Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My spl setup metered higher with the 1500D than the M1a by .6db, both being ran at 1/2ohm.

Edited by RAM_Designs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might as well stop responding. There is absolutely nothing you can say that will make those results anything more than what they are. They are not "real world", they are useless and meaningless. You obviously don't understand why. But nothing you can say will change that fact.

I am going to stop responding, because there is absolutely nothing anybody can say to get you off of this idea that all specs must be measured to a standard that is uniform to have an accurate result, when there isn't a standard that is followed precisely because of equipment variance, user error, not not specific enough conditions. I didn't even bother reading all of that because quite frankly, I don't give a shit. I measure power with amperage and current, it directly reflects my score, and if it sounds fine I don't care how much distortion is or isn't there. That's how everybody outside of anal retentive people work, they don't need a spec to tell them it sounds good, they just listen to it.

Did you not just read everything Imp typed out?

I'm guessing no, for the reasons I just explained.

LOL....you can keep trying to play the "no standard measurement" card. But I do believe if you look up AES standards, there is indeed an accurate and establish method for measuring distortion. Regardless, it's a fucking amplifier, not magic. People (other than yourself) understand how they work and how to measure them and make the measurements mean something. Have for decades. Machines can be accurate and calibrated. You're trying a cop out which just utterly fails.

Your "real world" experience, just like that "real world test", isn't worth two shits. You can do something a hundred times. If you do it wrong every time, all that "experience" isn't worth anything.

You read it, but didn't bother responding because you couldn't.

Simple fact of the matter is that you basically just admitted you can't say anything to make those tests anything more than what they are....worthless.

Though I'm glad to know you apparently don't care about distortion and could happily drive around all day with your amp driven into full clipping.....because these things are apparently not important to you, not in the "real world". You therefore incorrectly assume that these things also don't matter to anyone else and, again incorrectly, assume that there's no value in a proper amplifier measurement (obviously because you don't understand them). Even if that misleads people and causes them to draw conclusions which don't actually exists. That's apparently fine with you. God forbid someone try to correct misinformation and get people to actually think and understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My spl setup metered higher with the 1500D than the M1a by .6db, both being ran at 1/2ohm.

What voltage if I may ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My spl setup metered higher with the 1500D than the M1a by .6db, both being ran at 1/2ohm.

This is one of those things where the SAZ was a better amp in your setup. For others, it may be the opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My spl setup metered higher with the 1500D than the M1a by .6db, both being ran at 1/2ohm.

THAT is real world testing, funny how that works out.....

LOL....you can keep trying to play the "no standard measurement" card. But I do believe if you look up AES standards, there is indeed an accurate and establish method for measuring distortion. It's a pucking amplifier, not magic. People (other than yourself) understand how they work and how to measure them and make the measurements mean something. Have for decades. Machines can be calibrated. You're trying a cop out which just utterly fails.

That's as much as I read, because you can't teach somebody who isn't willing to learn. But lets just look at something here. According to the standards you say manufacturers adhere to, these 2 amps will sound just as good as each other and do the same power:

http://zapco.com/Reference.html

REF1100.1

4 ohms: 1 x 825 Watts

2 ohms: 1 x 1100 Watts

T.H.D. + Noise: <0.03% @ 4 ohms.

http://www.legacycaraudio.com/itempage.asp?model=LA1110BK

1 x 1100 Watts

2 Ohm Stable

S/N Ratio: >95dB

THD: <0.04%

And why is it that most manufactures don't even list THD as a spec?

My spl setup metered higher with the 1500D than the M1a by .6db, both being ran at 1/2ohm.

This is one of those things where the SAZ was a better amp in your setup. For others, it may be the opposite.

The only time I've seen consistent amp swapping results be the opposite of the norm is in extreme impedance rise cases where 1 amp works better on higher impedance loads than another, IE higher voltage output capability. It's a rare occasion, but happens, and usually only when it's being used at a higher DCR than lowest recommended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My spl setup metered higher with the 1500D than the M1a by .6db, both being ran at 1/2ohm.

What voltage if I may ask.

Started at 13.9(hot summer), and dropped to 12.8 after a 3 second burp(stock alt).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

\

My spl setup metered higher with the 1500D than the M1a by .6db, both being ran at 1/2ohm.

THAT is real world testing, funny how that works out.....

Might be "real world", but still not meaningful unless you can verify that all variables were constant, accurately measured and what information is needed.

How meaningful is that result if the gains were set differently? What if the subs were hotter and had higher power compression or more impedance rise when the DD was tested? Or other variables were changed? What if, what if, what if. There are dozens of variables that could have affected the results.

How meaningful is the result to someone not worried solely about SPL numbers if the Sundown was clipping and the DD was not? If the Sundown had excessive distortion and the DD did not? Hell, a .6db difference isn't even close to being audible, so that itself is meaningless to someone not interested solely about SPL numbers.

Yet again another reason why "real world" testing is "real meaningless" unless all variables are known and controlled. Yet another instance of ibanender incorrectly assuming all results are meaningful and accurate because it was measured in the "real world". "Real world" proof the Sundown is better in all circumstances and for all situations right? Wrong.

Funny how that works.

LOL....you can keep trying to play the "no standard measurement" card. But I do believe if you look up AES standards, there is indeed an accurate and establish method for measuring distortion. It's a pucking amplifier, not magic. People (other than yourself) understand how they work and how to measure them and make the measurements mean something. Have for decades. Machines can be calibrated. You're trying a cop out which just utterly fails.

That's as much as I read, because you can't teach somebody who isn't willing to learn. But lets just look at something here. According to the standards you say manufacturers adhere to, these 2 amps will sound just as good as each other and do the same power:

http://zapco.com/Reference.html

REF1100.1

4 ohms: 1 x 825 Watts

2 ohms: 1 x 1100 Watts

T.H.D. + Noise: <0.03% @ 4 ohms.

http://www.legacycar...?model=LA1110BK

1 x 1100 Watts

2 Ohm Stable

S/N Ratio: >95dB

THD: <0.04%

And why is it that most manufactures don't even list THD as a spec?

Now you are just being intentionally ignorant. First, you don't understand the difference between a "THD" amplifier specification and power output being measured at a specific THD? The two are not the same. Second, you apparently don't even understand the difference between continuous and max power? LOL....wow.

Also, just because a given manufacturer may not choose to accurately measure or rate their equipment or follow standard practices, that does not mean such a method does not exist. It's still possible to accurately measure the amplifier. I never argued that manufacturer ratings are definite and accurate. You are still completely missing the boat. You're either really getting desperate now, or demonstrating your sheer ignorance.

A THD spec isn't very meaningful by itself. What is meaningful is knowing the THD of the signal at the rated power output. We can then measure and verify the rating as accurate or not accurate. If they don't list a THD for rated power, it's generally assumed to be 1% or less. Regardless, if they don't list the THD at the rated power, we can accurately measure the amplifier and determine what the THD would be. The point is, regardless of manufacturer rating, it's still possible to accurately measure the amplifier. You are barking up the wrong tree. A power measurement is only useful if you know what the THD was for the measurement. Otherwise you can not compare that measurement to any other measurement (of the same amplifier or different amplifier) and you do not know how useful that measured power is. You can't seem to grasp this concept.

Though I do find it interesting you'd rather bask in your own ignorance than learn something new. Says a lot about a person. I had started out thinking you were fairly intelligent. After our discussions, I question my hypothesis.

"Never argue with a fool. They will drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

\

My spl setup metered higher with the 1500D than the M1a by .6db, both being ran at 1/2ohm.

THAT is real world testing, funny how that works out.....

Might be "real world", but still not meaningful unless you can verify that all variables were constant, accurately measured and what information is needed.

How meaningful is that result if the gains were set differently? What if the subs were hotter and had higher power compression or more impedance rise when the DD was tested? Or other variables were changed? What if, what if, what if. There are dozens of variables that could have affected the results.

How meaningful is the result to someone not worried solely about SPL numbers if the Sundown was clipping and the DD was not? If the Sundown had excessive distortion and the DD did not? Hell, a .6db difference isn't even close to being audible, so that itself is meaningless to someone not interested solely about SPL numbers.

Yet again another reason why "real world" testing is "real meaningless" unless all variables are known and controlled. Yet another instance of ibanender incorrectly assuming all results are meaningful and accurate because it was measured in the "real world". "Real world" proof the Sundown is better in all circumstances and for all situations right? Wrong.

Funny how that works.

So now you're arguing that the results that he tested aren't valid? Nobody said a given model has a definitive power output. As a matter of fact, EVERY amp will have different output. Will it be audible? No, but it's different. That 0.6 dB is roughly 15% more power. If you gain SPL, that's a meaningful test, period.

Now you are just being intentionally ignorant. First, you don't understand the difference between a "THD" amplifier specification and power output being measured at a specific THD? The two are not the same. Second, you apparently don't even understand the difference between continuous and max power? LOL....wow.

Those are the numbers the manufacturers advertise. If you don't like that one is one way and the other is another, why not take it up with these standards you're so set on?

Also, just because a given manufacturer may not choose to accurately measure or rate their equipment or follow standard practices, that does not mean such a method does not exist. It's still possible to accurately measure the amplifier. I never argued that manufacturer ratings are definite and accurate. You are still completely missing the boat. You're either really getting desperate now, or demonstrating your sheer ignorance.

Since you agree that manufacturer ratings are not necessarily correct, how is that any different from an individual doing their own testing? NOW you're getting my point. According to you, they hold the same warrant then. So ANY specs given by any manufacturer are false, and you should just buy something to buy something because everything is not believable.

A THD spec isn't very meaningful by itself. What is meaningful is knowing the THD of the signal at the rated power output. We can then measure and verify the rating as accurate or not accurate. If they don't list a THD for rated power, it's generally assumed to be 1% or less. Regardless, if they don't list the THD at the rated power, we can accurately measure the amplifier and determine what the THD would be. The point is, regardless of manufacturer rating, it's still possible to accurately measure the amplifier. You are barking up the wrong tree. A power measurement is only useful if you know what the THD was for the measurement. Otherwise you can not compare that measurement to any other measurement (of the same amplifier or different amplifier) and you do not know how useful that measured power is. You can't seem to grasp this concept.

Funny, isn't that exactly what I said earlier? They dont list THD because THERE ISN'T A STANDARD FOR MEASURING IT. EVERY amplifier is 1% or less at some point, and no manufacturer has a playbook for how it should be measured. I never said it couldn't be measured, I said it's not measured accurately to compare across other amps. YOU keep saying distortion this and distortion that and what power does it do at what distortion, but you can't give a single example of a manufacturers spec of distortion at the full bandwidth of the amp, at rated power. Manufacturers don't do it (or at least don't publish it) because the data is compared as something important when making a purchase decision against other terrible products that cost half as much. Class D has a lot of distortion in it compared to A/B, but can you hear it on a sub? NO. Why? If a sub in itself is 10% distortion, you won't hear how dirty an amp is till it's more distorted than the sub is anyway. Then, beyond that, the only people that seem to care exactly how much power they have are aimed at output. How does your ear interpret 150 dB? It's certainly not clean! So now your body can't tell how bad it is either. Moral of the story, you're the only one that seems to care. It's like you got your feelings hurt because somebody tested your favorite amp and it sucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kid you are thick and uninformed.

The reason they don't measure THD is very simple. Its frigging expensive to measure.

NO test is ever valid unless the uncertainty is also given with it. From a metrology standpoint that is the first thing that must be reported. So that being said the only part of your argument that holds water is that indeed the real world test does mean something, but conveniently for us the uncertainty may be 75% but we aren't sure because the person measuring it didn't even know how to calculate that nor report it.

I find it very amusing that you are arguing a test is valid when indeed the results may very well be subjective. Pretty nice when uncertainty is large because then you can just do that.

Same thing with RAM_Designs numbers. That raise is not within the uncertainty of other settings including the measurement system so it says absolutely nothing.

There is no scientific validity in either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's worth anything all gains were set minimum and the burps were a solid 30 minutes apart with the truck running the whole time inbetween to ensure everything was fully charged. Only one burp per amp. HC2000 up front and Batcap2000 in the back, 160amp stock alt. I was trying to decide which amp to use in a certain class(0-400).

Edited by RAM_Designs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now you're arguing that the results that he tested aren't valid? Nobody said a given model has a definitive power output. As a matter of fact, EVERY amp will have different output. Will it be audible? No, but it's different. That 0.6 dB is roughly 15% more power. If you gain SPL, that's a meaningful test, period.

Yes, I am arguing his test isn't valid. No, measuring a difference on a meter does not make it meaningful test, period. What part of this are you not getting? I thought my explanation was pretty well laid out. You do not know all of the variables were equal, therefore you do not know how valid the results of his test are.

Do you know the gains were set exactly to match? If not, how is the test valid ? What would it prove? It wouldn't prove anything useful or meaningful.

Do you know the power compression and impedance rise was exactly the same? If not, how is the test valid? What would it prove? It wouldn't prove anything useful or meaningful.

That's just the short list. I could go on, but there's no point as if you're not understanding it by now there's going to be no getting through to you. The variables are too numerous to list, and you don't know any of them. Therefore, test invalid. Period.

Those are the numbers the manufacturers advertise. If you don't like that one is one way and the other is another, why not take it up with these standards you're so set on?

My issue isn't that they report numbers on the website. My issue is that you don't understand why you are wrong and completely missing the mark. You aren't even close to making a useful point right now, much less contradicting anything I've said. The sad part is, you still don't understand why. I'm done trying to explain it to you. Perhaps you should go back and reread all of those posts you claim you haven't read. They will explain it to you.

Since you agree that manufacturer ratings are not necessarily correct, how is that any different from an individual doing their own testing? NOW you're getting my point. According to you, they hold the same warrant then. So ANY specs given by any manufacturer are false, and you should just buy something to buy something because everything is not believable.

No, the only point you are making is that you don't understand why you are wrong. I've explained it, in detail, multiple times. You are doing absolutely nothing to contradict any of my statements. You're just making yourself look like an ignorant fool. Go back and reread all of those replies you claim not to have read. They will explain it to you.

Funny, isn't that exactly what I said earlier?

No, nothing you have said has even remotely correlated to anything I have said. Other than my last quote about arguing with a fool, because so far you've done a good job of demonstrating yourself to be one so it's not going to be much longer before you begin beating me with experience. Go back and reread all of the replies you claim not to have read. It will explain everything, including why you are wrong.

It's like you got your feelings hurt because somebody tested your favorite amp and it sucked.

The funny part is that I don't give a shit about any of the actual products involved. I'm simply trying to combat ignorance and, in this particular case, explain to people why the results of a given test don't prove or demonstrate the conclusions they were drawing. Hopefully people increase their knowledge a little in the process. You seem to be the only one in this conversation with an actual financial and personal stake regarding the specific products, and unfortunately perpetuate the ignorance in the process. Ignorance, and a specific product, are what you're defending right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's worth anything all gains were set minimum and the burps were a solid 30 minutes apart with the truck running the whole time inbetween to ensure everything was fully charged. Only one burp per amp. HC2000 up front and Batcap2000 in the back, 160amp stock alt. I was trying to decide which amp to use in a certain class(0-400).

Please don't take anything I'm saying about your results personally. I'm not trying to beat you up here, and honestly wasn't going to say anything about it until ibanender decided to use that as more "proof from the real world". So it sort of got thrown into the gauntlet. But really, even with your added comments there, it doesn't really prove much of anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I got a point I want to make.

You saying SPL testing is invalid because of the variables. Which I agree to a certain extent.

But to RAM Design, his test was not invalid. He was testing SPL for his power class, and the Sundown was louder hands down. Now how can't you count that as a valid test?

I doubt in his setup, the M1a would of ever been louder. So now what?

Sure, if a major variable changed, box design, adding/subjecting input voltage and or impedance change, it could have a different outcome.

Point is, his test was valid. It might not apply to everybody but to him, it does.

In SPL world, bench test power isn't everything.

I rather have a amp that produces higher SPL, than on a test bench, if that's what I'm looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I got a point I want to make.

You saying SPL testing is invalid because of the variables. Which I agree to a certain extent.

But to RAM Design, his test was not invalid. He was testing SPL for his power class, and the Sundown was louder hands down. Now how can't you count that as a valid test?

I doubt in his setup, the M1a would of ever been louder. So now what?

Sure, if a major variable changed, box design, adding/subjecting input voltage and or impedance change, it could have a different outcome.

Point is, his test was valid. It might not apply to everybody but to him, it does.

Actually, not really. Again not reported within uncertainty and when you add those up they will eclipse more than the .6dB he found.

Also, like Impious I am not ripping on the test or findings, but the absurd comment that Ibanender made about the other tests being real. Is Ram's scientific? No. Is it repeatable? I doubt it. Will the same amp likely be louder when tested again? Perhaps and its probably even likely. Its just that VERY minimal changes can make that happen in the situation from all sorts of variables. Hell its so close it could almost be any one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I got a point I want to make.

You saying SPL testing is invalid because of the variables. Which I agree to a certain extent.

But to RAM Design, his test was not invalid. He was testing SPL for his power class, and the Sundown was louder hands down. Now how can't you count that as a valid test?

I doubt in his setup, the M1a would of ever been louder. So now what?

Sure, if a major variable changed, box design, adding/subjecting input voltage and or impedance change, it could have a different outcome.

Point is, his test was valid. It might not apply to everybody but to him, it does.

Actually, not really. Again not reported within uncertainty and when you add those up they will eclipse more than the .6dB he found.

Also, like Impious I am not ripping on the test or findings, but the absurd comment that Ibanender made about the other tests being real. Is Ram's scientific? No. Is it repeatable? I doubt it. Will the same amp likely be louder when tested again? Perhaps and its probably even likely. Its just that VERY minimal changes can make that happen in the situation from all sorts of variables. Hell its so close it could almost be any one of them.

I wasn't trying to argue or anything. But RAM got info from his test. And isn't that the reason from testing to begin with?

I agree there are a lot of variables, but I just think his counted, to him at least. That is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it counted as far as im concerned. Sometimes stuff gets broken down too far, i understand what there saying but it seems like its going into it way too far for the average person. Trying to prove your right sometimes will have you digging real deep in the barrel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's worth anything all gains were set minimum and the burps were a solid 30 minutes apart with the truck running the whole time inbetween to ensure everything was fully charged. Only one burp per amp. HC2000 up front and Batcap2000 in the back, 160amp stock alt. I was trying to decide which amp to use in a certain class(0-400).

Please don't take anything I'm saying about your results personally. I'm not trying to beat you up here, and honestly wasn't going to say anything about it until ibanender decided to use that as more "proof from the real world". So it sort of got thrown into the gauntlet. But really, even with your added comments there, it doesn't really prove much of anything.

I know you're not trying to attack me personally, you're a good dude. I'm just trying to clarify what I did since I know people will be wondering. If it makes any difference I was able to repeat the same score with the 1500D time and time again...I didn't test the M1a more than once because I didn't see a .7db turnaround happening.

Edited by RAM_Designs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree there are a lot of variables, but I just think his counted, to him at least. That is all.

What if the 30 min repeat time on the "mic" was +/- 1dB? Then would you say the same?

I know I oversimplified that and it is probably more repeatable, but the uncertainty in that device is around what I stated (and there are a LOT more sources of uncertainty in that test). Again the reason that it isn't valid is that the sum of the uncertainties wasn't added up and thought about in the process which can lead you to the wrong conclusions. Somewhere around Physics 101 you learn about significant digits and uncertainty which are necessary for ALL experiments to be valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Imp, I know you're probably aware of this but I just feel that this needs to be stated clearly. The reason ibanender (probably spelled wrong but I'll edit it.) is so adamant in his argument is because he feels that you're arguing in favor of something that is non-existent (and even seems mythical) and therefor cannot show any definite results for. He's showing you numbers that he can measure, results he can feel, hear and enjoy and you're showing him theory with no results.

As wrong as his numbers may be, his point is that he HAS numbers. He has something to judge against, a scale, if you will. If one test is wrong, and the next test just as wrong and he gains x.xx db, then he can say the second amp was louder. He CAN'T measure distortion, he doesn't HAVE resistive loads. From what I've seen, all the people who swear by perfect testing enviornments and procedures can't provide them so his argument is what's the point? (No offense, not saying that you can't).

By that logic, without a thd measurement (and how do we know it's accurate?) how do we know ratings are accurate? What do we use to judge an amplifier before we buy it? We can't use ibanender's way of measuring, because it's inaccurate. Nobody can realistically measure thd, and nobody has resistive loads laying around so then what? He wants people to do things the way he does because he can then feed that to people and help them to decide which amp to use. If the right way to measure is nearly impossible, then should we not measure at all? Does that make this argument between the Sundown and the DD just "there's no way to tell?" Because that sucks ass, to put it bluntly. If the man who designs and has the amps built (Jacob) does it wrong then??!??!

Edited by An-i-no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree there are a lot of variables, but I just think his counted, to him at least. That is all.

What if the 30 min repeat time on the "mic" was +/- 1dB? Then would you say the same?

I know I oversimplified that and it is probably more repeatable, but the uncertainty in that device is around what I stated (and there are a LOT more sources of uncertainty in that test). Again the reason that it isn't valid is that the sum of the uncertainties wasn't added up and thought about in the process which can lead you to the wrong conclusions. Somewhere around Physics 101 you learn about significant digits and uncertainty which are necessary for ALL experiments to be valid.

I do understand what your saying. And I can see why the test meanings nothing to you, and why you see it as invalid.

But I have a question. If you was in RAM shoes, and you needed to find out which amp was louder in SPL, how would you compare them more equally and actually have a valid test?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass or anything, but if the way he did it doesn't prove anything. I need to know how to it correctly for future reference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow guys. Though there might have been some arguing but I did learn a few things. I love threads like these because it changes the way I look at car audio every time.

But I agree, from a scientific standpoint a tiny change could cause a different outcome, but at the same time that change can mean nothing depending on which way you are looking at it(spl/daily senario).

On the testing I can see how it doesn't mean anything, but at the same time I would be open minded to believe it...well actually at least take it into consideration with doubts. For sure though i won't accept such claims until I proved it myself....if i had the proper testing equipment lol.

Edited by beandip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAM his test is invalid.

1/ Both amps produce more then 400w, and he was in the 0-400w class.

2/Do you think both amps have the same gain pots? I don't think so. (and if they have, design on the amp is different)

3/The amp was louder at a certain freqeuncy, doesn't mean it will do the same power over every freqeuncy, in his case he did get a gain. Other may not.

There are to many variables to be able to say the amp is better then the other one, because in YOUR situation it's better. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As wrong as his numbers may be, his point is that he HAS numbers. He has something to judge against, a scale, if you will. If one test is wrong, and the next test just as wrong and he gains x.xx db, then he can say the second amp was louder. He CAN'T measure distortion, he doesn't HAVE resistive loads. From what I've seen, all the people who swear by perfect testing enviornments and procedures can't provide them so his argument is what's the point? (No offense, not saying that you can't).

By that logic, without a thd measurement (and how do we know it's accurate?) how do we know ratings are accurate? What do we use to judge an amplifier before we buy it? We can't use ibanender's way of measuring, because it's inaccurate. Nobody can realistically measure thd, and nobody has resistive loads laying around so then what? He wants people to do things the way he does because he can then feed that to people and help them to decide which amp to use. If the right way to measure is nearly impossible, then should we not measure at all? Does that make this argument between the Sundown and the DD just "there's no way to tell?" Because that sucks ass, to put it bluntly. If the man who designs and has the amps built (Jacob) does it wrong then??!??!

If numbers are inaccurate why have them? What does it prove? Again, if it were reported with the uncertainty of measurement then they would be valid.

And to your second question, ratings are NOT accurate. How do you think crap sold at Walmart can carry the ratings they do? There are no tests that are valid that the manufacturers will pay to do.

Don't pick on Jacob for doing it wrong. People like you are the reason he does it at all. There is a misconception amongst the car audio followers that requests these sort of tests. Based on his equipment he is doing what he can, but its only real purpose are to satisfy cravings of those who don't understand. Personally I would much, much rather buy from Jacob than DD and have a lot more respect for his products. Does that mean I've compared numbers exactly on them? No, and I don't care as I am worried about a slew of other things and not chasing tenths on a meter.

But I have a question. If you was in RAM shoes, and you needed to find out which amp was louder in SPL, how would you compare them more equally and actually have a valid test?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass or anything, but if the way he did it doesn't prove anything. I need to know how to it correctly for future reference.

I'd figure out my uncertainties, minimize them, and then design a test that will show me something repeatable. Of course in my case it would include measuring distortion, but doing what I do means I have access to all sorts of gear like this for free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As wrong as his numbers may be, his point is that he HAS numbers. He has something to judge against, a scale, if you will. If one test is wrong, and the next test just as wrong and he gains x.xx db, then he can say the second amp was louder. He CAN'T measure distortion, he doesn't HAVE resistive loads. From what I've seen, all the people who swear by perfect testing enviornments and procedures can't provide them so his argument is what's the point? (No offense, not saying that you can't).

By that logic, without a thd measurement (and how do we know it's accurate?) how do we know ratings are accurate? What do we use to judge an amplifier before we buy it? We can't use ibanender's way of measuring, because it's inaccurate. Nobody can realistically measure thd, and nobody has resistive loads laying around so then what? He wants people to do things the way he does because he can then feed that to people and help them to decide which amp to use. If the right way to measure is nearly impossible, then should we not measure at all? Does that make this argument between the Sundown and the DD just "there's no way to tell?" Because that sucks ass, to put it bluntly. If the man who designs and has the amps built (Jacob) does it wrong then??!??!

If numbers are inaccurate why have them? What does it prove? Again, if it were reported with the uncertainty of measurement then they would be valid.

And to your second question, ratings are NOT accurate. How do you think crap sold at Walmart can carry the ratings they do? There are no tests that are valid that the manufacturers will pay to do.

Don't pick on Jacob for doing it wrong. People like you are the reason he does it at all. There is a misconception amongst the car audio followers that requests these sort of tests. Based on his equipment he is doing what he can, but its only real purpose are to satisfy cravings of those who don't understand. Personally I would much, much rather buy from Jacob than DD and have a lot more respect for his products. Does that mean I've compared numbers exactly on them? No, and I don't care as I am worried about a slew of other things and not chasing tenths on a meter.

But I have a question. If you was in RAM shoes, and you needed to find out which amp was louder in SPL, how would you compare them more equally and actually have a valid test?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass or anything, but if the way he did it doesn't prove anything. I need to know how to it correctly for future reference.

I'd figure out my uncertainties, minimize them, and then design a test that will show me something repeatable. Of course in my case it would include measuring distortion, but doing what I do means I have access to all sorts of gear like this for free.

Maybe I missed it completely, but I don't think you answered all my questions. Ratings are inaccurate? How do I go about choosing an amplifier then? Do I just trust that the SAZ-1500d makes rated power?

If rated power isn't important, then what's the difference between a Boss 3500w max, a Hifonics BRZ1200d and a Sundown SAX-1200d? I suppose the quality of the parts and whatnot, which is important. Also, customer service, which is important, and durability as well, but....all those are afterthoughts? You don't want a 500 watt amp on a BTL. You don't want a 2000 watt amp on a SSD. So how do I choose what amp to use with my speaker if the ratings can't be trusted? Forget walmart amps, that's a joke anyway.

I apologize if "people like me" want to know how much power an amp makes before we spend money on it. I apologize if guessing at something like that makes me uncomfortable. I suppose that you wouldn't be able to hear the difference between an overrated 1500 watt amp that makes 1200 watts and an underrated one that makes 1800 and never even see those numbers due to impedance rise but does that mean we discard ratings? What I'm reading is...impratical. Can someone please link me to an example of a "properly conducted" test?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×