IDGAF

ISO loaded being louder on less power has me vexed. I'm terribly vexed.

Holy hell. That's awesome. "push/pull"... do you mean it's iso loaded or just plain ol' push/pull with one sub inverted? And what class is this?

I see. Well, I guess that's my mistake for assuming those variables remaining connstant was a given. I won't get into the allusion to halving impedance doubles power because I know what you're getting at. If you don't mind me asking... Whom do you consider the world's top acoustical transducer engineers?

You guys on here are a riot. For real. What "control"? He doesn't have a control in this "experiment". It's a measured A/B test on a piece of equipment that's good enough for NASA, for chrissakes. He's not curing cancer or finding dark matter. He's seeing which f'n car audio submoofer is louder on his amp in his car in that specific box. What would you like him to use as a control? And how would that control be measured? Maybe you're stuck in basic 4h grade science class. But here in the grown up world, we use what we have on hand to do the best we can. If I do a drop in sub comparison and gain, you're damn tootin' that sub is louder. That's real, tangible, repeatable results. I also find it hilarious that people are telling him to clamp to level the playing field with the ohm load desparity when all everyone talks about on here is that clamping is stupid and useless. This is off topic, but I keep coming back here because I heard how intelligent the member base is here and how technical things can get. With an open mind, I open threads and see nothing but theoretical rhetoric that has so little traction in the real world. I'm not being argumentative on purpose. I'm honestly trying to understand where you guys are coming from.

Far better tools than throwing the thing in a box and putting it on the TermLab? I think not. Which, by the way... is the proper way of testing SPL.

I really don't see what the big deal is. I mean... he isn't claiming one sub is better or louder than the other for everybody in every application. He has (2) subs and a box. He's just going to see which one is louder. That's it. I don't understand why everyone is so uptight about testing shit on here.

Just for reference.... aluminum is good for 700A of ampacity per square inch of cross section. Copper = 1,000A.

If they both did the same score... that's a win for the DD. I bet the power difference is a theoretical DB difference. Probably 4k or so for the BTL and maybe 2700ish for the DD.

Love me some IA amps. Send me a couple 80.1's and I'll add to that trophy count. Actually... I need (3). I'm serious.

Tell me... how do manufacturers arrive at their ratings then? What magical devices are they using? Have you ever seen a comparison of the DSO nano vs. a high dollar benchtop? If everyone on this board understands the inaccuracies and limitations of them... then what are they? Explain it to me. What I really don't understand is how you can claim that the results aren't meaningful. If results are able to be successfully replicated time and time again, then they're meaningful. Regardless of their accuracy. Or perceived lack thereof. If I clamp a certain 2k and it does 2,000w and then clamp another 2k the same way and it does 2,500w. The latter is louder. Period. Does it matter that it may actually be 2 watts and 2.5 watts? No. Because the results are repeatable and verifiable. And I know what maufacturer you're talking about with clamps on here. And I find it comical that these diatribes about clamping irrelevance and inaccuracy aren't plastered in his threads simply because of verbage. He's using the same tools in the same way to verify the output of his amplifiers. Yet... the results shared for the Flatline stuff shows ignorance?

If I were trying to determine whether you were taller than someone who was 6'7.1295892839819834" tall... that last digit becomes significant though, doesn't it? But I understand what you're saying. The results were simply volt*amps from the meters. Known good meters that some organizations use for their "clamped" classes. It's entirely possible to round them off, I suppose. But without actually *knowing* where the signifigance stops and uncertainty starts... why round them? It's easy to nitpick someone else's testing/results without doing any of your own. I yell at Tom Brady all the time about the receiver that was open.

This place is a riot. Clamping is useless, invalid and breeds ignorance. How do people test amps around here? Show me how it's so flawed that it warrants disrespect from the "tech team" and mods to a new vendor. Let's see this scientific method in action. What's a fair sample size? 100 or so? Have you tested 100 amps using ABX measurement methodologies? What are these highly calibrated devices being calibrated with? How are those calibration devices calibrated? If you or the tech team haven't done this test, then who has? Where are you getting this information? Just exactly how flawed is 99.99% of people on the planet's testing? And what is the standard deviation? Help me understand the vehemence against clamping around here. Is there a sticky or something?

You're obviously smarter than the average bear. So tell me... how would you go about testing amplifiers? Say you start an amp company. People are going to want to see "clamps." But since you're a purist... you decide that clamping is archaic and invalid. You use fixed resistance to eliminate phase angle, include uncertainty, only go to significant digits and report that your 2,000w amp is producing maybe 1,400w. But wait... is that at unity? Gotta lop some of that off to account for power factor. Furthermore, say you want to charge $500 for this "2k". Well... now you have a choice. You can call it a 2k that does 1.4k real (or is it apparent?) power. Or you can call it a 1.4k. You know... since you're a purist. People think, "$500 for a 1400w amp?" You talk till you're blue in the face about how the way you test is the only real way and the only accurate measurement in the industry. You try to make people understand why clamping is invalid, current methodology doesn't account for this and that and how and why people are doing it wrong and that you're the only one doing it right. None of that is getting through to people so you're going to resort to citing clamps and what your amp WOULD do if it were clamped traditionally or what competitors' amps would do if they were tested the same way yours is. People aren't going to take your word for it. At this point, you can continue on the high road with crap sales or... acquiesce, swallow your scientific methodology and clamp the damn thing. Or, I suppose you could NOT start your own amp company and continue to criticize the testing methods of all of those who have. Or wait... do you own Zuki? Basically... some people know clamping is flawed. Most don't. And guess what? They don't care. But here's the rub... it's the end user standard of measurement. There would have to be a worldwide paradigm shift to change the way it's done and reported. And that's not happening any time soon. There has to be a reference. Clamping is the reference. Is it wrong? Maybe. But it's the standard. Just think of clamping as specific gravity.

That's wonderful if your vehicle doesn't require any electrical power--which it doesn't. It doesn't... not? Or it doesn't? Like I said, it's not a perfect equation. It has a built in fudge factor to account for your car's draw on the alt and amp efficiency and what not. Would you rather me just tell him to throw in dual 500A alts and 24 G31 batts to run 2k "just to be safe"? Neither are helpful to the OP. IE: 100A alt x 14.4v = 1440watts. 100A x 10v = 1000watts, 1440watts - 1000watts = 440watts. So your presuming the entire vehicle requires 440watts, and the rest of the power(1000watts) can be used to power the stereo equipment. I'm sorry but most manufacturer's don't put in alternators with over three times the power requirement for the vehicle--it economically doesn't make sense. I wouldn't want to be discharging the battery down to 10v on a continual basis either. Perhaps it would be more relevant to simply install all the equipment, and monitor the voltage before ordering alternators and additional batteries. Also presuming that if the voltage does drop severely then the OP will simply turn it down until the necessary electrical upgrades are done. I hear ya. And my advice is usually your last paragraph. LIke I said, it's just an IDEA of what you may need and the numbers sway more to the user's side when factoring in the batteries because we all know you can run more than 1,000w on a 100Ah battery since a battery of that size is probably a G31 or bigger like the XS d3100; which XS claims will support 5,000+ watts as a secondary battery. So, 100A alt and an XS d3100 = 5,000+ watts. Or 100A alt and 110Ah batt (d3100) = 2,100w. Which is the more safe recommendation?

Unless there is some sort of pass between the trunk and the cabin, like with the seats folded down or at least an armrest pass like the one pictured above, I don't suggest porting through the rear deck unless it's a bandpass.