# WHY am I seeing so many Pioneer DEX-P99RS for Sale?



## ryanr7386 (Feb 21, 2011)

Just curious as to why I'm seeing so many P99RS for sale on here lately? I just purchased one myself and just starting to notice everyone is selling theirs off!

What is everyone going to and Why? Are there downfalls with this deck perhaps? Lack of optical?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

External dsp's and other head units are more up to date with features like better Bluetooth and Android control, etc etc 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## ryanr7386 (Feb 21, 2011)

SkizeR said:


> External dsp's and other head units are more up to date with features like better Bluetooth and Android control, etc etc
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


Good point. $200 for an add on module I suppose. I went with the Helix HEC BT, cheaper.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

SkizeR said:


> External dsp's and other head units are more up to date with features like better Bluetooth and Android control, etc etc
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk




^^^^ This! We were just talking about this the other day. Single din desire is dwindling down, especially purist decks like the P99 that offer very little amenities for the kind of money spent considering you can match the cost of a new one (some used for what they're going for) with a lower to middle tier double din (even some middle to upper tier) and a low cost but good dsp like the Mini C. Add that up and ask yourself which offers more? 

The P99 will still go down in history as being a purist's dream. An ideal deck for someone desiring minimal installation and the belief that adding more steps in the digital to analog/analog to digital takes away. Ideal for those who like original store bought discs then deck-amp-drivers and nothing else.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

I believe it comes down to one thing.....processing power. The p99 is limited in eq power, and this drives folks to the external dsp route. I personally still love mine, it gets me where I need to be within its limitations. It also helps that I don't use Bluetooth with my audio system, and I enjoy it's ipod convenience.........

Aaand every one is in love with the new boner.......the helix....


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

claydo said:


> I believe it comes down to one thing.....processing power. The p99 is limited in eq power, and this drives folks to the external dsp route. I personally still love mine, it gets me where I need to be within its limitations. It also helps that I don't use Bluetooth with my audio system, and I enjoy it's ipod convenience.........
> 
> Aaand every one is in love with the new boner.......the helix....


i use external processing with mine for the bulk of the processing. i don't use the deck for any processing other than to further fine tune with its graphic eq.

like you, i don't use bluetooth. the deck works beautifully for my needs. i do use it with my iPhone for convenience music and it still works great for that.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

claydo said:


> Aaand every one is in love with the new boner.......the helix....




I don't really see the Helix or any other external DSP as a boner. More like an awakening to what can be had at the same or lesso cost for a deck that offered less control. L/R EQ is great, but parametric EQ per channel offers far greater flexibility in not having to stuck with carefully choosing what drivers to use since the EQ will have an effect on adjacent drivers. It's hard to justify the cost of the P99 in these current times although it seems like a nice piece to head up a system.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Bayboy said:


> I don't really see the Helix or any other external DSP as a boner. More like an awakening to what can be had at the same or lesso cost for a deck that offered less control. L/R EQ is great, but parametric EQ per channel offers far greater flexibility in not having to stuck with carefully choosing what drivers to use since the EQ will have an effect on adjacent drivers. It's hard to justify the cost of the P99 in these current times although it seems like a nice piece to head up a system.



I don't see using a dsp as being stated as the forum boner, lol, yer words not mine. Just the helix as being the processor of the moment, that everyone loves and recommends.......I'm also not saying the helix doesent do a fine job, because we all know it does. I don't say forum boner as an insult at all, just simply their product is receiving all the love until someone trumps it.......that's all. Also, of course parametric is more powerful......duh. I was simply stating the reason I believe is behind the large number of p99 sales, no need to try to explain anything to me....lol.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

claydo said:


> I don't see using a dsp as being stated as the forum boner, lol, yer words not mine. Just the helix as being the processor of the moment, that everyone loves and recommends.......I'm also not saying the helix doesent do a fine job, because we all know it does. I don't say forum boner as an insult at all, just simply their product is receiving all the love until someone trumps it.......that's all. Also, of course parametric is more powerful......duh. I was simply stating the reason I believe is behind the large number of p99 sales, no need to try to explain anything to me....lol.


A bit defensive this morning, no? I'm sure everyone can easily read your reply and I took no offense to it despite having a helix and a deq.8. 

Point is again, it's just more economically feasible to use a dsp and as you stated yourself, helix just so happens to trump others in features, support, and cost at the moment. But I digress. If you're in a pissy mood to converse in a respectful way on a forum, I dare entertain further. G'day.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Naw man, I'm not butt hurt at all.....lol, it's just that after reading your reply I thought my post needed further clarification....I'm pro dsp all the way, and your post implied that I wasnt. I own a p99, and love it, but I can't argue or defend it's lack of power and resolution against an external dsp........didn't mean to come off harsh or arguementative, just hoping my post wouldn't be misconstrued.....


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

wtf. when isn't 68.3% of the board in a pissy mood?


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Lmao....68.3%.....that's a pretty specific number!


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

We should take a poll.

(About how many ppl have sold their p99, of course)


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Not going to lie. I still would like to try one, but there's a lot of features to sacrifice. Can't stomach it.


----------



## benny z (Mar 17, 2008)

Bayboy said:


> Not going to lie. I still would like to try one, but there's a lot of features to sacrifice. Can't stomach it.


the deck has aux inputs.

there really isn't any reason you couldn't feed another deck with the features you want into it.

then you just use the p99 for your cd source for when you're doing critical music listening.

...which, maybe ppl would be pissy less often if they did that more often. :blush:


----------



## DDfusion (Apr 23, 2015)

There are a ton of people that are very anti DSP. The ones that think all you need is a few linear power amps and good placement. 
Technology is the devil


----------



## bigbubba (Mar 23, 2011)

The only reason I just took out my P99 is because I wanted to try optical output. Other than that, I love my P99. I'm also running the Helix Pro.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Biggest appeal to one I can see is less wiring. Even though I use externals, I hate the extra wiring, space to hide the unit (in a pickup), and not being able to make certain changes on the fly. Having dealt with an Audiocontrol DQX for a few years with the control was quite spoiling despite the lack of t/a.


----------



## cmusic (Nov 16, 2006)

I just got a new P99RS off the USP truck this morning. I have been in car audio since about 1999, competed in IASCA, USACi, and MECA for about 10 years (including 7 IASCA finals, the last in 2004), and have had many different types of systems over the years. I've had analog processors from Audio Control (EQL, EQL II, EQTs, 4XS, Epicenter, and more), MTX, and others and digital processors like the Clarion ADCS-1, Sony XES P1 and X1, and the Alpine PXA-H600 and F#1 PXA-H900. My current system uses a JBL MS-8 and it sounds great. 

I got the P99RS to simplify my system and because I want to have more control over the adjustments than what the MS-8 gives. I also like to tune "on the go" and disliked having to hook a computer up to a processor every time I wanted to make a small adjustment. 

Digital processors have gotten less expensive and added more control to the user over the past 20 years. However the system has to be installed and set up properly first to get the best results out of any digital processor. There are things that a digital processor should not be used to fix. The system has to be as correct as it can be before the processor is used. One of the first tuning tricks I was taught is that even though the processor has all these adjustments, they don't all need to be used. On a 31 band eq, if more than 2/3s of the bands are used, then something is mechanically, physically, or acoustically wrong with your system. Given this, the P99RS gives more than enough adjustments to make a good system sound great, even if it is not the latest thing out on the market.

If your a competitor in IASCA, the biggest drawback to the P99RS is that you really don't need any external devices like eqs and crossovers. In Installation Quality (IQC) judging these "other devises" and scored separately from the source unit, amps, and speakers during install judging and is a 10 point category. If you don't have any "other devices" then you will get a 0 in this scoring category.


----------



## ryanr7386 (Feb 21, 2011)

bigbubba said:


> The only reason I just took out my P99 is because I wanted to try optical output. Other than that, I love my P99. I'm also running the Helix Pro.



I'm sorta kicking myself in the ass for not thinking the source unit/processor pairing through more thoroughly. Specs indicate its a top notch deck sq wise but having an optical output would have been a huge plus had it been designed into the deck to start.

Oh Well, I'll try it out! Probably wont have it long and I'll want something else. So the Wife says!


----------



## Joebowl05 (Apr 1, 2016)

I just bought one too should arrive today. I am old school at heart but have to admit the Bluetooth etc are nice features to have built in. MIght be in the same boat as Mr Ryan, try it out for awhile but probably move on to something else!


----------



## ryanr7386 (Feb 21, 2011)

Joebowl05 said:


> I just bought one too should arrive today. I am old school at heart but have to admit the Bluetooth etc are nice features to have built in. MIght be in the same boat as Mr Ryan, try it out for awhile but probably move on to something else!


This is an addicting hobby car audio isn't it?


----------



## Joebowl05 (Apr 1, 2016)

Yes it is! I'm finally at an age where i can afford better things but there's so many options and a lot of cars don't allow you to have a lot of options for head units, etc.


----------



## sq2k1 (Oct 31, 2015)

So the new forum boner is the Helix DSP Pro as was said earlier.... just curious that one of the things discussed was the parametric eq functionality of it...The Arc Audio PS8 offers pretty much the same but people seem to be weary of it... is it because of the lack of the remote which is supposedly due out sometime soon or is it something else?

I am running a P99rs and have been for 5 years now, I have been looking at other options for processing just out of curiousness and also because technology evolves over time. I love my P99RS and for the time I have had it, I consider it probably the best car audio purchase I have ever made.


----------



## Joebowl05 (Apr 1, 2016)

I'm glad to hear that the P99 is that good for you.


----------



## rc10mike (Mar 27, 2008)

Sold mine recently, and absolutely hated that I had to do it. My new car simply wouldnt work with it, and I had to go the processor/stock HU route. I miss everything the P99 had to offer, right at your finger-tips. I still have dreams about it every now and then.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

I have two processors at hand (one in use, the other stored up) and two decks with t/a and good enough crossovers for the setup currently installed. With that, I still am tempted to try one of these decks for the simplicity and testing of skills (yeah I'm odd like that) to see what could be had with a minimal component setup. The only things stopping me from doing it is the high resale cost even after all these years, and the fact that you do give up a bit of features to run it. I'm surprised it hasn't been revised since it's first appearance, but it is a purist's deck and that allure will never go away.


----------



## gumbeelee (Jan 3, 2011)

I have owned a p99rs, many many times, in fact I just bought another one the other day. I love the 99rs but i am only using it this time as a pure SQ source running into my h800. The p99rs is an incredible deck but most opt for a dsp, more processing power and other features. I thank the main reason dsp's are so hot right now and will remain that way is because of all the features in todays cars. Most cars today have so many features running thru the factory deck u have to keep it, and if u want descent sound u have to add a dsp!!


----------



## sq2k1 (Oct 31, 2015)

Modern cars are like a blessing and a bane simultaneously..... they bring new technology and features baked into the OEM head units which will probably never be up to par as compared to an aftermarket head unit as far as purity of sound. And then problems can arise when using DSP integration with the OEM head unit as well,which I will not discuss.

Give the power to the buyer, not to the damn company I say. I personally like having the option to use aftermarket head units, but I honestly feel like it will be a dead subject in some years to come...another option taken away from the consumer.


----------



## Joebowl05 (Apr 1, 2016)

Yes I agree


----------



## VW Kevin G (Sep 3, 2017)

New to the forum.
So I have an Alpine 7949 with the H700 processor. The head unit has been giving me issues ejecting my disks because it won't read them. 
I was considering replacing it with the Pioneer 99RS, but I don't want to rebuild my whole system to get it working.
It seems like the Pioneer wouldn't work well with what I have, a four channel amp running a pair of 5.25 components with a passive crossover and a single sub bridged off of the other two channels, then a small two channel amp bridged into a rear center channel speaker. 
Will this head unit work in this type of system? It seems this unit needs 7 channels to be optimized, but is it required? It doesn't seem like it even allows for a rear channel. Can I time delay a set of channels for the rear like I have now?


----------

