Leaderboard

155.1 dB - woohoo This was with a "Monster" prototype woofer -- not a production speaker. Interestingly... with all my tweaks to the Z v.2 prototype it was doing the same numbers per watt up to 2500 watts (I stopped measuring with the Monster at that point). So... I may be able to match this with a full production trim Z v.2 driver. Previous best was 154.9 with an 18v electrical system and two SAZ-3000Ds on the sub... this time I am on 12v but with two SAZ-4500Ds (power is similar). Some more pics of the setup : I haven't played with front to back box positioning since I built the new amp rack (yah, slacking... I know) -- but I'll work on that a bit when I get time and see if I can increase this.

mine was done just as they said it would.. 2 weeks to the day... it was well worth the wait.... you will be Happy when you hear it !!!!

Don't run two tweeters in a door! The tweeters are more efficient than the mids, they will get plenty loud and running multiple per side will ruin your imaging. It will sound better with one tweeter per side. 2 is a waste of money and completely useless. Though if there is a discount on 4+ then buying 4 isn't a bad idea (just in case you blow one up).

Neither. SDS is where I'd shop. Link in my signature. Best bang for the buck and best advice as well.

I am pretty sure that they have not been built by Zed for many years, though I know at some point Zed did make a few models for them, but not for over a decade, if I recall. They were good amps, like everything I know of that Zed ever produced. I recently redid my system with a Leviathan and it just rocks. The 600 mono on the subs, is ALL I need, esp since it is a 24dB bandpass, so the bass is exactly how I want it. Cheers! Rick

i orderd a set of 2 mli's from SSA store for my front stage active setup. one of the mli's work great VERY loud n clear with my 100.4. the other mli works but it is very muffled. when i first installed it i only turned the HU up to about 15 just to get some sound from them and i noticed the one mli was muffled. i played with it a bit checked all the wires no cuts no issues. i am not sure how to test the speaker on a DMM? i might have just recived a bad speaker? what do you guys think? thanks!

I am really eager to hear your view on the xcon sub and how you like it. I was very impressed with the icon 12 inch sub. I am very excited to see how you like the xcon. Just make sure you put a lot of love into building the box and also sound deadening. After switching out my other 12 inch sub with the icon it shows me how badly I need sound deadening HOLY SHIT it pounds. I love it. I can't wait to see your review.

Best bang for your buck on a tweeter is gonna be the Vifa DQ25SC. You'd have to pay a lot more for a tweeter that can match that one. Plus it's a nice small neo motor (could even do sail panels with them). If you can actively cross LR4 (24db/octave slope) you could cross them as low as 2000hz. 2400-2500 would be safer and since the MLI has nice smooth response you should be able to get it to cross that high easy. The vifa xt25 is popular with the SQ crowd. It's a decent price. A really nice tweeter, but it has to be crossed a bit higher than the cheaper one I linked to and the ring radiator style is tempting for people that like to poke. The Seas 27tff is also popular (nice small size and can cross pretty low). The form factor is really nice for car audio. There is a metal cone version as well. 27TAF or something. Check out Zaph's tweeter mishmash for some decent reviews on tweeters. The compare tool lets you check out frequency response and distortion measurements. Since he performs all the measurements the same they are actually comparable to each other (unlike graphs from the manufacturers).

x2, and what tuning do you prefer. Please read new member guidelines before posting again and next time only open one topic when it is about the same thing as your previous topics.

My brother has one, and I looked at several last year. I'd lead towards an 03 or newer. More power and several updates. Nice cars though. Reliability will depend on the previous owner really. They're pretty durable though. They all used the 5R55 auto except for the first gen which was available with a 5sp. I believe it was the Getrag, but not quite sure. You may find some here and there with a few electrical gremlins, but the Jag engine is strong and reliable as are the transmissions. My only gripe is the delay in the throttle due to it being electronic. They used the Jag programming for this in the early cars and it's quite unbearable at times. It's a fraction of a second, but when you are used to putting your foot down and instantly moving, it can be quite a nuisance. My brother had some Blizzaks put on his before the snow hit and he said he prefers it in the snow versus the Explorer with 4WD.

I have the 12 inch icon and I was this close to getting the xcon. but holy shit the icon does above and beyond what I thought it was going to do. I can't believe the difference. It sounds sooooo good too. I can't wait for the beak in period to be over. I need to still do some tuning and adjustments to get everything on point. But yea I couldn't imagine a 15inch xcon. It would be too crazy for me!

Bad things over time. Do some research and see what you come up with.

You should upgrade your grounds first, you never want a positive wire bigger than your ground wire.

I ordered a SSA xcon 15" dual 2ohm so once they build it I will see how it performs, and I will let you guys know what I think of it. I do have pretty high standards so if I end up thinking its awesome, everyone will, lol.

You may want to take a look at Damplifier Lite as well and compare. Both companies make good products. Another consideration .... http://www.sounddeadenershowdown.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi A very informative site with a lot information on the benefits of deadening properly.

Class A is the least efficient amplifier design. They are theoretically limited to a maximum efficiency of 25% (remember, that's maximum). They also are never "off", which means they are pulling full amperage from the electrical system even at idle, with no signal input. Class A/B is more efficient than class A. At full power, they can be in the 60% efficient range. However their efficiency worsens as power output decreases. At 1/3 power they are only about 30-35% efficient. And guess where they amplifier spends most of it's time? Here's a hint; It's not towards the full power end of the spectrum. Class D are typically more efficient than Class A/B. Class A/B and class D efficiency can be similar at full power output, however class D don't suffer from the loss in efficiency at lower power levels that class A/B suffer from. As to the real "question" that you posed here; An amplifier should be designed to function properly within the temperature range it will be operating in. If you have an amplifier shut down on a shorter time scale due to over heating when used within it's intended operating range and given adequate ventilation, then it's heat dissipation properties was given poor consideration by the designer and that would qualify as a poorly designed amplifier.

It depends on where you are going here. You asked for SQ which we don't like on the forum because it isn't very descriptive to your definition. If that is truly your goal, then I wouldn't buy a 6 channel amplifier as the most important thing in an amplifier for an SQ install is power. The more the better. Spend as much as you can to get an amp with some balls, the headroom will pay dividends. Also on the whole crossover thing. You CANNOT have an effective 3 way front stage using the crossovers on an amplifier. You are going to need an offboard processor. -as an aside, if SQ is truly your goal you should spend WAY more time and money worrying about the install of the drivers than anything else in the system. The amps are the easy part.

You can't go wrong with Sundown. Not to sound pompous, or full of ourselves here, but before you buy, ask us here. We won't try to peddle you a product, or give you false information. A bunch of good guys here.

Yes the 100.4 on the midrange ant tweeters and a 125.2 on the midbass, the crossover board is explained here: http://www.sundownaudio.com/index.php/products/amplifiers/sax-1004d.html As far as the testing, Jacob is very honest, he has no need to lie to make his product look better because it's already phenomenal. Also, he has spent a long time perfecting his products, the latest 100.4 is the fourth version he's made as he constantly improves them.

There's no such thing as a "sound quality" amplifier. THD is a pretty unimportant spec to look at. Any amp worth owning (meaning anything but extreme low end junk) will be capable of operating at a level of distortion that is inaudible with music. Most amps on the market have their power rated at a THD level of equal to or less than 1%, which means there will not be an audible difference between them distortion wise. Many people mistakenly believe that THD is a "lower sounds better" spec, but the truth is that once distortion gets down to a certain level (2% or less) you won't be able to hear a difference with music. So you can ignore it. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) is the same way. Any amp worth owning will have a sufficient enough SNR to be audibly indistinguishable. SNR can only even be used as a point of comparison if you know the testing conditions of the measurement. If one amp had SNR rated at 1w of power output, and another amp rated at 100w of power output, then the "rated" SNR of the amplifiers are NOT directly comparable. But regardless, it's a relatively unimportant spec and can generally be ignored. Damping Factor is another spec that can be ignored. Many people incorrectly believe that DF is a "higher is better" spec. The truth however is that once an amplifier has sufficient damping as to not audibly affect the sound, going any higher will not yield any benefit. A damping factor of around 20 is sufficient enough to not cause an audible difference. Just about any amp on the market will have sufficient damping as to not audibly affect the sound. Damping factor thread is here: http://www.soundsolu..._1entry537161 Class A/B does not sound any better than Class D. Class A doesn't sound any better than Class A/B or D. You can not attribute any particular sound characteristics to the "class" of the amplifier, and no one has ever been able to conclusively demonstrate that the "class" of the amplifier affects the sound. What should you look for in an amplifier? Look for an amp that offers the most power output within your budget, has the features you need, the build quality you desire, aesthetics you prefer, fits your space requirements and has a warranty & customer service you can live with. It's that simple.

My Dayton bookshelves, 6" RS mid, $4.60 tweeter How they looked in my door room: Close up of the cross over:

So who's to say if the reproduction of the source is accurate, a machine or a person? Therein lies the subjective nature of SQ so my point is stated correctly, EVERYTHING subjective about that!

So who's to say if the reproduction of the source is accurate, a machine or a person? Therein lies the subjective nature of SQ so my point is stated correctly, EVERYTHING subjective about that! Your point is incorrectly stated. There are certain practical methods that can be used to objectively gauge accuracy to the source, and other less practical methods that could be employed. But our ability or inability to quantify every aspect of a system doesn't alter the definition of the terms. Sound quality is accuracy to the source. Personal preference is what you are describing. For example, someone might personally like a system with exaggerated low end response and higher 2nd order distortion as this generally sounds pleasing to the ear.....but that doesn't make it accurate to the source, and it doesn't make it anymore "sound quality" just because they like it more. Yet again, you fail. And to answer your question, a machine or quantity of measurements would be best used to identify accuracy to the source. Humans ears are actually pretty lousy, and we are inherently biased and preference based. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with setting up your system based on your personal preference. It's designed for you, and should sound how you want it to sound. But don't confuse your (or anyone else's) personal preference for "sound quality", which is accuracy to the source. They are two different and distinct entities. What sounds best to you may not be the most accurate reproduction of the source. Cute! I love the use of the comment "you fail" so often but you did nothing to refute the FACT that SQ is subjective no matter if you compete or not. All you did is repeat common knowledge, that SQ is the accurate reproduction of the source and "you fail". So how about this? How about instead of overusing a catch phrase, why don't you explain to me how SQ is not subjective? Don't make this a battle on the definition of SQ, that's not what the topic of discussion is so you emphasizing that so much and changing the discussion only weakens your stance on it....especially when you're offering nothing in the way of a true rebuttal to mine.Knowing that SQ is the accurate reproduction of the source, how is it determined that what's being reproduced is accurate? Please enlighten me o' wise one.

Huge post filled with nothing but verbal diarreah.Not too sure how you can consider yourself exposing a flaw in my argument when all you did is state the goal of SQ and totally ignored the manner in which SQ is determined which is exactly where the subjective element comes in to play seeing as how there is no defined or set standard for SQ. There are various competition bodies rules and regulations for SQ, but they all vary in some way, shape or form so what works in one may or may not work in another. With no set standard (singular tense) for SQ, the definition of it lies in the various competition bodies and/or the end user. Aka, subjective. And the determination on exactly how closely your SQ system meets the accurate reproduction of the source is, yet again, not defined by placing a mic in your car and running your system and having those results compared to the source for accuracy. That would be a non-subjective measure on the SQ of a given system, but we all know that's not how it's done. Just imagine if SPL comps were judged the same as SQ comps I'd imagine SPL comps would quickly become as popular as SQ comps are. At least in SPL comps they can place a mic in the car that takes a reading of how loud the system is, totally eliminating the possibility that the result is subjective. I bet if there were a way to do the same thing for SQ systems there would be far more competitors but the fact of the matter is that alot of people are turned off by the subjective nature of it. But I guess you have an ability the SQ competing bodies don't, the ability to use a machine or machines to measure the SQ of a given system. But seeing as how you'd much rather hurl insults over the internet instead of arguing facts, it seems clear that it's a concept not within your realm of comprehension.

You could save money and use welding wire, but its not very flexible at all. Also my car has the dimming situation also although ive done the big 3 in 1/0 and my voltage is at 14.8 at idle and never drops below 14 at full tilt so i just leave it alone.

Point of the thread is why we don't like it when people use terms they don't understand. SQLMonte is just proving he doesn't at all understand the terms either. Simple really. SQ is not subjective as accurate reproduction is finite, judging an SQ competition however is. I understand the terms clearly, no problem there, and I know the goal of SQ. My whole point is this, the acronym """SQL""" is subjective in definition as there have been a few different definitions given in this thread alone. It means something different to each person who uses it to nobody can say it's being used wrong. The acronym "SQ", in my opinion, is also subjective not in it's goal but in how it's determined that the goal has or hasn't been met. There's no machine you can hook up in your car so the final say in determining that is a person and his/her interpretation of any measurements that can be done to help lead you towards that goal. But I've stated my stance on the topic, it's not going to change until someone can show me how SQ can or is determined without any human interpretation that contributes to that determination, and obviously i'm not changing anyone else's opinion on it so I'll end this argument on that note.

If either one of us isn't coherent it would be you seeing as how you clearly stated earlier that "there is no true way to measure SQ", but now you're trying to argue to me that SQ is not subjective????? How is that logically consistent? I have not waivered one bit, you seem to have short term memory loss or something So you see, you said the same thing then that i'm saying now so why do you insist on arguing with me when in reality we agree? If there is no real way to measure SQ then that means there is a human element that plays a part in determining how accurate the reproduction is so to tell me SQ is not subjective, when you've clearly stated as much as indicated by your quote above, is just plain silly! And just to make it clear one last time, I agree that the goal of SQ is accurate reproduction of the source, nothing subjective about that. But the fact remains that until there is a device that can measure SQ there will always be a subjective element to it, be it a SQ comp judge, the installer, the end user, whomever! An engineer can take all the acoustical measurements they want and dial things in until they're blue in the face while that speaker is on the bench, but as soon as that speaker is placed into the automobile environment the whole game changes and we all know that so why would you even begin to blabber about such nonsense? You can take that same speaker and put it in two different cars and get two different results, hell you can even put that same speaker in two different locations in the same car and get two different results! So many things come in to play in the automobile environment that effect the SQ of your system that simply having speakers that are 100% accurate (if that's even possible) isn't nearly enough to dictate the accuracy of the reproduction of your system. How's that for a rebuttal?My use of SQ competitions as an example of the subjective nature of SQ is just that, an example! The same holds true no matter if you compete or not because at the end of the day unless there is a machine to grade a system and show absolutely no bias or preference to certain aspects whatsoever (like a TL does for SPL), then it is safe to say that SQ is subjective, SPL is finite.

Forgive me if there is another thread of the same subject but I can't find it and using my wii is painfully slow. Does anyone know when the woofer by AA and He Who Shalt Not Be Named (Ess em dee) is supposed to be released? I was trying to find pricing for a friend. Thanks.

You dont need top of the line electrical system for 1 btl, u might need a strong capacitor possibly an extra battery but u dont need to get all that stuff for it, i have a 15" btl fully loaded on a hifonics brutus 20100, 2000rms, and no extras and my battery gage is fine, i am getting an extra battery just so it takes strain off the alternator but u dont NEED it.