Attention all members!
Have a cool ride? Then show it off on our website! All vehicles welcome!

Debate: Amplifiers

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
Smilies
:awesome: :argh :ditto :inout :words :bow :cheers: :bigwink: :fing02: :sad017: :scorp: :o :D ;) :p :unwell028 :tongue017 :thumbsup :surprised :sm29: :angry011: :angry015: :angry012: :nono: :angry010: :nono :banghead :mad: :dif :angry :CRZ_13: :eek: :confused: :confused0 :confused :( :sad: :cool: :dance :mecry: :jesterlol :embarrass :flame: :doh :evil019: :evil001: :rolleyes: :sub:
View more smilies
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Debate: Amplifiers

by GlassWolf » Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:35 pm

lotas wrote:Wanna sell it? :sm29:
sorry man. using all three of the ones I have.
Jonathan wrote:Feandil on there humored me when he was talking about his "18mm x-max high efficiency midrange!!!!!!!", claiming it'll produce flat IB response down to something like the 50s IIRC. Then specifying that the Fs of the driver was somewhere around or above 100hz
yeah he posted the Bl graph on carstereo.com's forum before I realized it was Feandil.. heh I should have guessed, but he wasn't flaming everything in sight so it didn't register in my mind right away.. also used a different nick, which was clever and wise.
The graph looked like an ironing board. straight 24dB slope at both ends, flat as a board all the way across. I couldn't have drawn a straighter graph with a T-square.

by Jonathan » Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:23 pm

GlassWolf wrote:If you desire nothing more in life than to get baited by trolls, hang out on CAF.
Feandil on there humored me when he was talking about his "18mm x-max high efficiency midrange!!!!!!!", claiming it'll produce flat IB response down to something like the 50s IIRC. Then specifying that the Fs of the driver was somewhere around or above 100hz :lgh

I guess tools will feel that x-max can solve everything :confused

by lotas » Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:11 pm

GlassWolf wrote: An example of this, which you probably get tired of hearing about, would be an amp like the orion 2250SX I have. While it's rated on the front of the amp as being 250 watts RMS x 2 (@ 4 ohms) and rated to handle a 2 ohm load stereo, it will run at 1 ohm stereo without much complaint, and at 4 ohms bridged, the amp puts out closer to an actual 1500 watts RMS. While I complain about amps not being acurately rated for output, I will note that the ability of this amp to work at 1 ohm is a testament to the build quality, and over-engineering of the product.
Wanna sell it? :sm29:

by GlassWolf » Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:39 pm

If you desire nothing more in life than to get baited by trolls, hang out on CAF.

I'm just thankful we rescued geolemon from there *grin*

Thank you Jonathan for clearing up what I'd meant quite concisely. It saved me having to do it, which is good since I'm not feeling terrific today and I'm not sure I would have felt like typing that much just now.

While any two amps will sound the same within their limits when output is matched, the trick to better amplifiers, is where that limit actually lies. A better amp will have more headroom, and be able to give you more at it's limits than a cheap amp rated for the same "advertised output" will when pushed to the limits of that amp's power supply and output stage.

An example of this, which you probably get tired of hearing about, would be an amp like the orion 2250SX I have. While it's rated on the front of the amp as being 250 watts RMS x 2 (@ 4 ohms) and rated to handle a 2 ohm load stereo, it will run at 1 ohm stereo without much complaint, and at 4 ohms bridged, the amp puts out closer to an actual 1500 watts RMS. While I complain about amps not being acurately rated for output, I will note that the ability of this amp to work at 1 ohm is a testament to the build quality, and over-engineering of the product.

by jonnyb » Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:46 pm

i laughed everytime that guy said "YOUR idiots!"

by smoker » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:46 am

Airforceyooper wrote:Yeah, you can't base anything off of a gain. That's only there to match the input stage of the amplifier to the output of the head unit. All gains are definately not created equil. You can take a PG amp and run 12 volts of signal into it via the PG line driver. Remove the PG amp and plug in your Fosgate and watch it smoke. Well, not sure on current models. My point is, the function of the gain and that they are definately not all the same.

oh no no no..........you should go over to the other forum and be informed :)

by Robert Wollenberg » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:38 am

Yeah, you can't base anything off of a gain. That's only there to match the input stage of the amplifier to the output of the head unit. All gains are definately not created equil. You can take a PG amp and run 12 volts of signal into it via the PG line driver. Remove the PG amp and plug in your Fosgate and watch it smoke. Well, not sure on current models. My point is, the function of the gain and that they are definately not all the same.

by smoker » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:34 am

Oh, ok, we're talking subs. Take a 500 wrms Kenwood amp, ANY model, top of the line even. Hook it up to a Type R. Oh hook it upo to whatever the fvck SQ sub you want, let's say the sub is rated at 300 wrms. Turn your gain to 1/2. Do the same steps I mentioned with the comps. NOW hook up a Fosgate (just to be fair and not COMPLETELY blow this Kenwood out of the water) Power 500bd. Run the same test at the same gain setting.


so apparantely all gains are perfectly matched at the halfway point?

by mikechec9 » Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:40 pm

Felt compelled to slap down my quick .02 on that thread.
I hate reading the same 14 pgers (so I don't :) ) Now, I'll read everything from 14 on and see how it goes. :thumbsup

by Jonathan » Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:16 pm

My beliefs:

I'll note that I believe that the performance of any amplifier can be summed up by testing. I do not believe there is a single unexplainable subjective quality to an amplifier. I don't, nor will I ever, drive hundreds of miles to audition an amplifier as I feel it's pointless. Perhaps if they let me gut it and see the componentry, but I have complete confidence buying an amplifier I've never heard before as long as I look at the engineering and material/build quality.

I feel this same potential exists for speakers as well. We know all of the concepts of driver design, but where we fall short is our inability to represent driver characteristics to an extent to determine the final result without listening. I don't think it's really due to things we don't know, but rather the high number of variables taht have to be taken into account for the final result. I feel that if you had a driver that measures exactly the same as another driver when using all existing test methods, they'll sound exactly the same. After all, the only way an engineer can see what he needs to improve upon is by testing a driver and seeing known specifications, then finding ways to make it perform better. Look at the difference between, say, a JL Audio W6AE vs the W6v2. The difference is the optimization of the entire driver through FEA analysis, and the driver measures considerably better, and sounds that much better as a result.

Top