i have two pioneer 12" subs (might be getting a third if it fits) rated at 160watt (500max), what kind of amp do i need for these, would a 2 channel amp work, put one sup on each channel or would i bridge it. i know very little about amps and need some help, thanks how would 3 work

------------------
Trent
-----
89 Firebird
305 v8 TBI
automatic
t-tops

 

Yes, Run the amp mono on the subs, but with that power rating, it really can't be a big amp. Look for something clean, stay away from companies like Boss,Sherwood,etc.

 

Out of all the systems I've had I always seem to get the best and loudest sound from running two subs in stereo off of a 2-channel amp. When I bridge the subs sometimes I can't tell the difference, and other times it seems to not be as loud. As long as you have a decent amp and you can match the output per channel I prefer stereo. If you run 3 subs you'll have to wire them bridged. As far as an amp brand, I would try and go with one of the less expensive series of Phoenix gold.

------------------
'91 RS
SFC's & Poly bushings so far.
Quote "If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten."
- George Carlin

 

Subs really play the lower frequencies, so in stereo isn't really needed. The stereo "imaging" is needed up front, where the mid/tweet are.
If you hooked them up mono, and they didn't sound any better, it could be several other things like out of phase,power output,etc.

But most amps will be alot louder with a mono signal to your subs, as long as it is a reputable company.

 

Any amp whether it be from a reputable company or not should't necessarily play louder bridged. If you run one 4ohm sub per channel each sub gets the same wattage as if you run the subs in series and bridge the amp.

 

Any time you divide the ohms in half in theory you should be doubling your power but its not usually that great an increase but any setup you have that doesnt sound louder and deeper after bridging has something wrong with it...

I run four 4 ohm subs in parallel to a bridged two channel memphis 1000D...thats gives me 1100 watts rms (275 per sub)..If i wire them in stereo mode i wont drop down to 1 ohm and will only get 600 watts rms (150 per sub)...if your telling me that 150 watts per sub or 275 a sub is gonna cound the same than i shoulda saved my momey and got a jenson amp...

p.s. had a guy come in to work today and give me the worlds biggest secret behind car stereo...told me to sell my amp and wire my subs directly to the battery...Imagine me in my shirt and tie with my mouth wide open in complete awe of what kinda kids the south is producing these days...these are the reasons my days at work seem so long..

 

Depending on the number of subs, the number of voice coils, etc. You can get the same wattage from stereo mode as from mono. Keep an open mind. I was once told the same thing from a reputable stereo shop "You'll get better sound if you wire them in mono". Until the installer came and checked out my system as I changed from mono to stereo. Then he changed his motto to "Go with what works". Anywayz, I know what's supposed to sound better, I'm just sharing my real life experiences.

 

I am too. I've only done this for 13 years, attend most of the USAC and IASCA shows every year, work with some of the guys with the best systems in the world.

If a an amp puts out 75 watts to each woofer stereo, a good amp will double power going into bridged mode.

Examples, I will use our amps since that's what I know best.
ZR1000 250x2 stereo
500x2 stereo at 2ohm
1000 watts at 4 and 2.66 ohms bridged

ZR600 150x2 stereo
300x2 stereo at 2ohm
600 watts at4 and 2.66 ohms bridged

More power can be taken out of the amp if put in mono load, and subs really don't need a stereo effect. Most stereo systems use the imaging of stereo up front, and mono on the subs in the rear.

Now if stereo sounds better on your system, and amp, by all means use it if it works better that way. There isn't nothing wrong with it that way.

 

ok i have 2 pioneer sups rated at 260watt 500max, im looking for a amp around 200-300. what would you suggest for amp/hookup i owuld like to stick with pioneer but if there **** sucks, well recammend another in that price range that would work...thanks

------------------
Trent
-----
89 Firebird
305 v8 TBI
automatic
t-tops

 

I got the same 2 12" Pioneer subs rated at 500 peak. My amp puts out 450x2 and its a Profile. I think the bass is kick *** since I got my new 4x6's and my new Eclipse 6x9's. I got the amp for $350 but i seen it for $270 ( NOT INCLUDING SHIPPING )

 

wuts the model, i found a pioneer 600x1 for really cheap, would that be enuf power

 

ok i found a profile that has 400 watts x 2 at 4 ohms and 600 watts RMS x 1 in bridged mode at 4 ohms, is that good, would it be higher at 2 ohms? its only like 200$

 

Profile is flea market trash. Stick with name brands like Pioneer, alpine, etc. If you can afford it, get better stuff like Rockford or Kicker. You get what you pay for when you buy audio equipment.

------------------
The IROC Homepage
<A HREF="http://www.rit.edu/~jli4307/camaro" TARGET=_blank>
View the restoration of an 85 IROC</A>
"I didn't know a bored out Ford could go so slow" -Shenandoah

 

What about buying amono amp that can hadnle a 2 ohm load and then running the subs parallel? There's a Kenwood mono sub on sale on the crutchfield website for about $159 or so.

 

I guess the thing that ticks me off the most, is the power increase that just about ALL amp companies CLAIM in briged mode. You know how they say 50x2 @ 4ohms, 100x2 @ 2ohms, 200x1 @ 4ohms. Have you ever looked at the THD% in briged mode?

Here's the specs on my RF Punch100. The 50x2 @ 4ohms is at .05% THD. Then the 100x2 @ 2ohms and 200x1 @4ohms is at .1% THD. Yea, they double the power output, but also doubled the THD. So what's the point? Why bridge into lower resistance? Lowering the resistance does increase power, but at a more distorted, less controlled level.

I guess if you like loud and don't care about clarity, then go bridged w/fewer ohms. I did cause I like mine loud and I don't compete. But for clarity, it would make more sense to worry about the load on the amp, not whether it's in stereo or not. Fewer ohms=more distortion.

Running stereo to the subs would only sound better if the subs where on either side of you (if then), not behind you. So running stereo or mono to the subs won't make a diff in sound imaging. It's all in the ratio of the power output against THD that dictates if it sounds "better".

------------------
92 RS w/t-tops 305 TBI Auto.
170K miles and don't burn a drop o'oil
-K&N Truck filter #1500 w, open ele.
air cleaner
-Dynomax 2 1/2" cat-back
-B&M TransPak
-Jet Stage2 Chip
-180* T-Stat w/ 185* Fan Switch
-JVC CD--Alpine speakers & 4ch. amp
Rockford 2ch. to 2 MTX 12" subs

 

Subs are not really needed for imaging, and our amps, at the MAX,from stereo to bridged is .02% THD at 12.5-16VDC

Anything under 1.% in in-audiable anyways.But most people that do compete run subs mono.

[This message has been edited by Polecat (edited July 02, 2001).]

 

What amps are you talking about? Sound like good amps. I know RF aren't ****, but I know they're not the best either. I just like hearing about other companies that make premium amps. And I was always told that it was .1% that was the breaking point. Sounds like 1% would be more realistic though. Our ears aren't that sensative to detect .1%, right?

 

Sorry, I work for Kicker Car Audio. RF does make some good amps, I agree. And yes, you are correct, you really won't hear it at all.

Later.