Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

New Equalizer In Version 8.0.2.50.114 - Please Share Settings

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
It doesn't bother me much that this minor EQ reset (didn't impede driving or tuning into some music) bug pops up - there's no such thing as 100℅ bug-free software. Just as long as a hotfix comes out soon, I'll be happy and feel that the company cares.

But it's par for the course, that's where my growing frustration lies. I can think of two immediate examples off the top of my head because they were two features I heavily lobbied for. The first was reading volume names of USB devices. That came out in v8, but it translated spaces into ASCI "%20". The second was this equalizer (although I suggested a 10-band, 5-band is great). Neither are life threatening by any stretch, but I think it speaks volumes about how the testing process is done. All anyone would have needed to do is take the car home for night to see the equalizer problem, and use all the standard Windows/Mac characters that are allowed for file naming in a couple test scenarios to see if there was an issue in displaying.

I mean really, the list goes on about the bugs still in v8, and they only get worse on the scale of "distracting the driver from driving".

And quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of people accepting less than 100% when it comes to software. This is 5000lb killing machine people, the expectation should be 100%. Then maybe if you miss the mark one a couple things, just fix them ASAP instead of letting them fester for months/years on end. It's one thing to have bugs and not know they exist or how they are caused. But the forum here can usually identify both within 24hrs. And some of the more talented programmers can even offer up causes/solutions without ever looking at the source code. That's talent right there, and it's being wasted currently.
 
And quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of people accepting less than 100% when it comes to software. This is 5000lb killing machine people, the expectation should be 100%.

I agree with some of your points, but completely disagree with this part. I've been in software development industry for almost two decades, and there really isn't any 100℅ bug-free software.. especially in large complex, systems (such as Tesla's). With that said, software associated with the critical driving components is pretty damn sound, and is no more a killing machine than a regular ICE. In fact, much less.
 
I agree with some of your points, but completely disagree with this part. I've been in software development industry for almost two decades, and there really isn't any 100℅ bug-free software.. especially in large complex, systems (such as Tesla's). With that said, software associated with the critical driving components is pretty damn sound, and is no more a killing machine than a regular ICE. In fact, much less.
I think I phrased imprecisely. Remember Lexus' old slogan? "The relentless pursuit of perfection." I sumbit that the software needs to constantly strive to be 100%, but understand it never will be. And that the more complex the software, the more difficult that work becomes. But Tesla seems to think 90% is good enough on infotainment, which creates an ever slipping downward benchmark to hit.

Agreed driving dynamics are very good with the recent exception of misreading speed limit on highways. But there are also separate teams working on these things.
 
Last edited:
I agree with some of your points, but completely disagree with this part. I've been in software development industry for almost two decades, and there really isn't any 100℅ bug-free software

Whilst I agree with your point, the things being sited are trivial bugs and I think it is both a disgrace and worrying that they get through QA at all. Things that only a handful of people find, and turn out to be complex interactions, whilst still worrying (and annoying for the users) would be the things that I classed as "hard to find in QA".
 
I think the real value of this thread is to see how many people went to really loud rock concerts as a kid and now have that treble notch in their audiogram. ;) I played lead guitar in various bands for over 40 years in venues mostly without miking the amps through the FOH. So, keep that in mind when you look at my EQ spread. I shot this screen while listening to "The Night of the Swallow" by Kate Bush with the volume at 9 in my parked car. There's a really deep and crisp fretless bass, a strident Uillean pipe and lots of piano forward in the mix of that song so a lot of dynamics for the UHF to handle. I won't argue the esoteric vagaries of what constitutes an audiophile quality sound system. I just feel an emotional connection to the music when coming out of the UHF, so for me that is the telling tale. YMMV.
IMG_6702.JPG
 
Normally I'd have the bass at 11-12, but it sounds muddy and muffled depending on the recording.

But, you know, for Beach House anyway (a band I like), this mix works well when volume is at 11. Why the EQ has values going to 12 seems a bit weird. The volume should have 12 too, but if you take it that high, the windows should all automatically open, of course.

YOLO :)

View attachment 207952
For me, the mud lives in the mid-bass...
 
Happy to see this. I didn't like having only 3 EQ. settings. Installing tonight!
I thought it sounded perfect with the three settings. I just wanted to be warned when I was exceeding the speed limit by 10. The trade offs are killing me. Equalizer settings that don't stay where set or speed warnings. Ahhh I can't take it. How am I supposed to drive this car with a messed up eq? Please AP me off the nearest cliff. Ahhh I have no AP functions yet!!! Anyone have any cianide pills handy?