Hey Roushfan, do you have pics of it in your truck yet?





Oh and it's "you're" (Just knocking your *****)

 

Yeah I heard the same ..Old orion=good ,new=bad........No pics for a while ....sorry lots of planning to do....

 

Yup thats the jist of it...Same for PPI too. Looks like DEI is taking steps backwards...

 

No, pwnd is not gay.

31C

 

That amp would not be bad at all. It is definitely not a $1250 amp but it will be worth $299. I like the planet audio tube amps personally. I would assume their other amps are also very good.
What speakers are you going to be running?

 

the speakers would be a set of RF fanatic X components system, and a 10" elemental designs sub (an e-class). So do you think the RF amp could push all this (70X4 at 4 ohms, or 275X2 at 4 ohms). Not sure which amp im grabbin tho.

Thanks for the respond

Jim
Old audio system (stolen)

 

Those subs are very hungry you will want lots of power. Those amps are both good amps the rf being cheaper (I am not an rf fan, I like mtx but that is only preference). The problem is having enough power. Are you only running the fronts off of the amp then the sub off the other channels? Is the sub going to be a dvc? I don't like running only one sub because you lose flexibility. I would probably use a 4 channell amp for my 4 mids and then get a dvc sub with a dclass amp running it.
You could get the rf, use two channels for the fronts then bridge the other two for the sub but you will be underpowered. It will sound ok but you could always upgrade later.

 

I'm still gonna have to stick with my thoughts that an amp is an amp. I believe everything that you are pointing out is inaudible to the human ear. THD ratings must exceed 1 to 3% or more to be audible. With most every amp on the market you would have to clip the amp before reaching this level of THD.

As far as classes of amps, there are advantages and disadvantages of all classes. Do you believe the slew rate difference in A/B versus D will be audibe in a purely subwoofer application? The installation, enclosure, speaker deficiencies, and vehicle problems (rattles and resonance) would be far more noticeable and stronger factors to improper sound reproduction than anything the amplifier would introduce.

I suppose I'm a believer that Richard Clark's amplifier theories are valid and you're a believer that each amp enters its own inherent "sound" to the music.

Good to have varying ideas.

 

Tek
In no way do I disagree with you! I have seen your posts and you are very knowledgeable. I only like class d's because of the price per watt ratio. Yes a watt is a watt to a certain extent; subs yes, mids that is where the debate comes in. Would you put a set of Focals on a jensen amp, (like wise one wouldnt use a tube amp for a set of jensen speaks). I have actually never read anything by richard.Yes I belive every amp has its own characteristics. Is a 300hp chev the same as a 300hp ford? no Same thing with audio. I always find it funny when people debate about audio preferences It is what the listener likes (I am sure you agree). I personally love european home audio products and I don't like american or jap stuff. Is that stuff bad? not at all. That is just my preferance.
As far as slew rate; agreed. I will never get rid of those darn rattles! They are like an ex girlfriend they will never go away no matter what model you trade her in for.

 

I was planning on briding two channels to the sub, and running the other two to the components up front. Just got the old stock speakers in the back.

Anyway my HU and sub came in the mail the other day, so I'm pretty pumped!


thanks

Jim

 

Absolutely! However, it depends on how 'capable' the sub is.

I agree that the box can have more of an effect on it, but slew rate or class matters too.

Richards Clarks test are fine for what he is trying to proove, and I can agree with it for that matter. However I'm arguing somethign slightly different. How many people buy amps and disable all the processing features and everythign else?(I'll even leave crossovers out of it since those can make a larger difference) Not many if any at all. So with this being said RC test disables just everything in the amp. Well if everythign is deisabled on the amps then yes I can agree that most amps will sound the same, but if everything on the amps isnt disabled then the amps will have differences. (Look at tube amps v.SS amps)...RC will even make a test against Tubes and SS amps but he modifies the amps...I think his test is mroe to proove that you can get any amp to sound the same under the right conditions, but here again how many listen to their music in a lab?

As I said before I agree what his test are about and what he is trying to proove, but many people take his test to be something they aren't. So I have no problem agree with his test, but I still think amps can and do sound different. I mean look at it this way each amp doesnt use the same pieces therefore cant sound exactly the same (like gun barrels the same type of gune can use the same maching to drill it but each time the barrels are slightly different leaving different marks on the bullet) same can go for amps, each amp will have its own 'signature' while say a Zapco and a Sinfoni may sound identical because they use higher grade parts...its unlikely that a Zapco and a Pyle amp will sound the same in the install that we do (not lab test where this are minulipated).

 

Very good points Hazard... I must say you got me thinking quite a bit about the stuff you pointed out. I guess in my mind its more of a situation that I don't see the point in paying a thousand or so dollars for an amplifier when an amplifier that costs a few hundred dollars will provide the same amount of power. Now, the major difference in this IS quality (primarily reliability). You would THINK that the more expensive amp is definitely going to last longer and be more problem free than the less expensive amp... but this is not always the case.

HAHA I wouldn't put my Focals on a Jensen amp.. mainly because there are so many doubts as to the true power output.

How many different amps have you tested with the same exact speaker setup? Was there anything other than the amplifier that was changed (eq settings, any tonal controls, volume changes, any system installation changes)? The reason I ask this is because I, for one, have never done this. Honestly, I base all of my "theories" on a logical sense. I know that in its most basic design an amplification circuit should introduce little to no change in the signal being amplified. And, with THD ratings and primarily every amplifier spec there is... a lot of these spec differences are not even audibly percievable. So, that leads me to the conclusion that an AMPLIFIER is an AMPLIFER.. if it performs as advertised (outputs rated wattage within THD rating and no clipping, etc. etc.) the only thing left to compare is processing.. crossovers and such.

I'm not trying to argue the.. this amplifer "sounds" like this and that one "sounds" like that. There is no winning side to that argument.. each person will "hear" something different (whether it be mentally introduced or actually audibly present). My only question is... if 1 particular amplifier "sounds" different than another.. how would someone ever win a SQ competition if they use a different amplifier than what the judge likes the sound of? (I guess that goes back to my point about installation and all will be a stonger factor in sound reproduction than anything the amplifier introduces)

Good conversation guys. I appreciate your thoughts.

 

I have only done the compairson once in my stereo. It was between a JL amp and a Zapco Reference. The JL was rated at 150x2 and the Zapco at 100x2. With that beign said right off the bat people would assume the JL would sound better due to more dynamic head room. But, I ran both amps full range and basically just swapped them out. The HU was set flat I believe (wasn't changed for the amps). I heard slight differences in the upper frequencies, which was where I was told I probably hear the most change later on. They just seemed more 'fuller' more 'there' and more 'detailed' so I came to the conclusion that the Zapco sounded better. As for subs, I've heard differences between A/B amps on them and Ds on them in a few systems, one of them being mine.

And I do agree a lot of it is up to the person, some people can hear the slight differences some can't. Usually newer people in the audio world cant just because they dont knwo what to listen for, but the people who have been around a while usually know what to listen for in the music and can pick ou thte slight changes. I will also agree that generally the changes a fairly small, yet to some people they make a world of difference.

I will say that amps do sound difference that one another from talking to people and personal experience. Although when you change out and amp its not going to make as big of difference than say the speakers. But as I said before each amp has it own signature and 'colors' the music in some way even aside fromteh crossovers. The amp has other internal processing units that alter and effect the end prodcut and in some compairsons the sound differences will be very minor and inaudible (for example two highe end amps or two low end amps), but other it can be night and day (high end vs low end).

Well an SQ comp is supposed to be objective. Flat line on an RTA and then the imagin/soundstage. To your question about amps and judges...What if you have a set of speakers the judge doesnt like? Some judges dont like forns but from time to time they get good systems with horns and even then cant deny the fact that it sounds good thus awarding them with a place.

Again I guess the best way to relate the sounds of different amps is to use the example of a tube/tude hybrid amp v. a solid state amp. Differences can be night and day between the two amps some people like them some dont. As for a judge in the comp. its hard to say.

If you ever get the chance to swap out amps in a stereo...try it and depending on the amps/speakers/sub you may notice some difference.

One more thing say you find a jensen amp that turely puts out 100 watts by two and a zapco that put out 100 watts by 2 and your not going to use either crossovers on the amps, which would you choose and why?

Me I'd go for zapco lower THD even though both would be below audible. Higher slew rated for the zapco. Better amp in my book (but does cost justify the means?) Overall between the two Im willing to bet that you will have a 'better' sound from the zapco, and that where the cost comes into play. Are those differences worth that much to me? In my book yes, but to someone runnign 'entry level' comps and soem one who is a bass head or just wants a nice stereo....then probably not.

Oh and lastly...as a lot of people argue...Physcoacoustics...Are there truely no differences? (lol) I think this plays a roll but only to a certain extent yes all amps can be made to sound the same (thats the point of RCs test) but all amps do not initally sound the same.

 

Well, well, well.

I know a deep subject.

Anyhows, There are a few minor things I would like to point out that I think are crucial factors in the amplifier discussion. Before you can say that someone cannot hear THD of X-Y% you gotta look at how that manufacturer determined his THD rating. For many companies out there (not all) they love to pad their ratings in both THD, S/N, efficiency, RMS, PEAK, Damping Factor, etc. etc. I am not saying that their specs are inaccurate mind you but unfortunately with many of them they use specs as a marketing tool because they know many people do look at them.

Next thing I would like to say is that you could actually here that .1% THD rating they give an amp if when they rated that amp they did so using a 2khz tone at 1/4 output. You have to take into account that THD is more inherent in music due to rapid changes in frequency that push an amp to it's limits. Now, to further make that point. There is not one single car audio maker out there that I know of using pure music to determine their distortion rates. They all are using sine sweeps and/or single test tones.

TEK I have heard many many different amps on identical speakers and they all have a somewhat unique sound to each of them. The greatest sounding amp for musicality that I have heard in car would be a toss up between the Soundstream DaVinci (reference series in a pretty case) an older McIntosh (sorry can't remember the model of the Mc). I compared these about 3-4 years ago connected in my Honda (i know the H word) going to my Veritas HLCD's set to HP x-over of 450hz (24db/octave) butterworth's. I also listened at the same time to a less expensive amp that boasted good specs (Lanzar Opti series) and you could here slight discoloration with the Lanzar (not tons mind you but enough to cause my ears fatigue after about 10 minutes).

Anyway enough of that. My point is don't always blindly trust a companies specs. Although I have heard now that since the problem has been recognized, there is a company (third party) that does in fact certify a companies specs and allows them to brand their product with such. Sorry I can't remember right off hand who it was and what the brand looked like. I will try to find it again.

EDIT: Caused by lack of sleep and major brainfart. Thanks B for picking it out

 

Hazard,

I agree with much of what you are saying. I can only say for one that all SQ judges must remain 100% blind to what type of equipment they are listening to. That would be the only way that you could remove the Phsycoacoustic factor from the equation. I strongly feel that sometimes it is even my own biases that hurt me. I have judged SQ in several different shows and I feel that I had achieved the best results when doing my best to get in a car and not even know what I was listening to. My objective was always the same, to judge the system as a whole and not the individual components of it or the manufacturer of those pieces. Also a good point I must add is that my judging was always most accurate earlier in the morning. After listening about 3 minutes per car after 20 or so cars my hearing was IMO stressed an picking out the subtle nuiances became much more difficult.