PPI's new line
01-21-2004, 01:43 PM
#11
50 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 309
ouch
Chadxton: JL Audio 500/1 and 1000/1 are Class D but still have SN ratios way higher then 80 and damping factors ten times better then 50.
slownlow: Damping factor is most usually taken at 4 ohms and it halves every time the impedance halves, so a damping of 50 @ 4 ohms is 13 @ 1 ohm which is pretty bad. Since when is 1 ohm less efficient? It doesn't make any difference on the efficiency of amp but it gives you a lot of wiring flexibility that 2 ohm amps don't have.
Dave: you're a golden toque no messing with you
I might have gone a bit far, so what. Amplifiers and subwoofers all have to deal with the laws of physics so like anything else there would be a general set of rules and parameters governing them that will give you a general idea of how something sounds, and compared to most other amplifiers a damping of 50 is really bad and a SN of 80 is especially bad.
Chadxton: JL Audio 500/1 and 1000/1 are Class D but still have SN ratios way higher then 80 and damping factors ten times better then 50.
slownlow: Damping factor is most usually taken at 4 ohms and it halves every time the impedance halves, so a damping of 50 @ 4 ohms is 13 @ 1 ohm which is pretty bad. Since when is 1 ohm less efficient? It doesn't make any difference on the efficiency of amp but it gives you a lot of wiring flexibility that 2 ohm amps don't have.
Dave: you're a golden toque no messing with you
I might have gone a bit far, so what. Amplifiers and subwoofers all have to deal with the laws of physics so like anything else there would be a general set of rules and parameters governing them that will give you a general idea of how something sounds, and compared to most other amplifiers a damping of 50 is really bad and a SN of 80 is especially bad.
01-21-2004, 02:09 PM
#13
50 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 309
I am thinking from a more comparative view... but I get what you mean
It's just that compared to other amps, the new PPIs don't seem that great. Of course a listening evaluation could prove me wrong, but this still seems like PPI is just continuing a digression that has been going on for awhile now.
It's just that compared to other amps, the new PPIs don't seem that great. Of course a listening evaluation could prove me wrong, but this still seems like PPI is just continuing a digression that has been going on for awhile now.
01-21-2004, 02:35 PM
#15
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 550
I guess I'll be keeping my Art Series amps for a little longer.
I think PPI really blew their chance at regaining their place in the car audio market. They've revamped their amplifiers, but whats makes them so different from anyone elses. Their ugly for one. They've lost the elegant lines of the Art or PC series. In terms of features, their isn't anything that really sets the amps apart from another manufacture. Yes, they've introduced Class D technology in their amps but who cares, so has everyone else.
What PPI needs to do is to bring new innovatative products to the marketplace and establish themselves as an industry leader. The DEQ-230 is an excellent EQ, its one of the only products that dates back to the glory days and they are still manufacturing it. Why not take it one step further an build a digital one that can be controlled like the DEQ-230 (from the driver's seat). Its not like they have to reinvent the wheel, take Orion's digital EQ and revamp to add that extra degree of tunability. How about a digital crossover to go with the EQ (instead of the outdated FRX-456)?
In terms of their amplifiers, why don't they reintroduce the technology from the 2350DM on all their amps. JL won't be the only guys on the block with a RIPS system. I don't think PPI has to think too much about what they can do...its just a matter of making a REAL effort... Come on DEI... Wake up and get rid of the smoke and mirrors...
I think PPI really blew their chance at regaining their place in the car audio market. They've revamped their amplifiers, but whats makes them so different from anyone elses. Their ugly for one. They've lost the elegant lines of the Art or PC series. In terms of features, their isn't anything that really sets the amps apart from another manufacture. Yes, they've introduced Class D technology in their amps but who cares, so has everyone else.
What PPI needs to do is to bring new innovatative products to the marketplace and establish themselves as an industry leader. The DEQ-230 is an excellent EQ, its one of the only products that dates back to the glory days and they are still manufacturing it. Why not take it one step further an build a digital one that can be controlled like the DEQ-230 (from the driver's seat). Its not like they have to reinvent the wheel, take Orion's digital EQ and revamp to add that extra degree of tunability. How about a digital crossover to go with the EQ (instead of the outdated FRX-456)?
In terms of their amplifiers, why don't they reintroduce the technology from the 2350DM on all their amps. JL won't be the only guys on the block with a RIPS system. I don't think PPI has to think too much about what they can do...its just a matter of making a REAL effort... Come on DEI... Wake up and get rid of the smoke and mirrors...
01-21-2004, 07:50 PM
#17
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 756
Originally posted by AAAAAAA:
Here is the formal introduction to the new PPI line of amplifiers:
PPI has instituted a new MANLY amplifier. One that has a lot of "head" to it. Look at the long narrow shaft in the middle, and then the thicker metalic shaft around it. PPI has yet to say what they are going to call There new line. Its a plit between either "the penetrator" or the "PP" series.
It actually does look like male genetalia rapped in a metal looking male genetalia.
Here is the formal introduction to the new PPI line of amplifiers:
PPI has instituted a new MANLY amplifier. One that has a lot of "head" to it. Look at the long narrow shaft in the middle, and then the thicker metalic shaft around it. PPI has yet to say what they are going to call There new line. Its a plit between either "the penetrator" or the "PP" series.
It actually does look like male genetalia rapped in a metal looking male genetalia.
Its true! All it needs is a pair of subs beside it.
01-21-2004, 08:44 PM
#18
50 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 309
Specs mean nothing? Surrrre
So the sound difference between an Zapco and a Lanzar comes from the brand name. That's what I always thought, and you just proved me right.
So I really am just paying for a brand name when I buy a JL slash instead of a Sony Xplod. Wow! Next time I go shopping for a performance car, instead of looking at horsepower and torque and slalom speed I'll just buy the cheaper car since I'm not going to be sucked in by all those cold, hard facts.
..in response to DWVW in particular
[ January 21, 2004, 09:47 PM: Message edited by: Bumpin' Nova ]
So the sound difference between an Zapco and a Lanzar comes from the brand name. That's what I always thought, and you just proved me right.
So I really am just paying for a brand name when I buy a JL slash instead of a Sony Xplod. Wow! Next time I go shopping for a performance car, instead of looking at horsepower and torque and slalom speed I'll just buy the cheaper car since I'm not going to be sucked in by all those cold, hard facts.
..in response to DWVW in particular
[ January 21, 2004, 09:47 PM: Message edited by: Bumpin' Nova ]
01-22-2004, 10:46 AM
#19
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 866
Originally posted by Bumpin' Nova:
Specs mean nothing? Surrrre
So the sound difference between an Zapco and a Lanzar comes from the brand name. That's what I always thought, and you just proved me right.
So I really am just paying for a brand name when I buy a JL slash instead of a Sony Xplod. Wow! Next time I go shopping for a performance car, instead of looking at horsepower and torque and slalom speed I'll just buy the cheaper car since I'm not going to be sucked in by all those cold, hard facts.
..in response to DWVW in particular
Specs mean nothing? Surrrre
So the sound difference between an Zapco and a Lanzar comes from the brand name. That's what I always thought, and you just proved me right.
So I really am just paying for a brand name when I buy a JL slash instead of a Sony Xplod. Wow! Next time I go shopping for a performance car, instead of looking at horsepower and torque and slalom speed I'll just buy the cheaper car since I'm not going to be sucked in by all those cold, hard facts.
..in response to DWVW in particular
Specs in most cases mean nothing... Derek you are correct...
If 2 amps have a damping factor of greater than 50. THEN who cares!!
if 2 amps have a THD of less than .1 THEN who cares.
if 2 amps produce 500x1 into 2ohm RMS at the same voltage.. THEN who cares!!
What magical spec do you use to tell if an amp is superior in sound?
01-22-2004, 10:50 AM
#20
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 866
Originally posted by Bumpin' Nova:
ouch
Chadxton: JL Audio 500/1 and 1000/1 are Class D but still have SN ratios way higher then 80 and damping factors ten times better then 50.
slownlow: Damping factor is most usually taken at 4 ohms and it halves every time the impedance halves, so a damping of 50 @ 4 ohms is 13 @ 1 ohm which is pretty bad. Since when is 1 ohm less efficient? It doesn't make any difference on the efficiency of amp but it gives you a lot of wiring flexibility that 2 ohm amps don't have.
Dave: you're a golden toque no messing with you I might have gone a bit far, so what. Amplifiers and subwoofers all have to deal with the laws of physics so like anything else there would be a general set of rules and parameters governing them that will give you a general idea of how something sounds, and compared to most other amplifiers a damping of 50 is really bad and a SN of 80 is especially bad.
ouch
Chadxton: JL Audio 500/1 and 1000/1 are Class D but still have SN ratios way higher then 80 and damping factors ten times better then 50.
slownlow: Damping factor is most usually taken at 4 ohms and it halves every time the impedance halves, so a damping of 50 @ 4 ohms is 13 @ 1 ohm which is pretty bad. Since when is 1 ohm less efficient? It doesn't make any difference on the efficiency of amp but it gives you a lot of wiring flexibility that 2 ohm amps don't have.
Dave: you're a golden toque no messing with you
I might have gone a bit far, so what. Amplifiers and subwoofers all have to deal with the laws of physics so like anything else there would be a general set of rules and parameters governing them that will give you a general idea of how something sounds, and compared to most other amplifiers a damping of 50 is really bad and a SN of 80 is especially bad.
