While I agree with the study and test reports of the A2KTL, there are some facts being left out here. First, many of the factory units compensate to reduce bass response very gradually as volume is increased and no aftermarket HU's do this. I did not say all OEM HU's do this but I can tell you Ford is one that does as well as Honda and GM. Now if you adjust your LOC to where you get maximum unclipped input level prior to increasing volume to the point bass will be reduced then I would agree 100% with the reports. Second, the comparison was done using a mid-level HU of unspecified brand. Now price does not always mean your getting the best because there are some variances just in different areas. Third, take into consideration that you are comparing a $150-200 aftermarket HU (which you can obviously tell from the RCA voltage readings they provided) to an OEM HU that costs probably twice as much. Not sure now I am going to have to check replacement cost of the factory HU, but if I remember correctly it is typically in the $400-500 range. Third, if we compare an aftermarket HU that is equally priced to the OEM and equally matched for features you will notice that the specs then on the aftermarket HU would greatly exceed those of the OEM HU. So instead of the meager 2.5V 300 ohm output you now have 6.2V (just an example) with better impedance. So to say that the head to head battle was a fair comparison is ludicrous. If your going to compare then compare all aspects such as cost vs performace. For those of you who are familiar with A2K you will know that Richard Clark and David Navone are by far some of the most respected names in car audio. However, for those of you who do not know. Their driving factor behind the comparison was to compare on the basis of what the average person would spend on a HU and not what an audiophile or auto sound competitor would spend on the same HU. In other words the average Joe can save his 200 for the HU and instead add an amp, sub, and nice speakers for much less and get tremendous improvement.

In short I just want to say that you can improve your sound by replacing the factory HU but certainly not by leaps and bounds. BTW, the extra punch and fullness of sound comes from not having the bass reducing output section of the typical OEM HU. Which is installed to keep people from destroying speakers and bringing them back under waranty to replace them. Could you just imagine how many cheap factory speakers people would destroy if a factory HU didn't reduce bass response at high volumes? Tons! which = Tons of lost revenue

 

I hear what you are saying about technical specifications. However, with all due respect, technical specifications are not the whole picture. A friend and I did some blind testing of stereo components and found that there were substantial differences between pieces of equipment that had essentially the same technical specifications. there are real differences that are not captured by those specifications. Such as clarity, definition, spaceousness of sound, etc. I would submit that I can hear those differences in the Kenwood deck versus the OEM. Also, I believe the Kenwood does have extra punch that the OEM does not have. This results in crisper bass response and less distortion on peak demand. Just my opinion. Not attacking your point of view. Overdriving bass in a amp can blow out your tweeters and at the very least cause substantial distortion. I agree that an aftermarket HU with a built in amp doesn't have that much power. But it is an improvement over OEM.

 

acadianabob, The bottom line is for YOU to like what you hear. The opinions of the rest of us are of no importance, when it gets down to the real nitty gritty.

 

hope i wasn't sounding defensive. didn't mean to. just extending the discussion to explore the notion that the ear can detect differences that aren't necessarily captured by specifications.