your own adjusting. Ironically, the 3sixty gives you a full range EQ to do your own adjusting.. But of course, you would be adjusting the sound to your own ears and waving goodbye to a ‘flat signal”. But who listens to a flat signal anyway? But still JL was just providing the flat signal as a baseline to do your own adjusting at the head or by an EQ. then you would then modify the signal again to your own bass and treble preference. So for me, and my Acura TL, which already has a full range output, unless my output from my head unit is really whacked, and I doubt it is, then it may be best for me to just delete my factory amp and speakers and adjust out "weird sounds" by using the bass and treble. I mean lets face it, once the head unit has put a filter on a signal, you can't change it back. Maybe you can a little bit with an EQ booster on those filtered (attenuated) frequencies, but if you do that, you stand to introduce some noise or at least a signal that does not represent the original signal perfectly. So there's a lot to think about. I may not be expressing myself perfectly.. But I just wanted to say that, the head unit is already put some kind of filter on the output, and only another filter will further attenuate the remaining frequencies to make it flat. Boosting is better, but still not perfect. And if it was up to me, since I don’t know how JL achieves a flat signal, then, for the sake of tuning your own, 3sixty is probably better for tuning and overall output levels. Plus if you don’t like the way it sounds, you can change it. You can’t adjust the frequencies in the cleansweep. So hey, maybe the 3sixty is worth an extra hundred for that alone?
So, I have a new opinion on JL regarding their "tuning". If the cleansweep is only acting like a filter, and not a frequency booster, then it would be better to get an old fashion EQ and do your own adjusting. Ironically, the 3sixty gives you a full range EQ to do your own adjusting.. But of course, you would be adjusting the sound to your own ears and waving goodbye to a ‘flat signal”. But who listens to a flat signal anyway? But still JL was just providing the flat signal as a baseline to do your own adjusting at the head or by an EQ. then you would then modify the signal again to your own bass and treble preference. So for me, and my Acura TL, which already has a full range output, unless my output from my head unit is really whacked, and I doubt it is, then it may be best for me to just delete my factory amp and speakers and adjust out "weird sounds" by using the bass and treble. I mean lets face it, once the head unit has put a filter on a signal, you can't change it back. Maybe you can a little bit with an EQ booster on those filtered (attenuated) frequencies, but if you do that, you stand to introduce some noise or at least a signal that does not represent the original signal perfectly. So there's a lot to think about. I may not be expressing myself perfectly.. But I just wanted to say that, the head unit is already put some kind of filter on the output, and only another filter will further attenuate the remaining frequencies to make it flat. Boosting is better, but still not perfect. And if it was up to me, since I don’t know how JL achieves a flat signal, then, for the sake of tuning your own, 3sixty is probably better for tuning and overall output levels. Plus if you don’t like the way it sounds, you can change it. You can’t adjust the frequencies in the cleansweep. So hey, maybe the 3sixty is worth an extra hundred for that alone?
answers many of your posed questions
IIRC, the cleansweep can correct up to ~20dB in either direction (boost or cut).
All the cleansweep does is give you a flat baseline. From there you can use either stock tone controls or an EQ to "salt and pepper" to taste.
05-01-2010, 11:55 AM
#31
Drifting
I don't see on that page where it says it corrects 20db in either direction..I see: "The CleanSweep CL441dsp requires a full-range input covering the general range from 20 Hz - 20,000 Hz with no greater than a 24 dB variation within that bandwidth". This comment is a reference to the input signal from the head unit. It doesn't say if JL performs the equalization by attenuation or amplification or a combination of both. This just says the input signal can't have more than 24db between the lowest low, and the highest high.
05-01-2010, 11:57 PM
#32
I don't see on that page where it says it corrects 20db in either direction..I see: "The CleanSweep CL441dsp requires a full-range input covering the general range from 20 Hz - 20,000 Hz with no greater than a 24 dB variation within that bandwidth". This comment is a reference to the input signal from the head unit. It doesn't say if JL performs the equalization by attenuation or amplification or a combination of both. This just says the input signal can't have more than 24db between the lowest low, and the highest high.
I remember that from a JL training a few years back when the cleansweep came out.
you could just email JL tech too.
05-02-2010, 12:08 AM
#33
Team Owner
its got bass because you got a bazillion watts on it and a box. power boosting is same as boosting the bass and treble controls. No bodys head unit is so special that listing to a flat frequency response curve sounds good. UNLESS you've inadvertantly changed the tone by adding amps and big over sized woofers etc etc.
i think you just like to argue. Didint you go out tonight? haha
i think you just like to argue. Didint you go out tonight? haha
You're right about the reason mine is more or less flat but that proves my point. The V shape is to make up for the factory's shortcomings.
I don't like the "teenager" like sound where you can hear it from a mile away. It will get very loud but that's just a secondary benefit. It actually sounds very natural, reproducing the frequencies the stock system won't but doing so in a balanced way.
05-02-2010, 11:37 AM
#34
Burning Brakes
I thought about going with the 3sixity.2 until I found this:
http://www.minidsp.com/products/minidspkits
Standard features:
Time Alignment in 0.02ms increments
Phase Flip (0/180)
Channel muting
Linkwitz-Riley with slopes of 12, 24, and 48dB/octave slopes
Butterworth with 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, and 48dB/octave crossovers
Bessel crossover (fixed slope)
Individual channel input/output gains with attenuation of up to -70dB
Bypass: You can bypass the crossovers, or EQ to compare the changes you've made to what it sounds like without those changes
Levels of Equalizer is ±16dB
Equalizer Types can be standard (Peak) or High or Low shelf.
31 Band EQ (Plug in, extra $10)
Best of all it's only 110.00 with the plug-in plus shipping
completely stackable (add more as needed). Everything you need in a 3x3 board.
Easy to install, configure with a laptop. I have an aftermaket head unit but those with the oem HU would probably need a line driver. Use RTA to fine tune. I'm ordering one very soon.
Here is the complete review:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/...ternative.html
http://www.minidsp.com/products/minidspkits
Standard features:
Time Alignment in 0.02ms increments
Phase Flip (0/180)
Channel muting
Linkwitz-Riley with slopes of 12, 24, and 48dB/octave slopes
Butterworth with 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, and 48dB/octave crossovers
Bessel crossover (fixed slope)
Individual channel input/output gains with attenuation of up to -70dB
Bypass: You can bypass the crossovers, or EQ to compare the changes you've made to what it sounds like without those changes
Levels of Equalizer is ±16dB
Equalizer Types can be standard (Peak) or High or Low shelf.
31 Band EQ (Plug in, extra $10)
Best of all it's only 110.00 with the plug-in plus shipping
completely stackable (add more as needed). Everything you need in a 3x3 board.
Easy to install, configure with a laptop. I have an aftermaket head unit but those with the oem HU would probably need a line driver. Use RTA to fine tune. I'm ordering one very soon.
Here is the complete review:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/...ternative.html
05-02-2010, 08:35 PM
#36
Drifting
according to another post I read on acurazine last year...The outputs from the headunit going to the factory amp are balanced, rather than unbalanced. The miniDSP says its inputs are unbalanced. So, I dont really know if that means the miniDSP is compatible with the the Acura TL headunit. I guess if an unbalanced device can take balanced signals then ok. But I dont know how it works really.
05-05-2010, 10:16 PM
#37
Drifting
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
navtool.com
5G TLX Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
31
11-16-2015 08:30 PM
navtool.com
1G RDX Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
1
09-25-2015 05:15 PM
