JL 10w6v2
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles
JL 500/1 Class D mono amp, will rock the crap out of those subs, with CLASS and quality...DO get a cap for it as well, and i would get a custom box to get the perfect volume for those subs, but thats up to you, make sure the thunderform volume is in the proper range for the 10w6v2. I have two 10w6AE's, and i know the thunderform is a bit too large for it, so check that out and yer set.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,479
Likes: 0
From: O'Fallon, MO
One of the ways of expressing the "goodness" of an amplifier or other device is to use a number, based on measurements at a given power output level, expressing its "Total Harmonic Distortion." If an amplifier or other device is given a pure sine wave (i.e. just one frequency) at its input, the signal at the output will never be an exact copy of the input. There will always be some deviation in the shape of the waveform, which can be expressed as a series of "harmonics" of the fundamental frequency. This number indicates the RMS voltage equivalent of total harmonic distortion power, as a percentage of the total output RMS voltage.
Clear as mud? Let's say you've got a harmonic analyser or other way of determining the amount of each harmonic (such as an FFT spectrograph program on your computer). How do you convert these readings into a single THD figure, for comparison with other devices?
Before we go much further, it bears pointing out that there is considerable (and very valid) criticism of the practise of a single THD number to define the goodness of an amplifier. There are several weaknesses to this approach: not all harmonics are equally discordant; even harmonics tend to be much less dissonant then odd ones; higher harmonics are generally considered more dissonant; and a percentage number does not necessarily relate to how the ear perceives sound and distortion. Furthermore, it only describes one "kind" of distortion, and says nothing about intermodulation, phase errors, or other anomalies in the audio signal. There have been attempts to redefine THD to give more "weight" to higher harmonics, and other refinements, but as far as I know the industry has not agreed on any of these modified specs.
All that being said, a THD figure can be useful when combined with other specifications, such as IMD (intermodulation distortion), etc. Just don't assume that an amplifier with lower THD than another will necessarily sound better.
Clear as mud? Let's say you've got a harmonic analyser or other way of determining the amount of each harmonic (such as an FFT spectrograph program on your computer). How do you convert these readings into a single THD figure, for comparison with other devices?
Before we go much further, it bears pointing out that there is considerable (and very valid) criticism of the practise of a single THD number to define the goodness of an amplifier. There are several weaknesses to this approach: not all harmonics are equally discordant; even harmonics tend to be much less dissonant then odd ones; higher harmonics are generally considered more dissonant; and a percentage number does not necessarily relate to how the ear perceives sound and distortion. Furthermore, it only describes one "kind" of distortion, and says nothing about intermodulation, phase errors, or other anomalies in the audio signal. There have been attempts to redefine THD to give more "weight" to higher harmonics, and other refinements, but as far as I know the industry has not agreed on any of these modified specs.
All that being said, a THD figure can be useful when combined with other specifications, such as IMD (intermodulation distortion), etc. Just don't assume that an amplifier with lower THD than another will necessarily sound better.